Re: Re: Sicko ( ) and US Health Care

[Guest guest]

The United States ranks 41st in the world for life expectancy from birth and the

total cost is twice as much per capita then any other country. The U.S.

healthcare system is bankrupting individuals and our government. The U.S. has

enough horror stories about our healthcare to fill a 1000 novels. We need a

single payer healthcare system.

Leveille

Ringas wrote:

--- polo wrote:

> ,

>

> I am sure there is no perfect health care system

> out there, but you are

> lucky to have the safety net you have. There will

> always be disgruntled

> patients, no matter what system. No system is

> perfect.

This has nothing to do with disgruntled patients. It

has to do with people being denied the liberty to

choose the form of medical treatment they want, and

being forced to buy into a system that brings

everybody down to the lowest common denominator.

> You apparently have

> no idea what it would be like to finance expensive

> hospital stays in the

> USA. I was in the hospital in the early 1990s for a

> spinal cord injury and

> my expenses were well over $150,000 in a few weeks.

> Had I not had private

> insurance, I would have been ruined for the reminder

> of my life.

Since your insurance paid for your treatment, it is

apparent that you also have no idea what it's like to

finance an expensive hospital stay.

> I know of

> countless less fortunate people who were ruined,

> lost every thing they

> worked their lives for and they died from cancer any

> way. Their families

> came out of it, destitute.

A more fundamental question is why were you able to

afford insurance, but they weren't? Also, if America

was truly the land of the free, there wouldn't be a

system in place where you're stuck with only two

choices; insurance or destitution.

> You have no idea how

> fortunate you are to live in

> a country that has at least some type of safety net

> for those that may need

> it.

Actually, I do know how fortunate I am to live in a

country that has a safety net, but we're not talking

about a safety net. We're talking about whether

people should be responsible for their own lives and

whether they should have the maximum amount of freedom

to choose how they're going to live, and how they're

going to receive medical treatment, and also whether

they're going to be protected from being defrauded by

insurance companies. 's film was about people

who have insurance, but are being shafted by their

insurance companies.

> As far as your opinion on M. , I say, you

> simply do not know him.

And how many times have you been over to his house for

a cup of tea or a beer? Or do you perhaps think you

know him because you've seen his films?

> Have you actually seen his work?

Yes, I've seen his last three films, and probably some

bits of some of his other films.

> He has stood up

> for the little guy for

> years.

> If you want to call him a socialist, go

> ahead, but you are the

> " propagandist " in this regard.

That's what socialists do; with good intentions, they

stand up for for one special interest group of people,

what you call the little guy, instead of standing up

for all people to have equal rights and maximum

freedom. It's no different than what the elitists do.

> I think, if you

> actually saw SICKO, you

> would know he really did question the mechanism of

> why the USA health care

> is so expensive. He goes into great detail how

> politicians are bought to

> protect big Pharm's profits. He goes into further

> detail of why costs in the

> USA are so out of control with no checks & balances.

I did see it, and like I said, he whitewashes over the

more fundamental issues. The fundamental issue here,

and in most other issues is freedom, a subject you

show little understanding or appreciation for.

America as the the land of the free with your

celebrated constitution has become a SICKO joke. If

and others focused their energies on restoring

true freedom, issues like health care would naturally

resolve.

> I never perceived the

> theme from any of his documentaries that he is

> trying to tell us what we

> should do, he is only showing another side to the

> story which needs to be

> shown.

As I said before, he's very crafty at his art, and I'm

not surprised at all the you can't perceive his

manipulation. If I remember correctly, he admitted

that his goal with Fahrenheit 9/11 was to sway the

election. Yes, he does show another side to the

story, but the way in which he shows it is in a manner

that manipulates our emotions. I myself have been

emotionally moved by his films, even while consciously

being aware that he's manipulating me. He's very good

at that.

> To you and Dr. G, who seems to think Canadians

> prefer our health system,

> I sure don't see any Canadians coming to the USA's

> pharmacies to buy drugs.

> True, the wealthy ones may come across for expensive

> procedures not offered

> at home, but you will have to prove to me that this

> is a common occurrence,

> otherwise, I just don't believe it and it has not

> been by perception from

> those Canadians, I have known.

Nobody said that Canadians prefer your system, but I

would be willing to wager that most of us would like

the freedom to choose beyond the scraps that are

handed down to us by the government. As things are

now, I can use my money on all sorts of things that

are ruinous to my health, but I can use my money to

buy better health care than what the government

offers. I can buy insurance and better care for my

cat, but not myself.

> At any rate, you are

> really missing the

> point, is not saying he has the answer to any

> thing, only that every

> USA citizen deserves to have minimal health care

> without losing his life

> savings.

If that's the only point he was trying to make, then

he shouldn't have held up systems like the Canadian

one, where we're stuck with a monopoly and are taxed

through the nose to support it. Having a minimal

" safety net " as you call it would be a good thing, but

anything beyond that is a violation of liberty. You

can't have justice for one person at the expense of

another.

> We live in a country dictated by legalized

> drug/health care sharks

> that know they can charge the highest prices in the

> world and get away with

> it.

Well, that is a far more fundamental issue that

underlies why so many people can't afford health care.

To implement a socialized system that these sharks are

still in control of is a simple-minded proposition

indeed.

Regards,

---------------------------------

Got a little couch potato?

Check out fun summer activities for kids.

[Guest guest]

We need a government that does not involve itself in our lives. You already

have a situation where you cannot seek the type of care you want without

approval. Why do you insist on having further government intrusion?

EXAMPLE: FDA has just issued another ban against Stevia being used as a

sweetener by Celestial Seasons as well as Coke. It is safe and utilized

around the world as a sweetener yet here it is banned.

I cannot legally allow anyone to use my Rife equipment and even encourage

them that it might help with their lyme disease or cancer or anything else

because if I do, I can go to jail for practicing medicine without a license.

I am only a psychologist, not an MD.

I could not (when our kids were minors) even think of treating them for

cancer (if they had faced that) with anything other than chemo, surgery,

and/or radiation because if I did, I would go to jail and my children would

have been taken away.

And these are the people you want to administer health care for all of us?

Great choice.

Bruce Guilmette, Ph.D.

http://survivecancerfoundation.org

Re: Re: Sicko ( ) and US Health Care

The United States ranks 41st in the world for life expectancy from birth and

the total cost is twice as much per capita then any other country. The U.S.

healthcare system is bankrupting individuals and our government. The U.S.

has enough horror stories about our healthcare to fill a 1000 novels. We

need a single payer healthcare system.

Leveille

Ringas wrote:

--- polo wrote:

> ,

>

> I am sure there is no perfect health care system

> out there, but you are

> lucky to have the safety net you have. There will

> always be disgruntled

> patients, no matter what system. No system is

> perfect.

This has nothing to do with disgruntled patients. It

has to do with people being denied the liberty to

choose the form of medical treatment they want, and

being forced to buy into a system that brings

everybody down to the lowest common denominator.

> You apparently have

> no idea what it would be like to finance expensive

> hospital stays in the

> USA. I was in the hospital in the early 1990s for a

> spinal cord injury and

> my expenses were well over $150,000 in a few weeks.

> Had I not had private

> insurance, I would have been ruined for the reminder

> of my life.

Since your insurance paid for your treatment, it is

apparent that you also have no idea what it's like to

finance an expensive hospital stay.

> I know of

> countless less fortunate people who were ruined,

> lost every thing they

> worked their lives for and they died from cancer any

> way. Their families

> came out of it, destitute.

A more fundamental question is why were you able to

afford insurance, but they weren't? Also, if America

was truly the land of the free, there wouldn't be a

system in place where you're stuck with only two

choices; insurance or destitution.

> You have no idea how

> fortunate you are to live in

> a country that has at least some type of safety net

> for those that may need

> it.

Actually, I do know how fortunate I am to live in a

country that has a safety net, but we're not talking

about a safety net. We're talking about whether

people should be responsible for their own lives and

whether they should have the maximum amount of freedom

to choose how they're going to live, and how they're

going to receive medical treatment, and also whether

they're going to be protected from being defrauded by

insurance companies. 's film was about people

who have insurance, but are being shafted by their

insurance companies.

> As far as your opinion on M. , I say, you

> simply do not know him.

And how many times have you been over to his house for

a cup of tea or a beer? Or do you perhaps think you

know him because you've seen his films?

> Have you actually seen his work?

Yes, I've seen his last three films, and probably some

bits of some of his other films.

> He has stood up

> for the little guy for

> years.

> If you want to call him a socialist, go

> ahead, but you are the

> " propagandist " in this regard.

That's what socialists do; with good intentions, they

stand up for for one special interest group of people,

what you call the little guy, instead of standing up

for all people to have equal rights and maximum

freedom. It's no different than what the elitists do.

> I think, if you

> actually saw SICKO, you

> would know he really did question the mechanism of

> why the USA health care

> is so expensive. He goes into great detail how

> politicians are bought to

> protect big Pharm's profits. He goes into further

> detail of why costs in the

> USA are so out of control with no checks & balances.

I did see it, and like I said, he whitewashes over the

more fundamental issues. The fundamental issue here,

and in most other issues is freedom, a subject you

show little understanding or appreciation for.

America as the the land of the free with your

celebrated constitution has become a SICKO joke. If

and others focused their energies on restoring

true freedom, issues like health care would naturally

resolve.

> I never perceived the

> theme from any of his documentaries that he is

> trying to tell us what we

> should do, he is only showing another side to the

> story which needs to be

> shown.

As I said before, he's very crafty at his art, and I'm

not surprised at all the you can't perceive his

manipulation. If I remember correctly, he admitted

that his goal with Fahrenheit 9/11 was to sway the

election. Yes, he does show another side to the

story, but the way in which he shows it is in a manner

that manipulates our emotions. I myself have been

emotionally moved by his films, even while consciously

being aware that he's manipulating me. He's very good

at that.

> To you and Dr. G, who seems to think Canadians

> prefer our health system,

> I sure don't see any Canadians coming to the USA's

> pharmacies to buy drugs.

> True, the wealthy ones may come across for expensive

> procedures not offered

> at home, but you will have to prove to me that this

> is a common occurrence,

> otherwise, I just don't believe it and it has not

> been by perception from

> those Canadians, I have known.

Nobody said that Canadians prefer your system, but I

would be willing to wager that most of us would like

the freedom to choose beyond the scraps that are

handed down to us by the government. As things are

now, I can use my money on all sorts of things that

are ruinous to my health, but I can use my money to

buy better health care than what the government

offers. I can buy insurance and better care for my

cat, but not myself.

> At any rate, you are

> really missing the

> point, is not saying he has the answer to any

> thing, only that every

> USA citizen deserves to have minimal health care

> without losing his life

> savings.

If that's the only point he was trying to make, then

he shouldn't have held up systems like the Canadian

one, where we're stuck with a monopoly and are taxed

through the nose to support it. Having a minimal

" safety net " as you call it would be a good thing, but

anything beyond that is a violation of liberty. You

can't have justice for one person at the expense of

another.

> We live in a country dictated by legalized

> drug/health care sharks

> that know they can charge the highest prices in the

> world and get away with

> it.

Well, that is a far more fundamental issue that

underlies why so many people can't afford health care.

To implement a socialized system that these sharks are

still in control of is a simple-minded proposition

indeed.

Regards,

---------------------------------

Got a little couch potato?

Check out fun summer activities for kids.

[Guest guest]

While this is off topic I shall indulge once more. We

already have a government health care system and its

called Medicare. From what I have experienced so far

Medicare is the best health insurance I've either

experienced or heard about compared with others. The

idea of health care for profit by which other health

insurance companies run has led to needless suffering

and death from for profit agencies. I do believe we

need insurance reform if we are not to go the way of

socialized medicine for all. We need to embrace

alternatives as well as allopathic care. It would not

do us harm to study other countries that have good

health care and dedicate our tax dollars to that rather

than rebuilding other countries, bigger and better

monuments to wars etc. While you WILL find some

lackluster systems in other countries it usually is not

for its existence of socialized medicine itself but for

corruption. Government control in some agencies is not

necessarily an evil but only when it's not done right

does it share it reputation for money wasting,

corruption and stupidity. Lets not through out the

baby with the bathwater but address the pot holes of a

system and correct the machine so it may run better.

medusa

[Guest guest]

While this is off topic I shall indulge once more. We

already have a government health care system and its

called Medicare. From what I have experienced so far

Medicare is the best health insurance I've either

experienced or heard about compared with others. The

idea of health care for profit by which other health

insurance companies run has led to needless suffering

and death from for profit agencies. I do believe we

need insurance reform if we are not to go the way of

socialized medicine for all. We need to embrace

alternatives as well as allopathic care. It would not

do us harm to study other countries that have good

health care and dedicate our tax dollars to that rather

than rebuilding other countries, bigger and better

monuments to wars etc. While you WILL find some

lackluster systems in other countries it usually is not

for its existence of socialized medicine itself but for

corruption. Government control in some agencies is not

necessarily an evil but only when it's not done right

does it share it reputation for money wasting,

corruption and stupidity. Lets not through out the

baby with the bathwater but address the pot holes of a

system and correct the machine so it may run better.

medusa

[Guest guest]

what a bunch of krap that is. I might have to write to and question the FDA

about these stupid laws.

Josh

email: jkenn337@...

msn: kenn6498ku@...

AOL: kutztownstudent

skype: jkenn337

RE: Re: Sicko ( ) and US Health Care

>

>

>> Well, if you want to find out whether or not it is approved because it

>> works, I suggest you set up shop, advertise and see what happens. Just

>> drop

>> a note as to where they stick you in prison and if it is in the

>> neighborhood

>> I will drop by. Otherwise I do promise I will write a letter or two.

>> Whether it works or not is irrelevant. The FDA is not interested in facts

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

what a bunch of krap that is. I might have to write to and question the FDA

about these stupid laws.

Josh

email: jkenn337@...

msn: kenn6498ku@...

AOL: kutztownstudent

skype: jkenn337

RE: Re: Sicko ( ) and US Health Care

>

>

>> Well, if you want to find out whether or not it is approved because it

>> works, I suggest you set up shop, advertise and see what happens. Just

>> drop

>> a note as to where they stick you in prison and if it is in the

>> neighborhood

>> I will drop by. Otherwise I do promise I will write a letter or two.

>> Whether it works or not is irrelevant. The FDA is not interested in facts

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dr. G's post (below) is about the most concise description of the

situation I have seen so far.

If you doubt the truth of what's happening, look into what happened to

Rife, and to Knott, and to many others. Imprisoned. Fined. Striped of

their license to practice. Driven bankrupt. Driven to drink. Driven to

suicide. And when all else failed, murdered.

Ralph

-------

> You can use it in the States, you cannot advertise it as a sweetener.

> Therein is the issue. You can use Rife, but you had best not

> advertise that

> you can treat or cure a disease with it. In 1911(?)the FDA

> put out an edict

> that said, " Only doctors (MD's) can diagnose a disease and only a

> prescription pharmaceutical can treat or cure a disease. That was the

> beginning of the problems and it has gone down hill from there.

>

> Old story of an orange or any form of citrus fruit you

> choose. For over 400

> years it has been common knowledge that citrus fruits are

> " the " effective

> treatment for scurvy. Now with the 1911 ruling of the FDA, if

> you were to go

> out and stand on any street corner, hold up a piece of citrus

> fruit and

> proclaim, " This is an orange/grapefruit/lemon/etc.... and by

> eating it you

> can treat and cure scurvy, " you could go to jail for claiming that a

> non-pharmaceutical substance can treat or cure a disease. That is the

> reality and the stupidity of the laws we live under.

>

> So if you want to market stevia as a sweetener, go for it.

> If you want to

> market citrus fruit as a cure for scurvy, go for it. If you want to

> advertise that your RIFE machine will treat and cure diseases, go for

> it...just leave a forwarding address so we can all write to you.

>

> Regards,

>

> Bruce Guilmette, Ph.D.

> http://survivecancerfoundation.org

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.0/1049 - Release Date:

10/4/2007 8:59 AM

[Guest guest]

Ralph

I do not disagree with you. Just wondering about details. Can you cite a single

case where someone was murdered and the circumstances indicate that this was

contracted by the AMA or a pharma company?

Ralph_yg wrote: Dr. G's post (below) is about the most

concise description of the

situation I have seen so far.

If you doubt the truth of what's happening, look into what happened to

Rife, and to Knott, and to many others. Imprisoned. Fined. Striped of

their license to practice. Driven bankrupt. Driven to drink. Driven to

suicide. And when all else failed, murdered.

Ralph

-------

> You can use it in the States, you cannot advertise it as a sweetener.

> Therein is the issue. You can use Rife, but you had best not

> advertise that

> you can treat or cure a disease with it. In 1911(?)the FDA

> put out an edict

> that said, " Only doctors (MD's) can diagnose a disease and only a

> prescription pharmaceutical can treat or cure a disease. That was the

> beginning of the problems and it has gone down hill from there.

>

> Old story of an orange or any form of citrus fruit you

> choose. For over 400

> years it has been common knowledge that citrus fruits are

> " the " effective

> treatment for scurvy. Now with the 1911 ruling of the FDA, if

> you were to go

> out and stand on any street corner, hold up a piece of citrus

> fruit and

> proclaim, " This is an orange/grapefruit/lemon/etc.... and by

> eating it you

> can treat and cure scurvy, " you could go to jail for claiming that a

> non-pharmaceutical substance can treat or cure a disease. That is the

> reality and the stupidity of the laws we live under.

>

> So if you want to market stevia as a sweetener, go for it.

> If you want to

> market citrus fruit as a cure for scurvy, go for it. If you want to

> advertise that your RIFE machine will treat and cure diseases, go for

> it...just leave a forwarding address so we can all write to you.

>

> Regards,

>

> Bruce Guilmette, Ph.D.

> http://survivecancerfoundation.org

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.0/1049 - Release Date:

10/4/2007 8:59 AM

[Guest guest]

What is missed most in all these posts is that those who want help, get it.

Those who want sympathy and have victimitis get that.

The mistake is by those who give the sympathy rather than help.

Being a doctor for 27 years and investigating this phenomenon deeply

you begin to realize that those who want help find it offered and get

it.

Those who seem to want help, find it and do not get it are almost all

holding on to something creating illness because of a perception it is

needed. Do not tell me it does not make sense, I know that, they do

not.

You have not lived this until you find a kid with asthma who, upon

being asked who in his life had asthma talks and cries about the

failure and death of his grandmother who had difficulty breathing.

Then, realizing he was carrying this on since the age of 4 (he was

then 18) immediately stopped needing medication, chiropractic

adjustments and anything else to breathe just fine.

People then ask me if I think others are doing this on purpose. The

answer is no, but they ARE doing it.

There is knowing, willing cause -- unknowing, unwilling cause, and

every step you can think of between those extremes.

People who do not get help and well are causing it though they might

no know it or want it.

--

Dr. Jutkowitz www.ADVBIOSTRUCTURALCORR.com

Advanced BioStructural Correction™

618 Stratfield Rd, Fairfield, CT 06825

Have an opinion about ABC™ or something else but have not investigated

to get all the data? I enjoy this statement from JFK:

" Too often we. . . enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort

of thought. "