Health - your choice ??

[onecalledk]

http://www.naturalnews.com/030542_censorship_internet.html

link to an article on natural health which outlines what is happening in the US with regard to websites that are being taken down.

There is a petition that is circulating on the net (http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipetitions.com%2Fpetition %2Fjoininghandsinhealth%2F&h=6f564) also that warns of the EUs decision to ban alternative medicines, vitamins etc and potentially the teaching of alternative health next April.

The UK goverment has not consulted any of the millions of people of the UK. It needs to be highlighted how this can affect everyone. It means that if this is passed it will be illegal to buy herbal supplements or vitamins. If they take it further like in the US then they can stop organic produce as well.

In the US they are trying to pass a bill that will make it illegal to grow your own produce !


Surely we can make up our own minds about what to put into our bodies ? if the choice is taken from you what does that say about the world we live in ?

K

[Paul_and_Anna]

You are allowed only a minimum of choice, and you only get that whilst you vote for their so called democracies! :)

Such is life ......... until the winds of change start blowing.

[onecalledk]

thats the whole point though with the campaign for more signatures, the government have not consulted us mere taxpayers. They are in talks with the EU and this will go through unless the people of the UK stand up and say NO to it.

How many people even know about it? those who do know perhaps dont quite realise just how this will affect what you are able to have access to.

Basically unless its produced by a pharmaceutical company its not legal. We are talking lots of products that people consume and have done for decades. Nature remedies will be a thing of the past.......

Beware the spin that says natural is not safe. We had nature before we had the drugs companies.......

K

[theone]

Look at it from the other side.

Companies are free to market unproven and unregulated "medicines", giving people false hope, possibly doing more harm than good and, in basic terms, ripping the consumer off.

By regulating anything described as a medicine, these problems can be eliminated.

As for the government consulting the taxpayers, why should they on this subject? They don't consult us on other subjects and they don't have to. We elect them because we think they will run the country the best way possible. It is their job to make these decisions on our behalf.

[onecalledk]

hmmmm, so you are ok with the thousands of alternative health practictioners who will be out of a job then? supermarkets that dont stock (cos it will illegal) anything but medicines that contain laboratory made ingredients?

I hear a lot of people advising things like ecchinaccea for a cold on this forum, wont be allowed, will be illegal as it is a herb and therefore natural.....

Aromatherapy oils will not be allowed to be made or purchased as they are made from NATURAL products and would therefore be illegal .....

maybe you can see where I am going with this ?

K

[theone]

I think there's a bit of sensationalism being used here.

Of course I don't want people to lose their jobs, but at the same time I want to be protected from conmen.

I don't believe for a second they will ban natural substances, what they may well do is ban them from being marketed and sold as medicines unless they have been proven in regulated tests.

And don't forget many of the prescription medicines are made from natural products, they're not all chemically engineered.

[Phill]

Yawn. Big US corporations taking over the world OMG!

75 websites shut down, that is OTT.....hang on 75 out of 182,000,000....hmmm

So they want to prevent people selling 'remedies' that are not proven or 'medicine' that is not medicine, sounds like a simple trading standards issue which is fair.

On the site that is linked too there is an advert which states:
http://www.naturalnews.com/ads/125x125/10-1-Ad-for-Natural-News-125.jpg

OK this links to a book ($27.00) but this type of thing in my mind is preying on the ill, weak, feeble and desperate purely for financial gain and should be regulated, or taken down.

[onecalledk]

I would disagree that it is hype. The point that seems to be missed in all of this is that the government is in discussions about things that could seriously affect the choices of the population of the UK WITHOUT any consideration of what the people of the UK actually want.

We elected the government so dont you think that something that affects all of us should perhaps be run passed us? or is everyone ok with the government deciding EVERYTHING for them ?

THe spin is the protection of the average person in the street and of course I am in favour of people being protected from con men. What I am not in favour of is the government deciding for me what I use when I am ill and what my choices are concerning food that I want to eat.

This is about more than dodgy vitamins...

K

[theone]

They are the government, it is their job to govern. If you aren't going to allow them to make decisions, why have democratic state?

I think it is hype. The government aren't going to ban herbs. They're wanting to ban people selling the herbs as cures for illnesses when they are not. If you, or anyone else, believes that a herb will make you better then you will still be able to take it.

It basically comes down to false advertising, which is illegal.

[Paul_and_Anna]

They are the Government?

They ..... were not even elected! At best they got a VERY weak nomination. :)


..... and NOT from me I might add ........

[ducati]

Currently, the US government is unable to shut down websites that sell bleach (http://getbetterhealth.com/fda-warning-industrial-bleach-as-a-cure-for-cancer-and-hiv/2010.08.12) as a cancer cure. I think that the current crop of hype is a reaction to the perceived invasion of privacy and nanny state.

Unfortunately, some people are so gullible, desperate or just plain stupid, that they need a nanny.

[onecalledk]

dont expect to get the truth from the people running the countries. There are lots of things about the mass farming and food production in the US and now here in Britain that is hidden.

It should be a basic right to be able to eat fresh wholesome food that HAS NOT been genetically altered in any way. People can only make decisions about what to eat based on the information that is provided with the products and there in lies the problem.

A friend of mine told me recently that she does not eat any meat when in this country as she cannot be sure of the source. She is Swiss, has no problems eating meat in her own country as genetically altered meat is banned in Switzerland.

We are human beings and we are designed to eat the animals that nature provided not something that was altered (for our own good?) by man. We are playing god with things we have not enough knowlege about. By the time the full effects of tampering with nature show themselves it may well be too late.

Health should be a decision made by each individual but as there is little health education in this country and its getting less then that puts those with little knowledge at a distinct disadvantage.

We are lucky in a lot of ways living in this part of the country. Children here grow up knowing what animals are and have fresh air and access to fresh food and water. Not so further down the country where there are children that have no clue what some fruit is nor what animals their meat comes from and as for the water supply, well .... !

Our health starts with what is on our plates and continues from there. As a nation severe illness is on the increase as is modified food.

It is somewhat naive to think that those in power have our best interests at heart when the reality is that money talks. At the end of the day the pharmaceutical companies pull the strings. There was a report the other week in which GLAXO refused to divulge how much the government paid them for vaccines as a spokeswoman said that the balance sheet had not been fully finished. Hmmm really. Its billions that the government pays them.

Would that money not be better spent on improving the quality of food and PRICE of food available to the UK. Its a fact that those on a low income will have a shorter life span and poorer health. It should not matter how much you have in your bank account how long you live or what you can afford to put in your trolley at the supermarket with regard to what is good for you.

Walk into tesco or any supermarket and the goods on lower prices are high sugar, low nutrition foods. WHY ? !!

K

[Metalattakk]

It should be a basic right to be able to eat fresh wholesome food that HAS NOT been genetically altered in any way.

Right, so seedless grapes are out? How do you think they were created? They were created by modifying their genes through breeding and cross-breeding.

How about cross-bred cows? Too dangerous to eat?

What's wrong with genetic modification, and what's the difference if it was achieved over many generations or in a "test tube"?

The end results are the same.

[ducati]

I do see where you are coming from on the food production front K. Personally, I don't eat meat or fish full stop. But this isn't recent, I haven't for more than 15 years, it is more to do with wellfare than my own health.

[onecalledk]

Right, so seedless grapes are out? How do you think they were created? They were created by modifying their genes through breeding and cross-breeding.

How about cross-bred cows? Too dangerous to eat?

What's wrong with genetic modification, and what's the difference if it was achieved over many generations or in a "test tube"?

The end results are the same.

This is the sort of reaction that clouds the whole issue and stops people from seriously looking into what is being done to our food. The point is that we do not know EXACTLY what will happen to the human body if it continues to feed itself genetically altered material. No one is taking the time to test it to see what does happen so we all merrily buy into the food shortage hype that is out there and think that genetically altered food is the way to reduce risks that we will run out of food.

Ignoring of course the sheer amount of food that is THROWN AWAY daily by people. There is plenty wrong with genetically altered food, at the end of the day it is a choice for people though isnt it.

You happen to think that altered food is ok whilst I think the opposite, my point in all this is that at the moment there does exist a choice but its getting narrower daily.

I shop from a local butcher who can tell me where the meat comes from if he could not then I would not buy it. I am not vegetarian and I do eat meat. THerefore if the local butcher had to get his meat from the intensive farms that are now springing up everywhere I would not buy. THerefore I would be denied my right to purchase fresh naturally reared meat.

There is a difference between intensive farming of cows and those allowed out to play in the fields. THey are intensively farmed with a concoction of antibiotics etc which stays in the meat of the animal.

We could debate the pros and cons all day with both sides having the right to their opinion. There may come a day soon when it will be irrelevant as there will BE NO CHOICE.

We may elect the government and they can rule the country as they promised and we can vote with our feet at the next election. But nowhere did I tick a box on my voting form that allowed my right to choose my own health be given over to those running said country !

K

[Metalattakk]

you know, you could try answering the questions instead of rambling on about your favourite buzz-words - "intensive farming" and "GM foods".

So I'll give you another chance:

What's wrong with genetic modification, and what's the difference if it was achieved over many generations or in a "test tube"?

The end results are the same.

[redeyedtreefrog]

This is the sort of reaction that clouds the whole issue and stops people from seriously looking into what is being done to our food. The point is that we do not know EXACTLY what will happen to the human body if it continues to feed itself genetically altered material. No one is taking the time to test it to see what does happen so we all merrily buy into the food shortage hype that is out there and think that genetically altered food is the way to reduce risks that we will run out of food.


What about people in drought-stricken countries? Do they not have a right to crops that can grow in their climate? Do you eat bananas? This is a wild banana. (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DtTZ6HvuN9Y/S_QEOIU8Q2I/AAAAAAAAAZ4/aBiMPfW7v3E/s1600/banana-wild.jpg) Humans genetically modified it to be seedless, and modern dessert bananas in your fruit bowl originates when some guy on a banana plantation noticed one yellower banana amongst the red and green cooking bananas, which were the only ones available at the time. He noticed that these taste sweeter, so genetically modified some bananas to be yellower and edible without cooking.

This illogical, naturalistic hippy nonsense annoys me. Just because something's natural, doesn't make it good. Arsenic is natural. Bubonic plague is natural. Smallpox was natural, but scientists in these ungodly terrible labs eliminated that defenceless organism from the earth...:roll:

Anyway back on the point of the thread, they don't intend to ban any natural medicines, aspirin is derived from the bark of a willow tree. Aspirin won't disappear. They want to stop dodgy alternative medicine companies marketing their sugar pills and water as something which actually works. There's a reason alternative medicine has the "alternative" bit. At one point in history, we tested all the medicine and the stuff that worked still got called "medicine". The stuff that didn't got called "alternative", and that's the way it's been ever since. Alternative medicine that's been proven to work is just medicine.



Nice fact: You'd need a bottle of a homeopathic remedy the size of the solar system to actually find a single molecule of active ingredient.

[onecalledk]

whoah, everyone has a right to their opinion! for your information no I dont eat bananas but thats beside the point.

Its neither tree hugging nor hippy to be concerned about what you eat and what is produced TO eat.

Its all very well having labs and being able to create things but then man decides that he is god and starts altering stuff because he can. Thats the point BECAUSE HE CAN. That doesnt mean that he should.

There is a lot of disinformation out there to debunk natural and alternative remedies. If its all so harmless then why pass a bill to make it illegal. This is NOT a bill to protect the public, its not to pass regulations on who can sell what it is a BAN. There is a difference.

There are those who have rigid views on medicine and thats fine, its your views and your life. My point is that I would like it still to be a CHOICE and that choice is soon to be taken from us.

I cannot comprehend why people would trust a drug company that makes millions of pounds a year out of sickness. If the drugs work so well why is there not more cures for all the illness out there? Has anyone realised that if they were to cure people they would have no repeat custom?

Just for the record this was posted here to make people aware. Its not a thread where those that shout the loudest get heard the fastest. I am open to debate but not to hostility.

If alternative medicine and natural health is not "your bag" then fine, let it be, no need to shout.

K :)

[redeyedtreefrog]

This is not shouting. THIS IS SHOUTING.

It should be illegal because it's dangerous. The misinformation perpetuated by alternative heath companies may be gullibly believed, possibly leading to a child who doesn't know any better to be painfully ill for longer than they should or even to die. At least have a big obvious large-fonted warning on alternative remedies saying something like "THIS REMEDY HAS BEEN PROVEN TO HAVE NO EFFECT" or something. Or to label homeopathic stuff "water". Alternative remedies are dangerous, and lives could be saved or suffering shortened by using stuff that actually works.

Drugs companies are dodgy therefore sugar pills cure cancer is not valid reasoning.

[ducati]

Are alternative therapy companies not businesses that make money?:confused

[pinotnoir]

Evidence based medicine is the safest.

http://www.newstatesman.com/print/201011110122