What would it take for Russia to be #1?
Posted 21 May 2004 - 02:34 AM
True. It has no real incentive to manufacture or invent any products not related to sustenance of the oligarchy.
>>>I saw myself on dandelion flowers group of very small yellow birds, at first I took them for butterflies. Next year I saw only a few and I don-t see them any more. <<<
Whatever you were using on the dandelions they probably didn't like!
I agree many useless and dangerous products are created and sold. When government gets kickbacks or big taxes from sales all kinds of crap gets sold. First , one needs a public education though - just smooths things out a bit.
Posted 21 May 2004 - 04:16 AM
If we had any understanding of man we would not deny him his spiritual side in the art of healing. Treating the physical aspect of man is a mechanical function. The standard practice of medicine is no longer in the realm of art or the spirit. It is in cold science which does our soul no good.>
You are talking holistic medicine. It makes sense to me. But perhaps we can complement scientific medicine with holistic medicine, instead of risking losing advances. Like I said before, PREVENTION has a major role to play too, as does DIET and EXERCISE. We got to create alternative transportation like bicycles. We got to get rid of excess junk food. People gotta burn the calories!
<Before the advent of healthcare,or socialized medicine, doctors were paid whatever their patients could afford. They were never lacking and were always respected as pillars in their communities.>
Perhaps achievable in the coops, but not a in world where doctors are just another highly profitable profession. Will they give up their Porches and mansions?:confused:
<Alternative methodologies would thrive as well if they were efficacious. And real, not money-making, breakthroughs would be
the rule rather than the exception.
That's a basis for a medical model I believe more rational than the business, bottom line model that all healthcare models are based on currently.>
It makes sense to me...
Posted 21 May 2004 - 06:18 AM
>>>You are talking holistic medicine.<<<
No. Not really. I am talking about the economy of medicine. Treating the whole person - body, mind and soul is, yes holistic medicine.
A doctor could practice holistic medicine, orthodox medicine, naturopathy, acupuncture, what ever. It would be up to him to adopt what he thought was efficacious. You would see the face of medicine change quite drastically, I think. All sorts of blends would occur. Of course, the most efficacious treatments would weed out ineffective treatments. No government direction would be allowed unless coercion is used in the application of treatments. There must be informed consent. Today, you are not told of the side-effects of some drugs. That is not informed consent and is illegal, it happens anyway. People tend to trust and take their doctor's advice. The doctor follows the guidelines laid down to him by his superiors, the AMA, the HMO's, the Administration and the government, and let's not forget the pharmaceutical companies, those bastions of virtue.
I don't think they would have to give up their Porche's either.
More than likely they would not be distracted by materialistic goals and would feel more fulfilled in their work but if they wanted a Porche they would be able to have one. They would just be more humble about it. Medicine would become more of a calling than a position of guaranteed wealth.
Prevention is not measurable unfortunately. Six billion deaths were prevented today. Certainly lifestyles have an effect on health but who would deny an Arctic Explorer or an Astronaut his job or his dream. Prevention is in education only, people will always take risks with their lives and their health, force is not an option.
Our provincial government is right now suing tobbacco companies to recover healthcare costs.I think it is the stupidest action and a result of collective thought. It originated with our socialist party in office. Why the current administration is continuing with it is beyond me. Most of the cost of cigarettes is tax anyway. They want a double kick at it, I guess. You could say that the government is selling them since they take most of the profits.
I just quit smoking 2 years ago. Bought a book called, "The Easy way to quit Smoking" by Allan Carr. I read it and I quit. Cold turkey. I smoked for many years and thought I would never quit.
I might have one on my death bed, then the doctors could say it was from smoking. They love to fudge those stats too.
The argument for seatbelts was it would save money in the healthcare system. It's compulsory now and I don't remember the dip in healthcare costs.
Ah, well... that's all I have for now.
Posted 21 May 2004 - 10:57 AM
And what is most funny that nations with longest life span have highest degree the genetic illnesses which multiply with generations. They live longer to make happy health facilities if they have enough money to pay and troubling their descendants. For example Regan is about 100.
It is nothing more boring when society occupied with diet .
Diet is holistic sign that people should think about *one way ticket *.
Anyway some rich American hibernate and await the further medicine developments. Someday they wake up and instead of future life they find themselves travel to be used as a transplant parts. It is my favorite story I read before bad time.
The quality of live is more important that life span.
Terrorists will prevail, as long rich of this world will be permitted to buy transplants from the poor , who has nothing to sell besides one of his kidneys.
Posted 21 May 2004 - 03:08 PM
I agree with it: HELTHCARE HAS BECOME BIG BUSINESS. Naturally they don't want you HEALTHY; they want you SICK. They want you dependent on the WATER WELL they control. Encouraging ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE would amount to encouraging more water wells be built. And we all know how much the lion hates COMPETITION...
However we should proceed with caution at any change we propose. SOCIETIES SHOULD NEVER BE EMBARKED ON GRAND SCALE EXPERIMENTS. Collectivization caused millions of deaths in Russia. We can't just risk so much. And that's were the coops kick in. WHATEVER CHANGE WE PROPOSE SHOULD BE TRIED AT THE COOP LEVEL, where a limited amount of people participate voluntarily. Then if it works it can be expanded into society. If the alternative healtcare we propose works, it should be tried on a limited scale.
<Prevention is not measurable unfortunately. Six billion deaths were prevented today. Certainly lifestyles have an effect on health but who would deny an Arctic Explorer or an Astronaut his job or his dream. Prevention is in education only, people will always take risks with their lives and their health, force is not an option.>
I agree: Prevention is about EDUCATION. Regrettably, that's what we lack in the jungle, I mean in the present world.
<I just quit smoking 2 years ago. Bought a book called, "The Easy way to quit Smoking" by Allan Carr. I read it and I quit. Cold turkey. I smoked for many years and thought I would never quit.
I might have one on my death bed, then the doctors could say it was from smoking. They love to fudge those stats too. >
Congratulations. I quit 7 years ago. Best decision in my life. I even feel better and look better at 50 than when I was 25, due to underweight. Now I'm a little heavy, but I'm tall...
Posted 21 May 2004 - 03:21 PM
I hope it is the poor who prevail, and not the terrorists. The indifferent little animals are the key to peace and justice in the jungle. People think that the best way to appease the beast is feeding it. They think that when the lion eats one of them, he's full--until tomorrow...
The Owl though knows the best approach is to STARVE THE LION!
Posted 21 May 2004 - 05:31 PM
The quality of live is more important that life span.
True. Now we just need to define "quality" and "life". It will be different for everyone.
That healthcare model would only be able to start on a small scale. A few doctors may see some logic in it and try it but they could return to the mainstream if so desired. I think they would find it quite viable though and unfathomably less restrictive, and if it proved to be so, soon more would join - with no extra costs
to the taxpayer and no portion going to the lion.
Posted 22 May 2004 - 04:54 AM
because it has become tied in with UE where the sovereignty of
the UE rules. Sovereignty now means you keep your language
and tax boarder and puppet govt like Slovenia.
The big difference between Slovenia and the west of there is they
havent received their quota of muslims yet.
With a bit of luck, next year a million Iraqis with radiation poisening may claim refugee status as victims of the new regime to be and get the golden kiss of UN organised citizenship in a European country. Should slow up their economy and burdon their social vote and cause them to borrow a lot more as they lose their monculture status.
Posted 22 May 2004 - 12:37 PM
On Monday most prominent of chosen nation organized under UN Kofi Annan directives meting of UN in Warsaw .
Subject of this conference is how to transfer Security Consul to body which only US would reign. US is very upset situation in Cypress when prepared by Kofi Annan resolution to depressed the Cyprian Greek human rights and put them under Turkish boot went anywhere because Russian veto.
Posted 22 May 2004 - 01:12 PM
<Donq/Pliny; I don-t know what was the name of this Chinese emperor or when it was , but like an essence of this story ; Emperor paid his doctor only when was in good health.>
Chinese medicine may just be the right example of what Pliny proposes, but it's no panacea either. A combination of the two systems though along with prevention, can certainly improve a doctor's salary based on keeping people healthy.
As for the doctors not treating the poor, I favor a system where these things are first and foremost done in a voluntary way. But, if they don't work that way, REGULATION IS IN ORDER. And the same goes for all other ills of society...
THE ONGOING ATTEMPT TO CORRECT AND IMPROVE MEDICAL PRACTICES
A medical system that looks back to ancient times, that is highly personalized, and that collects vast numbers of suggestions that have no true hierarchy, could easily become diffused and lifeless. One can imagine it degenerating into a collection of individuals working at virtual odds with each other, relying on rote repetition of principles personally selected out of a sea of possibilities. Indeed, substantial periods of relative stagnation and decline can readily be identified in the history of the Chinese medical system, such as the 750 year interval between the end of the Han Dynasty and the beginning of the Song Dynasty. Further, one can observe this negative outcome as a characteristic of some parts of the existing Chinese medical system today. However, traditional Chinese medicine has retained considerable vigor into the modern era by its inclusion of a healthy debate about how it is to be best applied. In this, it is unique as a traditional medical system. For example, stagnation in the neighboring Indian Ayurvedic tradition, where critical debate about medical issues has been lacking, has left it dulled and difficult to revive.
Concerns about how medicine was being practiced have been illustrated by Paul Unschuld's examination of medical ethics in China. Quoting from a number of famous physicians, it becomes clear that there were certain failings that were constantly the subject of complaints. The leading problems had nothing to do with the medical system itself, but with the context in which practitioners applied it, such as the recurrent tendency of doctors focusing their efforts on getting paid (i.e., not treating poor people, only treating the rich); the solution was to remind physicians that they must first and foremost be humane and compassionate. At a second level, the complaints had to do with the lack of attention physicians were giving to the task at hand. As with Xu Dachun's concerns above, this involved observations that physicians didn't adequately study the basic doctrines and techniques; further, they didn't give adequate time to correctly diagnose the patient and didn't think enough about the correct principles of treatment. As a result of these flaws, patients would suffer. To remedy this, some physicians devised mandates that any principled practitioner should follow.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING REMARKS
Chinese medicine is a quasi-religious system relying heavily on ancient doctrines and a small number of ancient texts. Doctors personalize the medical system to suit their own orientation and they treat each patient uniquely, thus making a system that has tremendous diversity, to the point that it is not expected to present a uniform appearance. It is an expansive system that collects techniques and substances and fits them into the underlying medical framework. Chinese medicine retains knowledge of as many of the past experiences and recommendations as possible. Several medical scholars have attempted to define the central core of traditional medicine by clarifying the basic theories and pointing out practices that appear to be inconsistent with them. The Chinese medical system typifies diversity and expansion based on a limited set of basic principles. The tension between its expansive qualities and its conservative philosophy, along with the influence of critical thinkers who question its excesses, keeps the system vibrant.
A crossroads stands before the traditional Chinese system as Western medicine shows rapid progress. Not wanting to appear inferior, practitioners portray certain advantages to the traditional system. In particular, they point to the naturalist philosophy embodied in yin-yang and five elements, the non-invasive and non-toxic qualities of its therapeutic techniques, and the aim of holistic health care rather than repair of individual diseases or alleviation of individual symptoms. However, these apparent advantages are challenged by questions of how useful such basic philosophies are in the complex modern world, how effective the mild therapeutics can be (and how safe they really are), and whether or not the way Chinese medicine is applied is actually holistic or merely a one-to-one substitute for Western medical approaches.
Posted 22 May 2004 - 06:59 PM
any attempt of democratic application to problems will have any power.
Soil and seed, "food", GE, perverted bureaucracy, man made deseases, man made drugs and their huge multitudinous bad
health side effects are not things that any ancient knowledge will have any revelance.
Next year in the UE many things good for health will be banned.
If the corporates cant capture the market it will be illegal and
things you can get today without a DRs perscrition will be got through a Dr, meaning the professional surcharge of money and time in order to then go and buy it from a pharmacy.
Posted 23 May 2004 - 12:34 AM
Thanks. I bookmarked it and read some.
It emphasizes whole grain diet at an early age. Kids today eat worse than dogs too often. Even dogs' food is sold based on nutrients, not on bright colors. And the lion opposes any changes...
Posted 23 May 2004 - 12:52 AM
So long as there's no lions in Heaven, it'll be OK...
<So why do your analyze seriously heath care instead learn how to start fire from two pieces of quarts or survive in igloo. What is most funny in it, nobody cares about potentiality of WWIII, when everybody lookis forward for change.
Donq, your suggestion regarding coops might succeed it. Cooperation was the basic form few thousand years ago during nomadic time and very likely cooperation will prevail as a social living standard after WWIII. ;>
If we don't learn to build them before, we can always do that later. Or is it that we'll turn to cannibalism just as in Easter Island?:confused:
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users