I shudder when I consider I spent years striving to develop inhibitors of neutrophil activation as therapeutics for autoimmune disease. Was that not only misguided, but a sinister consequence of interloper manipulation to encourage the field of immunopharmacology, knowing it could make things worse? What can Creator tell us about the medical implications for using anti-inflammatories?

Sadly, what you are seeing now, intuitively, as a sinister undercurrent was present through the history here of wanting to use medicinal chemistry to craft therapeutic agents that are more powerful in limiting pain from conditions like autoimmune disorders that damage tissues and organs and often produce pain as a consequence. The interlopers are well aware that there is a sequence of bodily responses designed to provide signals for repair and regeneration and, unfortunately, chemical substances like NSAIDs and corticosteroids will block the repair and healing sequence that is available innately in the wisdom of the body in responding to an insult that can indeed short-circuit a successful complete resolution of a malady and, in effect, freeze it in place with respect to the ongoing symptoms. In your early years of research when you worked with several classes of chemical agents as potential candidates for alleviating signs and symptoms of inflammatory disorders, you were keenly aware that it was taking chances due to blocking the immune response, but more in terms of possible side effects rather than the drama with the primary illness also needing to express itself and not simply be suppressed across the board. Your intuitive sensing of the negative potential was not discriminating enough to tease apart the deeper meaning of the signs and symptoms being a cry for help and perhaps even a necessary stage in preparing the body for war, so to speak. The tragedy was predictably inevitable, given the lack of awareness and deeper insight about the true causes of such disorders being mostly chronic virus infections triggering the immune system to cause damage, including pain and inflammation, not as misguided overreaction at all, but a natural physiologic response to injury by invading organisms. To treat such a malady by suppressing signs and symptoms and not correcting the cause through elimination of the invading pathogens was, in effect, akin to putting a Band-Aid on a malignant skin lesion to make it invisible to the eye without regard to long-term consequences. So even though it is taking the easy way out in getting some symptomatic relief, it ends up prolonging the agony, and in some cases worsening outcomes, because long-term damage from chronic viral presence can mount and eventually cause organ failure and even death. The bottom line here is that most of what the pharmaceutical industry has been trying to do for many decades now is a primitive, simplistic, and faulty approach to dealing with chronic illness and you would be better off without it as a cultural fixture. At a minimum, it would provide a vacuum needing to be filled, perhaps by something more insightful and with greater promise, like looking for the cause as a primary goal rather than giving up hope at the outset because of the seeming size of the challenge. This would also help avoid the hidden selfish motive of needing a chronic condition as a moneymaking opportunity, whereas curing an illness quickly is far less lucrative. So it is not as though the industry has made a conscious choice to serve themselves and not cure cancer, so to speak, with respect to tackling chronic illness more deeply. Given the situation they don't know how to go about it because they are blinded by mind control manipulation to ignore useful scientific leads that have been stumbled on, this makes it a foregone conclusion they will fail to pursue the more useful and rewarding path because that is simply prevented from happening by nonhuman interlopers.