That’s not what I’m saying.

I agree a natural substance can be medicine.

His statement - not mine - is that it couldn’t be patented.

Therefore the profit is limited.

Therefore there are fewer studies than a comparable pharmaceutical.

Therefore when (not if) he is sued, he will be less able to defend himself.

Therefore he won’t prescribe it.

I worked for a medical clinic years ago.

One doctor was pushing natural hormone therapy.

I asked one of the other doctors. He wouldn’t touch it.

He told me he sees thousands of patients each year. Some number will get cancer, and some number of them will sue him.

If he prescribes a medication, he can defend himself by pointing to the medical studies showing the safety of the medication.

If he prescribes anything natural, there are no studies showing safety, because nobody can patent natural substances. Therefore there isn’t much money to be made, so nobody spends the money to do good studies.

Even if it was a miracle drug, he wouldn’t prescribe it.

I bought a toilet auger that works much better. It takes care of a lot of problems that the plunger can’t.