Alternative medicine is often dismissed with a casual sneer: “unscientific,” “dangerous,” or “folk tradition.” Meanwhile, mainstream pharmaceuticals — with long lists of known side effects, often including heart failure, stroke, or death — are marketed as “standard of care.” The herb Strophanthus provides a striking case study of how the sanctioned medical narrative marginalizes alternatives while normalizing pharmaceutical risks.
WebMD, one of the internet’s most trafficked
health portals, offers a telling example. Their entry on Strophanthus begins with a warning: “Strophanthus is an herb that has been used as an arrow poison in
Africa.” Only later does the site concede that Strophanthus seeds are used to make medicine. This
rhetorical framing matters. By leading with “poison,” readers are primed to
fear, rather than to inquire.
The deeper irony? Some of the most widely used modern drugs also originated from natural poisons — digitalis from foxglove, aspirin from willow bark, chemotherapy agents from periwinkle and yew. The issue isn’t whether a plant was once toxic. The issue is whether its active compounds can be harnessed safely for healing.
The Forgotten Legacy of Strophanthus
Strophanthus
gratus and related species contain ouabain,
a cardiac glycoside historically used in Europe to treat heart conditions. For
decades, ouabain was prescribed in Germany for angina pectoris and heart
failure, with reported benefits in improving myocardial efficiency and oxygen
utilization. Alternative practitioners such as Dr. Tom Cowan have argued that
ouabain represents a safer, more physiologically compatible option compared to
synthetic cardiac drugs.
In Cowan’s view, the heart is not a mechanical pump straining to push blood through 60,000 miles of vessels. Instead, it acts as a regulator of rhythm and flow — working in harmony with the body’s structured water and vortex dynamics. Within this paradigm, ouabain is seen not as a brute-force stimulant but as a subtle modulator, supporting the heart’s natural intelligence.
WebMD’s Framing: Poison First, Medicine
Second
Mainstream portals like WebMD follow a
predictable formula when discussing herbs:
·
Step 1:
Alarm — lead with an association to poison, toxicity, or danger.
·
Step 2:
Concession — admit the plant has been used medicinally.
·
Step 3:
Discredit — emphasize that “not enough evidence” exists, or highlight
potential side effects without context.
This formula subtly shifts perception. Readers absorb the impression that natural remedies are reckless risks, while pharmaceuticals — often with vastly more severe side-effect profiles — are “safe when taken as prescribed.” The double standard is striking.
The Side Effect Double Standard
Consider the comparison:
·
Alternative
remedies like Strophanthus are
flagged as dangerous because they could
cause nausea, dizziness, or irregular heartbeat.
·
Pharmaceuticals
routinely list side effects that include liver failure, internal bleeding,
suicidal ideation, and sudden death — yet are approved, prescribed, and even
advertised on television.
The question is not whether side effects exist. All medicines, natural or synthetic, carry risks. The question is why side effects from pharmaceuticals are treated as acceptable collateral damage, while side effects from herbs are amplified as disqualifying.
Iatrogenesis: The Elephant in the Room
“Iatrogenesis” means harm caused by medical
treatment itself. It is one of the least acknowledged yet most significant
causes of death in developed nations. Peer-reviewed studies estimate that medical errors, drug reactions, and
hospital-acquired conditions account for hundreds of thousands of deaths
annually in the United States alone. One landmark study in the Journal of Patient Safety (2013) suggested
that preventable harm may contribute to more than 400,000 deaths per year in
U.S. hospitals.
Yet this reality rarely enters mainstream conversation. The medical establishment does not open its literature with disclaimers like: “Pharmaceuticals are among the leading causes of death in modern society.” Instead, risk is hidden behind euphemisms, downplayed as “adverse events,” or buried in fine print. Meanwhile, a single herbal preparation is branded “dangerous” because it once served as a hunting poison.
Case Study: Jennifer Daniels MD and the
Politics of “Poison”
The story of Dr. Jennifer Daniels illustrates how “poison” is not a
neutral scientific category but a political one.
·
Daniels ran two practices in Baltimore’s Black community, where
patients grew healthier and required fewer prescriptions. Pharmaceutical sales
in her area reportedly dropped.
·
Her remedy of choice for detoxification and
parasites was pure gum spirits of
turpentine — a substance historically listed in pharmacopoeias but
later reclassified as a poison.
·
Once regulators learned her patients were being
declared healthy without feeding the pharmaceutical pipeline, Daniels came
under investigation. Her license was revoked not for malpractice, but for
deviating from sanctioned protocols.
Now contrast that with Australia’s COVID
policy. The Government of Western
Australia issued an official order in 2021 entitled:
“Authorisation
to supply or administer a poison – SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Vaccine”【WA
Government, 2021†pdf】.(See below)
Under WA law, vaccines are regulated under the
Poisons Act. In this context, the word
“poison” was not used to discredit but to legalize and mandate. Doctors were required to
administer the “poison” or face fines and deregistration. One Queensland doctor
who refused was indeed deregistered, though later vindicated, reinstated, and
compensated.
This double standard is stark:
·
When Daniels prescribed turpentine, “poison”
became grounds for professional destruction.
·
When governments classified COVID vaccines as
“poison,” it became grounds for mandatory compliance.
As one doctor reportedly exclaimed upon seeing the WA order: “They are trying to kill us.” Yet even she continued recommending the vaccine — trapped between conscience and career.
The Deeper Irony of “Poison” Medicine
If “poison” disqualifies an herb, then modern
pharmacology should indict itself. Nearly every major drug category contains
compounds once considered poisons:
·
Digitalis (foxglove) → heart medication.
·
Colchicine (autumn crocus) → gout treatment.
·
Vincristine (periwinkle) → chemotherapy.
·
Atropine (nightshade) → emergency medicine.
What makes these substances “safe” is not their origin but their dosage, preparation, and context of use. To deny Strophanthus or turpentine the same consideration is not science, but bias.
Toward an Honest Medicine
The goal here is not to romanticize herbs as
risk-free panaceas. Nor is it to demonize pharmaceuticals as inherently evil.
The point is consistency and honesty. A fair medical culture would:
1.
Acknowledge that all medicines, natural or synthetic,
carry risks.
2.
Evaluate herbs like Strophanthus
(and remedies like turpentine) on the same evidentiary basis as drugs — neither
exaggerating their dangers nor dismissing their potential.
3.
Confront the reality of iatrogenesis instead of
sweeping it under the rug.
4. Allow practitioners — including licensed doctors exploring alternatives — to share clinical experience without fear of professional persecution.
Conclusion
The way WebMD frames Strophanthus is not neutral. It is a case study in narrative
warfare: lead with poison, concede medicine, and close with alarm. This mirrors
a broader cultural reflex — normalize pharmaceutical risks while magnifying
herbal ones.
The tragedy is that patients, hungry for safe and effective care, are deprived of options by bias masquerading as science. Real medicine should serve truth, not monopoly. Until the double standard is named and dismantled, herbs like Strophanthus — and practitioners like Jennifer Daniels — will remain vilified not because they are unsafe, but because they are uncontrollable.
PUBLIC HEALTH ACT 2016 (WA)
INSTRUMENT OF AUTHORISATION
AUTHORISATiON TO SUPPLY OR ADMINISTER A
POISON
[SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) VACCINE-COVID-19
VACCINATORS
WA COUNTRY HEAL TH SERVICE]
(No. 9) 2021
1. The World Health Organisation declared COVID-19 pandemic on 11 March 2020. On 23 March 2020, the Minister for Health declared a public health state of emergency with effect from 1.30 pm on 23 March 2020 in respect of COVID-19 pursuant to section 167 of the Public Health Act 2016 (Act). On 22 September 2021, the Minister for Health declared a further public health state of emergency with effect from 4.25 pm on 22 September 2021 in respect of COVID-19 pursuant to section 167 of the Act. The public health state of emergency applies to the State of Western Australia.
2. I, Dr Andrew Robertson, Chief Health Officer (WA), acting pursuant to sections 197 and 198 of the Act that gives power, for the purposes of emergency management during a public health state of emergency, to authorise a person to supply or administer a poison, hereby authorise the person(s) occupying the class of position in Column 1 of the attached Schedule to perform the statutory functions in Column 2 of the attached Schedule, subject to the conditions, limitations or restrictions (if any) set out in Column 3 of the attached Schedule.
3. The Schedule is attached as Annexure A.
4. This instrument of authorisation takes effect immediately upon signing and shall remain in force until the public health state of emergency is no longer in force or until otherwise amended or revoked.
5. This instrument of authorisation is additional to the following:
· Instrument of Authorisation -Authorisation To Supply Or Administer A Poison [SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) VACCINE] (No. 6) 2021;
· Instrument of Authorisation - Authorisation To Supply Or Administer A Poison [SARS-COV-2 (COV/D-19) VACCINE-Australian Defence Force](No. 7) 2021; and
· Instrument of Authorisation -Authorisation To Supply Or Administer A Poison [SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) VACCINE- COVID VACC/NATORS- CHILD AND ADOLESCENT HEAL TH SERVICE] (No. 8) 2021.
DATED this 22nd day of September 2021 at :2I:27 hours.
Dr Andrew Robertson
CHIEF HEAL TH OFFICER
No comments:
Post a Comment