I agree people should do what they can to take care of their own health, but that word "ultimate" only works if healthful lifestyles sufficed to eliminate the need for doctors and drugs, not just reduce it. Failing that, healthful lifestyle would merely be a "very significant" reform, not the ultimate one.
And remember, the deck is stacked against healthful choices for much of the population. You want healthful lifestyles for everyone, you have to do something about the economic, political, social and cultural factors that stand in the way.
Has carbon ever combined with hydrogen in the atmosphere to create hydrogen cyanide? I think the point being made is that the issue of global warming has put cage over all the other environmental issues and has created an illusion that if we solve global warming we solve all the environmental problems.
What about carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide (remember acid rain?), nitrogen oxide, ozone, and hydrocarbons. All of these gases released in auto emissions and yet we don't even talk about these threats to the environment anymore.
More and more money is being wasted every year in Canada, too, reviewing the doctors' recommendations and creating paper hurdles for direct treatment. Gathering statistics (usually specious) and designing mostly redundant information systems has become the medical imperative because they are the only things remotely connected to health that the types in the government appointed health authorities can understand. Yes, the Canadian system is still better than the American but our taxes are very high and the true cost is masked.
The U.S. should not consult with people in the Canadian bureaucracies unless the consultations are very objective and cynical.
How about doing a hidden camera project about working for a "non" profit tobacco control organization? Then, tell them how "non" profit isn't really "NON" profit. Explain how the American Cancer Society and Tobacco-Free Kids create 501(c)(3)s that cannot legally lobby so they create 501(c)(4)s like the American Cancer Society Action Network and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund so they CAN lobby. Look to see what their hidden reactions are. Better yet, ask if they know who the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is. See if they know that they bought smoking ban laws with "grants", that they're another "non" profit who owns tens of millions of shares of Johnson & Johnson stock and that they profit from NRT products their "non" profit money bought. Ask the candidates if they could sell NRT products. Then find out if they realize NRT has a FAILURE RATE of 98.4% on long term (1 year of longer) (source: British Medical Journal, April 2009) quitting or that Nicorette causes extreme hair loss, skin lesions and high blood pressure or that it's more addictive than the cigarettes ever were (source: askapatient.com). What would their candid reactions be? Or that Winston Cup no longer exists in NASCAR but Nicorette sponsors a NASCAR team. Isn't nicotine, nicotine?
It would indeed be interesting to see how these "applicants" react to Tobacco Control's deception and pure profit. But then again, you will probably remove my post as it directly conflicts with your behavior control agenda.
Well, sorry to disillusion you, guy, but I can tell you that up here in Canada the same type of sharks that are raiding your private insurance companies are a growing infection within the Canadian bureaucracies, giving themselves ludicrous bonuses and all. Because they control the system, no one can do anything about it, Like they say: It's virtually impossible to give sharks that sort of money and expect them to use it ethically.
How about doing a hidden camera project about working for a "non" profit tobacco control organization? Then, tell them how "non" profit isn't really "NON" profit. Explain how the American Cancer Society and Tobacco-Free Kids create 501(c)(3)s that cannot legally lobby so they create 501(c)(4)s like the American Cancer Society Action Network and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund so they CAN lobby. Look to see what their hidden reactions are. Better yet, ask if they know who the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is. See if they know that they bought smoking ban laws with "grants", that they're another "non" profit who owns tens of millions of shares of Johnson & Johnson stock and that they profit from NRT products their "non" profit money bought. Ask the candidates if they could sell NRT products. Then find out if they realize NRT has a FAILURE RATE of 98.4% on long term (1 year of longer) (source: British Medical Journal, April 2009) quitting or that Nicorette causes extreme hair loss, skin lesions and high blood pressure or that it's more addictive than the cigarettes ever were (source: askapatient.com). What would their candid reactions be? Or that Winston Cup no longer exists in NASCAR but Nicorette sponsors a NASCAR team. Isn't nicotine, nicotine?
It would indeed be interesting to see how these "applicants" react to Tobacco Control's deception and pure profit. But then again, you will probably remove my post as it directly conflicts with your behavior control agenda.
Pages