Organic health care reform

[Dr.Who]

So here is a company that has many of the right answers. And it is a feel-good tree hugging company to boot.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html

 

[dahermit]

Recent scientific and medical evidence shows that a diet consisting of foods that are plant-based, nutrient dense and low-fat will help prevent and often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age.

Mr. Mackey [the author of the article] is co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market Inc.

Mr. Mackey does not cite the "medical evidence" that he states. Also, noteworthy, is the he is not likely an unbiased observer given his position at Whole Foods Market Inc. The article is nothing more than his political and personal opinion.

 

[Dr.Who]

Mr. Mackey does not cite the "medical evidence" that he states. Also, noteworthy, is the he is not likely an unbiased observer given his position at Whole Foods Market Inc. The article is nothing more than his political and personal opinion.

You are right that he is not unbaised.

But have you never heard of the food pyramid? It promotes a largely plant based diet.

I think it is pretty uncontestable that a better diet can prevent many diseases. The exact details of such a diet are being worked out.

In the mean time should we get universal health insurance the food pyramid will be less of a guideline and our government will have ammunition to promote it with far more intrusive means.

 

[dahermit]

You are right that he is not unbaised.

But have you never heard of the food pyramid? It promotes a largely plant based diet.

I think it is pretty uncontestable that a better diet can prevent many diseases. The exact details of such a diet are being worked out.

In the mean time should we get universal health insurance the food pyramid will be less of a guideline and our government will have ammunition to promote it with far more intrusive means.

often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age.

The data suggests that such diets may prevent some diseases.
He and you over state what doctors and nutritionists have been saying. There are benefits yes, but he is making some wild and unsubstantiated claims.

What arboreal people lived past the age of forty even though there diet consisted mostly of unprocessed, whole natural food? Anastasie?, American Indians (Eastern)?, Kalahari bush men? Aside from accidents and injuries incurred they (even the women who did not hunt), suffered many different diseases.

 

[Dr.Who]

The data suggests that such diets may prevent some diseases.
He and you over state what doctors and nutritionists have been saying. There are benefits yes, but he is making some wild and unsubstantiated claims.

You may be right - he may have overstated the case. I had not examined that aspect of his statement. I know that heart disease and cancer are both effected to a great degree by diet and as far as I know they are the two leading disease killers we have. But there are many other diseases that are not effected by diet. I can't think of one right now but they do exist.

What arboreal people lived past the age of forty even though there diet consisted mostly of unprocessed, whole natural food? Anastasie?, American Indians (Eastern)?, Kalahari bush men? Aside from accidents and injuries incurred they (even the women who did not hunt), suffered many different diseases.

That analysis is sadly confounded.

 

[dahermit]

You may be right - he may have overstated the case. I had not examined that aspect of his statement.

Were you not supposed to do that before you posted a link to his statement, and supported it?

That analysis is sadly confounded.

He suggested that most of use would live into our 90's or 100's if we would only eat as he suggests. "He", is the CEO of a company that would benefit financially if more people would buy the products that he suggests are the answer to good health and longevity (without providing any evidence).

As for my "confounded analysis", the Eastern American Indians raised corn (with a higher protein content than today's verities), squash, beans, and harvested natural tubers (cat tail roots, arrow root), high protein cat tail pollen, and other plant based wild edibles including grains. They ate very lean red meat and consumed fish, acorns and other wild nuts. Their diet was low in fat, sugars. In other words, their diet was, more or less, the recommend "food pyramid". Nevertheless, they did not live into to their 90's and 100's. Therefore, the article being mostly bunk, its author, and its supporters are suspect as to their motives. If you were against Universal Health Care, why not just say so.

 

[dahermit]

Despite the natural, organic diet, most primitive peoples did not survive beyond their middle to late forties. The major causes of death were: infections, complications of childbirth, cancers, various infant maladies. In short, the things that civilized countries control by providing universal access to health care for all of its citizens.

 

[Dr.Who]

Were you not supposed to do that before you posted a link to his statement, and supported it?

NO. I was clear that I like "many" of his answers. That implies that I did not like "all" of what he said.

He is mostly right. Diet will greatly effect many diseases that kill us. He simply overstated his case. That part is not a part that matters much, the overall plan is still good even if diet only is of great help and not of great great help.

He suggested that most of use would live into our 90's or 100's if we would only eat as he suggests. "He", is the CEO of a company that would benefit financially if more people would buy the products that he suggests are the answer to good health and longevity (without providing any evidence).

Many of us already do live to our 90's and 100's so it is not that extreme a position. The average life span in the US is over 80. It is not at all unreasonable to think that if people stopped doing the things that kill us that it would rise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy

I have talked to my doctor and told him that my goal was to live to 120. The only questions he asked me were whether I smoke and eat right. Then he said I probably would.

As for my "confounded analysis", the Eastern American Indians raised corn (with a higher protein content than today's verities), squash, beans, and harvested natural tubers (cat tail roots, arrow root), high protein cat tail pollen, and other plant based wild edibles including grains. They ate very lean red meat and consumed fish, acorns and other wild nuts. Their diet was low in fat, sugars. In other words, their diet was, more or less, the recommend "food pyramid". Nevertheless, they did not live into to their 90's and 100's. Therefore, the article being mostly bunk, its author, and its supporters are suspect as to their motives. If you were against Universal Health Care, why not just say so.

[/QUOTE]

There are still many confounding factors in your analysis because there were so many other dangers that killed them young. They ate right but they did not have adequate medical treatment. I would add that while they ate the right foods the history of the world is marked by people generally not having enough food.

 

[Dr.Who]

Are you aware that a large part of the Presidents plan depends on the possibility that preventive care (eating right and other lifestyle changes) will be effective.

If you doubt that eating right can make a difference then you need to doubt the math of the presidents plans.

 

[Dr.Who]

Despite the natural, organic diet, most primitive peoples did not survive beyond their middle to late forties. The major causes of death were: infections, complications of childbirth, cancers, various infant maladies. In short, the things that civilized countries control by providing universal access to health care for all of its citizens.

Hate to break it to you but our country largely does control these already. That is why the next step is preventive care.

We could have far larger gains if people lead healthy lifestyles than if we had UHC. 100% of the people moving from a bad lifestyle to a healthier one will be much more effective than providing health insurance to the 13 million who don't have it but already have health care through public aid.

 

[dahermit]

Hate to break it to you but our country largely does control these already. That is why the next step is preventive care.

Highest infant mortality rate than in any industrialized country. Evidently "largely does control...", is an over statement.

We could have far larger gains if people lead healthy lifestyles than if we had UHC. 100% of the people moving from a bad lifestyle to a healthier one...

The lifestyle is not going to change. It is what it is. Even in Europe where they have UHC.

...will be much more effective than providing health insurance to the 13 million who don't have it but already have health care through public aid.

Will be, should be, could be, the bottom line is conservatives will not give up their padded toilet seats. I have heard it all before: 1) It is their own fault for being lazy. 2) No such thing as poor in American; it is how the income stats are computed. 3) Poor already have health care by using emergency rooms.

 

[dahermit]

There are still many confounding factors in your analysis because there were so many other dangers that killed them young. They ate right but they did not have adequate medical treatment. [dahermit's emphasis] I would add that while they ate the right foods the history of the world is marked by people generally not having enough food.[dahermit's emphasis]

"...they did not have adequate medical treatment..." That is the point of the Obama initiative, to provide adequate medical treatment.

"...people generally not having enough food..." That is why WIC and welfare were created by people of Liberal values. Inadequate food effects health (infant mortality?).

 

[dahermit]

Are you aware that a large part of the Presidents plan depends on the possibility that preventive care (eating right and other lifestyle changes) will be effective.

If you doubt that eating right can make a difference then you need to doubt the math of the presidents plans.

Why is it that Conservatives always evoke the benefits of government programs they fight against? Again, WIC (Women Infants and Children food program), and Food Stamps. Oh, my God...socialisium!
Otherwise they would be eating stone soup.

 

[dahermit]

Are you aware that a large part of the Presidents plan depends on the possibility that preventive care (eating right and other lifestyle changes) will be effective.

If you doubt that eating right can make a difference then you need to doubt the math of the presidents plans.

You must only read your own posts...I posted this before:

In the city of Detroit there are no longer any major food markets. The residents (many have no autos, always relied on public transportation), are finding that they only have access to "convenience stores). The "food" that is available therein consists of unhealthy "snack foods". There are no fresh vegetables, fresh meat, but plenty of chips, soda, slim jims, corn chips, dough nuts, etc. So, what do you think that the children and adults in this area are eating? How would it be possible for them to "eat right"?

Or, are you going to fall back on: "It is their own fault for being lazy and not providing themselves with a better life style"?

Also, it is noteworthy that poor working folks, sometimes working two low paying jobs, do not have the time to prepare fresh vegetables, whole grains, etc. They do not have the luxury of an undocumented domestic cook. Or can afford to have one parent say home to do the cooking.

 

[Dr.Who]

"...they did not have adequate medical treatment..." That is the point of the Obama initiative, to provide adequate medical treatment.

"...people generally not having enough food..." That is why WIC and welfare were created by people of Liberal values. Inadequate food effects health (infant mortality?).

How is it relevant that Eastern American Indians did not have adequate medical treatment?

Today we do have adequate medical treatment - all of us in the US who choose to use it. Obama needs to offer adequate medical treatment to no one because they already have it. If the programs that were created to offer that do not work then I see no reason to expand them. And if they do work then there is no reason to expand them.