top of page

Let's Talk About Genetic Testing And DNA As It Relates To Nutraceutical Recommendations And Our Health

Updated: Jan 29

Let’s talk about genetic testing and DNA as it relates to nutraceutical recommendations and our health.

There has been a recent trend in the naturopathic and integrative health fields to use genetic testing and thus, single nucleotide polymorphisms, to suggest supplementation and thus, ways to “prevent disease processes” that are based upon such data obtained by these genetic tests. Not only is this based entirely on the assumption that DNA and thus, genetics never change [as well as their entire avoidance and dismissal of epigenetics], but it also creates a lot of fear [and misperceptions] for clients due to this assumption, as well as conditioning them to believe that their body is somehow not operating properly, is defective, and in turn, always will be based upon this “unchangeable DNA,” so they readily give over their power to this information, which then creates this story within their experience. In other words, they take on, own/identify with, and become a “victim” to this perceived “defect/mutation” [polymorphism] via this new “state of the art” genetic testing, which appears (and it is exactly that, appears) “superior” (or more complex and alluring to potential clients) over traditional naturopathic practices because simple lifestyle changes appear…well, too simple (often with the thought of it has to be more complex than this, right, which are simply those “not enough,” “searching for more,” and “must do more, know more, etc. in order to get an output of more” programming) and in turn, it appears “not scientific or complex enough” to fit in with and/or “appease” the “non-alternative” crowd (mainly via these accepted “norms” within society) in order to create such a lasting change in our lives. This is the type of “scientism” [via modern medicine narratives] that is seeping into the naturopathic field and more and more, the profession veers over to this way of thinking since a good chunk of practitioners and/or professionals now buy into this and many more of the other modern medicine narratives. It makes the profession look just as money hungry and manipulative as mainstream medicine and big pharma with their goal being long-term supplementation/intervention based upon these homozygous and heterozygous SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms). When in actuality, our traumas, programming/beliefs, and environment play a much larger role in our so-called health outcomes.

I’ve been down this road as a client myself over ten years ago and it has taken some perception shifts and a break down of programming for me as well to understand that our bodies are a finely tuned “instrument” (much more than anyone realizes), and nothing is ever permanent with it nor is it ever unchangeable…those terms are merely reductionist/materialist beliefs from a programmed perspective or mind. As such, many naturopaths and alternative practitioners haven’t faced their own programming on this yet and that is where we differ on our paths within these professions. Practicing in such a manner [under these false pretenses or assumptions] ripples out distortions to our clients that we are supposed to be assisting, who will then have to harmonize these distortions (i.e., beliefs) themselves by no longer buying into or aligning with these belief systems anymore and in turn, they then have the ability to see themselves beyond these fixed concepts for their own health benefit. I would rather see clients spend their money on whole food nutrition, doing something fun that they love and as such something that relieves stress, and essentially, living their life than on a couple hundred dollar test that simply feeds them these falsities.

So let’s go ahead now and break this whole process of assumptions down a bit.

Assumption #1: Genetics dictate all processes within the body.

According to the many critics of genetic research, this isn’t true in the way that it is assumed to be true. Everything regarding genetics is just a theory…the double helix model, the base pair model of DNA, the long and short chain/strand models, the replication of DNA…all of it has never been repeated and verified as true [with appropriate controls in place especially], but rather, it has just been accepted, passed around, and assumed to be correct, even the assumption that chemicals and other agents that are used within these so-called experiments do not have an effect on the outcome of these experiments, and the simple fact that the extraction process itself from its natural environment [for days/weeks even] doesn’t already skew the results or create a theory that is invalid because we don’t truly know if anything functions exactly the same across all environments, especially a toxic one, like what is always used in the scientific research field. They simply like to label these toxic additions in their experiments as “buffers” and so on. It honestly boggles my mind how all of this is just accepted at face value and never questioned, especially when it comes to the alternative health field(s). Why buy into a paradigm that is based upon Rockefeller medicine, which at its core (and basic, fundamental understanding) is to cut/burn/scrape/and remove certain parts of the body, to add in synthetics (like joint replacements and son on), to blame it on [the theory of] genetics or some catch-all diagnosis so that they don’t have to assist beyond their scope of practice (which is simply their prescription pad and a referral to someone else so that they can deal with it via these other limited options), or they medicate with petrochemicals because their whole point of reference is that they see the human body as inherently flawed and thus, it requires their intervention to “fix” things? Now this isn’t to say that surgery or some other types of intervention is not warranted in some instances, but it doesn’t need to be pushed as the first and only option, or “line of defense,” for every little thing. We aren’t fighting our bodies, and assumptions in this way of thinking, lead to choices that will inevitably cause harm because the beginning or base assumption was incorrect. Somehow many in the natural health field still fall for these scientific dogma tricks and gimmicks, often “prescribing” supplements in the same manner that doctors prescribe medication, even if it means putting their clients well-being at risk due to their own belief systems (and thus, their own perceived limits and/or frame(s) around reality) and this can essentially, take advantage of their clients in the long-run. I share all of this information as a means to open up humanity’s eyes and their ways of thinking, especially in regards to our bodies not being broken [or defective, like these genetic tests point to] because that has never been the case and will never be the case.

I don't agree with every assertion made from the above video, but the overall premise is what I will describe below and throughout this article.

Modern “science” tells us that DNA is the molecule that carries genetic information for the development and functioning of an organism, but research and observation has shown that DNA actually acts much like an antenna does in the environment so that it can receive, transduce, and transmit information or data into the surrounding [structured] water/terrain and thus, proteins and such can be made (as well as unfolded and folded by ATP) in response to this in the body. So in essence, it isn’t the DNA that is dictating these processes, but something “beyond” the DNA, most likely, organized waveforms and/or frequencies “behind” (or more so, at the basis of) form and matter. DNA is merely the receiver, transducer, and transmitter of this information, or frequency data, in order to “vortex” and “alchemize” it into form via structured water, microbes, biophotons, and the protein synthesis (and more) response. The waveform or frequency data is the creative “life-giving, material-forming” blueprint and the DNA just amplifies that to the structured water source (as well as using microbes, biophotons, mitochondria -- which are believed to be an ancient form of bacteria, and ATP) in order to continue the creation [life-sustaining] process. Resonance specificity (and likely electromagnetic fields, etc.) between various cells, tissues, and living, interdependent systems within the body is likely why a liver cell doesn’t end up in the heart tissue and vice versa and beyond. As such, there is an apparent organized order and structure to the body via these frequency resonance bands or packs of data and thus, DNA isn’t necessarily the dictator of that, but rather a passive translator between the “seen” and “unseen,” or in other words, the physical form and energetic blueprint of life. This is why sound, light, and energy therapies are so powerful in assisting the well-being of one’s body, since it brings harmony (and coherence) to the structured water and in turn, tissues and systems in the body as well as the electromagnetic field and terrain (including the microbiome); thus, leaving harmonious imprints (called resonance) in the biofield so that these natural healing mechanisms can begin and any repair can take place where distortions are apparent.

As such, “epigenetics” can influence our overall well-being and expression of so called health more than our “genetics” do. So what exactly are “epigenetics?” They are the environmental signals, or frequency data “triggers,” that our DNA receives and transmits to our cells/tissues/waters/microbes…so if one’s environment is full of so-called toxic [distorted] triggers or damage from them, then the frequency data reflects that way in the body [as in, distorted fields and so on] so dis-ease, which is just the body continually trying to harmonize itself into coherence, may appear. The same is true when it comes to beliefs, emotions, and traumas as well.

Air pollution and electrical grids are a couple of epigenetic influences that humans are exposed to frequently, which can create distortions in our terrain.

This excerpt explains the fluidity of DNA and the interdependence on “epigenetics” as well: “We know, for instance, that life experiences can alter DNA—not its sequence, but its form and structure and chemistry. The science of epigenetics is based on the ability of environmental triggers to change how DNA is packaged and expressed (without altering its sequence). Recent work also suggests that the actual sequence of DNA may be altered through experiences. The unifying interconnections proposed in quantum physics suggest that our DNA is controlled by signals outside our cells, ‘including our personal scripts—messages from positive and negative thoughts, from the environment,’ writes developmental biologist Bruce Lipton, author of Biology of Belief. Lipton argues that ‘biomedicine doesn’t recognize the massive complexity of inter-communication between physical parts and the energy field that make up the whole. Cellular constituents are woven into a complex web of crosstalk, feedback, and feed-forward communication loops. A biological dysfunction may arise from a miscommunication along any of the routes of information flow.’ We are a fractal community, after all. ‘When you look at yourself you see an individual person,’ says Lipton, ‘but if you understand the nature of who you are, you realize that you are actually a community of about 50 trillion living cells.’ Lipton goes on to say that, ‘each cell is a living individual, a sentient being that has its own life and functions but interacts with other cells in the nature of a community…health is when there is harmony in the community, and disease (dis-ease) is when there is disharmony that tends to fracture the community relationships’” (Munteanu, 2021, para. 11-13).

Assumption #2: Genetics/genes/DNA never change.

As stated above in the Munteanu excerpt, “Recent work also suggests that the actual sequence of DNA may be altered through experiences.” In this sense, genes (and thus, expressions of such) are influenced by environmental [frequency data] triggers more than genes ever remain constant. Our genes are constantly in flux because our environment and electromagnetic field is constantly in flux and making shifts. It reminds me of the old saying, “The only thing that is ever constant in this world is change.” So why would anyone state that genes and DNA remain constant no matter what you do or are exposed to, yet many of these same people look for single nucleotide poly (meaning many or more than one) – morphism (meaning having the ability to change and morph or mutate into something else; thus, having different forms and functions)? If something has the ability to mutate, then it does have the ability to shift or change, does it not? And what creates these “mutations” or changes in the first place? Most likely environmental and situational circumstances, where our DNA receives frequency data or intel for our terrain and biofield to begin “shifting” so that microbes are then “activated” or called to carry out a specific function as a result. If DNA/genetics were never to change in their accepted model or theory of function, then this orchestration within the body wouldn’t be possible and healing would honestly never take place. Even if “science” pulls our DNA/genes from our body and says, “See it is the same throughout all of these experiments”…the fact is, it is still out of our body and in a laboratory environment, being contaminated and influenced by damaging “buffers” and equipment and/or other processes, so how can we assume that it will behave or operate in the same way as when it is in our body, where it’s exposed to its natural electromagnetic field, microbiome, and a bio-communication network that continually streams waveform data in specific relation to us and the interaction that we have with our environment and/or experience? Our body, and thus, our DNA is constantly receiving and transmitting bits of information so for it to be in a state (or more so, such a constricted belief) of it never having the ability to shift (or evolve) to meet its needs in order to continue to live (or be provided frequency, matter-forming information), then ultimately, what this means is that we would all die off because we wouldn’t be able to adapt to shifting environments, and at a certain point, there would be no more signs of life anywhere.  

This then gives way or points to the fact that all genetic or DNA diagnoses are not accurate, or at least, they are missing a whole other contextual connection point at the basis of this expression or life experience for the individual, which involves 1) toxin exposure and toxic load, even that which is generationally compounded 2) traumatic experiences 3) miasms – passed down energetic imprints that either express or do not express via certain triggers 4) nutritional needs not being met through the diet as well as the environment, like sunlight and so on 5) chaotic or distorted environments 6) mental programming and beliefs 7) any other trigger that can affect a person’s biosphere. All seven of these categories can have an impact on a person’s biofield, and thus, their terrain. In turn, specific signals (via frequency data packs) are transmitted out and then responses form (via the structured water and microbiome) in the best manner in order to keep us alive. However, past a certain “threshold” or “tipping point,” since the living organism can only handle so much (especially if the categories mentioned from above aren’t addressed), then the living organism is pushed beyond that point and stops functioning appropriately due to the severe incoherence and distortion within the body, which eventually can lead to death.

So, just because a genetic test shows that you have certain SNPs that are positive (or heterozygous -- where they say that one of the two "inherited" alleles are "impacted" -- and homozygous -- where they say that both "inherited" alleles are "impacted"), it doesn’t mean that 1) you are expressing those supposed traits that they have mapped out as being involved in certain functions within the body and 2) it also doesn’t mean that since it is labeled as “genetic” that it is a life-long experience or an experience at all because the whole basis of genetics is simply a theory put forth by scientists, who are often ideologic materialists that do not and will not look at or consider the holistic picture of a living organism. DNA, in itself, does not drive function, the frequency data does. If we change the frequency data input by changing the story that we tell ourselves as well as supporting our body as it needs (and seeing it as whole), then the DNA transmission shifts, as does our experience because that is the information that our body is amplifying in its reception and transmission to its terrain so that the body can function optimally/harmoniously.

As a popular example of this SNP genetic conditioning, the MTHFR “polymorphism” is seen as an SNP that “causes detoxification/methylation issues, among other things.” However, what often really causes these detoxification issues is not having enough glutathione and other nutrients for the liver to break down and filter out toxins because a person continues to take Tylenol (or some other medication) frequently, or poisons their body in any number of ways, among other systems being affected as well due to lifestyle factors (i.e., sluggishness in the lymphatic system because of inactivity, and so on). As such, we have to stop blaming everything on our DNA/genetics and be more responsible for our actions and the assumptions that we follow or choose to believe (and in turn, take on as our experience) because it dictates our behavior, and thus, our choices in life. We have to realize that the power is (and always has been) with us and what we choose to believe and focus on…either in our innate healing power that is always accessible to us or in the belief that we are victims of our “unchangeable” DNA/genes because some scientist/doctor says that our DNA/genes are responsible for this health challenge or “outcome,” yet they can’t even unequivocally prove the function, form, let alone the definition of a gene and as Dr. Cowan often says, “how can 20,000 ‘unchangeable’ genes code for 180,000 – 200,000 different proteins in the body, if one gene codes for one protein” (so in other words, what is coding for the 160,000ish – 180,000ish left over proteins?)…but yet, they, the medical industry, somehow knows that these genes are affecting us in these ways. Yeah, I’m going to hard pass on those assumptions. I know without a doubt that our bodies are whole (not defective or permanently “polymorphic”), they know exactly what they are doing, and thus, they can take care of themselves fully as we support them. So how can we do this? We can listen to the cues of our body in any given moment and stop believing in, or even begin with a curiosity and questioning of the scientific dogma and assumptions that are accepted today as absolute truth. Those are at least, great starting points and then one can branch out from there as they listen to their own inner compass and from there, they can choose from a more empowered and informed place.

Assumption #3: Genes and DNA are responsible for disease processes in the body.

This assumption is absolutely false. Dis-ease has everything to do with distortions within the frequency data packs or imprints within our fluids, tissues, bones, and the whole electromagnetic communication network. In other words, a damaged tissue is going to transmit a different frequency than is a healthy, thriving one so the damaged tissue creates a distortion in the field in order to transmit the need for microbes to come in, break down the damaged tissue, and then clean up the cellular debris. Essentially, it is a sign of distress and incoherence when we begin transmitting this out to our terrain, or biosphere. Our DNA may receive and transmit these signals, but they, themselves, are not the cause of dis-ease. The true “roots” of dis-ease are what I outlined above, which are as follows - 1) toxin exposure and toxic load, even that which is generationally compounded 2) traumatic experiences 3) miasms – passed down energetic imprints that either express or do not express via certain triggers 4) nutritional needs not being met in the diet and environment, like sunlight and so on 5) chaotic and distorted environments 6) mental programming and beliefs 7) any other trigger that can affect a person’s biosphere, which can include any of these basic foundations of health – air/oxygenation, food/nutrition, pure/alive/mineralized water, exposure to sunlight and nature, sleep and rest, emotional balance and stability, body and energy balance, awareness of mental programming, environmental exposures, and open detoxification pathways.

Assumption #4: DNA/genes are the same throughout all areas of the body.

This assumption has actually been proven false by a group of Montreal scientists back in 2009. The following excerpt from their paper describes it: “The researchers focused on BAK, a gene that controls cell death. When they compared them, the researchers discovered major differences between BAK genes in blood cells and tissue cells coming from the same individuals, with the suspected disease ‘trigger’ residing only in the tissue. Moreover, the same differences were later evident in samples derived from healthy individuals. What they found surprised them” (McGill University in Science Daily, 2009, para. 7 – 11). Even in this research, the Montreal scientists assumed that the BAK gene controls cell death. Do we actually know this to be true? I’m not so certain because much of what we understand about molecular and microbiology as well as gene coding is not true and Dr. Harold Hillman was a great pioneer of that stance as well. Why is this? Well, this is because of the way in which they discount the environment as it relates to their experiments (as well as the fact that they are using electron microscope still images and have interpreted artifacts on these still images as organelles and such within a cell, where they then go on to describe how their cell theory works, which is tightly tied into the theory of genetics as well, and to top it off, they are inputting these already skewed data points into a computer software program in order to generate sequences of genetic information, and so on and so forth) and as a result, the outcome of those experiments are not valid nor are they accurate in the slightest.

So why does DNA differ from the tissue to the blood and probably everything in between? There are multiple reasons for why this could be, but one of the main ones is that the body has specific foundational energetic blueprints [in waveforms and frequencies] for each type of tissue, cell, fluid, etc. in the body; thus, this can look or express differently or in the least, function differently in each system of the body. If its functions are different, then its waveforms and thus, structure or form are as well, which we know this based upon the study of cymatics (and rife therapy as well), where each waveform vibrates the sand or salt on a platform in a different pattern since they are the vibrational instructions for expression, form/structure, and function. The same goes for all fluids, cells, tissues, and everything in our body, but instead of the sand or salt, our body uses structured water/gels, microbes, lipids, protein, and cells. Hence, the reason that these waveforms/frequencies dictate an organized “behavior” or coherence [within their basic structural pattern] in one’s biosphere so that the body can function appropriately. Since DNA acts as the waveform antenna within each tissue, cell, and area of the body, then it can only be logically understood that each waveform leads to a specific response, specific structure, and then that structure creates a specific function. So, in essence, we can gather that differing foundational [organizing] waveforms received by each DNA antenna would equate to differing proteins (which are synthesized with the assistance of microbes, so “killing off” bacteria, yeasts, fungi, etc. -- even advised by many in the natural health field -- is highly cautioned against because it will just create a “pleomorphism” within those microbes in order to handle and in turn, harmonize the distorted terrain), etc. in order to carry out the appropriate functions within that particular tissue, organ, fluid, etc. It also greatly depends upon environmental exposures and components as well, since that can highly influence our DNA and “genes” too. As you can see, microbes aren’t the bad guys either like they have been labeled in all fields of medicine and “healing.” Microbes assist with protein synthesis, snipping amino acid chains, enzyme production, recycling cellular debris, and are well-known as the clean-up crew of the body so it is imperative at this time that we stop blaming them, along with genetics, as the cause for disease processes and look at the real culprit, which has been blatantly obvious this whole time – it simply involves swaying from the basic foundations of health (and those can be found above under assumption #3). As you can see again, this really does involve simplicity…not needing to add in more complexity (but often does so to look more “advanced,” knowledgeable, and/or to have some hidden secret that many “non-scientists” cannot prove is true so one runs with it because it is an accepted norm), which ideally, muddies the waters and ideas on how we, as humans, can balance our health and actually live our lives. Of course, everyone has a right to their own approach, but if the approach is skewed (especially when working with clients), someone is only going to get so far before they hit a wall. Why is this? Because the underlying assumption doesn’t match up with “real life” or one’s experience(s)…and this is usually what takes place and wakes people up from these falsehoods that they are operating or living under. I write all of this to spare you the long process of hitting multiple walls with multiple practitioners and to empower you with a nudge back to your own remembrance within so that you don’t have to rely so heavily on information outside of yourself.

Assumption #5: The genetic testing is accurate and each gene function or role, as expressed by scientists, are accurate as well.

If genetic expression is more dependent on waveform patterns, one’s terrain (including microbes), and epigenetic variables, then testing simply for a sequence or polymorphisms within a “gene” sequence seems kind of skewed right off the bat, does it not? Why is this? Because if you take those variables away, how do we know that the sequences or polymorphisms wouldn’t change? How do we know that the testing process itself isn’t mutating the DNA, “genes,” and genetic profile or genome? Well, we don’t…so that is why it is important not to place all of our eggs in one basket for a theory that hasn’t even been proven to be accurate with controlled, replicable experimental methods…and to take it one step further, I’m not even sure they could ever accurately experiment with DNA and genetics since they have to remove it from its natural environment to do so, where it then doesn’t have the same exact waveform instructional packets or patterns of information since these new environmental packets have been introduced as well. This is what is highly flawed in most scientific research and their assumptions. One great question to ask ourselves is does everything act and function in the system as a whole in the exact same way or manner as it does in a lab setting, where they tend to use life-diminishing products and practices? It is a valid question that science may never be able to answer because studying a living being [invasively] isn’t deemed an ethical practice, nor should it be, so that is why they turn to extraction methods, cadaver studies, and experiments on animals. Since they can only experiment in this manner, they inadvertently (and that is giving them the benefit of the doubt) effect the terrain by their use of cell cultures and so on (using all sorts of contaminations and cytotoxic agents), which signals to the microbes in that cell culture or lab environment to act in a specific manner in order to clean up cellular debris, snip proteins, break down damage cells, and so on, which as such, the microbes will then affect the so-called genomic/gene sequences. So ultimately, it is the environment (both internal and external) that determines the health of our terrain and thus, microbiome, which is what assists in modulating our genes and genetic expression, along with the waveform data packs that signal the microbiome (microzymas, somatids, and protids as well as all current microbes) to “pleomorph” into what microbes are needed most in order to bring harmony back to the terrain. It is an interdependent system, whose basis is structured water, light, sound, energy, and primordial microbes, which can be seen in blood samples, under a darkfield microscope, as these tiny, flickering lights that move all across the sample. I'm sure that if one watches them long enough, as the blood cells die, they will see these microzymas morph into specific microbes so that the cellular debris can be cleaned up and ultimately, the sample as a whole. This is what happens to our body after death as well, if we are not cremated that is, so I'm not sure why this is so hard for professionals to grasp, especially in the field of natural health.     



So, in having gone through all of these assumptions and information, if a naturopathic professional or integrative practitioner suggests that you need or may benefit from any type of genetic testing as a way to provide better insight into nutraceutical recommendations and other interventions, then I suggest asking them about their assumptions regarding DNA/genetics, to decline the testing (unless you prefer spending this excess money and limiting yourself to these narratives), and/or find yourself another professional who sees you as whole, fully functional, and able to harmonize any distortions in your frequency data packs within your terrain (which includes the structured water/fluids, cells, and tissues of the body)…and that is done by shifting our beliefs, which then dictates our behavior and in turn, the epigenetic triggers that we expose ourselves to on a continual basis.

So how should naturopathic professionals and integrative practitioners go about making nutraceutical recommendations to their clients then? Well, they could start by recommending nutritious food and educating their clients on the removal of toxicities and excess stress or stressors within in their life (or recommend outlets to those) so that the body doesn’t use up nutrients that it does have so quickly (via tissue repair, metabolic processes, methylation, and the like). In other words, regaining balance in the body is not rocket science so adding on more testing to one’s regimen and plate, especially tests that are not accurate (which a great majority are not), simply adds complexity to a case that is often quite simple. When we don’t want to look at the actual “offenders” of health challenges and symptoms (like toxin exposures, nutritional intake, water quality, and everything else within our control) and in turn, hold ourselves accountable, then we tend to look at things that we are told are out of our control, like “genes,” microbes, “viruses,” parasites, and so on. This leads one on a wild goose chase, a game of whack-a-mole, and an experience of victimhood for the rest of their lives…or until they at least, wake up and snap out of that programmed behavior, and we have all been there so this isn’t finger pointing or shaming anyone for making these choices. It’s just an open invitation for everyone to know that different choices are an option for us, which is rather freeing from the previously mentioned limited beliefs and programming. Furthermore, when we take on anything as our identity (like MTHFR/COMT/COX, etc. mutation, or any diagnosis of an “incurable” or “unchangeable” disease, etc.), then we will begin to create that experience for ourselves because our focus is on that as truth…but, it isn’t true, unless we believe it as truth. In my own experience, clients do want to be validated in their thought process that something is “wrong,” that they are “broken/defective,” and that they are a “victim” in this sense to their circumstances because they feel “broken/defective” and a “victim” to their circumstances, but that isn’t our place as naturopathic professionals because there is no long-term benefit of that to the client. We can validate the “not feeling well, pain, and/or struggle, etc.,” but we do not see and treat anyone as “broken/needing fixed” because they aren’t, even the term deficiency, as in nutritional deficiencies, is distorted (and please know that those in the natural health field cannot legally say that one has any deficiencies or make recommendations on a product for one’s supposed deficiencies because that is practicing medicine to treat a “diagnosis,” but I see it happening a lot, even in our local area). Our goal, as professionals, is to build client confidence for self-healing by empowering them with what they can do…not point out so-called “mutations” in their genetics (or even “deficiencies”) so that they then think that they require certain supports beyond basic health foundations for the rest of their life or else, they will regress or feel like this for the rest of their life if they don’t…because as they see it, “it must be those dirty polymorphisms that are causing them to feel this way or hindering their natural processes in the body in some way, leading to any number of symptoms.” This isn’t true so why put a client through that, instead of simply empowering them to make simple lifestyle shifts in order to create true change by shifting the transmittal of any distorted frequencies into harmonic ones throughout their terrain and biosphere? And on that same note, we also have to be sure that we don’t overstep these client’s boundaries either with our lifestyle recommendations, as I’ve seen that firsthand too with quite a few naturopathic professionals. Disempowerment is telling clients what to do and then scrutinizing or shaming them when they choose differently for themselves; whereas, empowerment is educating clients on the reason why we make certain recommendations as well as asking them specific questions so that they can reflect on certain things in their life. This allows them to come to their own conclusion on whatever decision or path is best for them. In all honesty, I feel like consumerism and educational/institutional programming are two of the major reasons for this infiltration in the natural health field, and I feel compelled to speak out about it and shift the paradigm to a more open, whole, and empowering one, and that is exactly the reason that I am sharing this with you all today.

I will leave you with this quote by W.C. Fields because it sums up this type of distorted thinking perfectly:

If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit”…and this is exactly what many of these professionals are doing to millions across America so be sure to find yourself a highly aware and critical thinking naturopath/integrative practitioner that mentors you on the way of “new” biology and in turn, assists you with expanding your consciousness in order to make way for new perspectives and thus, different experiences.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and I wish each of you the best. If you require any additional support or mentoring, beyond your own innate capabilities, then please feel free to reach out.

Dr. Andrea Bird

Board Certified Naturopathic Doctor, Certified Holistic Health Practitioner, Professional Nutritionist Diploma, Certified Craniosacral Therapist, Certified Myofascial Energetic Release Therapist, Certified Level 3 Reiki Master + Advanced Reiki Master Teacher, Energy Medicine Practitioner, Certified Trigger Point & Deep Bodywork Specialist, Certified Gua Sha Therapist, Professional Cupping Certification, Kinesiology Certification, & More, Plus the Owner and CEO of Beyond Wellness, LLC.


P.S. My goal is to put out many more of these types of articles when it comes to breaking down assumptions in both the alternative health and medical field. If you take a look at the Beyond Wellness, LLC Facebook page, then you will find some other posts on various topics like this as well.


Links for Further Information Regarding This Article in Particular:



McGill University. (2009, July 16). DNA Not The Same In Every Cell Of Body: Major Genetic Differences Between Blood And Tissue Cells Revealed. Science Daily. Retrieved on January 15, 2024 from

Munteanu, Nina. (2021, March 13). When Water and DNA Talk. Retrieved on January 15, 2024 from

45 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page