Kevin Hughes – Natural News Aug 9, 2025
- Dr. Welch argues that excessive medical intervention often harms more than it helps, citing cases like unnecessary tests leading to complications or death — illustrated by an elderly patient subjected to invasive, futile procedures.
- Early cancer screenings frequently detect slow growing (“turtles”) or untreatable (“birds”) cancers, resulting in overdiagnosis (e.g., prostate/breast cancer) and unnecessary treatments with harmful side effects.
- Incidental findings (“incidentalomas”) — like a harmless kidney tumor — can trigger anxiety and wasteful medical cascades, emphasizing that more health data isn’t always beneficial.
- Welch stresses the need for randomized trials over observational studies (e.g., hormone therapy’s debunked benefits) to avoid misleading conclusions about medical interventions.
- Welch encourages trusting the body’s natural healing (e.g., avoiding unnecessary back surgeries) and prioritizing lifestyle, social and mental health factors over excessive medicalization.
In a world where medical advancements often promise to cure all ailments, Dr. H. Gilbert Welch’s book, “Less Medicine, More Health: 7 Assumptions That Drive Too Much Medical Care,” offers a contrarian perspective that challenges the status quo. Welch argues that our societal obsession with medical intervention may be doing more harm than good, and his insights are reshaping the conversation around healthcare.
Welch, a physician with years of experience, begins by questioning the deeply ingrained belief that more medical care invariably leads to better health. He cites a national survey where nearly half of primary care physicians admitted that their patients receive excessive medical care. This revelation is startling, suggesting that the problem is not just about wasted resources but also about the potential for harm. Unnecessary tests and treatments can lead to anxiety, complications and even death, as illustrated by the story of Mr. Nadeau, an 85-year-old man whose routine checkup spiraled into a series of invasive procedures. The initial concern — a harmless bulge in his belly — resulted in a cascade of tests, a hospital stay and a hefty bill, all for a condition that required no treatment.
The book delves into the contentious topic of screening, a practice often heralded as a proactive approach to health. Welch introduces the concept of “turtles, rabbits and birds” to categorize cancers based on their growth rates and treatability. While screening can be beneficial for “rabbits” — aggressive but treatable cancers — it often identifies “turtles,” which are slow-growing and may never cause harm, and “birds,” which are so aggressive that early detection is futile. The overdiagnosis of prostate and breast cancers serves as a cautionary tale, with many patients undergoing unnecessary surgeries and experiencing complications.
Welch also addresses the perils of having too much information about our health. He recounts the story of Mr. Baker, whose hoarse voice led to the discovery of a small kidney cancer. Although the cancer was a “turtle” and not causing any harm, the knowledge of its existence subjected Mr. Baker to years of anxiety and countless scans. This scenario highlights the concept of “incidentalomas” — abnormal findings discovered unintentionally — which can trigger a chain reaction of tests and procedures, often causing more harm than good.
A pivotal point in Welch’s argument is the importance of randomized trials in evaluating medical interventions. He criticizes observational studies for their potential to mislead, as they often fail to account for the fact that individuals who seek preventive care are typically healthier to begin with. The example of hormone replacement therapy, where initial observational studies suggested benefits later debunked by randomized trials, underscores the need for rigorous evidence before adopting new medical practices.
Welch advocates for a more cautious approach, urging patients and physicians to demand evidence from randomized trials before embracing new interventions. He believes this is the only way to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks. Throughout the book, he emphasizes the body’s innate ability to heal, suggesting that sometimes the best course of action is to do nothing and let nature take its course. The case of back pain, where surgery is often unnecessary and can exacerbate the problem, serves as a prime example.
“Less Medicine, More Health” is a compelling call to rethink people’s assumptions about medical care. Welch challenges the notion that more is always better, advocating for a balanced approach that considers the potential harms of excessive intervention. He encourages readers to make informed decisions about their health, recognizing that medical care is just one piece of the puzzle. Lifestyle choices, social connections and mindset also play crucial roles in our overall well-being.
As people navigate the complexities of modern health care, Welch’s insights remind everyone that the best medicine might sometimes be a little less medicine. This thought-provoking book invites people to reconsider their approach to health, urging them to embrace a more holistic and cautious perspective.
Watch this video about Dr. H. Gilbert Welch’s book “Less Medicine, More Health: 7 Assumptions That Drive Too Much Medical Care.”
—
This video is from the BrightLearn channel on Brighteon.com.
TOO LATE !
the jew Pfitzer/Moderna already has sinked in its
evilness already in the patients + they get all kinds of
deseases (to the enjoyment of the jew pharmaindustry) :
there are articles of qucksalbers with idiotic advices
against BRAINFOG, LONGCOVID and nobody mentions
the rootproblem : THE POISON COVID GRAFEN VACCINE .
they always tell about covid virus as root cause, never about
the covidvax . even my Dr are not better . NO TRUST ANYMORE !
ask your dentist if anesteticas are of mRNA nanographen !
Indeed..
well most of the problems arise from scientism itself, which on the whole is magical thinking and confirmation bias…indulge yourself by examining the history of modern medicine and the syringe and tablet, particularly the quackery of epidemiology, virology and the lol immune system….and the brainwashed imbeciles that actually staff the death camps..indoctrination runs deep with these creatures..
triage works and strapping a broken bone, although they often fuck that up too..most of the contemporary imbeciles maladies are purposefully invoked..the worst being it’s mental state, which guarantees a lifetime of affliction..
real or imagined…
There has always been a problem of over diagnosis IMO in many spheres of life; not just in medicine but in matters of education and spiritual edification.
The “practitioner” whether in white coat, wielding a piece of chalk, or “casting out demons” have their own agendas. Indeed the requirement to gain money from their practices put them as traders or peasants while representing themselves as the semi-deified, often by way of a ritualistic dress code.
In the comments sections, others and myself have frequently argued against argument from authority. The deferment to “Professor Smith” or “Dr Jones” or “Nobel winner” Brown always contains the presumption of “you plebs should pay attention”.
Simon Smith, Smethwick Cultural Attaché to TTS and 1974 Cycling Proficiency Graduate.
These characters treat symptons with oilbased phamaceuticals but first they invite you for free tests ..
HaHa, suggests? It’s a fact for anyone who wants to see.
this needs to be seen
https://christiansfortruth.com/ukrainian-demonstrators-demand-jews-apologize-and-repent-for-communism-and-the-holodomor-genocide/
Jew and chink ‘doctors’ will tell you that you have all sorts of ‘medical problems’ to get more of your money.
Simon Smith–do you put “casting out demons” third and last cos they oviously int none? But that would be your own ignorance
@Lewis Jones
You presume too much my friend.
The place in third is of no importance. My problem is with those who assert knowledge because of the hoops they have jumped through and the attire they wear to enforce their status. I do not assert anything regarding the existence or otherwise of demons.
(Mark Windows in his “Windows On The World” channel has some interesting views from a prison psychiatrist on the actuality of demons rather than the modern diagnosis of “schizophrenia” requiring medication. It is hard not to think this is not the affliction of a certain TTS multi-personality regular who is very irrititating, unintentionally comical, and ultimately, tragic.)
Sometimes you are exasperated by “longer” posts, but maybe this is because folks feel they need to caveat certain things lest you or someone else takes a point of possible contention to engage in strawman argumentation. I could have caveated my previous post with all of this of course but my postings would look like legal documentation.
Believe it or not I always try to be kind to those reading. I like to think of my posts as being like a chocolate bar with an initial crisp outer coating that when easily penetrated gives a satisfying chew that asks just the right effort of the readers teeth – without being a long unparagraphed unchewable piece of confectionary on one hand or something easily digested without much content.
It does seem you have a critiquing technique that blasts longer posts as emanations from folk who are “drunk” while necessarily being able to find “apparent” logical flaws in uncaveated posts.
***
BTW, as someone of 64 and not in the first flush of life myself, I have to say that my recent reacquaintance of CREATINE has probably improved my cognition somewhat recently. I would recommend this natural supplement to anyone. It is something people might want to look into – and not least of all – “truth-seekers” 😊