Redefining “wrong” and “right” in search of safety and happiness
Whenever I talk about staying in the middle, I imagine a crystal bowl with a ball in it.
Swirling the ball in the bowl makes it spin for a while, but it will eventually wind up at the lowest point in the middle of the bowl.
No matter what we do, no matter what theory about the ball in the bowl someone makes up, it will always end up at one place.
The place of truth.
Over the past several months, I have encountered many friends and acquaintances trying to convince me that the ball of truth is high up on one or the other side of the rim of the bowl.
This actually doesn’t just happen when discussing the topic of the pandemic, it also happens when we talk about medicine in general.
Some people are all-conventional or all-holistic, which ultimately results in lower quality healthcare, because they both have their place and should be continuously paid attention by researchers.
unconventional treatments are often less lucrative, hence, most research focuses mainly on NEW licensable substances, which can’t be natural in order to be licensed. There is also a commercial interest in driving focus towards expensive licensable products, and away from cheap ones.
When it comes to doctors, taking a holistic approach to medicine is rather difficult, because of how we are educated, and also due to liability concerns. Generally, we have to be daring and brave not to use proven but unapproved non-conventional protocols, as this makes us extremely vulnerable to liability lawsuits.
Also, irrational conclusions and theories on both sides are commonplace especially now.
My goal today is to bring some sort of sense to the madness, so that we can all talk to each other without thinking that the other side is either insane, or dangerous.
To say this as a person who is able to reach a relatively large number of people, I feel obligated to share this info to help you stay healthy both physically and mentally, and keep your dog healthy too.
Here is how I understand the current situation in 11 simple points
We may never know how the virus got out.
Lives have been lost, and many people have been affected by the pandemic.
Protecting people against COVID-19 and other viruses makes sense.
Vaccines appear to reduce the number of COVID-19 cases, which in some cases can be fatal, mainly in compromised individuals. (Let’s call this option A)
Vaccines produce side-effects that can be serious, and in some cases fatal, often in young and healthy individuals. (Lets call this option B)
Vaccinated people can carry and spread the virus.
Unvaccinated people can carry and spread the virus.
Drug and vaccine companies are in the business of making money. They also have a history of lying to us many times over. They may have a sincere intention this time around, but similar to a friend who has lied before, exercising caution makes sense.
Regulatory agencies and governments have always been involved with big pharma lobbyists who have a strong influence on regulatory measures.
Vaccines and testing have generated unprecedented income for some companies. It is a big business.
Many of the precautions and rules contradict each other, and make no logical sense, which naturally makes people question them.
To add to all this, most politicians may strive to do the right thing for two reasons:
To protect the public, and for their own personal benefit of being re-elected. They are prone to do what will make them more popular, or gain them more power. History repeats itself.
Sadly, in many countries, politicians have made the decision to create a two-tiered society, the privileged ones who chose option A and got vaccinated, and those who are often wrongly accused of being irresponsible for choosing option B and did not get vaccinated.
Objectively stated, groups A and B just have different but reasonable fears. One is dominated by the fear of a virus, the other by the fear of side-effects. Suddenly, our governments are deciding what kind of fear is okay, and what kind isn’t.
It is as if someone said, those who are afraid of car accidents are okay, and those who are afraid of guns are not, which to me makes zero sense.
What is the only difference between those who chose to get vaccinated and those who didn’t?
They are afraid of different consequences, which made them choose different risks.
One group chose to reduce the likelihood of COVID-19 and take their chances on possible vaccine side effects, which can sometimes be serious or fatal.
The other group chose not to get vaccinated and take the risk of infection, which can sometimes be serious or fatal.
Throughout my life, I have heard politicians preaching respect and tolerance, yet suddenly many leaders have resorted to intimidation and shaming. All I can do is shake my head and say, shame on those who do!
The argument that one group is more or less responsible is flawed, because no one can guarantee that serious problems or fatalities will not happen. This is a fact!
I find it disturbing and heartbreaking to see how quickly many people switched from tolerance and respect, to shaming, intimidation, and discrimination. History has shown that dividing people in groups, and pitting them against each other, is an effective way of creating dictatorships under the guise of “protecting the nation.” I know this from my time spent living behind the Iron Curtain, where the totalitarian government was telling us they were protecting us from capitalism.
One should not be surprised that such propaganda, censorship, and one-sided reporting is fertile ground for some other extreme conspiracy, which leads to even more division and distrust.
As soon as people learn that information from reputable experts and doctors is being taken down and censored, they will ask one question: “Has there been any point in history, where censorship was done for the greater good?”
The answer is no.
There is another serious problem.
Research on repurposing possibly effective drugs such as Ivermectin and Fluvoxamine, or any other generic drug for COVID-19, doesn’t seem to get the same funding support from our governments as vaccine research does. What if there is an inexpensive solution to the problem? For example, stats show that homeless people are not as prone to get sick from COVID-19. Would this not deserve more attention?
I have often felt very frustrated with the state of medical research, and believe it should mainly be done by independent government bodies in order for it to be objective and fair. I am convinced that more natural substances and preventive methods would be found to be effective if this were so.
I remember reading an article somewhere written by the daughter of a man who was in the business of developing and licensing proprietary drugs. She touched on the topic of drug licensing and how drug companies alter the active compounds only slightly in order to be able to continue the license, and prevent a substance from becoming cheap and generic.
This is the saddest part of healthcare, and it also shows that the purely free market model of medicine doesn’t work.
What can you and I do?
Over the course of the past 12 months the USA had an election, Canada went through one this week, and many EU countries are heading to the polls this fall.
From time to time, I listen to the debates and I find that the debate on healthcare is stranger than any other topic.
Politicians almost never focus on proactive and preventive medicine. Instead, they talk about how much money they will or will not provide for healthcare.
Do you know why? My guess is because most of them have ZERO or very little medical background, and a very poor understanding that the best way to address health is to focus on prevention. I wonder why their medical advisors do not seem to convince them otherwise. Could it be that many of them have links to big pharma?
I personally know of one veterinarian who has been working as an inspector at the veterinary college, a consultant at agriculture Canada, and as a private consultant for big pharma. If this isn’t a complete conflict of interest, what is?!
I am sure he is not the only one.
The current model of medicine could be also explained by using the following example:
If we want to prevent people from drowning, the most logical way to do so is to teach them how to swim, where and when not to go in the water, and how to get out of ocean rip currents.
In politics and government, we seem to skip all preventive measures and instead call for hiring more lifeguards to rescue those who are drowning!
Throwing money at treating disease without teaching people how to prevent disease is exactly the same. We must be able to treat disease, but more importantly we need to teach people how to prevent it.
This should be our priority.
But back to making choices around COVID-19.
I refuse to accept that our society is divided into two groups of citizens:
Those who are “responsible” and those who are “irresponsible.”
We are only different in what risks we feel more comfortable with because these risks are real.
I find it very disturbing to see that people are being shamed, ostracized, and their rights and freedoms denied. I lived under a totalitarian regime for 27 years, and feel compelled to warn those who have not had the same experience about this dangerous and slippery slope.
I hope that we all can manage to respect the choices others make, and not fall for the politics of division. I also hope that you will be unafraid to speak your truth.
Everyone deserves to live in a world where freedom of choice, empathy, and tolerance prevails.