Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer and the "German New Medicine"
By Cal Garrison 
My good friend and fellow Flower of Life Facilitator, Nicole Andraud, introduced me to Dr. Hamer's work back in 2000. Immersed in the New Medicine principles for quite some time, it was she who taught me what I know about concepts that, if they were widely accepted and practiced, would put the medical establishment out of business. Direct experience has shown me how Hamer's Biological Laws work and I am beyond the point of needing any further proof.
While I am not a Hamer Practitioner, I know enough about this method to talk about it with a smidgen of intelligence. My purpose in writing this article is to share what I do know with the hope that it will light up your interest in a healing modality that has had every effort made to suppress it. Those of you who understand that illness is something that comes to gift us with the cure for the issues that underlie it will be inspired by this information. German New Medicine brings the idea that we create illness from within into a framework that has some definite guidelines.
Born in Germany in 1935, Ryke Geerd Hamer studied medicine and theology in Tubingen. After passing both his medical and theological examinations he married and had a daughter and a son with his wife Sigrid. Licensed as a medical doctor in 1963, he spent 9 years working in the University Clinics of Tubingen and Heidelberg. Completing his specialization in internal medicine in 1972, he worked in several practices with his wife, Dr. Sigrid Hamer and patented a number of inventions. Life was pretty much normal until 1978, when his son Dirk was killed.
Shot in his sleep on a yacht off the island of Corsica, after 19 operations, leg amputation, and over 300 transfusions, Dirk Hamer died on December 7, 1978. His killer was never convicted of the crime, but confessed to it in 2006, when he was incarcerated on other charges. In reference to the death of Dirk Hamer, his comment was, "I was in the wrong�but I must say, I fooled them (the French judges)".
Two months after his son's death, Hamer contracted testicular cancer and his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. Hamer interpreted these findings as a biologic response to the shock of losing their youngest child. At that point he proceeded to develop a system at first termed, 'New Medicine' and currently referred to as, 'Germanic New Medicine' to explain cancer and every other illness as a consequence of very specific biological conflicts.
According to Hamer, any disease, most notably cancer, is not dangerous in itself, but merely a symptom of a biological conflict situation. He put forth the idea that a mental shock (In Hamer's case the fatal injury of his only son) affects the psyche and the brain in such a way that the physical organ that is connected to the part of the brain that receives the shock develops a malady that reflects the nature of the original conflict. When the conflict is resolved the illness disappears.
This new system turned out to be so effective, rumor had it that the German doctor was able to assist in healing 99% of the people who came to him for help. Medical experts and high level authorities confirmed that, 'New Medicine has to be declared as true, according to the present state of science and to the best of our current knowledge' (From a testimonial made by Prof. Dr. Hans-Ulrich Niemitz of the University of Technology, Economics, and Culture)
Further official investigations concluded that the natural laws of New Medicine were scientifically provable. After two testing conferences at the Oncology Division of the Hospital of the University of Trnava, The Vice-Chairman of the university and the Dean of the Faculty of Treatment Methods and Social Science, along with a total of ten teachers and professors signed their names to a document stating, 'The undersigned therefore conclude from the proof presented in two testing conferences that there is a high probability that the system is well founded. We have the greatest respect for Dr. Hamer's human, ethical, and untiring commitment and his new holistic patient approach. In view of all these factors, we are of the impression that the 'New Medicine' should urgently be followed up and put to use'. (Trnava, September 11, 1998)
It will come as no surprise that the medical establishment not only refuses to integrate Hamer's discoveries, they've also pursued him for years, prosecuted him for malpractice, and taken his medical license away from him — he's even been subjected to several murder attempts. Despite all of the official validation for the science behind his work, and despite his success rate, Dr. Hamer was arrested in Spain and incarcerated on September 9, 2004, 'apparently on 'preventative' grounds and based on a sentence Dr. Hamer was given in France earlier that year. While the sentence Dr. Hamer was given in France was based on dubious evidence and procedures, he is in danger of being extradited to France, with the possible consequence of innocently serving a three-year sentence in a French prison'.
Hamer's battle to prevent extradition failed. His experience in a French jail involved 17 months of psychological torture. He was released in February 2006 and sought asylum in a country whose name he, for obvious reasons, chooses not to disclose.
Those of you who think the powers that be might have been justified in their efforts to suppress Hamer's discoveries need to be reminded that pioneers like Nikola Tesla, Wilhelm Reich, and Royal Rife were subjected to the same type of persecution. It seems to be the case that any time any important, new scientific breakthrough is made or is in the offing, the establishment goes after the person behind it. The more vicious the attack the more likely it is that the discovery poses a serious threat to the vested interest groups that stand to lose money if the information comes to light. Hamer's 'New Medicine' poses such a threat to the medical and pharmaceutical establishments, it's no wonder he's been put out of circulation.
Despite all of this, there are Hamer Practitioners in Europe and Canada. To my knowledge there are none in the U.S. Any American who seeks this method of treatment has to leave the states to get it. Most of the literature on New Medicine is available on the web. A great deal of it was originally written in German, translated into French, and translated again into English. Unfortunately, a lot of the information gets lost in translation and I have found it best to learn about it from people who practice it. A book has finally been published on the subject — 'Summary of the New Medicine' by Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer — the last time I checked on Amazon, it was listed, but 'unavailable'.
What follows is an excerpt from a book that Nicole Andraud and I wrote together three years ago. The book talks about the root causes of obesity and addresses that illness from a different perspective. In order to make our point clear we felt it necessary to discuss Hamer's Biological Laws in layman's terms. We made no specific reference to Dr. Hamer in this section because Nicole felt that any sort of publicity might be harmful to him. All of this information is based on his principles, and I am including it in this article for those of you who wish to get a clearer idea of how and why these Laws work. Some of the wording has been adjusted, but for the most part the excerpt is duplicated here in its original form. My hope is that it will inspire you to explore the subject further.
All humans on this planet occupy a physical body. Every body comes equipped with a brain. As far as the physical vehicle is concerned, the brain is like a switchboard or a central computer system that functions to instruct the body about everything. From now on, for the purposes of this article, when I make reference to the brain I will not be referring to the psychological aspects of that organ. The psychological aspects of the brain belong to the mind and the brain and the mind are not the same thing. The brain as a physical organ is a purely biological thing.
The biological brain has several functions. Its primary function is to operate in a way that insures the survival of the species. Another one of its functions is to insure the survival of the individual. From the moment we draw our first breath the brain begins to receive information through the five senses. That information triggers off reflex responses that make it possible for us to continue living. The brain keeps us alive. If it didn't provide us with reflex response mechanisms we wouldn't last here very long. We wouldn't even be able to breathe.
The biological brain always operates in the present moment. It is like an ever ready sentinel whose capacity to remain alert is switched on at all times. It exists "To save our life", and offer the best solution to any shock that the body receives from the external environment. The brain has the capacity to evaluate instantly what is needed to make sure we survive.
To give an example of what I'm talking about here let's say that you're about to cross a heavily trafficked street and there is a tractor trailer coming at you going 90 miles an hour. Before your mind even has time to figure out what to do, your eyes are registering the fact that this huge machine is about to crush you, and your ears can hear the roar and relative closeness of the engine etc. The senses report this information to the brain and its reflex responses automatically send the message to the body to jump back, stand still, or move quickly out of the way, depending on what it will take to keep you alive. And all of us are perfect in this regard — God didn't make any mistakes. He gave every one of us the same system so to speak.
These reflex mechanisms that go on automatically operate according to certain laws that are very specific in every situation. If there is a certain type of shock the cells of the brain will always send the same message to the body, regardless of who the individual is. From the moment we are born the biological brain functions in this way. Before we are even able to speak, or walk, or know who we are, everything that happens to us is eliciting automatic responses from the brain that are sending messages back to the body. We don't participate in any of this in a conscious way and these things that go on automatically are never even recognized by us. They just happen.
In the same way that the mind is uninvolved in the processes that keep our hearts beating and our breath flowing, it also has no involvement in the way the biological brain registers shock or conflict. When a person is in the middle of a traumatic experience the sentinel in the brain interprets the individual's response to the event immediately, long before the mind gets hold of it. At the time the shock or the conflict occurs the mind is completely uninvolved in the transfer of information from the biological brain to the physical body. While the mind may be able to look back and remember the shock or the event, the biological brain is on the scene the moment these things occur.
In the last thirty years the idea that all illness is rooted in the mind and in the emotions has gained more attention. The work of reputable people like Barbara Brennan, Valerie Hunt, and Louise Hay has loaned more credence to this concept. Their research has made it more acceptable to view physical illness as the byproduct of deeper emotional and mental patterns that became stirred by an individual's response to experiences they had no control over.
The long held belief that disease attacks certain people at random is beginning to be replaced by this understanding. Even though the notion that sickness is something we have no control over still retains widespread popularity, there is more openness to the concept that it is in reality a product of thoughts and feelings that have been stored in the cellular memory.
Most of the research that has been done in this area has placed the focus on the psychological aspects of illness. While there is some value to this, it appears as if the crux of the matter goes even deeper. Whenever an individual is responding to an experience they have no control over the psychological mind is unable to process it immediately. The moment these shocks occur the sentinel in the biological brain is wide-awake. Long before the mind analyzes an event the biological brain is on the case, like an EMT, attending to the situation. This implies that the information it receives and transmits has more to say about how the body interprets the experience than the mind does.
The question arises; if the biological brain is so perfect in its response to everything, wouldn't it know how to prevent the body from getting sick?
This world we occupy is a polarized place. Everything in this reality exists in relation to its opposite. Health is as subject to the law of polarity as anything else. Like infra-red and ultra-violet, health and sickness are opposite poles of the same spectrum. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with illness. It has its place here.
That being the case, suggesting that the system that functions to keep us alive in every other situation doesn't know what to do when confronted with the shocks that give rise to some departure from health shows a lack of understanding about life in general. If we can accept the idea that illness has its place in the scheme of things, there has to be another way to look at this.
Dr. Hamer's research loans credence to the idea that people get sick because in the moment of shock or conflict, the biological brain sends specific messages to the body that manifest as illness. There is no imperfection here because the biological brain functions relative to illness the same way it functions relative to everything else — to save our life. Seen from this perspective it is easy to draw the conclusion that every sickness we contract comes to save our life.
This is a radical concept. Most people believe that disease is something that happens to us and that there is nothing we can do about it except take medicine or go to the doctor and hope that eventually we will get better. People suffer through their sicknesses and it's commonly understood that you recover, get worse, or die. Our cultural beliefs and the way we have been programmed to think make it really hard to grasp the idea that any disease could be there to save your life. In order to help you entertain the possibility that there might be some truth to this we'll give you an example of how this concept works in the case of people who have Diabetes. 
What Dr. Hamer has seen with those who suffer from Diabetes, or any disease, is that there is always a shock or a "conflict" that takes place around the time they are diagnosed with the illness. Before we continue let's see what Webster's Dictionary has to say about the word "conflict":
1) A fight; battle; struggle
2) sharp disagreement or opposition; as of interests, ideas, etc; clash
3) emotional disturbance resulting from a clash of interests in a person
From this perspective a person goes into a state of conflict any time they are forced to act in a way that is out of harmony with who they really are and what they really want.
In the case of diabetics the shock that triggers the original conflict sends a message to the biological brain that in order to survive from that point on they have to "Resist". There is an emotional disturbance or a clash of interests that creates a feeling that their survival depends on being able to do this. What they feel called to resist will depend on their experience and vary from individual to individual.
To give an example; a female diabetic, immediately prior to contracting the illness in her youth, recalls feelings of having to resist her father's sexual advances. This type of experience qualifies as a shock or a "conflict". And because the intensity of the shock and everything associated with it is too much for the mind to process and come to terms with, the reflexes in the biological brain take over and immediately handle what the mind cannot deal with. At the moment the conflict occurs the message the brain receives is that in order to save this person's life some form of resistance has to be offered up to the abusive person who is much stronger than she is, and who she has no power over.
Keep in mind that when the brain receives the message to resist it's going to respond at a biological level and act at a cellular level. The part of the brain that registers resistance programs is directly connected to the muscular system. In order to survive in the face of what they need to be powerful enough to resist or overcome, the immediate signal the body gets is that it needs more muscle. Muscles get their strength through the production of sugar. The diabetic conflict centers around an overproduction of sugar that is created because the individual needs that to be the case in order to survive. The excess of sugar in the system comes about to save their life.
This conflict of resistance isn't always about having to physically resist something. There are many different forms and levels of resistance. Here's another story about a young woman who got diagnosed with diabetes at the age of eighteen.
Recalling the circumstances in her life at the point of diagnosis she told me that she had made a decision to go to Canada to study dance. Her father was strongly against the idea. Feeling that it was just an idealistic fantasy and would yield nothing practical for her in the long run, he put a tremendous amount of pressure on her not to pursue this path.
Her entire being went into a state of resistance as her dad's efforts to block her intentions escalated. His refusal to allow her to do as she wished made her resistant to what he expected of her. The diabetes got worse during this period of inner conflict. Within about six months she overrode the need for her father's approval and made the decision to pursue her heart's desire. As soon as she made that choice the diabetes disappeared. The resistance conflict, triggered by the pressure from her dad got lifted the minute she did what she truly wanted to do.
These two examples of the same disease are included to illustrate that it doesn't matter what the personal issue is that triggers off the conflict. It is the nature of the conflict it self that determines the illness. The specific conflict that sets a person up to contract diabetes is the conflict of resistance. At the point of conflict or shock, people with this diabetic mindset begin to approach everything they do with resistance — they live in this state. Healing this particular illness is difficult because the intrinsic nature of the conflict that gives rise to it causes the diabetic to resist everything they are told, including any advice or information that might help them get well.
Every disease has a specific conflict associated with it. I'll go into explaining more about what is meant by "conflict", but for now it's enough to say that the more extreme the conflict is the more severe the disease will be. The diabetic woman who had been sexually abused by her father was in her 50's and had been living for years under the dictatorship of a health condition that could only be held steady with insulin. The girl whose intentions were thwarted by her father entered a diabetic state due to issues far less severe than those of the woman cited in the first example. She recovered completely as soon as she realized it was OK to override her dad's wishes. Eighteen years later there is no sign that diabetes is anything she needs to worry about.
It's interesting and important to mention here that the mother of the young woman in the second example is a diabetic. Because the general consensus is that these things are inherited or genetic one could say there was a predisposition to diabetes in this case. From my perspective this is not quite true. Take a moment to digest that statement because there is a lot of agreement out there that we inherit illness from our parents. Everyone accepts this as a fact.
If you can slide out of that belief and put aside what you have been told for a moment it will be easier for you to see it another way. The idea that illness is a genetically transmitted thing keeps us all sick! Think about it. If you're told all your life that you're going to "get something" because your mother, and Uncle Harry, and your grandmother, and all of your ancestors had the same disease you don't stand a chance of not getting it because our thoughts shape us. And what happens when we finally come down with an illness that appears to run in the family is that we never get a chance to look at any of the things that drew it to us. In one sense it lets us off the hook because we can turn around and say to everyone, "Well, this was inevitable of course. There is nothing I can do about it. I have no hope of escaping my fate so I will just accept it, continue taking my medicine, and wait to die."
The belief that disease is genetically transmitted totally closes the door on any possibility of a cure. We are so heavily educated to believe this, and there is so much scientific proof out there that it's true, any statements to the contrary sound heretical.
Ideally, it is possible to heal anything. All that is required to heal your self is a willingness to get to the source of the conflict that made you sick to begin with. From my viewpoint, if you inherit anything from your ancestors it is their mindset and their history. If you grow up with a diabetic mother who lives her life from a place of resistance it's quite likely that you will take on that attitude your self. It is the attitude that predisposes you to the illness rather than the fact that your mother had the disease.
To go a little further and to help you think about things in a new way, I'll offer a few other examples of illnesses and the conflicts associated with them.
I know of a woman, a single mother, who lived her whole life for her only son. The two were inseparable and everything she did revolved around this boy. At the age of 16, after a near fatal car accident he went into a coma.
When the accident occurred the experience absolutely devastated her. This boy was her whole life. The shock of knowing that her son might die created an enormous conflict inside this woman. With the connection to the only thing that mattered to her hanging by a thread, every instinct instructed her to do whatever she could to save him.
Immediately following the accident the woman contracted breast cancer. The conflict that fueled the illness caused the biological brain to respond by ordering the cells in the glands that exist to nurture and feed her little boy to multiply. The part of her brain that knew it needed to keep her son alive told the mammary glands that she needed to produce more milk. In this case, more cells equated with more milk, more life for her son — and for her, by extension, because her son was her life.
The boy remained in a comatose state for three months. During that time the tumor in her breast got bigger. After three months her son revived and the doctors told her that he was going to be fine. At that point the tumor in her breast began to shrink until it finally went away.
The tumor disappeared because as soon as she found out that her sons' life was no longer in danger the signal in the brain that told her body to multiply cells in her mammary glands stopped sending out the message that she needed to make more milk. There was no longer a state of emergency, no need to "produce more milk", no need to save his life — or her own.
When discussing breast cancer, it's a little more involved than other illnesses. The breasts cover a wide range of conflicts and imbalances in these glands can signify any number of issues. There are actually several different cancer's associated with the breasts and it's important to know which side the cancer is on. The breast that's being affected will offer clues as to what particular conflict triggered off the problem. Breast cancer appears to be related to conflicts that come from either "the nest", issues with the mother, mothering, or trouble through abuse, emotional, mental or physical coming through the partner.
With diabetes and the overproduction of sugar it's easy to see that the brain knows that it needs to make more of it in order to produce the strength needed to resist whatever is causing the conflict. With the woman who developed the tumor in her breast it makes perfect sense that the brain told her body that it needed more cells in the mammary gland to nurture and save her son. In the next example I'll talk about a man who developed stomach cancer to help you see that there is a great deal of logic and simplicity behind the way the biological brain functions.
A top business executive, this man entered into partnership with a good friend. In the course of their business dealings his partner and "friend" got him to sign a contract that caused him to lose everything, his whole share of the business. Simultaneous with this loss, the man in question was diagnosed with stomach cancer.
In an effort to verbalize what it felt like to be betrayed by his friend in this way he described that he couldn't "digest" the experience. That someone he trusted would do such a thing was indigestible to him. His biological brain responded perfectly, sending out a signal to the stomach to produce more cells in order to create more gastric juice. To make it possible for him digest the fact that he had been betrayed by someone he had total faith in, his stomach cells began to multiply.
The conflict that arose over an experience that he couldn't stomach caused the cancer to come to save this man's life. The parts of his brain that were not involved in the shock remained functional, allowing him to go on with his life, resolve the conflict, and recover from the illness.
What I have presented to you so far is just the tip of a huge iceberg. Every single disease has a primary emotional disturbance or conflict associated with it. It is beyond the scope of this article to explore the Hamer's Biological Laws in their totality. But you need to know that there are very definite principles and specific conflicts that relate to every illness — and all of them can be healed without the various methods of intervention if the original conflict is cleared.
I leave you with a quote from the man himself:
'Future therapies will entail very little medication but will require the patient's understanding of the root cause of his conflict and disease. Together with his doctor, the patient will find the best resolution to his problem or the best strategy in order to avoid repeating it in the future. The patient is thus able to be the absolute 'boss' in the treatment and procedure of his illness, and herein is the special aspect of the NEW MEDICINE. The patient will no longer be 'treated', but will 'treat himself'. The relationship between patient and physician will be completely re-thought and redefined. Today's highly specialized doctor will, in the future, have to be broadly trained, well-educated and a humane 'medical detective'. These 'Priests of Aesclepius' must be kind-hearted, wise, and possess outstanding general knowledge'.
About Cal Garrison 
Cal is a writer with four books to her credit. �The Old Girls� Book of Spells�, �The Old Girls� Book of Dreams�, and her latest book, �Witch On the Go� were published by RedWheel/Weiser Press and are available in bookstores or on Amazon.com. In addition to her own work, she also writes for Slim Spurling. Her first book with Slim, �Slim Spurling�s Universe� is being followed up by their second book together which, with any luck, will be out in 2008—2009.
A professional astrologer with 35 years experience Cal has cast over 6000 charts and is one of the best in her field. She is also an expert on the Tarot. When she�s not running the Spirit of Ma'at office, or working on her books, Cal spends her time doing in depth astrology and tarot readings for people all over the country.
|
