The Ultimate in Health Care Reform

The Ultimate in Health Care Reform

Arguably the hottest topic for debate in the good old US of A today is the Health Care Bill and its attempted repeal. It might be a good thing that it’s winter and a adequate covering of snow is protecting the ground from igniting from all the friction in the chambers of our legislature and the television talk shows. My take on that, in a nutshell, is that we need health care reform, but not the misguided and perhaps devious package that got pushed through the representatives of our government without them reading it. We need to provide insurance for those who can’t get it because of pre-existing conditions and those who can’t afford coverage. We don’t need the government taking over the industry and mandating that people buy their product or go to jail. Enough said on that topic. I’m here to talk about real reform that makes health insurance much less relevant.

How about we do two things? First reduce the medical expenses so that one visit to the doctor doesn’t threaten the life savings of a person without insurance. And more importantly, let’s encourage the practice of prevention, bolster the education of doctors in nutrition, and encourage scientists to discover cheap and natural means of treating people instead of developing expensive chemical formulas which frequently have side effects that rival or transcend the original condition. Thomas A. Edison made this prophecy many years ago. "The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest her or his patients in the care of the human frame, in a proper diet, and in the cause and prevention of disease."

Unfortunately, our medical establishment as well as the government seems hell bent on preventing that type of doctor from practicing. Is it possible that many of the medical researchers are not really looking for a cure for cancer, as much as a treatment which enables them to continue living lavishly? The American Cancer Society is a good example. In their charter you can find the clause that if a cure is found for cancer, the society will disband. How many full time jobs would go down the tube in that event? We continue to throw billions of dollars at the disease, but it continues to be the number two cause of death. Is it possible that answers are being overlooked? Is it possible that we have answers right now that are being suppressed?

I just listened to an illuminating discussion with a doctor conce
ing the things he and his team are discovering. A while ago I had heard that a doctor in a foreign country (Italy) had claimed that he could cure cancer with plain old baking soda. I didn’t really research it. Sounded like smoke and mirrors and hocus pocus. In the interview I heard on Natural News, a Dr. Apsley gave a fascinating report on how the body produces baking soda naturally. He went on to report on how the medical establishment continued to trod the death end path of chemotherapy and radiation when evidence points out clearly that those techniques are doomed to failure. Well, I’m not qualified to tell you what he said. Here is a link to his website. http://doctorapsley.com/default.aspx Check it out yourself and do the research. The dude is smart, eloquent, and passionate.

Ironically I’ve just starting drinking baking soda for heartbu
and my acid reflux condition. I’ve gone off Prilosec, something I wish I never would have gotten started with, so now my reflux is acting up again. Baking soda works very well at alleviating my symptoms. This concoction is not going to make anyone’s list of ten tastes you don’t want to miss, but it’s not as bad as some things I’ve tried to choke down.

The one thing that seems logical to me for researchers – study the peoples who don’t experience cancer and find out what they’re doing that prevents cancer. Dr. Apsley believes that proper diet (a future topic), healthy water (a subject of its own), and exercise will allow the body to manufacture the baking soda that is needed to keep the cells healthy. Isn’t it time that the government started issuing grants to researchers who think out of the box and whose primary goal is seeing healthy human beings? This might especially be critical in light of recent reports that indicate that nurses and doctors who work with chemotherapy may be contracting cancer from exposure to those dangerous chemicals.