Note: Thanks to Julie for this post. There is a trend in America called "slow medicine." I read that 35% of the MediCARE budget (for seniors) is spent on patients' LAST SIX MONTHS of life. We are a nation of medical procedure gluttons. Slow medicine allows a person to age and ultimately die with dignitiy, care and love, saying no to numerous medical inventions that do not increase quality of life and may harm the elderly patient. Wait, we can say no to medicine? Well, sometimes.....
By Julie Obradovic
If you believe it is not only right but just that the medical industrial complex (the government, the pharmaceutical industry, and the medical industry) has the authority to dictate what you must do and when to your own body or your child's for the sake of society in order to participate in society, with or without regard to your consent, your medical individuality, your instinct, your past experience, your family history, your personal or religious beliefs, or the possibility of your injury or death, at the same time that they profit from forcing you to do this, is it not imperative for that complex to be a) trustworthy b) transparent c) liable and d) ethical?
Is it not imperative the products be independently tested for safety by someone outside of the complex against true placebos?
Is it not imperative they be independently studied for cumulative, long term, and lifelong effects?
Is it not imperative the complex be held to the highest level of transparency in a court of law where their science, scientists, research, practices, and behavior can be scrutinized in the discovery process?
Is it not imperative vulnerable populations be identified so that they may be spared? (If the point is to save lives, how is killing anyone in the name of saving them justified? Are we really that complacent and incapable of doing better that we still accept some children must be injured or die so more may not? And if so, how many children is one family expected to give?)
Is it not imperative all data sets and other pertinent information from government studies be made easily accessible to the public who has paid for them so that they can verify the validity of safety claims?
Is it not imperative the process for receiving financial assistance for your sacrifice should you be harmed be public knowledge, speedy, transparent, and just?
Is it not imperative those sitting on policy boards recommending more of their product to the public while simultaneously paying lobbyists to successfully legislate they must have it be independent of financial conflicts of interest so that we know their motives are pure?
Is it not imperative the science is free of unsettled controversy, such as when there are whistle blowers working with Congress and/or waiting to testify otherwise, before we are forced to take that product again?
Is it not imperative that at every single step of the program the highest interest of every individual is carefully considered so that when being forced to participate by law they can at least be assured their lives matter?
This is not the case today.
Three of the most powerful groups in the world, the US government, the medical industry, and the pharmaceutical industry, have banded together as one, successfully aligning themselves against the individual consumer and creating a system where by law the consumer must receive the product the complex profits from, without access to a traditional court room if it harms them to verify if the harm was avoidable, and without any independent checks and balances in place outside of the complex to protect the consumer from the over-reach of the trifecta or if they fail in their duties to protect them.
The government, whose original and primary purpose was to protect the rights of the individual from their government, is now protecting their own interests and industry's in the name of protecting the collective whole instead, using fear, propaganda, insults, astroturfing, and the law to convince the public that mandatory participation in this system is the only way to prevent everyone from imminent death...and that it is not them or the system that is the problem, but the non-compliant consumers (who have often been harmed) who object.
In 2015 they have officially made their position legal and clear: You may make health care decisions for yourself and your children as the medical industrial complex who profits from those decisions and funds politicians who legalize them sees fit or you may not participate in society. You may not object to these decisions for any reason without great personal attack and your character, intelligence, and parenting abilities being questioned, for you are not qualified to question or object to their decisions, nor is there anything to question or object to in the first place. Furthermore, you may not use your instinct, past experience, personal beliefs, or religion to guide your health care decisions if they do not agree with the recommendations of the MIC. And finally, you must purchase the health care insurance that pays them for these decisions or you will be taxed. It is so ordered by law.
While I strongly disagree that the government owns anybody's body under any circumstance for any reason, I cannot fathom that there is anyone who disagrees that cannot at least agree such a system in which society does in essence own your body must be held to the highest standard of safe, ethical, trustworthy, responsible, and transparent behavior if it is to be employed, as well as held financially and criminally responsible should they fail. They are not. They have successfully created a system in which they run their own investigation of their own alleged wrong doing using their own research and their own researchers to decide their own innocence or guilt, all while convincing the public this is for their own benefit.
I am floored by the complacency of people who see nothing wrong with their individual and parental rights to make medical decisions for themselves and their families if they want to participate in society being aggressively taken away without any regard for sincerely examining and demanding the integrity, transparency, trustworthiness, liability, and ethics of the system and motives behind those doing the taking.
There are 150 vaccinations now recommended in the lifetime of every American born today should they live to 80 years old. 150! It is truly the greatest medical experiment of all time as no one has any idea what the unintended consequences of this will be, nor do they seem to be the least bit interested in finding out, insisting the attempted aversion of pain and suffering vaccination provides trumps the right or need to know at the same time they generate BILLIONS of dollars in profits from doing so. Furthermore, if the complex has their way, which they are getting every step they take, there will be many, many more added to the schedule (there are almost 300 new vaccines in the making at this moment) and no getting out of having them regardless of your concerns, regardless of the atrociously one-sided system in which you must have them by law, and very possibly if you want to have and keep your health insurance coverage, job and/or freedom from law suits and criminal prosecution in the future, not to mention your reputation, which they are already quite comfortable taking if you object.
It is imperative the American public understand what this controversy at its foundation is actually about: the tyrannical and unjustified over-reach and exploitation of a corrupt system conceived in the threats of the for-profit medical industry and birthed with our government's support who collectively justify the system, their profits, their policies, their products, their laws, and their behavior in the name of public health on the backs of the vulnerable individuals it knowingly harms with little regard for those victims or their families or for ethically maintaining the sanctity of the public's trust ...and those who think that's wrong.
Julie Obradovic is a Contributing Editor to Age of Autism.