So who wins? Who has the most money? Well sure, ol' Bill Gates has mucho dinero. And the Waltons, they got retail sewed up. But for the new kids on the block, those wanting to go out and be the next Gates or Walton, where do they go? You can't do as they did, no one can go out and start a software empire with someone else's operating system as Bill did, or start a new retail market and grow it into what Sam Walton did for his kids. It just isn't going to happen. So where do the newcomers go to make the most money? Surprisingly, I'm not the only one to ask that question. The financial analysts at Sageworks did some studies and found the top 10 most profitable industries for those wanting to be the next top dogs. Number one, no surprise, law and lawyers. Legal services. really, not a surprise at all, very little cost, with very high returns on investments. Well, shysters through and through. But four of the top ten are money and financial services related. Commercial equipment leasing is number four, with auto leasing as number 8. Gas and oil is actually down there at number 5 and the tenth spot is support activities for mining. That one probably doesn't include all the taverns and prostitutes, but then those are not actually on the list, but they certainly are a part of the category as stated in title heading it would seem to me. But it's not my circus, so let's just go with actual physical mining stuff. But there just below the middle of the list, is "medical services" This includes dentists, hospitals, chiroquacks, and all the stuff that is necessary for the "practice" of medicine. Now remember this list is about the most profitable industries, not the biggest companies with the biggest income. That of course would be Walmart, with nearly 400 billion in sales they only had some 24 billion in profit. Not exactly the most profitable. And Exxon and all the rest of gas and oil, huge incomes, and some decent sized profit margins as well. Of course US tax breaks along with their ability to hide profits in overseas "loopholes" make that industry incredibly profitable. Not like being a lawyer, but then the sheer volume of income compared to shysters is off the chart.
These lists made me wonder as to where the pharmaceutical industry was, as I was always under the impression that that industry was one of the more profitable industries around. The thing is that they would normally be highly profitable and in the top ten except that lately the FDA fines and lawsuits for injuries from their desire to market their drugs before adequate testing is ever done on them has cut into the drug money profits so much lately as to reduce the industry as a whole from being very lucrative.
The medical profession and related services are the sixth most profitable "industries" in America today. Now there is nothing wrong with making a profit, that's what the world is all about. However, is making a profit by doing things that are in complete and total disharmony with what your stated purpose actually a good thing? The stated purpose, cure the sick and infirm. The reality, not so much trying to "cure" anyone as it is to treat symptoms of disease without ever really addressing the actual problems of the disease itself. And yes, this is a generalization and doesn't include all doctors working diligently to cure serious maladies of the world but in fact covers MOST of the medical profession in their daily dealings with their customers, the general public. Let me explain, if you were to go to your GP because you had a rash, your doctor would look at your rash and give you a prescription for a cortisone ointment or a corticosteroidal ointment. Two different ointments that have marginal effectiveness against a few hundred of the more than three thousand different rashes that humans can get. And sure, there are about twenty or so that are most common, and one or the other of those two ointments are effective for most. And you might have about a fifty-fifty chance of him guessing correctly which ointment to prescribe. If he's wrong, and you go back to see him again in a week with your rash even worse, then there is the other ointment. That is the AMA proscribed methodology for treating symptoms of diseases. The initial contact for any doctor is to prescribe medication to treat a Symptom, and not to address the actual disease causing the symptom with the hope of that working. Do you know why Lyme disease is on the rise in America today? Because doctors utilize this very specific methodology for diagnosis to treat symptoms, not the underlying cause. It doesn't always work. And quite often, as it did in my particular case, the AMA method just leads to exacerbation of other problems and as the treatments get more intense, the resulting problems become greater and more varied as ever greater and more toxic drugs with wilder and more harmful side effects are visited upon your person. And of course there is always the other problem of just being in a medical facility you are exposed to what is fast becoming a scourge on America, antibiotic resistant bacteria. But as long as the doctors follow AMA guidelines and treat your symptoms, as those become greater and more varied and intense as they treat the side effects from their earlier treatments, then it is pretty hard to sue them for malpractice because they followed AMA procedures. They didn't treat your disease, or in my case the actual causes of those symptoms, they only treat symptoms.
Sometime do a search for the cause of cancer. There are no known specific causes as to why cells turn cancerous. Well there are some theories with the biggest being genetic propensity, but no known causative factors. Now, along that same line of thinking, let's look at what the FDA says about vitamins, "... statements that supplementation with vitamins claim to prevent or cure any known disease cannot be made, those claims can only legitimately be made for approved drugs." So the FDA is on board with the AMA. Both do not want anyone to ever think that taking a vitamin supplement could in anyway help prevent or cure any disease. Actual pharmaceutical made drugs can only do that. Even though so much of drug company profits go into paying lawsuits to people harmed by their products as we learned a little earlier. So, back to the internet, search for free radicals and cancer. Now we see that free radicals within our bodies play an enormous role in the growth of cancer cells. Scientists don't at this time think that having large numbers of free radicals in your bloodstream actually cause the cancer to begin, but they do cause it to grow at accelerated rates. So, how do you rid your body of free radicals? Well, you consume foods or supplements that are antioxidant in nature. Ooooohhhh, that is sort of contrary to the set guidelines from the AMA and completely against the mandate and policy of the FDA.
Depending on who you want to believe and where you look, over 600,000 people die annually from cancer. Cancer as an industry brings in from 200 to over 600 billion dollars annually. That's a lot of money. With over 260 tax exempt organizations and research facilities working to find a cure, not one has ever published any reports that eating a balanced diet with supplementation with antioxidants will do anything other than make you feel better during standard traditional treatments approved by the AMA. The stated AMA purpose of good nutrition is to help make you stronger so that you can better survive their traditional approved therapies. That sort of goes back to the above where the AMA therapies cause ever more serious and greater complications.
I'm never going to state that diet can cure cancer. I'm never going to state that diet is the primary cause of cancer, we do know that genetics plays a role. But I'm never going to believe every single thing that doctors and the AMA along with the FDA tell me about cancer, nutrition and traditional as well as experimental treatments. Not when this simple fact about antioxidants is so blatant. this doesn't even address all the other non-traditional therapies for cancer that have been suppressed by the AMA and FDA in the past simply because there is no money in eating a healthy diet.
Think outside the box, especially when the box is made of greed and thinly veiled lies.
Me on Cancer (Cancer 1) (Cancer 2) (Cancer 3) (Cancer 4)
No comments:
Post a Comment