+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 46
Latest: Tony Ryan
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 12561
Total Topics: 254
Most Online Today: 2
Most Online Ever: 137
(April 21, 2019, 04:54:01 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Author Topic: Human Life is Fragile but EVERY Life is Valuable  (Read 6093 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Human Life is Fragile but EVERY Life is Valuable
« Reply #45 on: December 16, 2014, 10:43:57 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSbtCX-uDEs&feature=player_embedded
Scientific proof of Life after physical Death.
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Human Life is Fragile but EVERY Life is Valuable
« Reply #47 on: December 23, 2014, 11:01:29 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=923jxZY2NPI&feature=player_embedded
The Pale Blue Dot. Unlike Sagan, I DO believe God is in charge.

However, I do agree with Carl Sagan that we have to get our act together. God is NOT going to solve our problems for us. He gave us the tools. We use them or we perish, PERIOD.

Comment on an article on non-human  predators and the public attitude towards them:
Quote
"Predators have undergone a remarkable transformation in the public consciousness in the last century. While certainly not universally admired they certainly get more favorable press than in years past."

Agelbert reply:

Especially the human ones... See News Media, CEOs and Wall Street...

The non-human predators get a bum rap while the human ones that stupidly do not limit their predation to what they need to live and eat, thereby endangering ALL of the biosphere, get the ALPHA MALE moniker in a truly Orwellian distortion of reality in nature.

I blame the deliberate ignoring of the massive levels of cooperation, nurturing and symbiotic interdependent caring observed in nature and the hyping of the relatively TINY, though important, role that predation plays in the perpetuation of species.

The biomass of the trophic levels that eat SUNLIGHT far exceeds that of the higher order trophics. In fact, without the phototrophic life forms, no high order intelligence or predator can exist in our biosphere. We ALL indirectly are eating SUNLIGHT! That does not make us parasitic of, commensal or symbiotic with the sun. The sun is NOT our "prey"; it is what gives us LIFE with no sweat off its back, period. But that is glossed over in scientific studies.

The mistaken  view  taught to all of us that in nature EVERY life form <em>(when the reality is a small minority of the total biosphere biomass!)  </em>is in a 24/7 competitive life or death struggle in a predation pecking order totem pole where only the top position (apex predator) is the "crown" of evolution is duplicitous and ignorant. 

I blame a massive fail in the proper interpretation of the Theory of Evolution FROM THE START!. Our society has become a culture that HONORS and CELEBRATES the ability to KILL as proof of viability in nature when that is EXACTLY backwards.

But Wall Street likes it. The DISTORTION of Evolutionary Principles through propaganda justifying rampant, unchecked predation as the sine qua non of an "Apex Predator" (not!) is DRILLED into every child's mind by the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. 

And that's why no kid in high school gives a second though to cutting a frog open and killing him in the name of "science".

Nature is, and always was, about LIFE, not DEATH.



Quote
"A society that loses the capacity for the sacred, that lacks the power of human imagination, that cannot practice empathy, ultimately ensures its own destruction"
Chris Hedges

If you think the scientific community does not contribute to this mindset with all the KILLING they do for "science" and "the good of society", I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

We need a paradigm shift in science. Science should not be for sale to justify human cruelty against other humans and other earthlings, PERIOD.


Golden Rule Government: A Lawful System Based on Caring instead of Conquest
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Eat some Dark Chocolate to celebrate St. Valentine's Day!   
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBKKnCtNeRU&feature=player_embedded
Human Life is Fragile but EVERY Life is Valuable
 

But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Tue Mar 31, 2015 at 04:27 PM PDT
Stirring photo; little girl surrenders when she mistakes camera for gun.


"I was using a telephoto lens, and she thought it was a weapon," says Sağırlı. "İ realised she was terrified after I took it, and looked at the picture, because she bit her lips and raised her hands. Normally kids run away, hide their faces or smile when they see a camera."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/31/1374712/-Stirring-photo-little-girl-surrenders-when-she-mistakes-camera-for-gun
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
RE,
I am sorry to hear of your plight with all the red tape and threatened costs. It's smart of you to have a lawyer running interference. Insurance companies only listen when they are forced to by lawyers.

As to your neck (C4-C5 vertebrae damage), I will pray for you every day.

What does the surgery consist of? Are they going to reposition the discs or put in some added disc cushioning?

 Is that your x-ray? It looks like C4 rode up on C5. Bummer. 

Why can't they use traction to reposition your vertebrae? Sure, with hospital stays being what they are ($30,000 went to my insurance for ONE DAY in a hospital when I got my pacemaker in 2007). Granted, the big bucks went for the pacemaker and the surgeon but the room is still over $1,000 a day. So if it took a 30 day stay fro a slow repo of your vertebrae with no guarantees that they could avoid surgery, perhaps that is why they are so gung ho to do the surgery.

Do they have you on some kind of anti-inflammatory meds now? I read somewhere that ANY inflammation in the spinal cord is very, very dangerous.

If there anything you want me to research and get back to you on, just say the word and I'll get right on it.   
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
That is not my X-Ray.  I just used it for illustration.  I would likely be quadraplegic already with that one.  I'm not putting my own snapshots up for legal reasons.

The procedures are C3-4, C4-5  anterior cervical discectomies. anterior allograft fusion, nucel, and a possible corpectomy. If you feel like researching all of them and reporting on what they are planning on doing to fix me up, go for it.

The problem here is the channel is just too narrow to begin with, and the displacement from the injury makes it worse.  Nothing short of surgery resolves this one.

Cost estimate is around $45K just for the Pro from Dover who carves up the neck.  Then there are the costs from the Anesthesiologist and the Radiologist and the Hospital Operating Room charges, then the in-patient recovery time estimated at 2 days (WHAT?  I'm good to go after just 2 days with this operation?), then 6 more weeks recovery time after that at home.  No idea how mobile I will be during that 6 weeks.  No doubt wearing a collar the whole time.  Anyhow, rule of thumb is 3X what the surgeon charges for the whole ball of wax.

I was able to get the lawyer no charge because it's a pretty good case they think they can win or settle on. They only get paid if they win or settle. The lawyer told me when I asked what percentage they lost, his reply was they don't take cases they can't win or settle.  They do the most Workman's Comp cases of any firm in Alaska, so one hopes they know what they are doing.

RE


RE,
Thanks for the info. I'll get to the research tomorrow. I just watched a video (animation) of a discectomy.

As you said, traction is useless. It seems they get between the vertebrae, jack them up a little, pull the disk, clean up the area, put two metal plates with cleats (a top and a bottom where the disc was) in position, insert a prosthetic disk, return the vertebrae to position (which holds the new disc in place) and sometimes fuse the vertebrae together with some special cement after that.

And yeah, the recovery is incredibly short! The  cement, even when they pump it into a collapsed vertebrae, sets within a half hour or so. They claim relief is normally instantaneous (at least with cement filled collapsed vertebrae).

I'm going to bed now but I'll dig up some videos if you are interested in the nuts and bolts (they use screws and bolts sometimes too).

Hang in there.
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
RE,
This is what I have so far. I am posting it now in case you have a possibility of taking advantage of  a giant freebee clinical trial.     

I will post graphics on the procedures you listed soon. 

C3-4, C4-5 anterior cervical discectomies (ACDF), anterior allograft fusion, nucel, and a possible corpectomy.   

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) Video

http://www.spine-health.com/video/anterior-cervical-discectomy-and-fusion-acdf-video

NuCel® allograft


NuCel is a minimally manipulated allograft product derived from amniotic membrane along with cells from amniotic fluid. Allograft bone is bone that comes another patient. NuCel and Allograft bone will be combined for this treatment.

Is the following a NuCel freebee opportunity? 

ClinicalTrials.gov
A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health


A Prospective Study of NuCel® in Cervical Spine Fusion
This study is currently recruiting participants. (see Contacts and Locations) Verified March 2015 by NuCel, LLC.

Estimated Enrollment: 60
Study Start Date: March 2015
Estimated Study Completion Date: September 2016
Estimated Primary Completion Date: September 2016 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)


Detailed Description:


The study is intended to demonstrate that the NuCel® allograft is effective and safe in promoting bone growth and fusion rate when used in cervical fusion in patients with one, two or three-level diseases of the cervical spine. ... ...

All subjects will have been established with cervical spine disease at one, two or three levels of the cervical spine that requires cervical interbody fusion per the opinion of the treating surgeon.

The primary objective is to demonstrate that NuCel® is comparable to autograft bone graft in producing a successful, contiguous fusion at 6 months ±4 weeks post-operative when used in cervical fusion surgery. Success based on findings of cervical CT scan and plain radiographs. Additionally, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and patient satisfaction will be used as secondary outcome measures. Success based on findings of cervical CT scan and plain radiographs.


Condition:
                                           
Spondylosis
Spinal Stenosis
Spondylolisthesis
Intervertebral Disc Disease
Intervertebral Disc Degeneration

Intervention:
Other: NuCel with Allograft Bone

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02381067

Aglebert NOTE:
Please checkout the exclusion criteria numbers 1 and 2 for the study participants.

corpectomy

Quote
A corpectomy is a surgical procedure to remove a vertebral body, usually to decompress the spinal cord. In this surgery, the vertebral bodies and adjacent vertebral discs are removed in order to alleviate the pressure on the spinal cord, which is causing spinal stenosis and cervical myelopathy.

Agelbert NOTE: Stenosis, as you know, is narrowing. Sometimes that stenosis is not precisely narrowing. Sometimes stenosis consists of tiny bone spurs here and there inside the channel your nerve cord goes through which are literally a pain in the back, as well as interfering with movement and signaling.

SO, they have to go in there and get rid of those spurs (if they are there) when they are doing an ACDF and/or a corpectomy.

All the fusion cement and metal plates with bolts stuff is their way of guaranteeing that things won't get out of place after they relieve spinal cord pressure. I am certain that fusion won't help you if you want to perform new yoga positions.  ;D But it will, in theory  , keep you pain free and able to move normally. However, that means no more gymnastics or stunts on your electric bike!   

But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Surgery (ACDF)


Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) is performed at the Spine Institute Northwest as a minimally invasive spine surgical procedure to treat nerve root or spinal cord compression in the cervical spine. The procedure has two parts, first a discectomy to remove the problem disc and decompress the spinal cord and nerve roots, then a fusion to stabilize the corresponding vertebrae. ACDF can be performed via a small incision in the front of the neck, providing relief from spinal cord or nerve root pressure and alleviating symptoms including pain, weakness, numbness, and tingling either at the site, or in the parts of the body the affected nerve serves.

ACDF: The Basics

ACDF is used to treat pain caused by a herniated or ruptured disc in the cervical spine. As we age, the fluid in our discs diminishes, sometimes causing them to tear or rupture.

This can cause the nucleus pulposus (the jelly-like padding at the center of the disc) to bulge and press on the outer wall of the disc (the annulus). When this happens, it can create pressure on nearby nerve roots or on the spine itself, causing intense pain.   :(


;): RE, notice the Bone Spurs and Thickened Ligamentum Flavum that contribute to stenosis in addition to the herniated disc creating pressure.

I wish they would call the disc "hernia" something like an aneurysm (i.e. an excessive localized enlargement of an artery caused by a weakening of the artery wall). In the case of a disc, I would call it an excessive localized enlargement of the disc caused by a weakening of the disc wall).

The "hernia" of the disc is the weakened wall of the disc. The localized enlargement which results ALSO leaves behind a localized REDUCTION of disc thickness. This causes pressure on the spinal cord TWO ways. The first way is the bulge pushing on the spinal cord. The second way is the reduced distance between vertebrae from the slightly deflated disc compressing the spinal cord.


Ruptured or herniated discs are not only caused by degenerative discs (spondylosis), however; this condition can also be brought on by injury or excessive wear and tear, for example, from a physically intense occupation.

This combination minimally invasive spine procedure has two parts.

First, in the discectomy, the surgeon enters through a small incision in the left side of the neck, and the affected disc is removed. If there is additional tissue compressing the nerve, this will also be removed to reduce pressure and create more space. 
















The second step is the fusion, which increases stability and prevents the vertebrae from collapsing where the disc was removed. By filling in the now-open space where the disc was with a bone graft and a cage implant, the vertebrae can be “fused” back together.















This will create a bridge of bone that will, with time, keep your cervical spine able to properly support itself and bear normal loads.



Read on for more details on this minimally invasive spine surgery, including what to expect before, during, and after surgery, as well as potential risks and complications.
https://www.spineinstitutenorthwest.com/treatments/endoscopic-microdiscectomy/anterior-cervical-decompression-fusion-surgery-acdf/
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 09:10:18 pm by AGelbert »
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Knarf, UB and Ka,
Ahem! I must admit I am not an expert on good vibrations like Buddhists of all stripes and yogis. Furthermore, I recognize that you are not going to charge RE a nickel for giving him the low down on how to make osteocytes be fruitful and multiply while they dance to the "right" tune (fuse dem vertebraes pronto! ).  :icon_mrgreen:

I have been doing some research to help RE and, of course, further my sneaky agenda to get everybody to do everything they can to adopt a CARING CAPACITY world view and **** can the CARRYING CAPACITY (i.e scarcity equals value predatory capitalist bullshit) destructive world view.

The Agelbert (Anthony Gonzalez Gelbert) Institute for Advanced Caring Capacity Research into BIOSPHERE CFS  has made an amazing discovery. I am certain there is another Diner, not included in the above names (who, for the moment shall remain nameless  ;D), who will back up this research anecdotally, if not scientifically.

Rather than boring you with umpteen details about how specific hertz heal HURTS, I will present two graphics and let you vibrations experts take it from there.


The bottom line for RE is that he is going to need some SUCCESSFUL bone fusion.  If they do a bone graft and saw a piece out of his pelvis to stick into his neck, there is ANOTHER place on his body that he will need osteocyte growth and quick healing.

Those pelvic procedures have a rep for causing enduring pain  :(. This is in contrast to the ACDF that usually just causes a sore throat and difficult swallowing for a few days, along with total neck pain relief. Since he is a smoker (a KNOWN cause of slow bone fusion or fusion failure complications), his doctor will probably recommend a bone growth stimulator after the ACDF procedure.

I have issues with that. I think you vibrations dudes may also have issues with that too. Where am I going with this?  I am saying PLAINLY that there is MORE to that bone fusion and healing than the vibrations themselves, even though they are, of course, a vital part of the healing process.

A LIVING BEING must be generating those vibrations, IMHO, for them to be truly efficacious  . Human technology is, as usual, a day late and a dollar short because of its STUPID, IGNORANT, NON-SPIRITUAL, mechanistic reductionist world view of cause and effect. 

And ALSO, as usual, they want to charge an arm and a cervical vertebrae  ;D for the "high tech" CRAP they pass off as "superior" to what living beings, NOT JUST HUMANS, give freely in the service of LIFE.

Knarf, UB, and Ka, please shed some light on good vibrations. RE needs our help.


Agelbert NOTE:
The above was posted on another forum. IF you have some healing vibrations info or testimonial, pleas post them here. Thank you.
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
AG---Since I found out about RE's condition, I have been traveling to Alaska to be with him.  We call it throwing your mind, and I am sure it works having lived with the Abbot for 10 years, and dealing with many, many people. We all have ESP and can communicate no matter what the distance.  I started recognizing the ability when I was about 20 years old. When things I and friend would do in the nick of time just out of instinct that kept us out of trouble. Then it started happening with my children, especially my daughter. She had moved to Illinois, and would start thinking i needed to call her, I would pick up the phone and there was no dial tone, SHE WAS ALREADY ON THE PHONE! This happened several times. Then I developed this ESP with a friend who lived about 15 miles from here. We would contact each other within minutes of feeling like we needed to talk. But the biggest one was when I called my father in 1980 just out of the blue. I hadn't talked to him for about 6 months, and all of a sudden I had to call him.  :emthup: :

He answered the phone and was crying and drunk, and said he had a shotgun and was going to kill himself, that his wife had left him and he had nothing to live for. I talked him down a bit  :emthup: :emthup:, and then contacted friends in California that lived near him, and told them to go pick up my Dad and get him on a plane to Kansas City, where I would meet him.  :emthup: :emthup: :emthup:  :icon_sunny:

He was so relieved that I cared so much to do this, that he complied and I met him at KC, and he quit drinking and was reunited with his wife. I hope RE is open to this type of communication. It is beyond words and involved with listening with top half of your head above your ears. Believe me I am sending him ( YOU RE ) the very best vibes I know of, that includes you AG, and Surly. :)

Knarf,
I certainly DO believe you. I have many ESP experiences myself that convinced me decades ago of the reality of this communication as well as the reality of "spooky action" (science would call it quantum entanglement producing unexplained therap eutic biochemical molecular activity  ;D) Healing (Harming is also possible through exactly the same mechanism in our universe).

Thank you for your healing mind throwing. Unlike the scarcity meme that corrupts this world, when we exert ourselves to heal, the healing multiplies and produces healing side effects in many others as well. There is no limit, as you know, to Caring Capacity.

In addition to all the above, please consider that owning a cat might help your arthritis too!  ;)
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Eddie, Matts is just defending his worship of science by ridiculing miracles. I do not consider that disagreeing without being disagreeable; I consider that snobbish baloney. And I was not kidding when I said I felt sorry for him. I really do.

We all get that, believe me. But even though you have a strong opinion, you don't turn nasty and vicious, like some I could mention. That's what it takes to have forum like this. We all have our belief systems, and they're all different. It takes a certain amount of tolerance to have these discussions. I appreciate that you can tolerate views that differ radically from your own. I personally choose to believe that miracles are possible, because we really do need a few, or we're gonna be toast, I'm afraid. I pray for a big miracle every day. Sincerely, I do.

Eddie,
Thank you. I try not to turn nasty and vicious, despite an enormous desire to do so born of my frustration with fighting status quo myths and distortions in this dystopia. However, if raining on Matt's parade of scientific myths is being "nasty and vicious", then I am guilty.

Thank you for your prayers. With enough of us doing just that, RE may get his miracle.

Here is some background on the myth that modern medicine has increased human longevity:



Human Lifespans Nearly Constant for 2,000 Years


by Benjamin Radford, Live Science Contributor   |   August 21, 2009 11:26am ET

 
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, often the harbinger of bad news about e. coli outbreaks and swine flu, recently had some good news: The life expectancy of Americans is higher than ever, at almost 78.

Discussions about life expectancy often involve how it has improved over time. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, life expectancy for men in 1907 was 45.6 years; by 1957 it rose to 66.4; in 2007 it reached 75.5. Unlike the most recent increase in life expectancy (which was attributable largely to a decline in half of the leading causes of death including heart disease, homicide, and influenza), the increase in life expectancy between 1907 and 2007 was largely due to a decreasing infant mortality rate, which was 9.99 percent in 1907; 2.63 percent in 1957; and 0.68 percent in 2007.

But the inclusion of infant mortality rates in calculating life expectancy creates the mistaken impression that earlier generations died at a young age; Americans were not dying en masse at the age of 46 in 1907. The fact is that the maximum human lifespan — a concept often confused with "life expectancy" — has remained more or less the same for thousands of years. The idea that our ancestors routinely died young (say, at age 40) has no basis in scientific fact.

Yet this myth is widespread, and repeated by both the public and professionals. A few examples:

Quote
* An article on Egyptian pyramid builders in the November 2001 issue of "National Geographic" noted, "Despite the availability of medical care the workers' lives were short. On average a man lived 40 to 45 years, a woman 30 to 35."

* In a 2005 press release for the TV show "Nightline," a producer wrote, "I am 42 years old. I live in a comfortable home with my family…. I'm lucky. If I were in Sierra Leone, the poorest country in Africa, chances are I'd be dead at my age. The life expectancy there is 34 years of age." 

* A Dec. 18, 2003, Reuters news story on the impact of AIDS in Africa reported that "A baby girl born now in Japan could expect to live 85 years, while one born in Sierra Leone probably would not survive beyond 36."

Such statements are completely wrong
; most people in Sierra Leone are not dropping dead at age 34. The problem is that giving an "average age" at which people died tells us almost nothing about the age at which an individual person living at the time might expect to die.

Again, the high infant mortality rate skews the "life expectancy" dramatically downward. If a couple has two children and one of them dies in childbirth while the other lives to be 90, stating that on average the couple's children lived to be 45 is statistically accurate but meaningless. Claiming a low average age of death due to high infant mortality is not the same as claiming that the average person in that population will die at that age.

Of course, infant mortality is only one of many factors that influence life expectancy, including medicine, crime, and workplace safety. But when it is calculated in, it often creates confusion and myths.

When Socrates died at the age of 70 around 399 B.C., he did not die of old age but instead by execution. It is ironic that ancient Greeks lived into their 70s and older, while more than 2,000 years later modern Americans aren't living much longer.    

Benjamin Radford is managing editor of the Skeptical Inquirer science magazine. His books, films, and other projects can be found on his website. His Bad Science column appears regularly on LiveScience.
http://www.livescience.com/10569-human-lifespans-constant-2-000-years.html

Agelbert NOTE: Eddie, if you can get Matts to back down on his claim that modern medicine has given us longer lives, I will admit that I misjudged him. His "reputable" sources are mendacious double talkers in the service of TPTB, period. He refuses to see that. 


But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Myths of Modern Medicine: The Increase in the Human Life Span.

Our longer *, healthier life span is due to a range of political social reforms, as described below. Medical interventions and commercial drug products had very little impact. [/size][/color]


* Agelbert NOTE: "LONGER" on the AVERAGE only (e.g. see reduction in infant mortality); NOT in longevity of the aged.

For diagrams that illustrate the decline of infant mortality and of the major infectious diseases see the article: Truth About the Decline of the Infectious Diseases

Quote
Medical products contributed little to increasing the human life span:

For instance, "Researchers John & Sonya McKinlay... showed that medical intervention only accounted for between 1 & 3.5 per cent of the increase in the average life span in the United States since 1900." [1] (Yes you read that correctly, just one to three point five percent.)

Similarly, in the words of Dr Richard Taylor, in Australia: "almost 80 per cent of the reduction in infant mortality between the 1880s & the 1970s occurred prior to the 1930s." [2]

That is, survival rates for infants increased steadily long before the widespread use of pharmaceutical drugs or vaccines designed to combat infectious diseases. Extensive vaccination did not begin in Australia until the mid-1930s and for many diseases did not commence until the 1950s and 1960s. This pattern is duplicated across the developed world.

Social reforms brought about the increase in healthy human life span:

In the words of medical historian Hans Ruesch: "All the medical historians of our century ... agree that the decline of the epidemics which had wrought havoc in the Middle Ages was not due to the introduction of vaccination, but of hygiene, for they had diminished long before large-scale inoculations had begun..." [3]

Medical historians explain that the great advances in human health like:
•the decline of the infectious diseases;
•the reductions in infant and maternal (birth) mortality rates; and
•the resulting increase in overall human life span;

are due to reforms that improved our living conditions - via improvements to our social infrastructure. [4,5,6,7]

Consider that almost everyone used to live surrounded by rubbish and raw sewerage; ideal conditions for disease.

Humans (in developed countries) now live longer healthier lives due to these kinds of reforms during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: [4,5,7]
•Access to clean fresh water supplies.
• Improved sanitation - flushing toilets and sewerage systems; governments collecting and removing rubbish and waste from where people live; burying the dead further away from where people live.

•Access to better nutrition (like fruit and vegetables from afar) due to improved trade, transport and refrigeration.

• Improved hygiene - people washing more often, particularly their hands.

• Improved antisepsis by doctors and hospitals - when doctors did not wash their hands or apply other meticulous antisepsis they spread infections from person to person. Antisepsis improved the survival rates for surgery.

• Improved maternal care - care for mothers who have given birth: "Maternal mortality rates [death rates for mothers] were lowest for home deliveries undertaken by trained and supervised midwives ... In contrast ... maternal mortality rates were very high ... where most deliveries were performed by physicians... due to unnecessary interference." [8]

• Improved housing conditions - so that less people were confined together in unhealthy housing conditions.

• Improved working conditions - shorter working hours, more rest-time, laws and regulations that reduced health hazards.

• Innovations like sickness insurance legislation led to improved care for mothers and infants. [9]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~


Dr Robert Sharpe:
Quote
"Mortality for virtually all the infections was declining before, and in most cases long before, specific therapies became available... The impetus to better health from the mid nineteenth century onwards can therefore be directly traced to public health measures and social legislation that improved the living standards of working people... Higher wages and welfare benefits made it possible for the poor to eat properly and public health measures radically improved conditions in the densely-populated urban areas, particularly with the provision of clean water supplies, sanitation, sewerage and new housing... Susceptibility to the infections diminished radically as nutrition, housing, hygiene and general living conditions improved..." [5]

Quote
"It is a widely held fallacy that mortality from infectious disease only commenced to fall with the advent of modern [pharmaceutical] agents." Ramsay & Emond, Infectious Diseases. [6]

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Quote
In sum, the commercial pharmaceutical industry does not deserve the credit for benefits which came from social and political reforms.

Most medical interventions lack scientific evidence:

In closing, the British Medical Journal reports: "Only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence... This is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound and partly because many treatments have never been assessed at all". [10]

Related Articles:


•A History of Western Medicine: From ancient Greece to modern times ... a summary of how human medicine: i) progressed due to scientific clinical observations of humans; and ii) was stalled and led astray for millenia due to misleading results from vivisection ... excerpts from a book by the medical historian Hans Ruesch.

•Myths of Modern Medicine:
The Decline of the Infectious Diseases happened before commercial vaccines, immunisations and drugs were develeped for them. This page contains numerous graphs and diagrams that illustrate the statistics and trends.

•Doctors warn about the dangers of Vaccination-Immunisation.
They explain how vaccines may not protect and how they could cause serious illnesses. Also, a contract for your doctor to sign before vaccination, in order that they reimburse you for any damages.

•The Decline of Smallpox in Great Britain
- Vaccination in Doubt. It includes a critique of Edward Jenner's book and theories.

International-Medical-Council-on-Vaccination-Doctors-Against-Immunisation

For information on studies that show how modern medicine is a leading cause of human death and injury, see:

•Death By Medicine - studies in science journals reveal that medical treatment may be the leading cause of death in the USA

•Why Do Pharmaceutical Drugs Injure & Kill So Many People? Are we the real guinea-pigs?



References:

[1] J.B. McKinlay & S. McKinlay, Health & Society, Millibank Memorial Fund, 1977, pp.405-28 (as cited in The Pharmaceutical Drug Racket Part 1, CAFMR, 1993 p.7, a two part 40-page booklet that exposes the drug industry; see http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/index.html for excerpts).

[2] Dr. Richard Taylor, Medicine out of Control, 1979 p.9, Sun books.

[3] Hans Ruesch, Slaughter of the Innocent, CIVITAS Publications, Hartsdale NY, 1991, page 194.

[4] T. McKeown, The Role of Medicine, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1979; T. McKeown and C.R. Lowe, An Introduction to Social Medicine, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1976 (both cited in The Pharmaceutical Drug Racket Part 1, Jon Lesso, CAFMR, 1993 p.7, a two part 40-page booklet that exposes the drug industry; see http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/index.html for excerpts).

[5] Robert Sharpe, The Cruel Deception, Thorsons Publishing Group, Wellingborough, U.K. 1988, chapter 1, p.24

[6] A.M. Ramsay and R.T. Emond, Infectious Diseases, Heinemann, 1967.

[7] Hans Ruesch, Slaughter of the Innocent, CIVITAS Publications, Hartsdale NY, 1991, pp. 147-287.

[8] Irvine Loudon, "Maternal mortality in the past and its relevance to developing countries today", The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 2000 vol. 72 no. 1 241S-246S.

[9] John Bowblis, "The Decline in Infant Death Rates, 1878–1913: The Role of Early Sickness Insurance Programs", The Journal of Economic History (2010),70:pp 221-232

[10] Richard Smith, editor, "Where is the wisdom?... The poverty of medical evidence", British Medical Journal, October 1991, Vol 303, 198-99, http://www.bmj.com/highwire/filestream/334291/field_highwire_article_pdf/0.pdf

http://www.medicinekillsmillions.com/articles/medical_history_truth_about_human_lifespan_increase.htm

Agelbert NOTE: So how come so many people swear by our "modern" medical/pharmaceutical system? How come so many people actually DO get healed by these questionable and mostly UNscientific therapies? FAITH! IOW, the FAITH that people have in the medical system is what heals most people while the medical system STUDIOUSLY tries to undermine ANY FAITH except that in the medical system because of YOU CANNOT BILL PEOPLE FOR FAITH:

Medical system fat cats PROTECT their food bowl  ;).



But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26366
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
MattS is saying by his chart that Life Expectancy at Birth is going up. He is right. AG is saying Life Expectancy at aged 7-10 is going down. He hasn't charted it, but he might be right.  How can both be true?  Because the first year of life is when people are at the highest risk of birth defects showing up, and are generally less resilient to disease and trauma (birth itself is often traumatic). Something like this effect extends to age 11, that is the chances of dying in the current year goes down until age 10-11, and then starts going up again.

So which is the right measure to use to substantiate the claim that modern medical intervention does/doesn't extend your life?  Well, at what age does modern medical intervention start?  At birth, of course.

Now to prove something like this, you really need to be a lot more specific in your statements. 
1.  You need to state which population you are considering - the US is NOT the only country in the world, despite its exceptionalism, but let's consider the US anyway.
2.  You need to state the time range over which you are considering "going up/down" - since medical procedures have been used to attempt to prolong life as far back as the data goes, we need ALL the data available.

The data is presented in Life Tables for each year. The US Life Table for 2010 is available at
ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_Statistics/NCHS/Publications/NVSR/63_07/Table01.xlsx
from which you really only need one data point - Expectation of life at age (x) for Age = 0 - 1, but you can choose some other age if you want.

There are also Abridged Life Tables published, where the "x"s are grouped in five year brackets, or you can compose your own age bracket (like 7 - 10), but this is not just simple addition. 7 - 10 is an odd sort of group to choose - I suspect it would be influenced by boys killing themselves by doing silly things like falling out of trees or drowning.

Then you download all the life tables going back as far as you can, to collect the corresponding set of data points over the years, and then chart them.

Fortunately some analysis has already been done for you by the demographers:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_07.pdf
In 2010, the overall expectation of life at birth was 78.7 years. Between 2009 and 2010, life expectancy at birth increased for all groups considered. Life expectancy increased for both males (from 76.0 to 76.2) and females (80.9 to 81.0) and for the white population (78.8 to 78.9), the black population (74.7 to 75.1), the Hispanic population (81.1 to 81.4), the non-Hispanic white population (78.7 to 78.8), and the non-Hispanic black population (74.4 to 74.7).

AG, by picking the unusual age bracket 7 - 10, seems to be selecting the data that minimises the "child effect", and maximises the "adult effect".  This is statistically valid, but is a common way statisticians bend things to support a point.

Anyhow, it has been admitted by everyone that antisepsis intervention does make a difference (it saved my life at my last hospital visit), so the argument seems to be that only SOME interventions make things worse.  This argument can only get somewhere if you look for as many points of agreement as possible, and stop shouting "I'm right!" and "You just don't get it !" at each other.

Palloy said,
Quote
This argument can only get somewhere if you look for as many points of agreement as possible ...

True, IF we can AGREE on what a "REPUTABLE" source of empirical data is. Can you trust the World Health Organization (WHO) to tell you what the number of deaths from radiation caused sickness and birth defects are? NO. WHY? Because in the late 1950's they were GAGGED by the Atomic Energy Commission (prohibiting publishing epidemiological studies about radiation effects without the "approval" of the fox in the henhouse AEC). The AEC morphed into the NRC which continues to spread the nuclear happy talk agnotology far and wide in "REPUTABLE" publications. YOU, as a mathematician, are hamstrung by mens rea profit over planet folks entrenched in the status quo BECAUSE you have NO OTHER DATA SOURCE. Of course data can be manipulated. But your assumption that the original "empirical" data was not massaged is NOT realistic.

Which means:
A) My overall point is NOT the cohort in life expectancy; it is my healthy distrust of most of the data.

B) There IS NO OBJECTIVE MATHEMATICAL standard that you can use to measure who is right here.

C) There is NO common ground between MattS and myself on what "Reputable" empirical data is.

D) This is not really an argument about life expectancy anyway; it's an argument about competing world views that are REALLY incompatible because one world view STRESSES that, sans measurable empirical data, no phenomenon is REAL, while the other STRESSES that, even though it is impossible to measure the response of biochemical mechanisms to the metaphysical activity, said metaphysical power is MORE powerful and MORE real than measurable phenomenon.

The best I could say is that the 3D universe is a subset of the overall universe. Hence, there is SOME predictability that science can work on and study to obtain improved health care. But that in no way provides an excuse to claim "miracles" are NOT really miracles because ALL have a cause and effect empirically measurable source. And, just you wait, soon we'll have it all figured out. That's your position, isn't it Palloy?  IOW, YOU have FAITH in your empirical world WITHOUT all the answers. Hell, you don't even want to admit the published data by TPTB is slanted six ways from sunday!  You don't want to admit that THAT is the NORM, not the exception to the rule. Neither does MattS.

And it's a never ending story because I finger the NRC and you will dig up some data by somebody here or there that is "irrefutable" followed by me digging up some that I claim is "irrefutable" and so on and so forth. AT NO POINT in that exchange will you ADMIT to the POSSIBILITY that "irrefutability through empirical evidence" is IMPOSSIBLE in human biochemical events involving spontaneous healing even if I provide a laundry list of documented events of this nature. YOU and Matts will ALWAYS fall back on the "Well, someday we are going find out! That's what SCIENCE is about! So There!".  ::)

But I am supposed to **** can my FAITH because a "miraculous event" cannot be measured.   I don't think so.  ;D
« Last Edit: May 01, 2015, 09:24:43 pm by AGelbert »
But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart,
having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience. -- Luke 8:15

 

+-Recent Topics

Doomstead Diner Daily by AGelbert
July 15, 2019, 04:58:49 pm

Apocalyptic Humor by AGelbert
July 14, 2019, 10:16:09 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
July 14, 2019, 09:24:56 pm

Homebody Handy Hints by AGelbert
July 14, 2019, 05:46:16 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
July 14, 2019, 05:06:46 pm

The Wisdom of the Books of the Bible by AGelbert
July 14, 2019, 03:49:18 pm

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
July 13, 2019, 07:25:29 pm

Creeping Police State by AGelbert
July 12, 2019, 08:27:16 pm

Fossil Fuel Profits Getting Eaten Alive by Renewable Energy! by AGelbert
July 12, 2019, 06:14:29 pm

The Anti-Democratic Elite Fix Was IN From The Very Start of the USA by AGelbert
July 11, 2019, 11:10:37 pm