The Medical Industrial Complex is indeed a monster (a very
dangerous and un-natural predator).

It only makes money if you are sick or afraid of becoming sick
and it is controlled by institutional and individual investors
who care about money above all things.

It only makes money if the treatment or preventive medicine involves
technology, which includes pharmaceuticals.

In order to make people afraid of becoming sick it spends enormous
amounts of money on advertising designed to convince them that
several falsehoods are instead facts:

1. That the human body is prone to disease.

If that were the case there wouldn't _be_ a human race. The
human body is obviously inherently healthy.

2. That aging automatically brings with it all sorts of diseasee
conditions including the loss of the senses.

Look around. There are old people all over the place who are
vigorously healthy and have keen senses. Talk to these people
and you will discover that they avoid the Medical Industrial
Complex like the plague and don't have TVs and thus avoid
their potent propaganda.

3. That only technological treatments and preventive medicine are
effective. They even go so far as to claim that depression is
caused only and directly by physical conditions, which is absurd.

They pretend to ignore the enormous body of evidence that
indicates that a person's state of mind is the most important
factor determining their overall health while making use of
that same knowledge to undermine people's health with the
above propaganda.

They also undermine people's health by using artificial drugs
rather than natural ones and constantly lobbying to have
all natural remedies and therapies banned.

Again, look around. Do you see the healthy people that the
MIC wants us to believe that techological medicine has
created? No. You see very unhealthy people who are spending
so much on disease care (to give health care a more accurate
label) that it is threatening our entire economy.

I remember being a kid in the 1950's. People were a LOT healthier
then. Almost no one had health insurance and they rarely went to
the doctor and rarely took drugs of any kind. The average person
could work hard all day long and enjoy it. Serious illnesses were
so rare that they were newsworthy and became the talk of the
town. Healthy old people died peacefully in their sleep after
playing with their great-grandchildren all day long.

Tom

Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.

On Apr 7, 6:05*am, Frank > wrote:
> Baloney. *Life expectancy has gone up.
Life expectancy is a tricky thing. There used to be a high death rate
of young children. What is the life expectancy of people 10 years and
older?

Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. Do not
confuse between longevity and health.

On 4/7/2010 8:28 AM, Jerry wrote:
> On Apr 7, 6:05 am, > wrote:
>> Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.
> Life expectancy is a tricky thing. There used to be a high death rate
> of young children. What is the life expectancy of people 10 years and
> older?
>
> Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
> problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. Do not
> confuse between longevity and health.

US today uses expectancy based on live births. This makes it somewhat
lower than other nations that will not count premature births or kids
that last less than a certain time period.

Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
dead. I know of very few that would agree with you.

I personally had a couple of incidents where surgical procedures that
saved me were not around in the 50's.

I still say, op is full of it.

On 4/7/2010 8:05 AM, Frank wrote:
> Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.
>

And the biggest fallacy is #2. Of course there are lots of old folks who
have avoided the "Medical Industrial Complex". And there is no mystery.
It is simply because of the genetic roll of dice that gave them good
genes. Same argument can be used about smoking. "Aunt Tilly smoked
three packs/day and lived to be ninety-nine" so that obviously proves
that everyone will get the same result.

On 4/7/2010 6:08 AM, Tom Emano wrote:
> The Medical Industrial Complex is indeed a monster (a very
> dangerous and un-natural predator).
>
> It only makes money if you are sick or afraid of becoming sick
> and it is controlled by institutional and individual investors
> who care about money above all things.
>
> It only makes money if the treatment or preventive medicine involves
> technology, which includes pharmaceuticals.
>
> In order to make people afraid of becoming sick it spends enormous
> amounts of money on advertising designed to convince them that
> several falsehoods are instead facts:
>
> 1. That the human body is prone to disease.
>
> If that were the case there wouldn't _be_ a human race. The
> human body is obviously inherently healthy.
>
> 2. That aging automatically brings with it all sorts of diseasee
> conditions including the loss of the senses.
>
> Look around. There are old people all over the place who are
> vigorously healthy and have keen senses. Talk to these people
> and you will discover that they avoid the Medical Industrial
> Complex like the plague and don't have TVs and thus avoid
> their potent propaganda.
>
> 3. That only technological treatments and preventive medicine are
> effective. They even go so far as to claim that depression is
> caused only and directly by physical conditions, which is absurd.
>
> They pretend to ignore the enormous body of evidence that
> indicates that a person's state of mind is the most important
> factor determining their overall health while making use of
> that same knowledge to undermine people's health with the
> above propaganda.
>
> They also undermine people's health by using artificial drugs
> rather than natural ones and constantly lobbying to have
> all natural remedies and therapies banned.
>
> Again, look around. Do you see the healthy people that the
> MIC wants us to believe that techological medicine has
> created? No. You see very unhealthy people who are spending
> so much on disease care (to give health care a more accurate
> label) that it is threatening our entire economy.
>
> I remember being a kid in the 1950's. People were a LOT healthier
> then. Almost no one had health insurance and they rarely went to
> the doctor and rarely took drugs of any kind. The average person
> could work hard all day long and enjoy it. Serious illnesses were
> so rare that they were newsworthy and became the talk of the
> town. Healthy old people died peacefully in their sleep after
> playing with their great-grandchildren all day long.

So what kind of food does the Medical Industrial Complex eat?

In article >, Tom Emano >
wrote:

> I remember being a kid in the 1950's. People were a LOT healthier
> then. Almost no one had health insurance and they rarely went to
> the doctor and rarely took drugs of any kind. The average person
> could work hard all day long and enjoy it. Serious illnesses were
> so rare that they were newsworthy and became the talk of the
> town. Healthy old people died peacefully in their sleep after
> playing with their great-grandchildren all day long.

Before technological intervention on a massive scale, natural selection
took care of bad gene combinations. FWIW, I think the liberal process of
protecting people from bad throws of genetic dice cannot go on for many
more generations. Liberals have to stop trying to prevent natural
selection while conservatives have to stop denying evolution is at the
center of human and other biology.

Bill

--
An old man would be better off never having been born.

In article >,
Frank > wrote:

> Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.

The amount of income during that period has also gone upby a factor of
fifty. That does not make feel rich. After all a $500 car now costs
$25,000.

Bill

--
An old man would be better off never having been born.

In article >,
Frank > wrote:

> Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> dead. I know of very few that would agree with you.

I sometimes think I would be better off dead.

I no longer drive.
I no longer can read books.
I no longer fish.
I have little sex.
My other bodily function are degrading.
My thinking has slowed down.
Serious computer programing seems out of the question.
When I do get my wits together I have to work on income tax and the like.

Bill

--
An old man would be better off never having been born.

Dear Tom Emano:

On Apr 7, 3:08*am, Tom Emano > wrote:
> The Medical Industrial Complex is indeed a monster
> (a very dangerous and un-natural predator).

We've shipped every other manufacturing job elsewhere. If / when we
destroy this "monster", we will have nothing to do, no product to
export, no retirement income, and nothing to replace it with. When we
point a finger at someone else, we have at least three pointing back
at ourselves.

Not saying you are wrong, or that your heart is not in the right
place, just understand this leaves only "insurance", "politician", and
"lawyer" as choices of occupation.

Be careful what you wish for.

David A. Smith

Dear Salmon Egg:

On Apr 7, 8:10*am, Salmon Egg > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *Frank > wrote:
> > Tell those with health problems being managed that
> > they are better off dead. *I know of very few that
> > would agree with you.
>
> I sometimes think I would be better off dead.

Probably not, or you'd already be there.

> I no longer drive.
> I no longer can read books.
> I no longer fish.
> I have little sex.

*That* is the shits. But did you ever much define yourself by the
amount of sex you were capable of?

> My other bodily function are degrading.

I miss having knees that didn't hurt...

> My thinking has slowed down.
> Serious computer programing seems out of the question.

Then try non-serious programming. Have you picked up a new language?

> When I do get my wits together I have to work on
> income tax and the like.

As we get older, it takes new terrain to make life "re-markable".
When we run the same rut, the brain feels like it can stay in
automatic. Have you tried "Toastmasters", or any complete change of
venue? I understand that you may depend on others for transport...

You *can* still find enjoyment.

David A. Smith

On Apr 7, 11:10*am, Salmon Egg > wrote:
> In article >,
>
> *Frank > wrote:
> > Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> > dead. *I know of very few that would agree with you.
>
> I sometimes think I would be better off dead.
>
> I no longer drive.
> I no longer can read books.
> I no longer fish.
> I have little sex.
> My other bodily function are degrading.
> My thinking has slowed down.
> Serious computer programing seems out of the question.
> When I do get my wits together I have to work on income tax and the like.
>
> Bill
>
> --
> An old man would be better off never having been born.

I'm old too but I can still do all these things.
When I almost bought the farm 10 years ago and was saved by modern
surgery the only good thing was that I cashed in on all the medical
insurance I had paid for over the years.

On alt.food.vegan, Tom Emano > wrote:
> The Medical Industrial Complex is indeed a monster (a very
> dangerous and un-natural predator).
>
> It only makes money if you are sick or afraid of becoming sick
> and it is controlled by institutional and individual investors
> who care about money above all things.
>
> It only makes money if the treatment or preventive medicine involves
> technology, which includes pharmaceuticals.
>
> In order to make people afraid of becoming sick it spends enormous
> amounts of money on advertising designed to convince them that
> several falsehoods are instead facts:
>
> 1. That the human body is prone to disease.
>
> If that were the case there wouldn't _be_ a human race. The
> human body is obviously inherently healthy.
>
> 2. That aging automatically brings with it all sorts of diseasee
> conditions including the loss of the senses.
>
> Look around. There are old people all over the place who are
> vigorously healthy and have keen senses. Talk to these people
> and you will discover that they avoid the Medical Industrial
> Complex like the plague and don't have TVs and thus avoid
> their potent propaganda.
>
> 3. That only technological treatments and preventive medicine are
> effective. They even go so far as to claim that depression is
> caused only and directly by physical conditions, which is absurd.
>
> They pretend to ignore the enormous body of evidence that
> indicates that a person's state of mind is the most important
> factor determining their overall health while making use of
> that same knowledge to undermine people's health with the
> above propaganda.
>
> They also undermine people's health by using artificial drugs
> rather than natural ones and constantly lobbying to have
> all natural remedies and therapies banned.
>
> Again, look around. Do you see the healthy people that the
> MIC wants us to believe that techological medicine has
> created? No. You see very unhealthy people who are spending
> so much on disease care (to give health care a more accurate
> label) that it is threatening our entire economy.
>
> I remember being a kid in the 1950's. People were a LOT healthier
> then. Almost no one had health insurance and they rarely went to
> the doctor and rarely took drugs of any kind. The average person
> could work hard all day long and enjoy it. Serious illnesses were
> so rare that they were newsworthy and became the talk of the
> town. Healthy old people died peacefully in their sleep after
> playing with their great-grandchildren all day long.
>
> Tom
>
>

I know one thing: If there were no cars you could close half
the hospitals in this country, and if the medical people were
really interested in making us healthy they would be lobbying
the government to ban cars and telling their patients not
to drive.

The medical people would be the strongest proponents of public
mass transportation in the country.

But they are obviously more interested in money than they are
our physical well being. Money includes jobs.

Sid

On 4/7/2010 10:59 AM, Salmon Egg wrote:
> In >, Tom >
> wrote:
>
>> I remember being a kid in the 1950's. People were a LOT healthier
>> then. Almost no one had health insurance and they rarely went to
>> the doctor and rarely took drugs of any kind. The average person
>> could work hard all day long and enjoy it. Serious illnesses were
>> so rare that they were newsworthy and became the talk of the
>> town. Healthy old people died peacefully in their sleep after
>> playing with their great-grandchildren all day long.
>
> Before technological intervention on a massive scale, natural selection
> took care of bad gene combinations. FWIW, I think the liberal process of
> protecting people from bad throws of genetic dice cannot go on for many
> more generations. Liberals have to stop trying to prevent natural
> selection while conservatives have to stop denying evolution is at the
> center of human and other biology.

"Conservatives" don't deny this. There's a lunatic fringe that does,
but they're not the mainstream. Unfortunately the press gives them good
coverage--if the press would just ignore them the world would be a
better place.

Liberals? It's the conservative who don't want defective babies aborted,
who wanted to keep Terry Schiavo alive.

Salmon Egg wrote:
|
| Before technological intervention on a massive scale, natural
| selection took care of bad gene combinations. FWIW, I think the
| liberal process of protecting people from bad throws of genetic dice
| cannot go on for many more generations. Liberals have to stop trying
| to prevent natural selection while conservatives have to stop denying
| evolution is at the center of human and other biology.
|
| Bill

In article
>,
Frank > wrote:

> I'm old too but I can still do all these things.
> When I almost bought the farm 10 years ago and was saved by modern
> surgery the only good thing was that I cashed in on all the medical
> insurance I had paid for over the years.

On more than one situation, I have had my close calls with death. I came
within a few seconds of my cold hands losing grip on some rock and my
sliding down an ice stream for over 1000 feet into a partially frozen
lake. That taught me that I was not petrified at the thought of death. I
would be more scared of a combat situation where there is a significant
probability of a painful lingering death.

I remember the quote:

Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of
chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course
others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
Patrick Henry

There is a point at which I do not wish to be enslaved by infirmities.

Bill

--
An old man would be better off never having been born.

In article >,
"J. Clarke" > wrote:

> > Before technological intervention on a massive scale, natural selection
> > took care of bad gene combinations. FWIW, I think the liberal process of
> > protecting people from bad throws of genetic dice cannot go on for many
> > more generations. Liberals have to stop trying to prevent natural
> > selection while conservatives have to stop denying evolution is at the
> > center of human and other biology.
>
> "Conservatives" don't deny this. There's a lunatic fringe that does,
> but they're not the mainstream. Unfortunately the press gives them good
> coverage--if the press would just ignore them the world would be a
> better place.

Having once been a conservative Republican, I see no conflict between
being conservative and believing evolution takes place. Starting with
Ronald Reagan, however, the conservative nuts have taken over the
Republican party. As a consequence, I reluctantly became a Democrat.

Bill

--
An old man would be better off never having been born.

On Apr 7, 6:49*am, Frank > wrote:

> > Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
> > problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. *Do not
> > confuse between longevity and health.

> Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> dead. *I know of very few that would agree with you.

I did not say they are better off dead. I said only that there is a
difference between longevity and health.

Dear Salmon Egg:

On Apr 7, 12:03*pm, Salmon Egg > wrote:
....
> As a consequence, I reluctantly became a Democrat.

"I don't belong to an organized political party. I'm a Democrat." -
Will Rogers

David A. Smith

On Apr 7, 4:28*pm, Jerry > wrote:
> On Apr 7, 6:49*am, Frank > wrote:
>
> > > Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
> > > problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. *Do not
> > > confuse between longevity and health.
> > Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> > dead. *I know of very few that would agree with you.
>
> I did not say they are better off dead. I said only that there is a
> difference between longevity and health.

Yes, objective is to live long and be in good health. They are not
exclusive.

On Apr 8, 1:31*pm, Bill Penrose > wrote:

> on the street every month? Quarantine postings on people's doors:
> rheumatic fever, measles, mumps? People died of those things *all the
> time*.

Measles? Mumps? People died of those things? When I was a kid, I got
lots of diseases: measles, mumps, chicken pox, colds, the flu, scurvy
at the age of 3, and other diseases that I don't remember. They were
no worse than the common cold. They were an excuse to not go to
school. I did not get treatment for any of these diseases (except
oranges for scurvy). Maybe what people died of was drugs taken for
these diseases.

Dear Jerry:

On Apr 8, 1:05*pm, Jerry > wrote:
> On Apr 8, 1:31*pm, Bill Penrose > wrote:
>
> > on the street every month? Quarantine postings on
> > people's doors: rheumatic fever, measles, mumps?
> > People died of those things *all the time*.
>
> Measles? Mumps? *People died of those things?

Yes. By the thousands, worldwide.

>*When I was a kid, I got lots of diseases: measles,
> mumps, chicken pox, colds, the flu, scurvy at the age
> of 3, and other diseases that I don't remember. They
> were no worse than the common cold. They were an
> excuse to not go to school. I did not get treatment for
> any of these diseases (except oranges for scurvy).
>*Maybe what people died of was drugs taken for
> these diseases.

More than likely, the people died because they had no drugs, no
medical direction to take, and / or because the genome had not been
weeded out to the level of including you and those like you. Not
everyone died, but those that did, could no longer reproduce.

David A. Smith

On Apr 8, 1:05*pm, Jerry > wrote:
> Measles? Mumps? *People died of those things? *When I was a kid, I got
> lots of diseases: measles, mumps, chicken pox, colds, the flu, scurvy
> at the age of 3, and other diseases that I don't remember.

There were no drugs for measles and mumps. Most people survived, but a
significant proportion of folks were damaged or killed. God bless
vaccines.

Measles - they kept you in a dark room because the light was painful.
You might end up blind or deaf, or brain damaged.

Mumps - could make you sterile.

Rheumatic fever - was considered to be contagious, but was actually
the autoimmune aftereffect of a Strep Group A infection. It attacked
heart valves, kidneys, vascular system, etc, doing every sort of
damage, depending mainly on what strain of strep had got you down. The
period of contagion began and ended long before the rheumatic fever
period, which could go on for days or weeks before resolving itself as
permanent loss of kidney function (no transplants then) and heart
failure (before routine valve jobs).

Nowadays, the evil medical industry does a quick outpatient saliva
check for streptococcus and gives you a prescription for a $5
penicillin drug and sends you home, and you may wonder what all the
excitement is about.

DB

In article >,
Frank > wrote:

> On 4/7/2010 8:28 AM, Jerry wrote:
> > On Apr 7, 6:05 am, > wrote:
> >> Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.
> > Life expectancy is a tricky thing. There used to be a high death rate
> > of young children. What is the life expectancy of people 10 years and
> > older?
> >
> > Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
> > problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. Do not
> > confuse between longevity and health.
>
> US today uses expectancy based on live births. This makes it somewhat
> lower than other nations that will not count premature births or kids
> that last less than a certain time period.
>
> Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> dead. I know of very few that would agree with you.
>
> I personally had a couple of incidents where surgical procedures that
> saved me were not around in the 50's.
>
> I still say, op is full of it.

Still no citations, Frank?
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/HZinn_page.html

In article
>,
Frank > wrote:

> On Apr 7, 4:28*pm, Jerry > wrote:
> > On Apr 7, 6:49*am, Frank > wrote:
> >
> > > > Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
> > > > problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. *Do not
> > > > confuse between longevity and health.
> > > Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> > > dead. *I know of very few that would agree with you.
> >
> > I did not say they are better off dead. I said only that there is a
> > difference between longevity and health.
>
> Yes, objective is to live long and be in good health. They are not
> exclusive.

Come on, Frank. Your always telling us that you are a CHEMIST. Say
something "chemisty";O)
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/HZinn_page.html

In article >,
Frank > wrote:

> On 4/7/2010 8:28 AM, Jerry wrote:
> > On Apr 7, 6:05 am, > wrote:
> >> Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.
> > Life expectancy is a tricky thing. There used to be a high death rate
> > of young children. What is the life expectancy of people 10 years and
> > older?
> >
> > Also longevity is not the same as health. To live long with a health
> > problem that does not kill is not the same as being healthy. Do not
> > confuse between longevity and health.
>
> US today uses expectancy based on live births. This makes it somewhat
> lower than other nations that will not count premature births or kids
> that last less than a certain time period.
>
> Tell those with health problems being managed that they are better off
> dead. I know of very few that would agree with you.
>
> I personally had a couple of incidents where surgical procedures that
> saved me were not around in the 50's.
>
> I still say, op is full of it.

Well, you are the expert on that, Frank.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/HZinn_page.html

In article >,
Frank > wrote:

> Baloney. Life expectancy has gone up.

Could we have a citation, Frank? You never give citations. This should
be an easy one for you. Come on, Frank, model behavior.
Has life expectancy gone up due to a better environment, or because of
technological innovations?
And what about the tropics and the "Global South", Frank? They are poor,
and there's no money in it for Pfizer, Merck, et al. to make cures for
them.
An' how come we (US) is 38th in life expectancy, when CUba is 37th?
We have mo' money, are they just smarter than us, Frank, hmmm?
Come on, say something chemisty, Frank.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/HZinn_page.html