suzyrice.com Rotating Header Image

BOGUS REMEDIES

440wde_TipOffsBogusRemedy_02.jpg

RedDotSml.gif “BOGUS ‘VOTERS’: ONE WAS DEAD”
Hundreds of (Colorado) forms dubbed suspicious

RedDotSml.gif “KERRY WARNS DRAFT POSSIBLE IF BUSH WINS”

Kerry makes known his plan for a draft if and when people re-elect President George Bush: Kerry and fellow Democrats will reinstate the draft! Kerry doesn’t “know how you do it” otherwise, revealing his “I’ll reinstate the draft because I don’t know any other way to do a war but I’ll blame Bush and everyone who votes for Bush for ‘making me do it'” Plan.

The preface to this Plan is that Kerry and the DNC need to first frighten as many people as possible into misperceiving his Plan by way of threatening that “a vote for Bush is a vote reinstating the draft” but what they aren’t revealing is that the actual heart of this Kerry plan is that he and other Democrats in Congress will push to reinstate the draft if Bush is re-elected, hoping to encourage voters into a vote for Kerry so that Kerry can implement his Plan and reinstate the draft as President by default, and/or don’t vote for Kerry as President and then Kerry can implement his Reinstate the Draft Plan in Congress, and/or, vote for Kerry and the Democrats in the Congress, with Kerry as President, will implement the Kerry Reinstate the Draft Plan — any option still drives votes to support, either directly or indirectly, the Kerry Reinstate the Draft Plan. Just don’t ask him about his Plan because so far, he’s been able to motivate people by fear and remain without examination as to what the Kerry Reinstate the Draft Plan actually is. It’s called covert activity: work toward the Kerry Plan but keep everyone’s eyes on the opponent about the Kerry Reinstate the Draft Plan.

Since President Bush is making it known, time and time again, that there will be no reinstatement of the draft during a Bush second term in the Presidency, the Kerry Plan to Reinstate the Draft is dependent upon the prerequisite that the “blame Bush” meme continue, thus frightening people into a vote for Kerry, thereby ensuring Kerry’s Plan to be implemented, and, presto: Kerry can reinstate the draft.

Read Wizbang! for more:

“IS THAT A DRAFT I FEEL?” “NO, SENATOR KERRY’S TALKING OUT HIS ASS AGAIN.”

RedDotSml.gif “KERRY CANCELS VISIT TO WEST VIRGINIA CHURCH”

“Foiled again! What is “church” without politics,” asks Kerry of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

RedDotSml.gif “HEINZ-KERRY PITCHES HEALTH CARE”

Teresa Heinz-Kerry promotes the daily ingestion of alcohol (it has to be gin!) for those stricken with arthritis and related osteo-arthritis conditions. Given that even a modest ingestion of alcohol by those suffering with arthritis and other auto-immune disorders results in an immediate rise in inflammation and, therefore, pain associated with inflammation, Heinz-Kerry suggests that they do, in fact, persist in the ingestion of daily alcohol. It’s the “damn the pain, give me more inflammation and give me more pain” theory of “healthcare” by Heinz-Kerry.

A proven bit of information as to human physiology is that among those who ingest alcohol, there is a greater loss of bone mass compared with those who do not, among both those with arthritic conditions and those without them. And, among dietary guidelines for those with arthritic conditions, there is a persistent and ongoing suggestion that everyone “drink plenty of non-alcoholic beverages…”

Heinz-Kerry, instead, says she wants those with arthritis to drink daily alcohol (it has to be gin!) and then you’ll be “cured.”

There’s a study from the Netherlands that in some vague way parallels that by Heinz-Kerry, by alleging that “alcohol may protect against Rheumatoid Arthritis,” but what the study and Teresa Heinz-Kerry do not tell you is that this study, and Heinz-Kerry’s strange “cure”, are based on the fact that those who drink are more likely to stop drinking (you can’t stop if you’ve never started or have stopped long ago, prior to the onset of Rheumatoid Arthritis), AND, most importantly, by drinking alcohol, you increase inflammation and therefore, increase dramatically the pain associated with Rheumatoid Arthritis (and osteo-arthritis, too), and are therefore motivated to STOP drinking. So, in those terms, yes, alcohol CAN be “protective” against Rheumatoid Arthritis by either bringing about your earlier disability and death from Rheumatoid Arthritis and/or by motivating someone to stop drinking (if you’re self appreciative) and so, “protect” you against worsening conditions caused by Rheumatoid Arthritis.

But, people want a quick fix or otherwise a simple way out, particularly for and about issues of health. People enjoy drinking alcohol and would prefer to continue to drink it. People want a pill or a quick eight-day “cure” and to not have to read or listen to anything more complex than a simple raisins-and-gin diet for eight days.

Unfortunately, the conditions lumped into the generalized term of “arthritis” are so complex that there are no quick fixes or simple solutions to any of them — it’s a cellular problem, not something as simple as “bones” alone but involves conditions of cellular behavior and interactivities and then reads outward from there. And, among the word, “arthritis,” exists a broad range of very different problems, some of which are chronic (acute, persistent), some of which are fatal, most of which are degenerative either catastrophically or locally but all of which are generally no fun to experience and are categorized by pain and loss of normal physical funtioning to one degree or another, but usually disabling over time and with age. Some of the conditions involve the intestines. Some involve the liver. Some involve the bones. Some involve the soft tissue around the bones. Some involve the eyes. Some involve the skin. But most involve all of those aspects in some combinations.

But, the main helps for those suffering from pain caused by inflammation is to not induce any more inflammation from both exogenous sources (influnces from outside the body) and endogenous sources (products of a body’s metabolism/influences from within), and to try to reduce what inflammation already exists. Alcohol induces inflammation. Draw your own conclusions from there.

Read the following ten-point warning descriptions, of which I can easily equate Teresa Heinz-Kerry’s “health care” plan with nine of the ten points:

RedDotSml.gif “TIP-OFFS OF A BOGUS REMEDY”

“Bookstores abound with information on new treatments for arthritis, including new diets. Television, radio, and magazine advertisements may try to convince you that changing the way you eat will cure your disease. The Arthritis Foundation compiled this list of 10 practices typical of promotions for unproven remedies. The Foundation warns that even a doctor’s testimonial doesn’t always make a claim legitimate. You should be alert for these signs:”

1.
A cure is offered. (There is no known cure yet for any form of chronic rheumatic disease. All current treatments merely reduce the symptoms and slow the progress. When genuine cures are found, there won’t be any question about it; the whole world will know.)

2.
The cure or remedy is described as a “secret” formula or device?as “exclusive,” or “special.” (Legitimate scientists don’t keep their discoveries secret or exclusive.)

3.
Testimonials and case histories of people who have supposedly been helped by the remedy are offered as “proof” of its effectiveness. (A few successes? if true?still don’t prove the remedy will work for everyone.)

4.
The remedy or treatment is described in sensational articles in tabloids and special health-interest publications, or advertised in magazines and through mail order promotions. (The tabloids are fun; but you should never take them seriously.)

5.
Quick, simple relief of pain is promised or implied. (There is nothing simple about arthritis.)

6.
The treatment is promoted as “cleansing” the body of poisons or “toxins” to allow the body’s “natural” curative powers to clear up the disease. (They won’t.)

7.
Drugs and surgery are condemned as damaging, dangerous, and unnecessary and you are advised to try a nondrug treatment. (Standard treatments can be dangerous for some people, but that doesn’t mean a nondrug treatment will work.)

8.
No reliable evidence or scientific proof is offered to back up claims that the advertised remedy is safe and effective. (The promoter has not had the method properly tested in clinical trials.)

9.
A special diet or nutrition treatment program is promoted as the answer. (Research scientists have not found any foods or nutrients that, by themselves, cause any rheumatic disease, or can be relied on to make any of these diseases better or worse [except modestly in gout]).

10.
The “medical establishment” is accused of conspiracy to thwart progress by refusing to “recognize” or “approve” the remedy being promoted. (Doctors are conservative; but they have no reason to deliberately block progress.)

3 C O M M E N T S

  1. JayTea says:

    And let’s not forget the product is touted as “herbal” or “all-natural.” Those are the secret words that translate into “not tested or certified by the Food and Drug Administration, and any and all claims are completely unverifiable.”

    That one’s gotten a LOT of suckers to bite…

    J.

  2. -S- says:

    Yeah, agreed, but I think that falls within No. 10, because many people find appealing anything that’s “counter” or not otherwise offered through physicians. Physicians meaning people with actual doctors of medicine degrees, unlike Teresa Heinz-Kerry.

    What I find revealing about THK, more than anything, is that she fancies herself as “someone who might have been/could have been/should have been/perhaps is” a “doctor.” Most people do, who also behave as she does…there’s something there as to a shared personality grandiosity, and unfortunately, THK’s billionaire’s access to all the best healthcare in the world isn’t conjured into the mix as to her as source. She’s healthy due to one system of conventional and very expensive conditions, and yet she urges others to do what she suggests and bypass that very system, to undermine it, actually.

  3. JayTea says:

    I suppose I can buy my suggestion as being lumped in with #10, but I still think it deserves its own category. There are a lot of products out there that tout the “herbal” or “all-natural” claims without mentioning the “suppression” angle — I’m thinking about the “male enhancement” products that you can’t swing a dead libido without hitting these days.

    Also, I seem to recall hearing about the gin-soaked raisins on Paul Harvey a few years ago… I guess I oughta go over to Snopes and do a quick check…

    Nope, nothing about it at snopes.com. Oh, well, it was worth a look.

    It’s bad enough Kevin comes up with caption contests, now I gotta enter a pumpkin contest too? Sheesh… I dunno if I can take the pressure.

    J.

    (Jay Tea of http://www.wizbangblog.com)