With respect to ballooning costs of healthcare, perhaps it is time we looked at viable and economical alternatives from a purely ethical perspective. Hope may yet be found in obtaining valuable health information in reassessing credibility at source. We are at a crossroad with an aging population. The costs of healthcare on it’s current track will assure many will die of premature deaths directly related to a highly flawed and unethical medical community. The process of discovery producing timely and relevant health advice can be seen as a huge expensive albatross not able to find the pocket, let alone their car keys. We need to do away with the epidemiology model and replace it with something more reliable. The expansive knowledge necessary to form opinions based on extremely complicated calculations based in memories of the respondents as a base of knowledge with which to do comparative estimates with another group similarly disadvantaged in the level of memory skills available. So dependent are people’s lives on the correct placement of a decimal point and the energy remaining in a calculator battery. It is not hard to imagine the system requires repair. I would suggest an implementation into the medical process of determinants with more conclusive results not requiring interpretive logic skills, colossal paper trails with excuses for inexplicable inaccuracies in logic not consistent with historical experiences or wasting the effort involved by allowing credibility to be dismissed based on the party paying the bill.
I believe from a logical perspective we could find much more integrity of process in the implementation of Tarot cards or a simple dartboard to decide without doubt or bias the unknowns in medical research as it is now directed. The simplicity and savings realized to obtain relevant information that is more reliable, in an improved stable process could not be dismissed fool hardily, as we continue on our current path of certain destruction. The public already has a lot more confidence in the new methodology and the cost savings certainly would make for some huge political popularity points.
When you consider the latest headlines outlining how our research dollars are being used in fraudulent and unethical ways, it should be made clear to all, your rights to autonomy requires anyone relaying health relevant information if that information is false or inaccurate they take themselves beyond just perspectives of unethical behavior or quacks. They can in reality be seen as criminals for knowingly relaying health information which has the potential to cause harm to others. We set standards of integrity to protect the public from acts of unethical behavior. For years now those rules have been ignored universally in the scientific community wishing to please their masters.
There are many discussions in the realm of scientific integrity and the discarded values of ethical behavior in the pursuit of a smoker-free world. Ignorant to the crimes they commit on others, they plod on. Inexperienced mathematicians calling themselves researchers, breach the rules daily as they produce immense piles of scientific garbage in what we understand is valid evidence discovered repeatedly; ETS is a carcinogen and an extreme health hazard. The Borg infected researchers with their comatose like ignorance, attempt to employ the mathematical calculations of disease tracking to create facts relating to cigarette smoke which fly in the face of real scientific discovery, and historical observations of the so called smoking pandemic related diseases. In front of TV cameras, they chant in tongues their theoretic announcements and how closely to everyone’s amazement and shock, research fits the pattern being purchased by their benefactors. All the researchers and politicians are now as loyal slaves to industry bought and paid for, with the interest and investment returns earned on trillions of dollars promised to charity no less, while the fools in community pay taxes allowing the creation of these massive war chests.
There can be little doubt the rekindling of Hitler’s campaign against smokers which he later aimed at ethnic groups he disapproved of, has once again in his model been quite successful in turning peaceful communities upon themselves. The enormous expenditures purchasing public acceptance and silence of those who would speak against the assault dictating what is decided for you is acceptable. The resources which would be normally funding infrastructure and feeding the poor are now diverted into grandiose schemes to build enormous healthcare bureaucracies to protect the people from themselves. Who needs a Taliban guard posted on every corner? We have cameras and neighbors trained to report on each other for the protection of the public good. An adjustment to a public space definition, a tweak on the hate crimes rules and off you go into a controlled environment automated and dictated on the 6 o’clock news.
The problem starts here. We take tobacco smoke, which can be produced in a number of different ways, primarily burning a vast array of ingredients making what one would think a number of different products. Again, those who control the rules of the game are allowed to define all of these products as one with only one possible description regardless if smoke is produced or not. Bring on the mathematician who, although they know well the single product scenario, is dishonest at best. Driven by hopes of gold coins and their 15 minutes of fame they press forward with the rationale; the government wants this and everyone else is doing it. So it begins, the voyage of discovery, similar to discovering the 7-11 on the corner down the block. The same place he gets his slurpies every time he is due for a break.
Vast impeccably stated calculations, bar charts, graphs and pictures if diseased organs, defining the smoke as a single dimensional vector ignoring as many potential confounders as the peer review will allow. The puzzling thing no matter how many twists and contortions of the results are made we cannot avoid the ever present possible confounders, might, may, should, could, if and a variety of other carefully injected descriptors to explain why significant proof is missing.
Ethical malaise is started by accepting smoke as a disease, which it clearly is not.
Smoke is produced in a number of different mixtures resulting in a number of different smoke creations.
Smoking habits vary by the individual.
They cannot be defined beyond grouping of similar habits which, even with the aid of the best of memory, research values could vary significantly from the gathered evidence.
With the smoking lifespan of the individual, too many variables are evident. Stress increases smoking, being over tired or impaired in addition to many other lifetime factors affect the research.
Additionally, where smoking is done in the pristine (if you discount the air quality} wilderness or a smoke filled steelmill, too many variables to simply afford a single dimensional vector to any individual let alone a group.
Regardless of the reality which exists, the researcher can accept a wide berth of interpretation in defining a single product he allows as a single dimensional disease vector. A vector designed for him by others to fit the mold of his discovery process in pursuit of a predetermined outcome. The outcome announced in the title of his stated theory. In conclusions it can be determined, however; no room for variance will be afforded. There is a non-linear dose response relationship due to the unpredictability of the resulting relationship to the selected disease. A shocking discovery to some, affording the no safe level announcement by the modern day tambourine brigade in anti-smoker advocacy.
Benefactors coincidentally, we are assured, who help fund the research facts by design. It can be nothing more than coincidence the same industry charity foundations funding both parties also would find financial gains determined in what was discovered. Charity truly has its rewards; for the rich, benefits can be collected right here on earth no need to visit Heaven, if indeed they could ever find it.
In a purely ethical perspective, the researchers hold no value in personal integrity or ethical behavior the fear and smear gang in kind, knowing the quality of the facts created validify the deceit. Selling their own and others’ professional integrity in the process.
Criminals, every one of them, robbing us all of the protection of credible science and information concerning our health which is our right above the right of others to spew political truths with no valid basis.
The two most significant effects of smoker-ban crimes against humanity; would be the elevated levels of violent crime in a community set upon itself, and the loss of public confidence in governments and the scientific community at large. They are all as stakeholders able to illicit payments for their efforts today however, who will stand and declare integrity in the days ahead?
Surely, no one employed in a professional career should wish to be looked upon as a clown.
Perhaps in the end, the pricing for medical services could be reduced to the level of gypsy ladies telling fortunes in the circus, who it appears at the moment the public finds much more credible.
FXR
Be Careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint
Mark Twain {1835-1910}
No comments:
Post a Comment