Is the US government good for our health?

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

Someone claiming to be a doctor wrote that American life expectancies now rank 41st in the world. If that's true, and that would be despite our being first in health care expenditures; you know the first thing I'd blame.

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

You may have heard that many doctors are leaving the medical system in the USA, and fewer people are training to be doctors, because of federal red tape and stingy Medicare and Medicaid payments. Besides long wait times, there's a serious consequence. Doctors are so rushed that they make wrong diagnoses more often than otherwise. The third leading cause of deaths from health problems, after heart disease and cancer, are mistakes by nurses and doctors http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/Headlin...8/26/id/590884

[Truthseeker]

Wow, what a bizarre reason why your insurance provider may want to cancel your health policy. I'm not sure how important that is, but I can see many people will be harmed. Besides, the article points out that Obamacare was sold partly based on the premise it would increase competition, though I don't fully understand in detail why it won't. Enough chatter, here's the link to the explanation http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...ur-health.html

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

This news has appeared in many sources including this report
http://www.usnews.com/news/us/articl...omote-diabetes
so maybe it's not news to you.

I nevertheless press on. The FDA said in response that the artificial sweeteners approved for sale have been thoroughly studied and are considered safe. Can you believe that! Nothing like, "Wow, maybe the world had better not use artificial sweeteners starting now until the scientists have done several studies of this thing."

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

Antoine Bechamp showed that bacteria cannot cause a disease on their own. The human body has to be in a condition so that the bacteria can multiply. Obviously that's true of viruses. If our bodies were perfectly healthy, they would remain thus. Vaccines are only necessary, if ever, when the body is defective or sick in some way. Recently people studied the HPV and its distribution in the human population. Guess what? 70% of the population had HPV! Yet only around 4% got infected by HPV.
Reference: Ma, Y., R. Madupu, U. Karaoz. et al. "Human papillomavirus community in healthy persons, defined by metagenomics analysis of human microbiome project shotgun sequencing data sets." J. Virol. 2014 May;88(9):4786-97
[THanks, Dr. Frank Shallenberger, Second Opinion (October 2014)]

[lilpixieofterror]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

Antoine Bechamp showed that bacteria cannot cause a disease on their own. The human body has to be in a condition so that the bacteria can multiply. Obviously that's true of viruses. If our bodies were perfectly healthy, they would remain thus. Vaccines are only necessary, if ever, when the body is defective or sick in some way. Recently people studied the HPV and its distribution in the human population. Guess what? 70% of the population had HPV! Yet only around 4% got infected by HPV.
Reference: Ma, Y., R. Madupu, U. Karaoz. et al. "Human papillomavirus community in healthy persons, defined by metagenomics analysis of human microbiome project shotgun sequencing data sets." J. Virol. 2014 May;88(9):4786-97
[THanks, Dr. Frank Shallenberger, Second Opinion (October 2014)]

Oh yeah... more conspiracy theory nonsense.

[Truthseeker]

Why, what's wrong? I thought it made good sense. Another example is the influenza virus. It's probably just about everywhere, yet usually less than 5% (typically around 3%) come down with the flu each season.

[Paprika]

Why, what's wrong? I thought it made good sense. Another example is the influenza virus. It's probably just about everywhere, yet usually less than 5% (typically around 3%) come down with the flu each season.

From the article:

[Sparko]

TS, do you know how viruses work? And Anti-bodies?

The viruses actually invade a cell's nucleus, inserting their own genetic code into your cell's DNA and hijack that cell into becoming a virus factory. Being "healthy" will not defend you against that. Your body had two defenses: 1. Destroy the infected cell and 2. develop an antibody that attaches to the free virus shell, and basically locks it up so that it cannot deliver it's payload.

Nobody has every antibody for every virus. The reason that some people become ill with the flu while others do not is because those that do not either already have the correct antibody in their system or develop one quickly enough that the virus cannot spread enough to make you sick.

[Truthseeker]

TS, do you know how viruses work? And Anti-bodies?

The viruses actually invade a cell's nucleus, inserting their own genetic code into your cell's DNA and hijack that cell into becoming a virus factory. Being "healthy" will not defend you against that. Your body had two defenses: 1. Destroy the infected cell and 2. develop an antibody that attaches to the free virus shell, and basically locks it up so that it cannot deliver it's payload.

Nobody has every antibody for every virus. The reason that some people become ill with the flu while others do not is because those that do not either already have the correct antibody in their system or develop one quickly enough that the virus cannot spread enough to make you sick.

Wow, you actually think I'm that ignorant. Maybe you're not the sharpest tool in the shop. EVERYONE knows that his body is under constant, multiple assaults by bacteria, bacteriophages, fungi, other viruses, and God knows what else. The question is, why is everyone not sick all the time? Vaccines? Nope. For one thing, they usually work only for viruses. A sound immune system is ALL you need. It's unfortunately true that many people don't have sound immune systems, for many reasons: Congenital faults; poor nutrition; lack of good health practice; bad health practice; injury. Vaccines might be a good idea in some cases. NOT all. And too often vaccination injures the immune system so that the patient is in worse shape than before.

What you or Lil Pixie need to do to make your case (whatever that is, "vaccination are indispensable!!") is to cite a study in which the healthiest people nevertheless got sick upon normal or usual exposure to say a particular influenza strain. Lotsa luck.

[lilpixieofterror]

Wow, you actually think I'm that ignorant.

Most of the anti vaccine crowd is usually pretty ignorant of basic science and history.

Maybe you're not the sharpest tool in the shop. EVERYONE knows that his body is under constant, multiple assaults by bacteria, bacteriophages, fungi, other viruses, and God knows what else. The question is, why is everyone not sick all the time?

If you want to return to the days of dead children and the possibility of dying from a cut or do you prefer to live in the days where you don't end up getting some deadly infection or are protected from diseases that were once seen as common place. You're welcome to it. I think I'd prefer to live in an era where a pin prick in the finger doesn't end up killing you or crippling you for the rest of your life.

Vaccines? Nope. For one thing, they usually work only for viruses.

More nonsense posted as truth. Have you ever had Tentanus? I haven't and most people haven't either. Want to know why? It is because of a vaccine that we are given that protects us from it. So nope, you're wrong again and not just a little wrong. You've very wrong. There's many vaccines out there that protect us from bacteria as well as virus'. There's reasons I have little tolerance from the anti vaccine crowd. It will end up killing scores of children or crippling them for the rest of their lives because of unethical lies posted by people that claim to be doctors.

A sound immune system is ALL you need. It's unfortunately true that many people don't have sound immune systems, for many reasons: Congenital faults; poor nutrition; lack of good health practice; bad health practice; injury. Vaccines might be a good idea in some cases. NOT all. And too often vaccination injures the immune system so that the patient is in worse shape than before.

While this is somewhat true that being immune compromised does make more open to infection, where are digging up this nonsense that vaccines injures your immune system? Go ahead, cite an actual scientific study that proves this and not some crack pot web site that spreads lies that will end up with scores of dead children because of their lies. I have zero tolerance for your nonsense TS because your anti vaccine nonsense will lead to scores of dead children because it ignores history and science. I have two brothers and scores of cousins. Why have all of us made it to adult hood? It is because vaccines protected us from what were once common child hood illness that killed them before they became adults. Your stupidity will end up killing children and how many children are going to have to die before you admit that your anti vaccine idiocy is wrong and should have never been picked up?

What you or Lil Pixie need to do to make your case (whatever that is, "vaccination are indispensable!!") is to cite a study in which the healthiest people nevertheless got sick upon normal or usual exposure to say a particular influenza strain. Lotsa luck.

Too bad influenza is caused by several virus strains and nobody has ever aruged that vaccines prevent ALL disease, eh? So how many children are going to have to die from your nonsense before you admit that your anti vaccine idiotic claims are not only wrong, but dangerous?

[Truthseeker]

I did err in saying that USUALLY vaccines work only against viruses. Bacteria and other bugs are also vaccinated against. However, Lil Pixie does not mention that vaccines could be dangerous. Many deaths have occurred that are at least rather suspicious. Cases of serious damage such as autism are suspicious at least. Many previous posts have links to relevant reports. She has failed so far to meet my challenge to cite a sound study that appear to show that the healthiest part of the world fell victim to some serious disease such as polio as about frequently as people with immune systems that are less sound.

I've cited this evidence before and I'm going to cite it again. Bill Sardi wrote that disease incidences plummeted in and around London when public sanitation and other health policies greatly improved (cleaner water, especially), well before vaccination was first instituted.

I am puzzled how Sparko and Lil Pixie would explain how it is that before vaccination was first instituted, how animals and human beings managed to survive the onslaught of bugs. Sparko and Lil can cite the high birth rate of past times, but they are asking us to think we were rather lucky to have came through the gauntlet. I doubt that, I think there were people who did have good immune systems and survived to old age or midage at any rate. Please try to prove that assertion wrong. As for people who suffered accidents resulting in broken bones or large wounds, given the lack of medical knowledge then, I would concede their chances of surviving to old age were rather poor, but that does not prove Sparko and Lil right. Why not assume such people's immune systems were rather badly impaired by the accidents?

[Jedidiah]

Add up all the deaths that might be caused by vaccines and compare to all the deaths that we had before vaccines. Give me the results.

[Epoetker]

Add up all the deaths that might be caused by vaccines and compare to all the deaths that we had before vaccines. Give me the results.

About the only argument you could make against vaccines is that they keep people alive who would have died in the past, and thus increased deleterious mutations in the aggregate population:

What this increasingly looks like is a sick society of sick people. An old society, a society of millions on invalidity benefit, tens of millions dependent on drugs - whether they need them or not, of chronic diseases - mental and physical.

I am not making a Nietzschian point here, I am not yearning for a nation of vigorous blond beasts; I am not despising or hating the sickness of old sick people (after all, I am one of them!). (Modern society is already filled to overflowing with resentment and hatred - it is just that the resentment is feeble, futile, evanescent - hence deniable.)

I am simply stating that there are strong indications that the population of the oldest industrialized society in the world is maladaptive; as individuals and at a group level.

Why? Well all the above is consistent with widespread, near universal, genetic damage; mutation accumulation due fact such as the child mortality rate has fallen from about half to about one percent, and that for six to eight generations the people with the least mutations have had the least children, and those with heavy mutations loads have had the most - also that for several decades the average fertility is well below two children per woman for all classes, and the population of British is shrinking. This is a recipe for eventual mutational meltdown, but on the way to that increasing pathology is inevitable.

So we in Britain, we in the West and East Asia, are a sick society of sick people; and there is nothing that we can realistically do to prevent it; not least because it is caused by what was probably the greatest boon of the industrial revolution - the near abolition of child mortality - which throughout human history has been a major cause of human misery.

However, it makes a vast difference; it makes all the difference in this world (and the next) how we respond to the facts.

We do not need to be - we ought not to be - what we are now; which is a society of death wishers, a society of time-servers, a passive society of unmotivated hedonists. That we have just given up is because we have as a nation and as a society turned away from God, forgotten God, hate God - and this puts us into a position of weakness unprecedented in human history.

We know in our bones that we are dying, personally and socially - because genetically. We know too that disaster looms. But it is unacceptable to respond by simply trying to get through the intervening time with as as much fun and as little unpleasantness as possible. This attitude doesn't work, it makes everything worse; and it is evil because it not only acquiesces in the destruction of all good things (marriage, family, beauty, honesty etc.) but actively (albeit feebly) promotes evil (sexual hedonism, the marring of beauty and imposition of ugliness, hype and lies and fake denial).

In such circumstances it is not hard to imagine a suicide cult taking hold - even a cult of humane murder on a massive scale; spun as being the only reliable way to avoid future suffering for yourself and those you care about. Because modern secular people regard death as a full stop, an oblivion, and they like the sound of that better than a world of suffering, fear, starvation, disease and violence (which is the world they are working hard to enable).

Therefore, if it is not to become a cult of death, a culture that is dying needs to look beyond death. There is no alternative. Only by looking beyond death can we put a life of disease and decline into a meaningful and purposeful context.

We can only live well in a sick society in the time that remains us (indiviually and collectively) when our mortal lives are seen in context; and context means as not-the-whole thing but a part and a preparation for the whole thing.

No matter how bad things become, and the quantitative scale of a modern collapse would dwarf anything humans have experienced so far, from the individual perspective there can be no suffering or loss that Men of the past have not already experienced - and which some of them have transcended by their faith in God.

*

Where does it begin?

It can only begin with individuals, individual choice, by opening-ourselves to God. We are not going to be rescued; we are not going to have God forced-upon-us and the future mapped-out and ourselves carried-passively-along.

It all begins with a change of fundamental attitude. Anybody can do it. You don't need to be young, healthy, high status. You can be old, sick and despised.

No matter how sick you are, you can open you mind, you can say yes. You can repent the evils of our time and in yourself. You can recognize the side of Good and join it.

It makes all the difference: the difference between living the cult of death, and living in expectation of eternal life.

Bruch Charlton does seem to have the best attitude toward the situation, at least.

[Paprika]

It is very true that from a biological perspective, the high reduction of child mortality has all but eliminated what used to be a highly significant source of selection pressure. This, however, doesn't mean that all those who survive to adulthood pass on their genes: from demographic statistics, birth rate is falling amongst some populations and not others; it is also well known that certain worldviews or ideologies predispose the person holding them to be more inclined towards abortion or having no/few children.