That’s right ” Who’s health is it anyway?” The daily news is full of some stories that have plenty to do with our health, but who’s behind the scenes, and why? Who’s concern is it if I choose to eat… what ever it is, that now is to be found to be less than healthy? Remember back in the day when there were plenty of stories on ” Coffee” and the health risks it presented to our body’s needs. That was then backed up with some stories on how coffee was found to be healthy to drink within moderation. Then the new stories of how it can cause cancer / cure cancer…..! Are you just as frustrated with the stories yet, confused, or just tuning out to all the chatter out there on health, and some new government studies on what is means to be healthy now? If your like me at this point, just pour your self a big mug of coffee and get amused at all of the conflicting news on any new health fad out there. What is good one day will most certainly be bad the next day. In short they ( who ever they really are ) really don’t know any thing about it!
If you’re trying to be healthy then fine, I see why you may have an interest about such studies. You have to excepted some facts, that your gean’s, the ones your ancestor’s gave you, may then play an even bigger part in the health equation. It may not only be how much we eat or of what we eat, or not eat at all. Just saying something like “smoking is bad” isn’t going to be the end all to any assumption made. To say you may have a higher degree of health problems “when you smoke”, would be more accurate. There is always a Gorge Burns in the mix. The one person or some group of people, who have been doing what ever is deemed to be “un-healthy” for the moment, as a daily practice, and have no real negative affect on them. Doesn’t make it healthy or unhealthy. But that’s the exception, not the rule.
For governments to get involved with some regulation of some product or substances. On the false premise that they must do this for the best health possible. Is just a wrong way of going about helping people. Why regulate the use of something with a future possible negative result? How about telling people what they now must do for some future positive result, concentrating on some positive activity’s rather than focusing on some negative ones? almost every thing that is good for you, can also be a substances, or action that will affect you negatively if used in excess.
Example: Some people who have been blessed with having reached the mile stone of living passed 100 years young, almost all ways are asked, “What they think is the secret to long life?” More times than not, they say something like, ” Having a shot of alcohol, moderation in everything and good gens.” But there is plenty of studies about alcohol and the negative affect of it on the body. Who is right? Some young wiper snapper who says it is bad, or some old person who seem to say what a big fool you are with every second that ticket by on the clock.
Life is to be enjoyed, not lived in fear of what is going to destroy some aspect of it.
So it seem like more of a bet in the casino of life with every choice we have to make when it comes down to what to do with health. If left to government to do everything for us then. We will certainly get over regulated by government. People who only call for governments to get involved are just people with weak dispositions, lacking the willful abilities to choose and live, with having made a choice in the first place. They only wish to have some guarantee to some likeable out come, or some fulfillment of their fanatics they create in their minds as how things should be. Funny when these people are faced with a somewhat different outcome. They wish to change the whole outcome thing, or at least cast blame on someone or something as their reasoning, in deal with this new unlikable thing in their lives.
There is a story going around right now that some people would like the government to get involved in regulating ” SUGAR!” Yes they sight that sugar is a menace to society as a health destroyer. They point out that it is also additive to people who tend to use to much of it. They also sight the added cost to society as a negative and the biggest reason as why governments need to regulate it. Are these people for real? Did they forget about the other substances out there in the food chang that are also addictive? How about everyone’s taste buds? We all train them. Like it or not we control or trained to our own likes and dislikes, no matter who their owner may be ( The individual person). We all train our taste buds to our determination as what tastes good. So yes! Food can be just additive. So lets face it! It is dangerous to everyone who isn’t getting it or understanding these simple truths. How about drink? Drunk driving is killing thousands of people every year. It could be regulated even more! Right?
Yet we live with too much regulations from government already. Some of these regulations are costing people’s lives. Even when they are being promoted as being concerned government, looking out for you. How about the government regulating minimum gas mileage ratings for cars and trucks. For the automotive industries to achieve these limits they have cut down on the weight of steel used in each cars, and trucks. How many people are killed do to lower speed accidents that are also fatal to the occupants of these kind of cars. The regulation by governments are then not always the best solution to any problems out there. Nor do these governments doing anything for the good of its people and their health or safety, just because. It is a degree of money and control then, to these issues, rather than what is found to be healthiest for everyone.
When it is involves governments, it always comes down to money, and control. He who controls the money also has the control. Money all on its own breeds corruption uncontrolled. So this is why regulation never works to anyone advantage. The outcome is always an out of control government.
It is not wrong to study sugar and it’s effects on the human body, both short-term and long-term. But leaving it up to each and everyone to decide for themself’s as what to do for themself’s and how much to use of it. The truth is, to realize the dangers of sugar as possibly causing or interdicting hypertension, Insulin resistance, High triglycerides, Diabetes, and liver problems that also mimic the effects of alcohol and or alcoholism. These can all be contributed to some kind of sugar abuse or self-abuse through and by the using of sugar to an excessive amount.
If we are only going to use sugar as the whipping boy to one of the biggest health problems out there. Then we are making an incomplete assumption to the dangers to good health. What about Obesity? There is an obesity problem in this country, also an important and serious health issue as well. To signal out just one issue or to just label a signal food, or just one ingredient in that food, is to overlooking to a greater degree the health issues as a whole problem to good health. Picking only on one issue by the government or by some over active activism group. Which through intense lobbying of the government hopes to change the lives for everyone is short-sighted. It’s accomplishments then only will confuse the issues, and therefore adds to the problems. No to mention the unintended consequences. Remember the studies on coffee already mentioned. Some who were dangerous and then some who were great. Conflicting information at best. Resulting in total confusion.
To legislate human behaviors is impossible! It is impossible to legislate against stupidity, as well all forms of behaviors like compulsiveness, irresponsibility, and even impulsiveness, all of these traits are involved in the individuals choices that they choose for themself’s in everything. Successful control through intervention, by some legislature, is the first ingredient in failure. Every government that has tried it in the past has failed in the long run. For it is always met with resistance by all of those who are affected by it. Why not let nature take its course? Let nature regulate people who by their own choices, choose badly within their own lives, like diets, smoking, or whether they on their own will exercise regularly or not! The consequences good or bad from all of our choices are the price of living free and enjoying freedom. If we enjoy some sugar along the way, should we or anyone have to pay the price through taxes or over regulation for the sweetness of it? Who’s health is it anyway?
If it is only about the health cost to government or individuals, as the argument to regulating….( just pick something to be regulating ). Are you not then just removing the chef incentive for changing behaviours. Governments charge more taxes on cigarets, the overall outcome is reduces usage of the products. But when it comes to health no one has the responsibility’s of their choices, because of insurance paying the bills. If people were more directly affected by their choices and knew there was not to be a bailout of some sorts for their poor choices. They may then choose differently for themself’s. Instead of destroying what health they were given by abusive behaviours, or their self-imposed abusive habits. Who’s responsible for the health they would have at any time in life? Who’s health is it anyway?
Just some cute references ….http://t.co/6hPzpfhy
All the best!