The Pros and Cons

Road rage


Road rage is a competition between two dictators. Public Health Intervention is built on the same foundation. Do as I demand or I will make you pay for your insolence and disrespect.


Insanity on the road begins with a thoughtless act, inviting another in a series of escalations between two ballooning egos to a point of insanity, which more often than not ends in tragic consequences. We can see the same predicament rising out of competing self-interests who describe themselves as Public Health stakeholders, demanding legislation so that their paying clients may be punished and criminalized, for not following the Doctor’s orders. Personal health and it’s vested interest starts and ends with an individual, to the chagrin of many pumped up lobooist roosters, who dare to steal that right, as though it were their own. Autonomous authority is once more under attack by well-financed dictators and con men who conspire to depreciate all of us, along with our right of authority.


How did we allow ourselves to loose so much and walk away from our basic rights without a murmur? The answer to that question is multifaceted, the most significant reasons fall within deceptions apathy and allowing ourselves to believe we need to be mothered, in place of standing on our own. Communities have lost their moral compass, their connectivity and all sense of confidence. As protected sheep we now line up for the slaughter. In the majority, we are referred to as human capitol a term taken well beyond a figurative context. The livestock raised with a single perspective, of cost versus profit analysis. The slaves of the Industrialists who have captured us all once again.


I believe the statisticians who create “science to order” which has empowered the irresponsible fear mongers who dare to call themselves “scientists”, “Doctors” and “professionals” have had it all delivered “their way” for far too long. The lies and exaggerations have grown too large to sustain and the costs to all of us have grown far too extreme.

So as my contribution to setting things right I have decided to expose them for the frauds and opportunists they really are.

Smoking related diseases.

We have been told many times and in many ways, that “smokers” cost the rest of us huge health and productivity costs. The rally cries of “ending premature mortality and morbidity” as you will soon see, is delusional and poorly considered. It is said “smoking related diseases cause 450,000 premature mortalities annually” and this is seen by many as shocking and unacceptable. Closer examination reveals, this is actually quite normal and a fortunate event [It could be a lot worse] if the figure is legitimate

[Research tells me, you cannot actually trust anything you are being told, so I allow Public Health lobbies nothing any more]

First, we have to consider the rush hour on the way to and from work. If everyone started work at Eight AM and finished at Four Thirty PM, the roads would be understandably overcrowded twice a day. Many years ago, people realized if we rotate start schedules; between Seven AM and every half hour up to Nine AM, we could reduce the congestion on the road by upwards of eighty per cent, both coming and going.

Now consider in nature how well balanced the variety of species have evolved. If insect eating birds are too plentiful, insects would become extinct and with them the birds which eat them. Balance plays a part in many aspects, which allowed the survival of both the birds and the insects, who have other roles to play. For most species of the most plentiful birds, who have multiple offspring, as luck would have it they also have shortened life spans. Insects that reproduce by the hundreds in one egg sac have a lifespan sometimes of only a few months. If we tampered with the cycles, we may end up fighting for our own survival standing in three feet of bird guano, which would have covered the planet thousands of years ago, without the natural balance seen in nature.

Today in the industrialized countries, the average lifespan of a human being is somewhat close to seventy years of age. Meaning for every one million people we should expect to see .7% or 7000 people dying each year offset by 1.3% or 13,000 being born every year.

The average population today can be forecasted into the future, if the maximum lifespan is considered to be 100 years;

[[[number born plus the number of deaths] divided by half] times 100], will maintain a balanced population at the current growth pattern.


This sounds strange at first glance until you realize the lifespan of a human varies, and if we eliminated all causes aside from age, we should see, a distribution which is consistent and which results in the approximate and normal numbers we see in mortality and morbidity figures today; even with a fast growing population offset by an aging population.

An average lifespan of seventy years means half will die before seventy and half after. If as we are told; smoking shortens a life by ten years and as we know smoking has been around for many more than ten years, our mortality numbers have found a balance point in exit numbers.

If we have a 320 million population which includes 20% [64 million] to 30% [96 million] current, and 60% [192 million] ever smokers. We should see, by multiplying 64 million by .7%, an expected mortality number of 448,000 smokers dying every year, regardless of smoking with no expectation of a reduced lifespan, which is quite likely, exactly where the 450,000 figure originated.

I have questioned the “Professionals” for a few years now, asking if we have the same number of smokers today, as we had fifty years ago, how is it; the smoking related, or smoking caused, disease figures continue to grow? Lung cancers for instance which are believed to be primarily caused by tobacco use have increased six fold and heart diseases have grown in similar proportions. There is an obvious reluctance to answer, because an explanation would reveal their slight of hand, when making other more insidious claims.

The number of those who use cigarettes and the consistency can be confirmed by calculating prevalence versus total population quite easily. In the United States close to 55 Million people, using cigarettes has been consistent. Despite what the medical community has been telling you, in use of prevalence figures to deliberately create a bigoted misconception, they have obviously taken every advantage of.

They are coning the politicians and the public into believing disease management reduces the cost of healthcare, when we all should understand it never could. At a time such as this with a huge population bubble moving into old age, the bubble would only be increased, exaggerating the financial problem tremendously. The reality is, if disease management is 100% successful and all of us give up our sinful ways; If living fast and dying young falls out of fashion over night, we are all doomed to witness a painful disaster.

If the average life expectancy is suddenly increased from 70 to 100 years of age, the increased costs of health care would rise by 30 percent as a compounding figure [like the interest on your mortgage] over the next 30 years. The resulting effect of the new numbers, with over 60% of the population over 65 years of age would cause catastrophic global depression [Along with a severe hatred of the elderly] Even if that problem was solved, in a mere three generations at the current rate of growth, we would have a person standing on every square meter of ground on the planet. Of course the possibility of that happening, would be reduced by the length of time food was available, the population was held back from slaughtering each other, or by the increased risk of plague which rises [in potential deaths and potential incidence] right along side of the population increase [Mother nature looking after the balance as usual]


Global Warming

The hockey stick of computer modeling precludes the actuality of physical realities which should be obvious to anyone with an unbiased iota of intelligence. Carbon gasses cause a heating of the environment The glaciers melt. Science tells me water expands when it freezes so water lines would receded not expand as Al Gore contends in his version of fear-mongered events. If the environment increased in temperature, the increase of evaporation rates of water would also occur meaning more clouds less sun on the earth and as more rain occurred the carbon and carbon gases, would return to earth with the heavy rain as temperatures declined. Of course, moderated temperatures would result in global cooling, for a period well capable of replenishing the ice caps at the poles and once again, Mother Nature rules, with moderation once again.

Fat pandemics

Similar to Second hand smoke inspired power grabs describing obesity as a contagious disease, fashioned after taxing addictions, we now find the moral obligation by and for governments, to tax our eating habits toward the 1984-styled common gruel. A common pot of Communism, with paternalists competing on their soap boxes, for control of the ladle and what little remains in our wallets.

Cult over State.

Perhaps it makes some people feel a little better about them selves if they can dismiss all those around them as just a bunch of drug addicts and gluttons.

The question has to be; would they feel as confident as they do, in categorizing and discriminating against others, had the Government and the medical institutions not given their blessing and deliberately promoted an encouragement to divide us?

When Industry through their Lobooists [Fear mongered advocacy] advertising, dictates the rules of morality, in turn industry rules over governments by moralist coercions and the medical community dictates morality issues over their patients, we are in real trouble, both as a community and as a civilization.

Of late, it is harder to dismiss, than to believe, that all three relationships, do not exist.


Philanthropy

I does seem more and more true, that the nationalization of all Charity foundation assets would be the most charitable act a government could ever support.

Taking tax exempted funds and the power they enlist, out of the political arena. Diverting them instead to legitimate acts of charity.

This would solve both a tremendous charity need and a financial crisis in one grand act of kindness.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comme...ed-is- love.html

Just as the moralist crusades of Industrialists work to their advantage, they can also be made into their worst nightmare when the tables turn. It really would not take a large number of people to accomplish tremendous change with such a heavy burden focused on moralities today.

If Politicians grow to realize they are threatened with carrying the title of bigot and Nazi they will be forced by process "best practices" to act quickly and start shifting the blame.

The convictions will come fast and furious by those who can not take the risk of paying the political price should they delay. Y2K for the masses.

Leadership in a democracy does not fit well with the designation of promoting hatred violence and bigotry. It does make you a fine target, for any opposition parties, who denounce such actions and ask for the people's forgiveness.

Placing democracy back on track, as a buyers market.