Pluot -
Let me first make very clear that there are no conspiracy theories here. You're building up a straw-man argument and then trying to bring it down. The data, statistics and facts on western medicine are very transparent in this day and age. I already provided the statistics and data in other threads, and I am done with bringing them up again. I don't know how Gary missed the medical death statistics because I linked it so many times. Lisa Bloomquist even registered to post the Harvard data (she's a medical writer). I am NOT going to waste my time again linking these. Just use the search feature. As a scientist that worked with data sets, I draw my conclusions from data alone and ONLY data. Emotion has little to do with this, but it does incite rage in me and make me passionate about
these issues.
1) You talk about
shades of gray, and yet the harms of the western medical establishment are as clear as day to me. The death statistics, the record profit numbers of pharmaceuticals, the hospitalization rates from simple drugs as tylenol inducing toxicity -- these all paint an otherwise different picture from what you say. I just don't see it anymore. I believed this "shades of grey" ideal for the first 10 years of my disease, and believed that something good would come of it. Medications obviously have their place for certain situations (emergency, accidents, etc), but putting that elderly patient on a statin drug just because doctors don't have a clue about
how cholesterol works is asinine to me.
I can tell you first hand that there are no shades of grey in medicine. It's an idea -- an insidious philosophy that needs to be shattered. Just as fascism is a terrible idea, so is the idea that all diseases need to be suppressed with medications. It is this very idea that gives doctors the "birthright" to do as they please, while completely disregarding the mental, physical and emotional needs of the patient. Has a single doctor ever taken responsibility for the death of their patient? The semantics of who did what is usually tied down with hospital bureaucracy and doctors get an easy pass out. Usually there is some obscure reason the patient died. Polypharmacy is THE cause of death in many elderly patients. Doctors don't even bat an eye to this.
Why should doctors not be treated with the same regard as criminals when they commit acts such as these? Why are they given free passes? Is it because they "slaved" through medical school? They didn't earn anything in my book. I think about
all the not guilty people in serving sentences for essentially non-crimes like doing or selling weed, and juxtapose that with our politicians, doctors, ceos -- these guys are the real criminals.
2) From my understanding and research, funerals for cadavers have become common as
of late, but I can assure you that most of the practicing doctors today did no such a thing in their medical school days. As such, I still concede to Dr.Adam's account remaining accurate. Does this relatively new practice of honoring cadavers teach empathy? I don't know. I think the burden of compassion and integrity lies on the new generation of doctors. It is up to them to stand up to the scandalous behavior that goes on in the background.
3) I seriously deviated from my main argument. My main point was that doctors have zero clue about
what's happening to the patient unless they experience it themselves -- no exceptions. All they have are manuals and medical textbooks to fallback on -- it doesn't even begin to scape the surface of all the humane emotions. Their so-called empathy can only go so far in understanding the
layers of our suffering - this suffering just doesn't extend to the physical level -- it goes to the mental, spiritual and emotional level. They'll never be able to understand the extent of it.
Post Edited (Guardian7) : 7/19/2014 6:52:26 PM (GMT-6)