Hidden Danger of the Keto Diet
- Created on Monday, 06 July 2020 19:20
There is a very attractive female doctor on Youtube who goes by Dr. Boz who advocates the keto diet. She is a real true believer in it. She says, for instance, that “fruit is poison.” And I don’t doubt that she is very strict about it. She gives an example of one of her meals being green salad, a small portion of meat, and then most of the calories on the plate from fats, such as avocado and cream cheese. Cream cheese. Now, there’s something that nobody needs to be eating.
But, I have a very strong suspicion that the people who follow that diet, and especially as strictly as Dr. Boz does, develop a severe degree of carbohydrate intolerance. The reason I say that is because I have much experience with people who have been on a keto diet. I am referring to people who have been water fasting.
Do you realize that fasting is like being on a keto diet? It’s just that it is internally generated, rather than provided from the outside. When fasting, you’re in a state of ketosis; your body has switched from burning sugar to burning ketones; and increasingly, your body burns ketones instead of glucose the longer you fast. If you suddenly start putting carbohydrate in, your body will get the message that it doesn’t have to stay in ketosis any longer, and it can start burning sugar again. But, it takes time to make the switch. It isn’t instant. So, if you just start off by pouring sugar into yourself, even wholesome foods such as fruits and melons and sweet vegetables, such as carrot juice, your blood sugar can spike. And I mean spike more than it would under normal conditions when you’re not fasting. Temporarily, you are sugar-sensitive.
And that’s why it’s a good idea not to go overboard eating sugary foods right after a fast- even wholesome ones.
How do I know this? I know it from testing the blood of post-fasters and seeing that they are sugar-sensitive, that they spike from eating an amount of sugar that a normal healthy person would tolerate easily. The effect doesn’t last very long. Within two weeks, it’s gone, and they’re back to tolerating carbohydrate normally. The reason that it happens is because the body has to change gears to get into a fasting state, one in which they are going to efficiently get through it. And it takes time to change back.
But, if these Keto people are really staying in a state of ketosis all the time, then I presume they have those adaptations going all the time, and thus, they develop sugar sensitivity and sugar intolerance. And in their case, it may be going on for months and years. How entrenched is it going to be then?
Now, if they remain as strict at avoiding carbs as Dr. Boz apparently does, then their blood sugar obviously is not going to spike. But, I suspect that in the real world, even among her most devoted followers, who think the world of her, that they sometimes cheat. And when they cheat, they may cheat a lot. They may actually binge on carbs sometimes. And they may think that it doesn’t matter because they avoid them most of the time. But, because they avoid them most of the time, they are probably sugar-sensitive, like a faster, and the result is that their blood sugar spikes, even from a normal amount of wholesome carbohydrate.
So, my advice is: don’t train your body to be insensitive to carbs by eating such an extreme diet as the keto diet. The important thing is to cut out all junk carbs, refined carbs, because you surely don’t need them. And make some of your carbs complex, such as beans, which digest slowly and tend not to cause spikes- even in diabetics. And eat plenty of non-carb foods, such as green and yellow vegetables which are non-starchy, and also raw nuts, seeds, and avocado. In other words, you should find a balance that works that relies very largely on, if not exclusively on: whole, natural, plant foods.
But, if you don’t eat carbohydrates at all, then you are setting yourself up for trouble.
When is the insanity going to stop?
- Created on Saturday, 27 June 2020 17:58
Medicine is such a dogmatic institution, and its dogma permeates all over the world. For decades now, they have preached that the amount of cholesterol in the blood determines whether arterial plaquing takes place. They say that if serum cholesterol is high, it causes atheromatous plaquing, and if serum cholesterol is low, it prevents it. High is now defined as 200 or above. But, if your cholesterol is 150, you’re considered OK.
But, how could a 25% reduction in serum cholesterol have any effect on starting or stopping a pathological process? Cholesterol is a normal constituent, and it is vital. Every cell in your body depends on cholesterol to maintain its intracellular environment. Without cholesterol in your cell membrane, your cells would dissolve! In other words, they couldn’t exist. Cholesterol is also a building block of steroid hormones, including testosterone and estrogen, and it provides vital cholic acid for digestion, which is synthesized from cholesterol.
If the atheromatous process is driven by the amount of cholesterol in the blood, where a level of 200 milligrams per decaliter of blood drives it, then why shouldn’t 150 also drive it? Why should that little difference be the determining factor in whether plaque forms or not? It’s insane.
It’s true that when people are on good health programs, where they are eating well, a diet consisting mostly, if not wholly, of: fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, etc. that they are going to have lower cholesterol. And if they eat bad diets, consisting of burgers, shakes, cookies, etc., they are going to have higher cholesterol. So, the level of cholesterol in the blood may be a marker for the kind of diet they eat. But, it doesn’t mean that the concentration of cholesterol in the blood is the determining factor in whether plaque is formed.
There is one caveat, and that is that oxidized cholesterol, from frying meats and whatnot, has been shown to be irritating, and anything that irritates the endothelium can cause plaquing. Tobacco smoke has no cholesterol, but it is very irritating, i.e. poisonous, and it is a powerful progenitor of arterial plaque.
There are special tests that can determine how much of your blood cholesterol is oxidized, and that has significance. But, that aside, the idea that the amount of cholesterol in the blood is what determines whether your have open or clogged arteries is crazy.
But, what about the fact that when they give people statin drugs, that their cholesterol goes down, and it may go down a lot, and their risk of heart attack and heart disease goes down with it? The truth is that the risk isn’t lowered that much from taking statin drugs. Maybe one heart attack gets prevented when 100 people take statins for a year. It’s something like that. The demonstrable benefit from taking statin drugs is actually very small.
And that tiny risk reduction may be due to other things than cholesterol reduction. We know that statin drugs are anti-inflammatory, and we know that inflammation is directly involved in atherosclerosis. It’s very telling that the slight reduction in heart attack risk has not been shown to be dose-dependent.
Meanwhile, the demonstrable harms from taking statin drugs are much less obscure, including: an increased risk of diabetes, dementia, and even cancer.
Furthermore, statins are often prescribed in the absence of any clinical signs of heart disease; based solely on the cholesterol number. In other words: it’s a knee-jerk reaction to a blood test.
“Mr. Jones, we see that your cholesterol is a little high, so we’ll be starting you on a statin drug. You’ll be taking it indefinitely- for the rest of your life. Have a nice day.”
That is the state of Modern Medicine today. For all the money, and it’s about $20 trillion spent in the U.S. every year, for all the exalted research and science, and regardless of whether you, yourself, are a rich bastard or a dirt-poor pauper, that is what you get. That is what 21st century Medicine delivers and calls health care.
Dr. Andrew Kaufman on Covid-19
- Created on Friday, 19 June 2020 12:46
Dr. Andy Kaufman is a board certified psychiatrist, and I know that doesn’t sound like a specialty that would lend expertise about a viral illness, but he also has a degree in Molecular Biology from MIT, and he has done clinical research in other fields of Medicine, including hematology and oncology. So, he is broadly educated and widely experienced.
And, as I listen to him, he certainly comes across as being very knowledgeable, and intelligent. Yet, what he says is certainly extreme. He challenges medical orthodoxy to the nth degree about Covid.
But, please give him a listen because I think it’s valuable to do so, whether or not you agree with him. That’s because, like it or not, he makes some very important points and asks some very important questions. For instance, the fact is that, to this day, the Corona virus has never been isolated, even though they speak as though it has been. For two, all claims about the death rate from Covid-19 are worthless because, as he puts it, “you don’t know the bottom number.” Since a great many people, reportedly, contract the Corona virus without getting the slightest bit sick from it, it means that anyone could potentially have it. And that means that you would have to test every person on Earth before you could know how many infected people there are. And that obviously has not been done or anything close to it. However, it’s worse than that because that assumes that you have a valid test, but you don’t. The inadequacies and faulty assumptions underlying the RT-PCR Covid-19 test have been detailed by David Crowe, Jon Rappaport, and others, including Dr. Kaufman, but he stresses that the problem in methodology long precedes this. The whole medical field of Virology has been plagued, from the start, with the kind of dogmatism that would make religions blush.
Dr. Karufman goes into vaccines and the refusal in Medicine to do double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of them, presumably because it would be “unethical” to do so, to deny anyone a vaccine. But, that is ridiculous. For instance, what about vaccines for adults, such as the Shingles vaccine? Obviously, a lot of adults don’t get that vaccine and aren’t going to get it. So, why couldn’t they do a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of it? And even with children’s diseases- and that’s the kicker because how could you deny any child the protection of vaccines- they could still do studies because there are parents who willfully do not vaccinate their children. So, those children aren’t going to be vaccinated anyway. So, why not compare those children to vaccinated children, and I mean scientifically? Granted, it would not be a blind study, but that doesn’t mean that it would have no value. You could test for the incidence of the disease that is supposedly being prevented, but just as important, you could test for incidence of other diseases and general health outcomes. There has been some attempt outside Mainstream Medicine to do this. For instance, there is this study, which shows a lower incidence of common maladies and chronic problems in unvaccinated children compared to vaccinated.
But, getting back to Dr. Kaufman, he is a psychiatrist, and he looks at the mental fixations of medical experts who are glued to a paradigm that is a colossal “group-think” of the worst kind, where the dogma starts, and everything that happens afterwards is interpreted according to the dogma- and if they have to pound square pegs into round holes, so be it. For instance, there is the question as to why an infective agent causes little or no illness in the vast majority of people (where, apparently, the number who don’t manifest any illness at all outnumber the ones that get a little bit sick because, as I type this on June 18, they are telling us that the virus is still spreading rapidly, and especially in states that have reopened "too soon," such as my state Texas, but how are these new cases coming about? How are people contracting it? Surely, the vast, overwhelming majority are unaware of having been around anyone with Covid or anyone with respiratory symptoms, which means that, presumably, that they got it from someone without symptoms.
In other words, with all the quarantining, social distancing, sanitizing, etc., it not only means that the “sickless sick” (to coin a phrase) are the motor of spread of this disease, but that the face masks, etc. are not effective.
And remember that all this supposedly started at “A” seafood market in Wuhon, China, and then spread, from there, person to person, to everywhere on Earth. The implausibility of that is staggering.
But, to me, the scariest thing is not Covid-19 but the medical response to it. Dr. Kaufman goes into the ventilating, and clearly they have killed a lot of people with those machines. And, Dr. Kaufman explains that they often they have to persuade conscious people to submit to that treatment- to allow doctors to anesthetize them, then administer drugs to them to paralyze them, so that a machine can forcibly ram oxygen in and out of their lungs. And the really perverse thing is that often these people have not been in that much distress. They have not been that dyspneic. They are being asked to volunteer to go on a respirator, you might say, electively.
Well, I will tell you flat-out that anyone who is able to sit and think and listen and talk (and remember that talking is a modified form of expiration) doesn’t need to be on a ventilator. The risks of ventilating are extremely high. The vast majority of Covid patients put on a ventilator have died: over 90%.
Dr. Kaufman goes into this and more. Again, he strikes me as a very intelligent man and a very courageous one. He explains that there is nothing solid about any of the claims made about Covid-19, and the idea that the whole world needed to shut down over it, is just plain insane.
So please listen to Dr. Kaufman and share this video:
Two surprising articles on Medscape
- Created on Saturday, 13 June 2020 13:32
Medscape is a weekly online journal for medical doctors that I have been reading for years, and the June 9 edition contains two articles that surprised me.
The first concerns the latest guidance from the American Cancer Society about lifestyle measures to prevent cancer. For the first time, besides setting limits on alcohol consumption for men and women, they admit that it’s best not to consume alcohol at all- to avoid it completely.
Thus, the change here is that the previous guideline only recommended limiting alcohol consumption, whereas the update suggests that, optimally, it should be avoided completely.
But, I have to wonder what took them so long because it’s not as though it was ever suggested that a little alcohol is good for you, that it helps to prevent cancer. Ethyl alcohol is a carcinogen, a mutagen, and a teratogen, and that’s been known for a long time.
Of course, there was the longstanding fallacy that a little alcohol helps to prevent heart disease, but that was based entirely on the “sick quitter” effect. In the U.S. and many other countries, most non-drinkers are former drinkers who used to drink a lot and often for decades. They are still suffering from the effects of alcohol even though they don’t currently drink. When researchers compared lifelong abstainers to so-called moderate drinkers, they found no protective effect from alcohol at all. The best thing you can do for your heart- and every other organ in your body- is not to bathe it in alcohol- at all.
The second article was an admission that many Covid patients who seem to recover, whose symptoms clear up completely, continue to test positive for the Corona virus for a long and indefinite period of time. So, the question is: are they still infective? But, what the question should be is: Is the PCR test valid? The medical world, in its religious faith in the Covid PCR test, still refuses to admit the possibility of false positives- even though it is widely recognized that the non-sick often test positive, and that the fully recovered also commonly continue to test positive. Some medical authorities are saying that it’s pointless to rely on the PCR test to determine if someone is cured, that other tests will need to be developed, and it may be best to forego PCR testing of recovered patients completely.
There is supposition about disease that occurs across the whole spectrum of pathology, where this, that, and the other thing are believed to be true. In other words, Medicine is riddled with “commonly held beliefs” that are unproven. But, the amount of supposition that is going on with Covid is off the chart.
I am not saying that there is nothing real underlying the Covid crisis, but I am saying that there is an element of “extraordinary popular delusion and the madness of crowds” that has taken over and is feeding on itself. And I am saying that it is happening at the professional level and fueled by the institutional dogmatism within Medicine, especially when it comes to this kind of disease. And to a large and growing extent, the masses just don’t seem to care any more, as evidenced by people flocking to beaches- and to anti-lockdown rallies. Medicine, as a profession, started based on superstition. Well into the 19th century, they were bloodletting to release the bad humors and the evil spirits. Modern scientific Medicine supposedly started at Johns Hopkins in the early 20th century. But, to a great extent, dogma and authoritarianism, and I mean of the worst and most dangerous order, still dominate the profession. What the world did, which was to shut down on medical orders, where governments of every stripe submitted to worldwide international Medicine shows you what Medicine has become and the extent to which it controls our lives. And it’s a very scary thing. With so many exotic viral outbreaks having happened, don’t you think it’s extremely likely that there are going to be more? What are we going to do if another one breaks out next winter? Is the world going to shut down again? One thing is absolutely certain: medical dogmatism is here to stay, and the sweep of it is going to be even greater going forward because of what happened.
Dr. Grundy’s grunge
- Created on Friday, 05 June 2020 19:37
Dr. Steven Grundy is either very rich, or he has a company backing him with pervasive internet advertising. His schtick is that lectins are bad. Lectins are proteins in plant foods that can potentially have harmful effects, but it’s more theoretical than real. The food highest in lectins are beans, but thorough cooking thoroughly deactivates the lectins. I’m a big fan of beans, and I eat them almost every day. And I’ll confess that it’s almost always out of a can. But, one advantage of that is that you know they have been cooked properly, and you don’t have to worry about the lectins.
Much smaller amounts of lectins occur in almost all plant foods. Dr. Gundry likes to give lectures holding up a tomato and asking if you think it’s good for you. Of course, the answer is that it isn’t. And that’s what got me thinking about Dr. Gundry because my garden tomatoes are pouring in right now, and I am eating them voluminously every day. The quality is so good. And I am not the least bit worried about the lectins.
Here’s a man who ate nothing but canned beans for 40 days. And he was very active physically during that time, so he ate a lot of beans. And on the 40th day, he competed in an ultra-marathon race. The race was so long, the runners had to eat solid food during the race to keep going. And he ate beans. Just beans.
And he looked good too. He slimmed down, as I expected he would (regardless of how many cans of beans he ate). But, he appeared to just lose body fat. His muscles stayed firm.
It's amazing all he could do. What harm did he suffer from the lectins? None.
And if you check the medical databases, you’ll find scant evident of harm from lectins. The most notorious case involves the eating of raw or undercooked red kidney beans. You shouldn’t do that. But, I do eat red kidney beans. Whenever I go to the salad bar, I always take a scoop. The USDA says that they are the highest antioxidant food on the planet. They’re not going to hurt you if they’re cooked properly. And eating them can only drive down your risk of heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. And that’s what you have to worry about, not Dr. Grundy’s leaky gut obsession.
The bottom line is that Dr. Grundy is so deluded, you should pay him no mind. None at all. Run away from him. Just click him off whenever he pops up on the internet. And eat your plant foods, including beans. There are things to worry about in this world, but lectins aren't one of them.
Caloric reduction for life extension
- Created on Saturday, 30 May 2020 20:26
First, it works. It has been demonstrated in animals many time, both large and small. Also, in insects. It’s never been tested with people, for many reasons. But, I know of a surrogate test in which they used telomere shortening as a surrogate for aging, and the test subjects who were calorically restricted for two years experienced less telomere shortening.
So, caloric restriction is the most proven life extension technique. But, what should we do about it? Well, I cant see getting underweight, and by that I mean skinny where you are decidedly less than your ideal weight. Life is about quality not quantity, in my opinion. You want to feel good about yourself, the way you look, about your manliness or womanliness. And if you get too thin, you’ll have no reserves to sustain you in an emergency. So my advice is to restrict calories enough to get down to lean body weight but where you still look good and feel good about yourself.
So, what is the best way to do it? There are several ways. You could just eat less at every meal. Or, you could just eat fewer meals. Say, for instance, instead of having 3 meals a day, you have only 2. Or, you could just have fasting days occasionally. That’s how Dr. Roy Walford went about it. He wrote in his book Maximum Lifespan that he fasts every Monday and Tuesday. He found that easier than having to skimp on his eating all the time. But, that really is radical because it comes to 104 days of fasting every year, and that is a lot. I know I couldn’t do that much fasting. I would waste away. I wouldn’t be able to eat enough the other 5 days to make up for it. But, he did it, and perhaps others can.
But, there is such a thing as being too thin, and we have to be practical. But, here’s a way that everyone should think about caloric restriction and that is to use it to keep you from eating things that you shouldn’t eat at all. Say someone offers you a piece of cake with some ice cream. You know you shouldn’t be eating that, and that those calories are just extra calories you don’t need; calories that will age you. So, you pass. That is the most important way to exploit the fact caloric restriction can lengthen your life. Use it to gain the fortitude to say no to food that you should not eat. Use it to say no to junk food.
One world government? It’s already here
- Created on Tuesday, 26 May 2020 20:44
I see a lot written online about the new world order and the coming one-world government. Whether it is going to happen or not, I don’t know, but in one very important respect, it is already here, and I mean: medically.
You know how powerful the CDC is in the U.S. It got the federal government to shut down the economy over the Corona virus. Your freedom to move about, to work, and to live as you wished was shuttered by the CDC, that is, by the medical establishment. Medicine is a profession; it is an industry; but through the power of government, it is overlord. Why couldn’t they just recommend that people who are vulnerable stay home? Or even if they wanted to recommend that most people stay home except for essential workers, but to make it the law of the land? In what is supposed to be a free country?
So, Medicine is powerful. When it talks, people listen, including our leaders. And it’s partly because Medicine is so highly revered. Doctors are the best and the brightest among us, and they, and they alone, have an understanding of disease and what needs to be done about it. We need to listen to them- at the doctor/patient level, and at the level of medical decrees about health and disease that are fanned far and wide.
Why is Medicine so highly revered? It’s because it is perceived as the pinnacle of science. And surely, there is a tremendous amount of science involved in Medicine; I don’t deny that. However, to a great extent, Medicine is a cult, and a dangerous one at that. And I could say it is a religion. It is definitely a belief system. And as in all cults, it has a strict hierarchy of authority, and it does not tolerate dissent.
Take the guiding principle of Medicine and Biology, which is Darwinian Evolution. Is it scientific? A distinguished group of PhDs in biology and biochemistry say it isn’t, and they have put their names to this statement:
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
It would be tangential for me to go into this at length, but briefly: life obviously underwent changes on Earth, but what drove the changes? Medicine says that random, accidental chance changes (mutations) to DNA from radiation etc. caused changes in organisms that were favorable, that had distinct survival advantages, such that they were “naturally selected” wherein those individuals survived better and lived longer and reproduced more often and more successfully, passing along those traits, and that’s what drove the whole process of evolution.
I debated it once with a Professor of Biology, and I asked her how it worked when it came to lactation, which is the crux of being a mammal. She actually had the nerve to suggest that it probably started with a pre-mammalian mother holding her infant close, and the infant got some sustenance, if only water and salts, from ingesting sweat from her sweat glands. But, that is SO stupid because it is totally imaginative, and it doesn’t even involve a mutation; it’s just an adopted behavior. So, how could it be passed along genetically? But, it’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to explaining the evolution of lactation because it involves not just changes in the glands on a woman’s chest, but changes in her uterus and birth canal, and a complete revamping of her offspring into a milk-consuming creature. And all these diverse changes had to evolve at the same time. And if it was driven by random changes being naturally selected, it meant that every single piecemeal step in the direction towards becoming a milk maker and milk consumer had to be useful and advantageous. It had to contribute something to survival- immediately. How can you explain the supposed evolution of some kind of a reptile into a mammal that way? It’s preposterous. It is absurd. Yet, it is regarded as “medical science.”
But, you better believe it because if you don’t, it’s assumed that you believe that God made the universe in 6 days and rested on the 7th. But, what about just saying that it’s a mystery, that life is a mystery, and we just don’t know how it happened and what drove the unfolding of it?
But, you can’t question Darwinian Evolution. If you do, you are put in the same category as flat-earthers and those darn “9/11 conspiracy theorists”, and be aware that, like the 3000+ architects and engineers, I am one.
But, the point is that Medicine involves beliefs- suppositions that are accepted on faith and in submission to authority.
Look at the whole realm of “vaccination science.” Consider how many doctors spend their days injecting vaccines into children. What do these doctors know about the vaccines, their effects, their effectiveness, or lack thereof, their safety, or lack thereof, their risks, their harms, etc.? I would tell you that they don’t know much more than you do. The only difference is that they have a few more talking points than you do. That’s about it. They’re not “virologists” or “immunologists.” So, not only are the people accepting the vaccines out of faith, but so are the doctors.
There are fields within Medicine that are very straight-forward, such as Anatomy and Physiology. But, when you get to “Virology” it is very autocratic, hierarchical, and dogmatic, and I mean that in the worst sense of the word. This is a paper by David Crowe, a Canadian researcher whom I greatly respect, and it concerns the isolation of the Corona virus. We have been told, repeatedly, that the Corona virus has been isolated, but what they mean by that is not what you think they mean. They are conflating the demonstration of “cytopathic effects” with the isolating of a virus.
David Crowe also has done more than anyone else to expose the flakiness of the RT-PCR test for the Corona virus, while completely ignoring the very possibility of false positives and hushing anyone who tries to raise the issue. David discusses it in this video:
David has also written an excellent critique of the Corona antibody tests.
You should definitely listen to this podcast of David Crowe and Dr. Andrew Kaufman discussing the very nature of viruses and their association with and similarity to exosomes, which are cellular excretions.
The whole paradigm of viral infections is fraught with uncertainty and inconsistency. Why is it that having Corona antibodies is good while having AIDS antibodies is bad? Why is it that children, who get colds easily and frequently, which are reportedly caused by Corona viruses, should be relatively immune from Covid-19? And yes, I’ve heard the explanation that there is an overlap of the antibodies, but it’s just a lip-flapping convenience, and it still comes down to believing that feeble children who get sick often are more resistant and better off. And that just doesn’t make sense.
Then, there is the whole “cytokine storm” theory for the lethality of Covid-19, that that’s what kills you. But, they are also telling us that it’s mostly the old and feeble who are dying, and they can’t generate cytokine storm as well, just as old people can’t generate fever as well. Who do you hear about getting 106 degree fevers? It’s not the old; it’s the young. It works the same for cytokine storm because it takes vitality to do it.
The bottom line for me is that we are in a situation in which a disease is being diagnosed solely on the basis of a test, and a very flaky one at that. And the possibility of error with this test is being systematically and dogmatically shunned, and that’s like not seeing an elephant in a room. Clinical presentation has been completely discarded. Although Covid-19 was initially designated as SARS2, which stands for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, with the cardinal symptoms being fever, coughing, and shortness of breath, now, it no longer has to be respiratory at all. Covid could be digestive. It could be dermatological. It could be anything. If you test positive, it’s Covid- no matter what your symptoms are. If you die of something that you’ve been suffering with for 20 years, you died of Covid, if you test positive- even if it was found out postmortem. If a husband and wife both seem to have colds, and they test for Covid, and she’s positive and he’s negative, then, of course, her positive test is valid, and his negative test is false. But, why not question the validity of the test?
Because of the arbitrary decree that the presence of Corona antibodies means a successful, if asymptomatic, fight against the virus has already been waged and the person is now recovered, they are adding people to the list of contractees in leaps and bounds, such that the lethality of Covid-19 has been reduced to well less than 1%. Because of all the asymptomatic cases, they’re now saying that it’s no more deadly than the flu. But wait. If it’s no more deadly than the flu, what did they shut down the world economy for? And remember that the deadliness of the flu occurs despite the fact that there is a vaccine which is supposedly protective and preventative. So, if Covid-19, without there being a vaccine, is no more deadly than the flu, and if the vast and overwhelming majority of people get no symptoms from it, where they don’t even know they’re sick, or they just get very mild symptoms and don’t even have to stay in bed, then what the heck are we doing shutting down the whole world economy and bringing so much suffering and ruin to so many people? It’s crazy.
The only thing I know for sure about Covid is that it is a dogma; a medical dogma, and the scariest thing about it is that this dogma knows no borders. You know how there is separateness and independence between countries when it comes to international relations, economic policies, and certainly military policies. BUT, THERE IS PRACTICALLY A ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT WHEN IT COMES TO MEDICINE. And that to me is truly the scariest thing of all. Because: all the wacky theories and wacky tests are being heaped on everybody; every person on Earth.
Medical globalism is already a reality. Medicine is a global cartel, and OPEC is like Little League in comparison. China has its own CDC, but methodologically and in their beliefs, they’re the same as ours. Medicine is an international institution and an international mindset. When it comes to this pandemic, they’re practicing the same religion. The institution of Medicine has superseded national sovereignty.
And medical tyranny is on the rise. Of course, in a country like China, it’s easy for it to grow. But even here, opting out of vaccines is getting increasingly more difficult. California recently passed a bill vacating personal exemptions from vaccination, even if doctor-prescribed. Now, If you want to put your kids in public school in California, they have to be vaccinated; no ifs, ands, or buts. It’s been that way in Germany for a very long time. What’s going to happen when they come up with a Corona vaccine? Are they going to lower the hammer even more?
Medical doctrines are like an ether that pervades the whole planet- seeping everywhere. To a great extent, the medical establishment has taken over the planet. It is like a virus that has commandeered the machinery of governments everywhere. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Why I am content to live without medical insurance
- Created on Sunday, 24 May 2020 01:42
I went my whole adult life without having medical insurance, and I do mean none. Now that I am pushing 70, I have the minimal Medicare coverage, but that’s it. I don’t fret about not having good coverage, and I want you to know why.
There is very little in Medicine that I would want or make use of. Obviously, if I were severely traumatized I would need surgery, but the most likely way for that to happen is a car wreck, and I carry extra insurance for that- far more than the State minimum. I think I have $500,000 personal injury protection and the same for Uninsured Motorist. And, it doesn’t cost that much more to get the extra coverage. And otherwise, I avoid doing dangerous stuff. I don’t go up on the roof. I don’t go downhill skiing. I don’t use a chain saw or any kind of dangerous equipment. I play it safe. I am a very cautious driver, and I drive as little as I can. I am very content the days I stay home and don't have to go anywhere. I go bicycling, but never in traffic. I have safe places to ride that entail very little interaction with cars.
But, what about disease? Well, the fact is that there are 3 main diseases that people get in old age: heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. Those are the 3 big killers.
For heart disease, well I’m a total vegan, living on fruits, vegetables, salad greens, nuts, seeds, and beans. I eat some whole grains too but not much. I take heart-healthy supplements like CoQ10, DHA, Curcumin, Vitamin D3, Vitamin K2, etc. I stay active physically. I keep myself lean. And I take anti-aging hormones like DHEA and melatonin which are cardio-protective.
So, doing all that, what are the chances that I, Ralph Cinque, am going to develop clogged arteries? And even if I did, and I don’t think I will, I wouldn’t take statin drugs or have a bypass operation or do anything medical for it. I’ve known too many people who have. But again, I don’t think it’s going to be an issue for me, and I don’t think I need insurance for it.
What about high blood pressure? Well, I just checked my pressure, and it was 112/60. And it’s always been about that. I don’t believe I have ever had a systolic pressure higher than the teens. In other words, I have never been as high as 120.
But again, even if I developed high blood pressure, I wouldn’t want to take medical drugs for it anyway. I am very open to the possibility and the likelihood that lowering blood pressure with drugs does more harm than good. They refuse to do double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of blood pressure drugs. They say it would be unethical, which is the same excuse they use for not doing double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of vaccines. But, If you think about it logically: drugs do not correct the causes of high blood pressure, and they add a pathogenic influence that takes the body further out of true- which is a reference to a bicycle wheel being out of true when it does not rotate correctly; where it wobbles. You can’t get your blood pressure back to true by taking drugs. Period. They don't fix anything.
What about cancer? The lifetime risk of getting various cancers varies a lot depending on which cancer you are talking about. But for men, the cancer that is, by far, the most likely to happen is prostate cancer with a lifetime risk of 1 in 9. That is the only cancer that is in single digits for men. But, here’s how I view it: 1) I get a lot of lycopene from watermelon, tomatoes, and ruby red grapefruit. 2) I take Prosthera from Klaire Labs every day, which is an excellent prostate botanical supplement.
There are other good ones, but I think it’s prudent for men to take a good prostate formula because the ingredients we are talking about are perfectly safe and have been shown to be effective.
But, let’s get back to that 1 in 9 chance. Again, I have to think that my personal risk is lower than most because of my diet and lifestyle, and I’ll tell you something else that you probably won’t hear elsewhere: I believe that staying lean, as I do, is also a deterrent because you have to think of the prostate as the low man on the totem pole. If there is a lot of weight above from a pendulous abdomen bearing down and putting pressure on the prostate, its drainage is going to be impaired (since veins are low pressure) but the arterial blood is still going to get through. And the result is: congestion. Torpid congestion. And that’s a predecessor to cancer. And that’s why any time you go out and exert yourself hard, you are diverting blood from out of your pelvis and into your arms and legs to do the work. It means you are wringing out your prostate gland. Do you understand how beneficial that is?
So, the next time you should be going out for a vigorous hike, but you’re feeling lazy about it, remind yourself: it’s time to drain your prostate.
So, that’s the worst cancer risk for men, which is 1 in 9, and again I feel that because of everything I am doing that my personal risk has to be much less. If it were half, then it would be 1 in 18. And I can live with those odds.
And the other consideration is that a great many cases of prostate cancer are practically innocuous, that they progress so slowly, that you usually die of something else before it kills you. I’m going to be 70 soon, and let me tell you: as long as I can urinate freely and I’m not having any pain, I am not letting anybody cut on my prostate. No way, no how.
What about diabetes? Again: with my diet, my exercise, my supplements (such as magnesium which is diabetes-preventive) and staying lean, I think I have a handle on it. Besides, I do blood testing every year, and my fasting glucose is 85. It’s no higher now than it was 30 years ago.
But, if it started going up, I would be open to taking Metformin, which is one of the few medical drugs that I think is good. It’s made synthetically, but it is based on an herb. And, metformin is dirt-cheap.
But, there is also the option of taking an herb, such as berberine, and I might do that instead.
Beberine is actually more expensive than Metformin, even though the latter is a prescription drug. But, I may never need either. My mother is going on 99, and she isn’t diabetic. Neither is her sister who is going on 102.
So, I have a plan in mind in case I do become diabetic at some point in the future. But remember that there are all different degrees of diabetes, and in my case, I’ll probably either never get it, or I’ll get such a mild case that I will easily be able to manage it myself.
So, those are the big 3. But, what else is there? There is joint degeneration, and that can happen to anybody. I have friends who are health enthusiasts who wound up with degenerated hips and underwent joint replacement. I have not had my hips x-rayed, but there is an orthopedic test called the Patrick FABER test that I perform on myself sometimes, and it shows good range of motion in my hips. But frankly, even if I did develop bad hips, I don’t think I would have surgery. I would try loading up on SAM-E which is cartilage-boosting supplement, and I would do my best to manage it without surgery. Hip replacement is a very radical procedure, and I am not planning on having it.
What else? Of course, there is Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia. But, I’m doing things about that too, such as taking pregnenolone and Acetyl-l-carnitine.
Mental decline is very common. For instance, in the 2020 Presidential race, it’s going to be one demented old guy versus another. I think that both Trump and Biden are manifesting significant mental decline, although Biden more so, and people are making jokes about it like crazy. It’s sad. I feel sorry for him. But, it is progressive, and it is only going to get worse. He shouldn't be running for President, and neither should Trump, in my opinion.
As I approach 70, I think that I am holding up quite well that way. I'll admit that my short-term memory isn't as good as it used to be. But it’s it's going to take more than that for me to think that I am losing my mind. However, it is something that that I am going to pay attention to going forward. But again, I wouldn’t be interested in taking any Alzheimer’s drugs anyway.
Then, there is cataracts, which are caused by ultraviolet exposure, and they're pretty much inevitable. If you live long enough, you're going to get them. But, I'm already tracking. I have a very good friend who is an eye doctor. And he tells me, first, that I am never going to get macular degeneration because my macula are so yellow. And regarding cataracts, he says I have a little opacity but nowhere near the operative stage. I realize that it is going to progress, but I am doing all I can to slow it down. I take Carnosine, which is a dipeptide known to protect the lens.
There are also Carnosine eye-drops that are widely available, but I haven't started using those yet. But, I do wear protective lenses when I'm in the sun, and not usually sun glasses. I am referring to prescription lenses that darken in the sun and become sunglasses, as needed.
But, if worst comes to worst, I'll need cataract surgery at some point. And when the times comes, I'll just pay for it. The uninsured always get a steep discount. I'm finding it available for as little as $5000 per eye. So, if I have to shell out $10,000 for that at some point, I will. I'm not going to pay for medical insurance for decades just to avoid it. Who knows, I could get killed first in a car wreck, a tsunami, or by a jealous husband... just kidding.
But, the main thing is that as I enter old age, and I think everyone would agree that when you’re 70, you ain’t young any more, nor are you middle-aged, that my goal is to remain active and vigorous and avoid the “medical stage” of life, where taking medications and going to doctors and having surgeries, etc. is the center of my existence. I don’t want that. I wouldn’t be content with that. And I am determined to have a higher quality of life than that.
To me, life is more about quality than quantity. How long would I like to live? As long as I am feeling well and functioning well and living independently, and staying engaged in the things that I am passionate about, I want to keep waking up in the morning.
I don’t want Medicine intruding on my life. I want as little to do with Medicine as possible. I seriously see it more as a peril than as a savior. And especially in the wake of this Corona crisis, I see Mainstream Medicine as a sick profession, and I do not want to get in their clutches- not at any age.