Is the US government good for our health?

[Sparko]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that
caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

I've discovered an interesting webpage "Five Supplements That Could Help Prevent the Flu"
http://www.cbn.com/health/weightloss...lu_galland.asp
Four references for you to evaluate!
The first reference is about a trail that showed 79% of people given a placebo developed flu symptoms but only 25% of people given a NAC supplement developed flu symptoms. Moreover, they appeared to be more mild. For information on the other supplements, click on the link above.

Drinking cyanide will prevent the flu. and a lot of other diseases.

[Jedidiah]

I believe that general good health will help ward off things like flu. Stronger immune system means greater immunity. It ain't magic and you can not take some supplement for three days and avoid the flu. It must be a long term health support habit.

[Truthseeker]

Drinking cyanide will prevent the flu. and a lot of other diseases.

I've discovered an interesting study. People were given posts by Sparko to read. An equal number of people were given other posts (none by Sparko) to read. The first group showed many indicators of illness, a number that is much greater than average. The other group showed far fewer indicators of illness, by at least 89.45% less. Somewhat average, but what do you expect.

Conclusion: reading posts by Sparko could be injurious to your health.

[Sparko]

I've discovered an interesting study. People were given posts by Sparko to read. An equal number of people were given other posts (none by Sparko) to read. The first group showed many indicators of illness, a number that is much greater than average. The other group showed far fewer indicators of illness, by at least 89.45% less. Somewhat average, but what do you expect.

Conclusion: reading posts by Sparko could be injurious to your health.

But they didn't get the flu.

[Truthseeker]

But they didn't get the flu.

Reread the study.

[Sparko]

Reread the study.

They did a study on reading posts by me? Awesome.

Just wait till I let my Reptilian Overlords know how important I am to their plan for world domination. I bet I will get a promotion!

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

To be sure this is not a USFG problem. But it is very much related.

What is called legal medical kidnaping is declared a growing problem http://medicalkidnap.com Especially bizarre is the ordeal of Justina Pelletier and her parents. She was getting treatment for mitochondrial disease in Tufts Hospital, a prestigious medical center near Boston. Events however conspired to land her in the clutches of Boston Children's Hospital. There doctors diagnosed her condition as "all in her mind." They would not allow her to be treated anywhere else. When her parents tried to get her discharged and taken back to Tufts, they were accused to the state of "medical child abuse."

But now she is back with her family, but it took more than a year and a nationwide outcry.

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

Dr. Marc Micozzi wrote, "Serious epidemics of vaccine-caused neurological diseases have been reported in Canada and Scandinavia." Also, "Dr. [Peter] Doshi also pointed to an Australian study that found one in 110 children who received vaccinations in 2009 for H1N1 influenza experienced brain seizures (convulsions) following vaccination. Researchers also found a prominent spike in narcolepsy among adolescents who received this vaccine."

Micozzi wrote that in his email newsletter on 2015 01 05. Unfortunately, he didn't give references except for the Doshi report (British Medical Journal [BMJ]). I looked in the BMJ website for the Doshi report. There were several ones. The first reference was probably not what Micozzi meant, but it still looks interesting: BMJ 2014;348 doi:http//dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2263 (Published 10 April 2014) Multisystem failure: the story of anti-influenza drugs. Anyway, you have to sign up to get the report and other BMJ ones.

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

I looked up the statin entry in Wikipedia. Quotation: "High cholesterol levels have been associated with cardiovascular disease. Statins have been found to prevent cardiovascular disease (statins are supposed to lower cholesterol levels, with the hope of preventing heart disease)." But there is this recent study

"Statins and the risk of diabetes: evidence from a large population-based cohort study," Diabetes Care 2014;37(8):2225-2232

supporting the conclusion that statins do not lower morbidity; especially, they do not lower heart disease incidence. And they do cause nasty side effects (emphasis by Dr. Marc Micozzi http:www.drmicozzi.com )

Take a gander at these studies shown just below and wonder why the Wikipedia entry seems so favorable BUT the studies show that in Dr Al Sears' opinion, "This fraud claims the lives of hundreds of thousands Americans every year."Such a big discrepancy.

[Truthseeker]

Disclaimer: "Buyer beware!" The government should have made the market a honest place, but that caveat is still necessary. The risks that you decide to take on are solely your responsibility. Whatever advice you take from my posts here has to be treated with due diligence. I cannot guarantee that I will never make a mistake, but your health or that of your dependents is still solely your responsibility.

Stephen Petranek (contributor to Tomorrow in Review) wrote why consumers are confused whether artificial sweetners are beneficial overall or not. Most studies that favor them are "sponsored by companies, like Monsanto, that produce them. On the other hand, studies that warn you of the dangers of artificial sweeteners are usually sponsored by companies that support the consumption of real sugar, in order to drive up their sales."

I certainly don't think that this "sponsor maker syndrome" is unique to the marketing of artificial sweetners. You should suspect it every time you see a study sponsored by a company appears to enhance the sales prospects of any one of its products (or companies in the case of a kind of product).

What about studies sponsored by vaccine makers that don't find any cause-effect relationship between ASD and the toxins in the 60+ vaccinations that many kids get?

[pancreasman]

resized_stoner-dog-meme-generator-its-all-a-conspiracy-man-the-government-wants-our-biscuits-man.jpg

[Truthseeker]

Are you one who believes that we should rely on the government to do more good than bad (make the world better than otherwise), even to the point that the government manages all of our global resources? Why only 40% or so today? Make it 100%!

[Sparko]

Are you one who believes that we should rely on the government to do more good than bad (make the world better than otherwise), even to the point that the government manages all of our global resources? Why only 40% or so today? Make it 100%!

...says the guy who wants the government to pay him subsidies to set up windmills.

[Truthseeker]

...says the guy who wants the government to pay him subsidies to set up windmills.

Do you really believe that I, given a choice of a windmill subsidy and a no-government world, I'd choose the first alternative?

[pancreasman]

Are you one who believes that we should rely on the government to do more good than bad (make the world better than otherwise), even to the point that the government manages all of our global resources? Why only 40% or so today? Make it 100%!

No. But I am sane.