Medical industry foolishness

[eish]

Got a bad cold? Clearly this is a worldwide emergency which requires imprisonment and forced gene therapy.

Got a medical emergency? Clearly you're nuts--which also requires imprisonment.

https://youtu.be/x1pIo5PzpLo

[Suaidan]

we are in psycho world

[SavaBeljovic]

I remember few years ago being the "natural medicine guy" you were looked at like a crazy person but now I think people are starting to wise up and understand it's way better than trusting the pharmaceutical companies (though for as much shouting you'll hear about "big pharma", no one actually stops participating in it) and trusting in occupational medicine etc.

[eish]

I remember few years ago being the "natural medicine guy" you were looked at like a crazy person but now I think people are starting to wise up and understand it's way better than trusting the pharmaceutical companies (though for as much shouting you'll hear about "big pharma", no one actually stops participating in it) and trusting in occupational medicine etc.

 

I have been denouncing certain excesses of the medical industry for years, although I would not entirely describe myself as the "natural medicine guy."

What I myself also noticed with opposition to big pharma is that people will nod along until it is their turn. You can demonstrate to people that cancer treatments don't work and that diagnoses are iffy. Statistically, you're better off avoiding most of it. In fact you're generally worse off even getting routine tests than not getting them. Someone will completely agree until the point where his own doctor tells him this or that looks like a tumour, or we need to do this or that test every so often. Fear of death takes over and they all go along with it. Doctors themselves are also in a bind, because if they recommend not intervening or not testing they are on the hook for the patient dying, but if they do intervene it is not deemed their fault.

An anecdote regarding St. Alexei and Gregory Rasputin. The new wonder drug at the turn of the 20th C. was aspirin. Physicians were prescribing it to everyone for everything, but Rasputin--perhaps because he was a peasant with a bit more common sense and healthy distrust of physicians--was the one who insisted that the Tsarevich should not be taking it. Whenever Rasputin was around, like a miracle the young heir and future martyr would always get better. As you and I know today, aspirin is a blood thinner and the last thing on earth one should be giving to haemophiliacs!*

We could go over all the wonder drugs of their time--the birth control pill (which was given to pregnant women!), thalidomide, mRNA gene therapy, ritalin, etc. Intellectuals insist that they are following the science by running whatever fad is promoted by the salesmen in the lab coats. In fact it is quite the opposite--if we applied scientific method, we would not just blindly go with someone who said he sprinkled magic scientific method dust on a paper, but rather conclude after repeated testing there is overwhelming evidence from a very long self-selected trial of doing or not doing as the intellectual expert class said and they consistently turn out to be causing significant harm in hindsight. Like clockwork. And we have all the financial and professional reasons why anyone might be motivated to perform and interpret studies in a biased way. Blind faith that it is different this time because science has advanced and we now know better ignores the fact that it is the methodology itself--that of running after the current fad, which we have not yet had time to see all the side effects of, which we have not yet had the time to see how often it actually doesn't work, which we have frankly not yet had the time to investigate the manipulation of data and biased proofs of efficacy, not to mention survivorship bias from clinical trials--which simply is not as good in the general case as sticking with the devil we do know. We also know that landmark studies are not replicable and many groundbreaking medicines--especially psychiatric ones--do not perform their purported function when compared to a placebo. This is dismissed as a miracle of science--the placebo effect is now stronger than old medicines!--to paper over the obvious conclusion that the studies were just fake and the pills never worked.

It is a direct consequence of modernism--what's new is progress, after all--combined with the fear of death. It is also a direct consequence of the pride of the intellectual class, the vision of the anointed as economist Thomas Sowell calls it. As he rightly points out, they can sit around and make stuff up about how they think in their own heads things aught to work, and congratulate themselves in their echo chambers while deriding as backwards everyone who points out the evidence to the contrary, and they suffer absolutely no consequences for being wrong. When history proves their detractors to have been right all along, with sound reasoning laid out, they dismiss this failure even in hindsight and still there are no consequences. That things went awry was pure coincidence and nobody could have foreseen it, especially not those neanderthals who did.

I will also have some words for the "natural medicine guys" because most fall into the same errors, just replace "new" with "natural." There is no sense in taking colloidal silver until metal deposits turn your skin blue. There is no sense in smoking weed which ruins your lungs and your psyche while arguing about how good it is supposed to be for cancer--when you don't have any--or how it treats the insomnia which you actually have from staring at a screen late at night. There is no sense in collecting "superfoods" like twitterati collect vaccines.

In fact, I find in general people who needlessly take medicine, whether pharmaceuticals or herbs, to be some of the most sickly people and the sicknesses did not come first. Mother raised me on not taking any medicine needlessly, even prescribed medicine, except to finish a course of antibiotics if started. And no, I won't take just any antibiotic for the flu because it was prescribed.

What's scary to me is that these salesmen in lab coats have the power to institutionalise people as in this case. Yes, it was an abuse and not the norm. But on what grounds are they given such absolute power? We here know full well what Soviet hospitals did with the same powers, and we know that the same awaits us if TPTB have their way.

There have been many, many cases of old people being locked up and declared senile due to relatives wanting their money. Worse still, in the postmodern West those relatives can now have the doctors outright murder them, under the guise of "euthanasia." We know well the famous Dutch case, although there are actually many, of the old woman who was held down and injected against her expressed will. It was her family who held her down. Take a wild guess--do you think it was over grandma's suffering, or over the money? And if any of us expressly refuse, they just give themselves the right to declare you incompetent and decide otherwise on your behalf.

Such power can and does override anything you yourself put in writing beforehand. I'll tell you how "consent" works. If you're conscious, you can consent to treatment or refuse. If you are unconscious, there is implied consent. The same was also abused by hospitals to force-vax with mRNA those with completely unrelated injuries, as you may recall. They don't fear repercussions. What you may not know is that in my first aid course, we were told that if someone refuses treatment and then passes out, you have your implied consent regardless of what was previously expressed. Maybe he was delirious, who knows, who cares. It doesn't even matter if a lawyer agrees with that statement; it is the attitude in the business. You can get forcibly "treated" for anything and maybe afterwards your lawyer can get you a coupon if you outlive the trial.

Father is right, it is a crazy world. The more the love grows cold, the worse it will get.

*I can hear bugmen scream "The plural of anecdote is not data!" Half true; detailed case studies can be more insightful than random data points which are invariably biased in uncontrolled and unknown ways. Idolatry of numbers is misguided.