2007-06-18

reckless foray into the origins of public health - and social impact

Too many people believe theirs is "the truth" (miracle cure, solution, prevention, answer, whatever), not willing (or perhaps unable) to accept or admit (or understand) that they found a "whatever" that only works for their particular combination of factors including genes, health, age, state of mind, nutrition, activity level, environmental exposure, medications, etc. Emboldening these people is that given the vast number of people they know and the high probability that, through mutual yet independent choices, they know them because, as they say, birds of a feather flock together, it is highly likely that the "whatever" will work for most of them when shared; if it doesn't, the embarrassment of failure and aversion to accountability usually influences them to turn their backs on anybody who does not respond positively to the "whatever" as expected. Too often, this can be poisoning or death.

I am pretty sure greater minds than most of us today are willing to recognize came to this realization a few generations ago and actually had the opportunity to impose a concept called "public health" - investigation of the collective wisdom from witchdoctors, grandmas, religions and other sources of such "tribal knowledge" - and prescribe of a course of action that is demonstrated to be safe and effective, regardless of whatever factors made up your life. The problem with this is twofold: (1) public misperception, due in no small part to the arguments they used to justify imposing their program to a simple-minded public and vote-eager politicians: these prescriptions are NOT designed to promote actual wellness, just a reduction/delay in the immediate badness and increase your chances of not dying right away (aka "greater longevity"); and (2) they contribute to the decline of individual responsibility for the choices we make on a daily basis because they filter out anything that is not safe and effective for the vast majority of combinations and permutations of aforementioned variables, contributing even more to the social absolution of personal responsibility for one's health. Besides, there'll be a similar-purpose fix for anything that may go awry in the process. Naturally, the mega-food industry is a major willing (if unknowing) partner in and benefactor of this phenomenon, as they have inherited carte blanche to provide us with non-nutrients that sell well because they are pretty and last weeks longer than the natural stuff, despite actually preventing the body from fixing itself and silencing our own body's cues designed to improve our lifestyle.

So: We continue to make (and sustain) poor life choices (including letting the mega-food industry slowly poison us) because we naively believe big-pharma and public health will cure us, after too many people suffered from the misguided broad application of "tribal knowledge" that came as a result of a lack of understanding of the root causes and respect of individual factors that is typical of faith-based approaches.

The "cure" for this is, if there is any, is education - about the importance of the state of our bodies at any given time, and how to take have control over what we can (inputs, stresses, and compensators). This requires time and resources, and the will to commit them despite high competition from the immediate profits of investing in today's instant-gratification economy.

In the end, I guess, it comes down to respect for the individual and human rights in general, so that each can respect him/herself sufficiently well to perceive and address what they need to be healthy. Unfortunately, that creates highly inconvenient demographics for marketers and overzealous leaders hungry for control, so they target the public to influence the election of representatives who strangle the funding of once-important public institutions, leaving them with little choice but to exchange their purpose and credibility for funding (and direction) from big-pharma and mega-food inc.

2007-06-09

it's funny cuz it's true

wiiitis - i can relate!

Atheist?

Having evolved to a point somewhere between cocksure ignorance and thoughtful uncertainty, I firmly believe believe that "God" does not exist as we "know" (or have been led to believe) him to be. Most major religions have some parts of it right, but over generations too many bits of folklore and interpretation have been mixed in to make the explanation easier to remember and associate to (for instance, we are taught we were cast in his image, when that is probably the other way around simply because we cannot fathom him taking any other form).
He is everywhere, being everything around us here and beyond. He is us, casting judgment through history on others after they have fallen. He is omniscient, noticing everything because every bit of universe is him, and as far as humanity is concerned, he is us because we as a society will eventually be aware of everything. He is omnipotent, as natural forces are part of him, but he has no will (a distinctively human trait) other than to explore, discover and observe. He is the Borg hive and we are but semi-random cogs in the Collective not fully aware of each other, blinded as we are with our infatuation with our "independence." People and animals and rocks and planets are all just tiny little bits of him, and the more we learn, the more we are aware of his full extent. The scientific method really should be embraced by everybody so they can discover just how amazing "he" really is, but they'll have to get over their mortal insecurities, release their childhood teachings, give up their religious security blankets, and accept that we individually are meaningless other than for the connections and experiences we contribute to the human experience.

I am not atheist. I am pantheist.