Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:32:23 -1000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
David:
> Nor can they do anything about attaining true health through a pill,
>powder, or potion. Evil, evil, evil I tell you.
Evil, evil, evil?
>Seriously, drugs are for
>crisis care NOT health care. A crisis being when the body has reached it's
>material limits not because it is displaying a sign that it is struggling
>to maintain homeostasis.
I think most medical people would agree with the above--what is so evil,
evil, evil about it?
> Simply calling it a disease means there is the possibility of
>"treating"
>it. Profitability will be the deciding factor not some great humanitarian
>effort.
Plenty of diseases have no treatment. But anyway, why shouldn't treatments
be sought? What's wrong with profit anyway? And why not some humanitarian
effort?
> Conspiracies never work in the long run and besides when you are in
>something for profit alliances usually cut into the bottom line.
So, you are well-studied on the matter. ;)
> Then you surely realize that animals become diseased as does man the
>further he introduces his limited educated mind into the food source
>through technology.
Wild animals succomb to disease as well. You may be quilty of romanticising
"nature" just as you demonize human endeavor.
Cheers,
Kirt
Secola /\ Nieft
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|