Why is prevention in the health sector so strongly opposed?

Prevention—the targeted prevention of disease—sounds like a given in any healthcare system. Yet it's often neglected, sometimes even actively hindered. Why? Because true health isn't a good business model—but illness is.

The system is programmed for repair

Let's start with an important distinction: Modern medicine has undoubtedly achieved great things. It is a blessing in emergencies, in cases of serious infections, accidents, or life-threatening conditions. Without intensive care units, surgery, or emergency care, our lives today would be unimaginable.

But when it comes to chronic diseases, a different picture emerges: Instead of addressing the root cause of the problem, symptoms are controlled – often for life. The result is a "repair system" that isn't designed for healing, but rather for long-term treatment. And there are economic reasons for this: medications can be patented – lifestyle changes cannot.

Why prevention is rarely a product

Prevention means preventing diseases from occurring in the first place – through diet, exercise, sleep, stress management, micronutrients, and education. But this is precisely what's difficult to market. No one can secure exclusive rights to broccoli, sunlight, or breathing exercises. There's no shareholder return on healthy behavior – but there is on new drugs, therapies, and technological monitoring.

The industry isn't following a conspiracy, but rather simple market mechanisms. It's simply more lucrative to "manage" high blood pressure than to eliminate it through a sustainable diet and exercise. A healthy person is a poor long-term customer.

And those who openly criticize this situation often risk their professional existence. Doctors who publicly advocate for holistic prevention are increasingly coming under pressure – from colleagues, hospital management, or medical associations. Some are reprimanded, others dismissed, and some even lose their licenses. Not because they endanger people, but because they refuse to participate in a system of long-term treatment. Those who cure are fired. Prevention is becoming a threat – because it works.

The dogma of plant-based nutrition – a dangerous mistake?

The modern nutrition debate is increasingly dominated by a dogma: Plant-based = healthy. But this equation is not just simplistic—it is alien and highly harmful .

The human organism is the product of an evolutionary development in which animal nutrients—such as high-quality proteins, fat-soluble vitamins (A, D, K2), omega-3 fatty acids (DHA/EPA), bioavailable iron, and vitamin B12—have played a central role ^{1 2} . A purely plant-based diet ignores this evolutionary basis and forces the body into an artificial deficiency regime ^{1 3} .

In addition, many plants contain so-called antinutrients – such as lectins, phytic acid, or oxalates – which have been shown to hinder the absorption of essential minerals, irritate the immune system, and promote long-term inflammatory processes ^{3 4} . The whole situation is exacerbated by the industrial processing of so-called "plant-based" products: synthetic ingredients, isolated proteins, additives, and seed oils form a toxic basis for a system that claims to be sustainable – but is in no way sustainable: neither ecologically nor physiologically ⁵ .

What is sold as preventative is in fact often a stealthy attack on the immune system, hormone balance, and cellular health. Instead of naturalness, the plant-based industry relies on ultra-processing with a green label – and many consumers believe they are doing themselves good while systematically weakening themselves.

What now?

The solution does not lie in a blanket demonization of medicine or the pharmaceutical industry. It is indispensable in many areas – especially in emergencies, complex surgeries, infections, and acute illnesses. But it must not become the sole authority for health.

Real health does not come from pills, but from knowledge, lifestyle and personal responsibility.

What we need is a system that rewards prevention rather than combating it. One that allows doctors to treat causes rather than manage symptoms. And one that treats nutrition not as an ideological matter of faith, but as a biologically sound foundation for health.

Food Sherlock stands for exactly that: critical thinking, scientifically sound questioning, and courageous education. For people who aren't satisfied with a fix-it system—who want true health.

And above all: sincere praise to all those who remain undeterred despite headwinds . Those who follow their minds and their hearts – whether as doctors, therapists, scientists, nutritionists, or just ordinary people with common sense. They are the ones who – often quietly, sometimes at great personal risk – are paving the way for a medicine that seeks to heal rather than merely administer. For a society built on knowledge rather than routine. And perhaps they are the ones who will ultimately make possible the change that still seems impossible today.

Footnotes / References

1. Melina, V., Craig, W., & Levin, S. (2016). Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Vegetarian Diets. JAND, 116(12), 1970-1980. ↩ ↩ ²
2. Eaton, S.B., et al. (2002). Evolutionary health promotion. Preventive Medicine, 34(5), 504–513. ↩
3. Samtiya, M., et al. (2020). Plant food anti-nutritional factors and their reduction strategies: An overview. Food Production, Processing and Nutrition, 2(1). ↩ ↩ ²
4. Holmes, R. P., & Assimos, D. G. (2004). The influence of dietary oxalate on kidney stone formation. Urological Research, 32(5), 311-316. ↩
5. Monteiro, CA, et al. (2019). Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them. Public Health Nutrition, 22(5), 936-941. ↩