POLITICAL - FW: Your Health - Your Government

[Guest guest]

_____

From: ingrid@... [mailto:ingrid@...]

Subject: Your Health - Your Government

Dear Subscribers,

I am going to write quite a few essays and assume you will delete the ones you

do not want to read. Don't unsubscribe because you

feel inundated, just wait for the tidal wave to pass!

My involvement with health began probably the moment I was conceived but the

first conscious memory was of a mandatory smallpox

vaccine at a fire station in Seattle when I was three years old. I did not want

the vaccine and, of course, this was viewed as fear

by the adults forcing it upon me. As it turned out, I immediately developed

scarlet fever and later it was claimed that the vaccine

had, in fact, been contaminated. There were many complications from the scarlet

fever that resulted in my seeing more than the

usual number of doctors while I was growing up, but health did not become a

serious profession for me until the early 70s when I

left the State Department with 14 people in white coats in hot pursuit. I had

simply had enough.

It's fair to put this out there because not everyone is a dissatisfied customer,

but I surely felt that the quality of my life was

in jeopardy. I spent a few years reading every book I could get my hands on and

once I had a good foundation, the networking began.

Long before the advent of the Internet, I was already " connected " and eventually

consulted on some alternative insurance and

wellness clinics, basically with the aim of lowering costs to 10% of the norm by

relying extensively on adjunctive measures that

promote healing and less on conventional measures aimed ostensibly at the

disease.

Much later, my expertise was sought by those trying to develop alternative

protocols for major illnesses. Unfortunately, these

pursuits are not necessarily what you would call " pure science " or " pure

medicine " because there are areas where money and medicine

overlap or compete. Obviously, in a perfect world, this could never happen and

no one would be without care simply because of lack

of ability to pay. However, to the extent that money is accumulating at the top

of the pyramid, there is great deprivation at the

bottom, a situation that is completely unnecessary as well as a poor reflection

on our present global economic ethics.

By the time the debate over the health care bill is finished, it will be like

the proverbial blind men and the elephant. There will

be doctors who are livid because they stand to lose so much latitude in their

hugely important processes with patients. There will

be patients who are even more incensed because they are paying more for less.

There will be patients who are satisfied because they

no longer have to worry about bankruptcy; and there will be those who are

relieved because care that is needed is finally available.

The question that will be blurred in the process is whether the government

has/had the right to force this much change/reform on its

citizens. I suspect only Dr. Ron will assume a leadership role on this

major constitutional issue.

A few other considerations are already hugely out of focus. For instance, in

the quest for health, there are really only two major

components. First there is you: your resourcefulness, your understanding of

your body and its needs, your trust of the various

sources of information and protocols available, and your ability to find and

apply what you decide is right for you. The other half

of the equation is the health care provider and your relationship to the

provider. Can the person upon whom you depend for accurate

diagnoses and assessment of your options actually take the time necessary to

cover your issues and needs sufficiently? Does this

person have the latitude to choose from a variety of options? Is his or her

scientific training deemed adequate for making certain

judgment calls or is it always " by the book? " I am afraid that bureaucracy is !

a " by the book " piece of machinery that will strip

the healing process of nuance and strip the professionals of their ability to

use modalities that have somehow not found their way

into the book.

To some extent, this is already the case. Licensing boards have strange and

usually archaic rules and they crack down harshly on

innovative and courageous professionals. Outcome seldom factors into rulings.

If the truth be known, facts also rarely matter.

The book matters and it was written when dinosaurs walked the Earth.

What I have seen in my nearly 40 years of involvement in the health care world

is that in the U.S., patients have generally had more

latitude than doctors. If a doctor steps too far out of the box, he is on a

fast track for Tijuana. However, at this point in

time, patients can find the supplements they want, mostly, not entirely, but

they are on their own when trying to determine the

correct uses of the supplements because the people who know how to use them are

gagged.

In some countries, including much of Europe, doctors are considered to be

intelligent, well-trained specialists who probably know

their fields better than bureaucrats and who can therefore exercise judgment --

aka latitude -- in making recommendations to

patients. However, they do not have nearly as much access to alternatives, at

least the alternatives that compete with

pharmaceuticals. They can open clinics specializing in oxygen or ozone

treatment or something else that is rare here, but the

auxiliary protocols they would like are not exactly unavailable, just difficult

to obtain. For something as simple as astragalus or

digestive enzymes, a prescription may be needed. The strangulation of what we

call " generally regarded as safe " is severe and if

the Big Pharma prevails, this will become a more pervasive issue than it is now.

If therefore I see a Trojan horse, it is because I have seen the battle plan and

know how the flags will unfurl. Naturally, when

there is a great deal to hide, the propaganda of a government gift will be made

to sound like something we want, but for me, taking

away choice tramples not just the rights I assumed came with my birth but also

on my most deeply held spiritual convictions which

include pacifism and strict vegetarianism, i.e. no exploitation of animals and

no use of animals for food or medicine. My own

beliefs go even beyond these because unlike those who see humans at the top of

some evolutionary impulse, I see humans as needing to

find more balance between Heaven and Earth and needing to learn how to express

more divinity in a manner that creates as little

disturbance as possible for Nature and the other members of the Planetary

Family. As such, corporate medicine is not just !

soulless but also devoid of the profound sense of responsibility towards Nature

that I believe is urgently needed. Corporations

lack commitment to the sustainable future everyone knows is necessary, and

corporations tend to be predatory in their short-term

behavior and completely wanton in terms of their longer-term impact on

individuals as well as Nature.

The medicine and health care of the future need to be in harmony with Nature,

not opposed to Nature, and the individual should not

be trampled in the rush to make changes.

Most of you reading this probably agree with what I have said or you probably

would have hit delete already. I am therefore assuming

that the purpose of writing is to somehow affirm to you that you also have a

right to demand a system that has deep and lasting

integrity and not one that is rushed into existence because we have to engage in

a bit more madness before complete financial

collapse.

I do not believe this health care reform bill is about compassion. If this were

the case, we would be talking about creating lots

and lots more jobs, giving incentives to corporations to bring jobs back home,

providing shelter and food for the homeless, and

issuing vouchers for emergency health care without any preconditions whatsoever.

If you are hemorrhaging, if you have broken bones,

if you are starving, here is a coupon you can use to get immediate relief. This

would be compassion in action and it would probably

make a lot of people much happier than bailouts that are moving up the pyramid.

Countless opportunities exist in the collapse that is occurring before our eyes.

There are immense numbers of vacant properties

that could be made available for immediate use by homeless people or businesses

with a viable plan for creating quality jobs. There

are lands that are fallow because there are more tax benefits for growing

nothing than for producing food. If the government is

compassionate, it will show concern and initiative for putting idle lands and

idle hands to work, not recruiting more law

enforcement agents to control dissidents, people who are simply upset with the

mismanagement of government and their corporate

cohorts . . . or should that read corporations and their cohorts in government?

Unlike most people my age, I don't have children or grandchildren for whose

future I am concerned, but I am nevertheless concerned

because without very important and sincere changes, it will get worse before it

gets better. Suffering is not pleasant to watch nor

even to contemplate, but unless there is a real shift in motivation at decision

making levels, I am afraid we are going to have a

lot of tears to wipe away.

Changes that are appropriate usually require some effort but they begin to feel

good in practically no time at all. Changes that

are inappropriate only create more problems to fix. We can continue to take

away freedom and force people at gunpoint to do our

bidding or we can say " enough " and oblige our leaders to restore choice,

opportunity, and freedom from concern about what a

government crazed with power will do to avoid listening to the people.

At the moment, people who are uninsured are either uninsured by choice or

because of circumstances. Compassion would move leaders

in the direction of increasing the means of survival, not forcing people into a

system they would not choose if free to make a

choice. If government cannot create opportunity, it is either because it hasn't

got the imagination or the will. I suspect it is a

bit of both, but there is lots to imagine and lots that individuals can

accomplish on their own or in groups and I would urge

everyone to make as much effort as possible to be self-sufficient in food

production, to learn how to grow medicinal plants and make

your own medicine, and to become so good at what you doing that you need to hire

others to help you expand. This is how organic,

sustainable living starts . . . and it is amazingly centering.

Many blessings,

Ingrid

<http://www.landscapingrevolution.com> http://www.landscapingrevolution.com