Prayer and topics of illness and death

Yeah, if you have the feeling this is going to be another one of "those" posts, one that is a *thud* back to reality, your instinct is correct. Believe me when I tell you that I wish that all of my posts could be and would be like my series on the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, understanding God, understanding Jesus Christ, prayer, strengthening one's faith, and other affirmative crucial subjects necessary for a joyous believer to understand and embrace. But for every one of those posts that I issue, I know that misinformation and misunderstanding that is out there among both unbelievers and believers drags downward the efficacy of the joy and love that I present. And so it is time to make very clear an urgent problem that more of you have noticed, I would expect, than you would admit to. The problem is the decreasing efficacy of praying to God for support and intervention relating to illness and increased longevity in life.

First of all, remember that there are really two types of prayer. One is general prayer, which can be thought of as conversational, honoring, worshipful and glorifying of God in its purpose and content. The other kind of prayer is intercessory prayer, where one is basically asking God for something. One of the greatest failings among believers globally today is that there is much more of the second type than the first, and it ought to be the other way around. I am not being unkind, and neither is God, because every preacher and Sunday school teacher knows full well that people tend to forget about God day to day, but turn to him when they want something from him. That's human nature, and while "human nature" is a valid excuse for backsliding into that mindset, it is no excuse for remaining in that proportion or total lack of prayer once one is reminded that it is incorrect and showing lack of reverence and commitment in your relationship to God. So I am speaking about the problem of intercessory prayer that is directed to God asking for cures for one's self and/or for others and those that are related to asking for a long or a "longer" lifespan. The problem that I wish to address is that more of you than will admit to it, who are of a certain age and experience, know that God is answering in the affirmative less and less of those prayers now than he did previously. Young people (hi there!) you are not old enough, obviously, to remember when there seemed to be and indeed was a higher proportion of answered prayers relating to illness and lifespan, so just ride along in reading about this because it will give you a lot of useful insight and re-programming, so you can start to repair this problem and avoid the faults of the current generations' mindsets.

We need to start out with a reminder, which I have blogged extensively about, that scripture states very clearly that human lifespan is limited in time, no matter what humans may do regarding medical or technological achievements and advances. It is a generous amount of time that God has stated is the upper limit (one hundred and twenty years), when one considers he made that statement after Adam and Eve had disobeyed him in the Garden of Eden. God did not state that everyone would someday live to be one hundred and twenty (nor that those who died earlier than that are somehow cheated out of their right to a long life). God made clear that because Adam and Eve refused to live in obedience to God's Holy Spirit in Eden that they forfeited the supernatural extension of life on behalf of all of humanity. I recently blogged to explain that the dozen or so patriarchs who lived extraordinary centuries of life did indeed exist, and for several reasons they had this long life in God's service. I remind you of that because another reason a few, only a few, of God's children had this gift is that they bear witness to the overcoming of the flesh (and its eventual decay and demise) if filled with the Holy Spirit, which only God can give and cannot be "summoned" or otherwise gained or manipulated by humans via magic, "all natural living," or other false beliefs. So one has solid scriptural basis for understanding that God states that one hundred and twenty years will be the upper limit for humanity, but he makes no promises regarding any individual or group, and that he "proves" this to humans by having a small group live extraordinary live spans in the days of the great Patriarchs, for they were, for God's purpose, filled with the Holy Spirit to that end.

But already by the time of King David we see that even those who are blessed by God, but are now as all humans are, subject to natural laws regarding life span, able to "expect" only seventy years. In fact King David only lived to that age himself, and he was mightily blessed by God but again, recognize the difference between being blessed and being given supernatural presence of the Holy Spirit, which only those few Patriarchs had, and no one ever will again. How do we know that? There is extensive scripture regarding the shortness of life and the need to be prepared to suddenly meet God, but listen to what the human who knew God the best of all, since he often spoke with him face to face, said:

Psalm 90:10

The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labor and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

This is a Psalm that was written by Moses. Moses is the only man to have frequently met with and spoken with God face to face, to have heard God speak his own Holy Name, to see God in passing in his glory, and to have a tent where he could ask God any question he needed, and ask for intercession on behalf of both large religious problems the Israelites faced, and squabbles where God's advice was needed. Last and not least, of course, Moses received the Ten Commandments and the Law from God. Besides Jesus Christ, was there ever anyone who knew God better than Moses? No, indeed. And here Moses writes in his Psalm that the life span of humans is seventy years, and that while some through their strength (health and what we'd call "good genes" today, ha) do live to eighty, that death will come fast nonetheless even for those oldsters, and that they achieve that lifespan often with discomfort and struggle (the sufferings of old age or a life of hardship).

Thus the Bible is filled with much observation, and remember all scripture is divinely inspired, often with direct "quotes" from God, regarding the upper limit (one hundred and twenty years) and likely limit for individuals (seventy to eighty years). It is imprudent and misleading, therefore, for people to expect otherwise.

Remember, as I've blogged before, up until one hundred years ago most humans did not live past forty years old, with men and women of good character and wisdom being eligible for being considered "elders" after the age of thirty! Through advances in medicine, better hygiene, and better food, water, shelter and energy supply, humans have in the past one hundred years added a good thirty years onto their practical expected lifespan: right on the mark what Moses observed and prophesied in his Psalm. One problem is that when through goodness of human charity and endeavor that lifespan was increased to reach its best potential, modern humans think that is an open ended "trend line." What I mean is they ignore the reality of how that progress was achieved, which is that more people are receiving what they previously "lacked," which was good food, shelter, hygiene, clean water and medical care, and it was that lacking that kept them from the natural life span they could expect. It was not a refuting of the fact that humans do have a real limit to their lifespan. In other words, even when what is lacking is provided, this does not open up a "gate" to indefinite length of life. To the contrary, abundance is sometimes a two edged sword where people often find new ways to lose their lives.

But let us stay on the point and not talk about risky behavior or the technical trade offs (such as whether automobiles versus horses or walking give more opportunities for long and safer life or not, which only God knows, of course). Let us stick to the point of 1) the reality of the human body and its frailty and limitation of life 2) God's stated intentions regarding human longevity.

As I've repeatedly advised people, when reading the Bible and thoughtfully trying to understand the events contained in it and God's will, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John containing the direct teaching of Jesus is the guide to proper discernment. So what did Jesus say about long life? What he said, undoubtedly preached many times, is actually repeated in Luke in two different contexts:

Luke 9:24

For whosoever will save his life, shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same will save it.

-and-

Luke 17:32-33

Remember Lot's wife.
Whosoever shall seek to save his life, shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life, shall preserve it.

In Luke 9:24 three of the Apostles had just witnessed Jesus transfigured into his glorified body, accompanied by Moses and Elias, and being enveloped in clouds while hearing the voice of God. Upon descending the mountain where this occurred and joining the other disciples, they are immediately approached by a man seeking a cure for his son, who is wracked by spasms caused by a demon. The disciples had been unable to expel the demon and so Jesus does so and the boy is cured and restored. Having seen all these wonders the disciples start to discuss both out loud and in their own thoughts who of them would someday be the "greatest." It is then, in a longer discourse, that Jesus makes the remark in Luke 9:24. You should read the whole of Luke 9 on your own and study it. But with the context I have given you, you can now understand better what Jesus intends by Luke 9:24.

Jesus is both explaining and rebuking that the amount of miracles and cures that a person is part of is not the measure of greatness but, rather, in how much they serve God through Jesus. In other words, the disciples and others should not think of how great they are relative to each other or anyone else, but how totally they serve Jesus for the sake of God. Now, what does that have to do with lifespan and health? Two things. One, Jesus makes this statement immediately after curing a boy. Remember, one learns by the actions of Jesus in addition to his words. So Jesus is clearly saying that where possible it is God's will to cure illness, but that cure of illness must always be in the context of the glorification of God, whether that cure is miraculous, as only God can provide, or routine through good care and medicine. Remember that the woman who had been cured of bleeding by Jesus had gone for years to many doctors first. So Jesus by example demonstrates that God is all for good health and curing of ailments so long it is done for his glory. I do not mean just praising or thanking God. When someone performs medicine for the glory of God, it means two things: they acknowledge that all goodness comes from God AND they do not accomplish any cure via sinfulness or injustice.

Suppose that father had said, "Please cure my son. I've done everything, including killing some pagan kid and trying to transplant his brain into my son's head." That would be a stark example of someone not glorifying God in their search for a cure for their son.

So the second reason this passage spoken by Jesus has to do with lifespan and by implication medicine is that Jesus equates the disciples' argument and speculation about greatness with lifespan. In a time of great poverty often a person was viewed as "great" simply because he or she had a long lifespan. A long lifespan (again, remember that was being over forty years old for the average person) was viewed as a blessing, one that was often merited due to being in God's good graces. Whether that was true or not (and of course long lifespan can be a great blessing, but not always) Jesus of course spoke using concepts the people could understand. So Jesus is essentially saying that rather than worry about which of you is "greater," understand that even if you are cut dead after a short life, if you lose your life for my sake you will save your life through all eternity... but if you try to cling to a long life (cling to greatness), life will inevitably strip it away from you, especially if you are attempting to be great (live long) without God.

If humans had a hope of living beyond what God had previously stated and demonstrated throughout the Bible, this would have been the time that Jesus would have said so. Instead, Jesus with one very simple and powerful image conveyed much spiritual and worldly information. Jesus let people know that:

1. There is the life that one has as a living being, and then the eternal life afterwards, and the eternal life is obviously the one that a person should look to God for in hope of receiving, not the worldly life;
2. That if a person suffers a curtailment of his or her lifespan for the sake of God through Jesus, then he or she will save their eternal life and not perish in it;
3. That a person who attempts to cling to life shall lose it, one way or the other. Either the forces of natural life and/or the consequences of one's actions (including sin or injustice) will curtail the life that is so eagerly attempted to be preserved and/or the person will lose their chance at eternal life with God simply because they put their earthly life ahead of God and eternal life in importance.

Thus to apply the totality of Luke 9 to the question of praying for good health, cures or long lifespan, you see that Jesus:

1. Demonstrates what the glorified body will look like in eternal life and that two well known prophets, Moses and Elias, are indeed in heaven, so Jesus begins that day with affirming the primacy of one's eternal life and the reality of it, that it is not just an illusion or wishful thinking;
2. Demonstrates that one should, indeed, care about the health of one's loved ones on earth and seek responsible cures, as the father sought the help of Jesus to cast the demon from his little boy;
3. Chides the apostles for vying among themselves in search of a false hierarchy of greatness based on earthly life, even if that earthly life includes receipt of the authority from God to perform miracles;
4. Acknowledges that the greatest currency in the mind of the people of those times as far as measuring "greatness" among poor people was to have a long life or to save one's life from peril;
5. And thus debunks both the idea of relative greatness and the idea of preserving the earthly life as being of foremost importance;
6. Therefore explaining that attempts to save one's life as more important than focusing on God foremost will be futile, resulting in loss of earthly life and possibly eternal life;
7. While, therefore, if one thinks not of one's greatness or life span as of the utmost importance but instead thinks first and foremost of God might retain one's life on earth and definitely will have the promise of eternal life in heaven.

This is such an important concept of not only the spiritual sanctified life of serving God that all faithful believers should pursue that Jesus uses almost the same words but in a different context, both reaffirming and more so broadening their meaning. That is the significance of Luke 17: 32 and here is that context.

Jesus is having a long teaching and discussion session with the disciples. In previous chapters they have already discussed many things, culminating with telling the disciples about the rich man who was sent to hell for not having saved a suffering starving man outside of his gate. Thus Luke 17 is Jesus' summation of the importance that 1) people must avoid sin and offense at all costs and 2) people should be generous in forgiveness.

Then "The apostles said unto the Lord, 'Increase our faith.' Jesus does so by telling them a parable demonstrating that faith is first found through great humility while obeying all that God instructs. After this discourse they traveled through Samaria and Galilee and entered a village where Jesus heals ten lepers who had begged him to do so. Now, this is interesting so make note of it. Jesus healed them by sending them to the local priests. When the lepers went to the priests, without the priests doing anything each leper was cured (by Jesus) but out of the sight of Jesus and in the direct sight of the priest. Only one comes back to thank Jesus and that ends up being the focal point of this miracle, both in the subsequent actions and discourse by Jesus and also by most preachers in modern times. Yes, gratitude is a crucial point, but have you ever thought about why Jesus sent the lepers, uncured, to the priests, and then the cure by Jesus fell upon each of them in the sight of the priests? There are two reasons and these are essential to understanding Jesus and his teaching:

1. Sure, the obvious reason is true that Jesus was forcing the priests to witness the cure of the lepers and thus rubbing their faces in it a bit (the priests would have been shunning the lepers and so you can appreciate the humor if you understand that when Jesus sends ten lepers to the priests and right in front of the priests each leper loses his leprosy while the priests stare in horror and astonishment);
2. But here is the more important point. Even though the priests were of no help to curing the lepers, Jesus was demonstrating, even though some time had passed, what he had just spoken of to the disciples regarding humility and obedience to God. Thus Jesus sends the lepers to the priests of God first, showing all that one is supposed to focus on God first, rather than the "cure."

This event and of course the other events resulted in another confrontation with the Pharisees. Jesus gives a discourse to respond to their question of "When the kingdom of God should come" that Jesus again makes the statement about losing one's life or preserving one's life. Do you see how the context differs, but the truth is constant? In Jesus' discourse, Luke 17:20-37, Jesus first reminds the Pharisees of their history, from creation through the days of Noah and up to the destruction of Sodom and the saving from it of Lot. The reason Jesus mentions this history is to make two points that 1) God's kingdom is already here and always was, as his will is done whatever the circumstances, whether foreseen by humans or not and 2) the cycle of obedience/disobedience/chastisement that humans continually test God's patience with. The form of disobedience that Jesus is focused on explaining here is an excessive focus on material goods and activities and diminished obedience to God. It is in that context that he compares what happened when it rained fire and brimstone from heaven onto Sodom as being, in the future, how it will be when the Son of Man is "revealed." This refers to Jesus returning in the Second Coming as judge.

By the way, pay close attention to not only our theme about holding onto life/health but also I am going to explain one of the most misunderstood passages about the Apocalypse here too, so we have a dual benefit in studying this scripture.

In Luke 17:29 Jesus reminds the Pharisees that the righteous man, Lot, was saved from the destruction. Lot did so by fleeing, following the instructions of the angels, and taking nothing with him. So Jesus compares Lot following the instructions of the angels, running away from his earthly possessions and thus toward God with what righteous men and women will do at the End of Times, the Apocalypse, the Second Coming: they will flee all earthly attachment, follow the instructions of God's angels and look only to God:

Luke 17:31
In that day, he which shall be upon the house-top, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.

In other words, people (who spent a lot of time on their roofs, as many lived above their animals and other goods) should not go back into the house to get their stuff; they should be ready to go with God as they are. Likewise people who are working in the field should leave the field and not try to harvest some food for the road. This is NOT RAPTURE. Sodom was not "rapture," it was the handful of faithful fleeing on foot while the many unfaithful were burned and destroyed. When Jesus makes a comparison, he means it as it is, literally. Sodom was a bloodbath, not an "out of body" or "rapture" experience. Thus Jesus is saying that at his Second Coming people need to be ready in advance to leave all earthly attachment behind and attend to God.

How do we know this besides the obvious fact that like I said, Jesus makes his comparisons to be exact? That is the heart of the reference to Lot's wife and the problem of clinging to health/cures/lifespan/goods:

Luke 17:32-36
Remember Lot's wife.
Whosoever shall seek to save his life, shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life, shall preserve it.
I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; and the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken and the other left.
Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, the other left.

Now, all Jesus had to say is "remember Lot's wife" without expounding further because everyone indeed knew what he meant. Lot's wife was one of the just who was saved by following the warning of the angels and fleeing Sodom with her husband... except for one problem. She was just, she was saved, but she turned around to look back, whether by morbid curiosity or regret for her possessions, and she lost her life. Everyone would have immediately clicked and understood exactly what Jesus was saying.

Two just people, Lot and his wife, were saved from Sodom, but one at the last minute did not shed her earthly attentions and thus, even though she was just, lost her life. She disobeyed, having been told not to look back. It is a great sadness and reality that many just people do, in a pinch, disobey God, even (often) for the most stupid of reasons. We've seen that often. Remember when Moses was told to strike a rock once for water by God and he struck it twice "just in case," as if the number of times he struck the rock "made" the water come and not God? Likewise Lot's wife, though just, disobeyed in the ultimate "what was she thinking" moment.

Here is where the math comes into it. Lot and his wife were two just people, and both were saved by the angels. One just person obeyed everything God said and saved his life, that being Lot. One just person disobeyed the instructions and lost her life, that would be Lot's wife. So of two just people, one stayed just to the end, while one disobeyed out of weakness at the last minute. That's half and half.

That is why Jesus drives home the point that at the coming of the Kingdom of God, half of the just will obey to the end and be saved, while half will fizzle out and disobey at the last minute because of their attachment to the world.

1) Two men sleeping (no, not "that way," but in those days people shared blankets and mats on the floor), one will be taken (as in the Lot analogy) and one will not (as in Lot's wife analogy).
Half and half.
2) Two women shall be grinding together (no, not "that way," but in those days people had to pulverize their grains to make bread or gruel); the one shall be taken (as in the Lot analogy) and one will not (as in Lot's wife analogy).
Half and half.
3) Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken (as in the Lot analogy) and the other left (as in the Lot's wife analogy).
Half and half.

They then go on to ask Jesus where, but really, we need to stick to the topic here or this will turn into too long a single posting bringing in too many topics that need in-depth discussion on their own.

Jesus is once again explaining that life is good and should be lived with goodness and joy, but that even the just humans fall in great numbers to the often last minute weakness of earthly attachment and thus disobey God, often for the most dimwitted and minor of reasons, as Lot's wife demonstrates. That is what Jesus is saying and warning about, and it ought to be very sobering for you because Jesus is talking about two JUST people here, Lot and his wife: one obeys and is saved and the other is saved, but disobeys at the last minute, and is lost. Jesus isn't even talking about believers or non-believers, "sinners" or not: both Lot and his wife were just and were saved by the angels... but Lot's wife disobeyed at the end by looking back with longing on something of worldly possessions and attachment when it was time to let them go.

Jesus is not saying that half of the people will be "raptured" into heaven: he is saying that half of the just people will fail and fall in disobedient weakness at the very end. If you have been believing otherwise, you should be very concerned and worried right about now. (Past due actually!)

This is what you need to understand about prayers for heal, healing, cures, and long lifespan. Too often even well meaning prayers are like Lot's wife... they are just people who at the last minute cling too hard to the world. This does not mean you can't pray or should not pray for yourself or your loved ones health, sicknesses, ailments, or that they should be healed and live, but one MUST do that against an overall background of knowing that:

Whosoever shall seek to save his life, shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life, shall preserve it.

I'm going to wrap up this post and continue in a subsequent one because believe it or not this was the context setting post, ha, for getting to the point I want to make about why God seems to be answering fewer prayers for healings and life savings than he used to, just in these past fifty years or so. In the next post I will explain that sure, I'm not saying to stop praying intercessory prayers regarding life and health, but I am going to explain to you why so many of them are not answered the way that many are hoping. For you to follow my "faith and reasoning" commentary this post's background and context is essential, so do think about it and read the recommended chapters to get the overall context renewed and refreshed.

Urgent msg re: cancer and "healing thoughts"

Rather than people being more logical (reasoning) and developing their faith in God, there has been for years an alarming trend where people "send healing thoughts" and "send vibrations" and so forth "toward" cancer sufferers and others with diseases or injuries. This really has to stop because it is part of the problem and not part of the solution. Here is the "why."

Without giving an anatomy lesson, think of cancer as the body's reaction to what it thinks is something wrong, an internal wounding or attack. So the cancer sufferer's body "thinks" that he or she is under attack, and the development of cancer is the "healthy" but inappropriate response to the perception or reality of attack. When you mentally "urge" someone's body to "heal," you are egging on the cancer response, not diminishing it. Yeah, oops.

To better understand, think about what we do know about the causes of cancer, and what we don't know. We do know some direct correlations between contaminants such as smoke from cigarettes or the breathing of asbestos fibers and the resulting cancers. This is because as I have explained, the body "thinks" it is under attack, because it really is. Cancer is then the inadequate response to something the body cannot naturally dispose of, such as the asbestos fibers. If you mentally "urge" someone's body-or your own-to "heal" itself, you are encouraging the stimulation of the very response that the body thinks it IS using to heal, which is cancer.

On the other hand, think about people who develop lung cancer but are not smokers, or maybe have not even been around second hand smoke. Why do they get cancer? They may have some other irritant that no one realizes that has finally reached a threshold point. It's impossible, really, to analyze every particle, compound, chemical or other matter that a person has breathed in their life to date. So there are many contaminants that singularly or in group also trigger a cancer response, even if they are as yet unrecognized as carcinogens, etc. There was a lot of talk about barbecue and wood burning in the science literature for a while. See, it doesn't have to be one thing. If a person was around mild doses each but multiple sources of irritants (for lack of a better word), the adding on effect can and does cause cancer. They then wonder how they got cancer because they weren't around any of the famous well known causes. Yeah, but they were around below the threshold levels of a few or many different irritant sources, and those added together makes the normal body feel it is under attack, and hence it responds with the development of cancer cells.

Let me repeat, it's not like evil cancer cells fly into a body and attach themselves. Think of cancer as the body starting a feverish campaign to manufacture its own bandages. Tumors and cancer cells can be thought of as the body's normal, healthy but ultimately futile effort to churn out more and more bandages. When you mental monkeys send "healing vibes" to people with cancer, including yourselves, you are urging your body or theirs to produce more "bandages," more futile causing cancer efforts to address the real or perceived irritants.

Researchers know that genetic miscues are a contributor to cancer. Again, genes are healthy and normal real building blocks of your body's existence. When a gene is miscued that means it is garbling instructions that it is receiving. Like if the factory manager is told to make 100 bandages and instead he hears 10000 bandages. THAT is the "problem" with cancer.

We know that thoughts have power, which is why the Bible forbids sinful AND even "foolish" thoughts. Thoughts directed at others are real and are thus a form of ESP, which everyone has to some degree. So when you think you are some sort of mental marvel magician and "spirit worker" and send "healing thoughts" to someone, it doesn't matter what you think of that person or even if your intention is supposedly pure. You are sending another irritant to the locations where the body is already fully involved in the production of cancer. You are speeding up the assembly line of the misunderstood bandages, not slowing it down. "Healing vibes" to someone with cancer or ANY illness is a grave danger. It's like you are sending more garbled messages to the bandage producing frenzied assembly line.

That, by the way, is a reason that those who voodoo or otherwise engage in sending "bad" vibes, like wishing cancer on someone, often finds it boomerangs. Cancer is the body doing natural and healthy things, but inappropriate or inadequate to the actual task. So if you send your "enemy" wishes that he or she "gets cancer," you are urging their body to be more effective in being healthy. LOL. And because you are using your mind and spirit to do bad things, you are providing your own and your supporters own "irritants" that can very well boomerang your intentions back onto your selves. People, I've been trying to explain this to you for years in order to save you grief, not because I'm lacking in items of conversation. Unlike you, I do not wish ill on anyone: even those who amply deserve it. I know that the consequences of injustice and sin will return to the person, either in their lifetime or at God's absolute judgment of them upon their death. So those of you who think people "cause" cancer, or, in turn, think that you can wish it onto someone, take a look at how well that has turned out for you, your loved ones, and the world. FAIL.

But my focus is really on those of you who in the frenzy of wishing to "do good" and "focus on cancer" during the so-called cancer awareness month, are really trying to do a good thing but don't realize the harm that you ARE doing. This is why, I repeat, God in both the Bible and the Qur'an forbids magical type of thinking, in addition to actual magical deeds. It's because you really don't understand the biological implications of the complexity of the human body and mind, say nothing of the spiritual goodness or not. Believing that you have the power to "heal" through thoughts, and not actual band-aids and iodine, is a total fail. This is why the second thing that God insists on is prayer to him, not "vibrations" to other people. Charity, not "healing vibes" when you don't even know how the disease or situation exists in reality. Pray for the well being in God's hands of the other person; don't "manifest" your trite and simplistic views of what is "good" and what is "not."

I was reading on the blog of a friend her thoughts about silence and sound. I like what she wrote but more to the point, silence is a crucial part of healthy life. Think of cancer as a cacophony of noise, clashing frantic internal assembly lines of trying to produce more well intended but inadequate "bandages." Your ill friends and family need more silence, not more sound, so everyone should silently direct prayers to God on the friend's behalf and not add to the fail noise that is going on inside of his or her's body.

It's so ironic that the generations that value "meditating" actually provide more spiritual and actual bodily pollution noise in the name of so called "healing" than any generation past. For your own sakes stop using your minds for stupid thoughts and turn them instead back toward God, in prayer, and each other in actual hands-on charity, which is where they should have been all along. By the way, I write this in honor and memory of the great Danny Thomas, who knew first hand where all good things and healing comes, through his patron St. Jude.

Human health perspectives, case study, analogy

There is one really crucial point that I want to convey in this particular blog post. Humans have barely begun to scratch the surface of understanding the complexity of their own physical, mental and emotional biology and part of the problem is that they do not sufficiently understand that they evolved to be a certain way that is not at all reflective in the modern life style.

In other words, the human organism, both body and mind, is structured and functions the way it is because it lived a more natural life for millions of years. Technology and enforced social structure at first provided an evolutionary and survival advantage to humans, but now the balance has tipped so that much of the routine activities one takes for granted each day are actually contrary to how the human body and mind evolved.

Let's use an analogy, one that is a bit of a stretch, but everyone can relate to it. Thing of the human body, mind and emotions as an automobile. Roads existed before automobiles did, since they were the result of footpaths, by both humans and animals, and eventually were widened and paved to support horses and wagons. Thus when the internal combustion engine was discovered (first for trains that ran along their own roads, called tracks) and cars were developed, they used the same roads and were even called horseless wagons. Cars were developed to automate a function that already existed, which was to move along a pathway and transport people on land.

Suppose that over the past hundred years that the waters of the ocean rose so much that just about all land was under at least a few inches of water all the time. Humans have a huge investment in cars and they'd still work, so obviously everyone would have to get used to driving cars around through water all the time. A new set of problems would arise, so people would tinker with cars, perhaps making bigger tires so the chassis would be farther up and more out of the water, for example. But people being stuck with cars would continue to use devices that were designed to run on dry roads in the new theoretical water covered world.

Problems would spring up (no pun intended) because cars were not originally designed to be in continually wet surfaces. What happens when the exhaust pipe is under water? Will the engine quit when hit by a wave? Cars can float away and capsize in just about a half a foot of rapidly moving water. Would traffic reports now report local tidal action on the roads rather than traffic jams?

OK, so now let's assume that several generations of mechanics were born and raised knowing only the water covered world, not the dry land masses that cars were originally developed for. When they sit around and talk about cars, how much would they understand about why cars are developed the way they were? They would not understand it much at all.

For example, they might look at windshield wipers and say, "Why did they put them 'up there?'" They should have put a propeller under the car so that it can move better through the water. They would not understand that there was no 'water to move through' except from puddles of rain and that visibility, not boat type of safety, was the only need for wipers or "propellers."

So much of how cars were developed would seem baffling or like egregious oversights to these young mechanics who never knew the dry world where cars traveled at most through rain. The most incredibly obvious thing to those of us who drive cars in the normal world would seem weird, mysterious, or stupid to the young mechanics who modify and fix dry world cars that operate in the wet world that is constantly covered with several inches of water, day in and day out.

Likewise the humans of the past hundred years understand very little about the millions of years of life that the human body and mind evolved for and lived within, and wonder why the body "breaks down" or "works the way it does" as it tries to make do in a world that is not structured now the way it was evolved for.

The most obvious example is the daytime biological clock. Humans were evolved to wake with the sunrise, perform all of their work, child rearing and recreation activities before sunset, and then have quiet evenings with low or no lighting and then sleep. Huge chunks of the human DNA and chemical balance evolved in that simple formula of concentrated physical and mental effort during day light hours, and long periods of sleep at night time, with low light and reduced activity in the evening, since only natural star and moon light or some candle, oil lamp or fireplace light was available.

Now, think of all the ways that the natural body is now forced to be unnatural in the modern world. List them for yourself so that you can use this as a comparative exercise: if human bodies were evolved to be active from sunrise to sunset, with diminished visual and mental activity in the evening, and a long period of overnight sleep, how many ways do we break that formula today?

Working shifts comes to mind, but do not focus on that too much since there have always been those who were "night watchmen" and others who had to adjust to different work schedules.

Instead, think about how desk jobs and school enforce physical laxity during the day while only moderately stimulating the mind. Instead, people are forced to be mentally stimulated more in the evening (homework, bill paying and electronic media usage), just when they are supposed to "wind down" in low light and stimulation conditions. What is elevated during the day? Corrosive stress hormones and other chemicals. When humans farmed and hunted they were not in a continual state of arousal. There would be the need to react quickly to prey or to a sudden weather condition or mishap, but in general people only got the occasional as needed "adrenaline shot." Now we have seething people everywhere in a constant state of stress arousal but having to contain it, whether it is due to economic crisis, child care crisis, oppressive and stressful workplace, and physically sedentary jobs or classrooms where kids are even drugged into being "non hyperactive" and thus "compliant."

Virtually everything about modern life, both the infrastructure and the mindset, are in opposition to how the human body, mentality and emotions have evolved and are naturally programmed and sustained. Life was difficult and often brutal for much of human history, but humans thrived and increased. Why? Because life was still structured to leverage human strengths and evolutionary "talent." But now modern society is infested with "secret weapons" that work against the human body, mind and emotional well being. All humans are consistently overstimulated while having at the same time to suppress much of the over stimulation in order to conform to the expectations of the job or activity AND at the same time they have less physical activity during the times in the day when they are supposed to, according to their own genetic evolution and profiles.

This is the heart of the physical and mental health crisis in the world today.

Here's an example. Can you believe there is a mental disorder called "SAD," "Seasonal Affective Disorder?" This is when people get depressed due to low light levels and so forth during the winter. In other words, people who still respond to the world naturally are diagnosed with an illness, while those who seem on the surface to not mind or respond to seasonal changes are viewed as the "healthy" ones.

Think about it. People who experience SAD are the ones whose bodies are correctly saying, "Hey! The seasons have changed and the body and activities should change accordingly." Yet we no longer have intensive work summers followed by harvest and then reclusive winters as did our ancestors. We are supposed to be jolly and carry on with our "work" or studies or other activities no matter what the season, what the daylight or how our bodies try to recapture their survival skill rhythms. People used to be thrilled at the short days and dark wintry season because they weren't busting their backs working in the fields. The crops were in and they were tucked and hunkered down for a low activity season. They didn't get "depressed" or the 'winter blues!'

Much of the global epidemic of depression is from the feeling of inadequacy-no matter how much one 'achieves'-because so much of modern activity is forced into slots that down in the soul feel unnatural. People are forced to live less in sync with reality and more and more in an artificial and enforced timetable of activities and expectations that are contrary to the body's natural evolved survival traits. Look at the war against "fat." I mean, no one used to be "fat" in the way that it is meant today. Fat is the body trying to do the right thing in circumstances that have become miscued regarding the daily activities that humans were evolved to partake in. I cannot believe how much people are now warring against their bodies even as they try to do the best that they can.

Think back to the dry land cars that are now forced to operate in wet land. What if the modern mechanics who only know of wet land but have to maintain the dry land cars got "angry" at the parts of the dry land cars that don't seem to work "optimally" in wet land? Rather than being grateful that dry land cars worked at all in the wet land environmental crisis, they were enraged at the dry land car parts that weren't totally "perfect" for wet land? That is what humans are like with each other and with their children, and now our children have learned to be enraged at themselves because they don't "measure up" to the insane expectations of modern life. Rather than being grateful that the dry land cars kept on working in the wet land crisis of change and their complexity and ruggedness praised and understood, people are made to feel "at war" with the dry land cars and their original makers. They learn to hate themselves even as they successfully drive their dry land car. They put their dry land cars in situations where they must break down (like drive them into a lake) and then gloat with anger and self loathing.

It's a real mess; I'm not going to lie to you. I see one moronic health research study after the other and wonder if people are ever going to understand themselves before they have completely come undone. Defiance of natural body rhythms, day and seasonal activity, lack of sleep, over electronic stimulation and the corrosive effects of social stress have damaged the human race far more than any, and I mean any, of you realize. And whenever people have warning signs you view it as something to warp even more in the "cure" rather than understand what is really going on. The refusal to work together to make congenial, honest and natural work, school and social activity settings that are mutually supportive is one of the most destructive of the changes in society.

This is another reason why so many have become less than tuned in with reality. The human mind is able to look at an object that is partially hidden by another object and infer what it looks like in total. For example, if one dry land car is parked partially blocking another dry land car, even though you cannot see the entire dry land car in the background you know that it is complete and looks the color and size, blah blah blah based on what you can observe. Human brains are evolutionarily designed to constantly "fill in the gap." Thus when you flood it with partial over stimulated images of unreality (TV, Internet, video games) the brain works to make real and false connections. So, for example, you see accurately the porn, but you then create an inaccurate mental linkage regarding reality of day to day priorities. Where once a man would feel pride and pleasure centers at having a good wife and happy healthy children, the man feels pride and pleasure center at seeing hot women lesbian kiss.

I'm not being droll and I'm not exaggerating. I'm explaining that just as too many killings in the TV and movie entertainment media have enforced unrealistic based brain circuitry, so too has overstimulated "reward" fragments of input, such as porn, overcoming the survival traits and the self esteem regulatory mechanisms that evolved in the human animal over millions of years. It then becomes lose-lose. Humans lose the joy that they used to obtain from natural cycle activities, including marital love, and they never gain what they are now programmed to crave in the new addiction. They lose what they had, or could have had, and never gain the theoretical "new world" continual gratification. That is why all addictions are called "progressive," not because they are liberal (LOL), but because they are the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow that does not really exist and is only further and further out of reach, and so more and more addiction activity results in less gratification and/or more destruction of the norm.

I'm not just ranting and in fact, just yesterday it was on the news about how something like twenty-five percent of people view porn on the Internet at work. Again, this has nothing to do with being a prude. I'm saying that such activity is depression and stress increasing because it is contrary to the biological and genetic evolutionary structure of human biology, mentality and emotional health. Humans are not evolved to be continually self stimulating during all hours of the day and rather than a "release" or a "diversion" or an "enhancement" of one's "sex life" (or a substitute for not having one) it becomes a barrier to both having a real life in that regard and also becomes a biological and emotional/mental hindrance to health and ultimately satisfaction. Simply put it is making artificial and corrosively stressful what should be a naturally flowing goodness for every human being.

So as the population is seething and overly stimulated and stressed (often at their own choice), you wonder why there are sudden heart ailments even among the young, cancer, bipolar, depression, autism and all sorts of woes and ailments at levels they have not been seen before? Remember that as I blogged just yesterday humans are also consuming in their food, water and through their environment untold numbers of chemicals that have detrimental effects. Again, the human body is a marvelous thing and can withstand a lot of cleansing (that is what the liver is for, no "detoxing" regimes please!) But it is not evolved to withstand constant dosing of strong chemical cleansers, other people's medications in the drinking water, preservatives and food additives and the emitting of fumes from so much plastic and other artificial building material surfaces.

It's like the angry wet land car mechanics so resent the success of the "badly designed" dry land cars that they now throw acid on top of the car since "that's the modern way to live." It's a mess and I wonder when people are going to wake up and be more generous and kind about their own bodies and minds and each others'. I hope that the car analogy helps because like I said, it is a bit of a stretch but one that everyone can easily grasp and understand. Sigh.

Babies' health, spiritually and for the economy

It's a sign of the times, and not a good one, that many of you might wonder what the health of infants has to do with the economy and the current economic crisis. These modern times are so ill informed and warped in their priorities that obvious connections are no longer recognized or well understood. So here are some thoughts and background for you to contemplate.

For virtually all of human history parents have had many children, and several of them have died young. As recently as the early 1900's this was an unsurprising pattern. Everyone knew a family who had a baby die at birth or soon after. It was a great sorrow and not spoken about, not because people were ashamed of the poor baby, but because that was how everyone was "in the same boat" and coped by feeling sorrow but moving on.

We then had tremendous health breakthroughs in the middle 1900's where prenatal care was better understood and provided, hospitals provided rapid response to problem births, and people began to learn how to treat many birth defect conditions and other problems that put a baby's life at risk.

I don't know if young people today know the old expression of relief that new parents would express, saying "As soon as he or she was born we counted all his or her fingers and toes." This is from the time when there was no sonogram or other prenatal diagnosis of fetal health, and upon first sight virtually all parents "checked" the hands and feet of their newborn for all the fingers and toes. Birth was a time of suspense because as I said, everyone knew a family who had lost a baby in birth or in young childhood and the counting the fingers and toes was a kind of "laughing in the dark" ritual that accompanied the sigh of relief when a birth was healthy and successful.

Humans have a horrible problem of back sliding, though. One would assume that infant health would only get better and better as society and technology "progressed," but it has not. For example, just as infant prenatal and post natal doctor care improved, women took up smoking cigarettes. Women did not smoke, either while pregnant or normally, until pretty recently. So in a way, much of the health of infants that was achieved through technology progress was canceled out by women taking up cigarette smoking. A study announced today shows that women who smoke while pregnant put their children at higher risk of being aggressive. That is a risk factor that simply did not exist throughout human history, just to give you one example. During more socially prurient times mainstream women did not smoke cigarettes, drink or take illegal drugs, including marijuana. Thus on the one hand women gained the benefits of prenatal care and more prosperous lives in which to have safer births (housing, heating, vaccinations, antibiotics, for example). However, on the other hand, "liberated" women started putting substances into their bodies both before and during pregnancy. See, I am not explaining this to blame, but to educate especially the young people about why things change the way that they do in human social and medical history. As having babies became safer women (and the fathers) accelerated their unsafe choices that canceled out much of the progress.

Further, lifestyle and environmental situations changed around all humans, both those having children and not. For example there is a huge influx of food additives, chemicals such as in plastic, medication and hormones that are in the drinking water, and toxins in the air and even more insidiously in the household. Again, the health gains of safer prenatal care and post birth delivery and treatment of any birth defects or conditions has been canceled out by the acute toxicity of the environment. In my time I have witnessed houses that used to be made out of natural materials (wood, stone, brick, etc) be replaced by houses made out of artificial chemically produced and "treated" materials. People were slow to recognize that humans have built two generations of "sick buildings." Upholstery and carpet used to be made from cotton and wool. Now it is filled with toxic material. We used to wash our bodies and homes with soap and water. Now the "cleansers" are worse than the dirt and those that kill germs only breed stronger and stranger germs to replace them.

So now we see all sorts of mysterious physical, emotional and mental reactions in babies and children and lots of them look like "allergies." The asthma crisis of several decades ago should have been the first wake up call. Mold and the dander and leavings of vermin such as roaches are a large contributor to the asthma crisis. But now it is even more insidious because even the "cleanest" modern house is filled with toxins. Just as an example, those expensive lovely granite countertops in the finest homes sometimes emit radiation. Scented products are no longer scented by the actual flower or herb but potentially toxic chemicals. So your "cinnamon"candle does not have cinnamon but a chemical that is "derived" from or "smells like" cinnamon.

Thus there is a confluence of three tragic things:
1) People have very high and unrealistic expectations about the health and survivability of all of their children since they only remember the good times where people could take it somewhat for granted, and thus forget that there has always been a real risk of losing a child to death or being presented with very serious life curtailing conditions.
2) People have unwittingly canceled out much of the progress in infant and child health by engaging in optional activities (drugs, drinking, smoking) or enduring unwittingly enforced (surrounded by toxic products) high risk conditions.
3) People have not invested their economy's wealth into addressing these problems and promoting the best of healthcare, free healthcare, for all pregnant women and their fetuses, and their born infants and growing children.

So here is the economic kicker. No economy thrives or survives that is not based on a high child bearing population.

"It's not the spending, stupid."

People think that "spending" is the key to the successful western economy. It is NOT. The key to the (previously) successful western economy was an economy that was highly child and child birth oriented.

The "baby boom" was a great time, not because babies were born with charge cards and thus we had "more spenders."

The "baby boom" was a great time because genuine economic growth and thriving relies on lots of people having lots of children and building child friendly communities and thus jobs.

Where there are many children there were investments in health care facilities, schools, infant and child clothing and products, nutrition industries... you name it.

What is key is that these were lasting products. A school is not a video game.

This country has invested in total trash for thirty years now while losing all the gains of "progress" regarding our infants and children.

I do not understand how the economy can survive and recover, especially in the form of the "faux capitalism" that I've explained previously that has ruined genuine capitalism, if it does not reform to have a new orientation toward the having of children in families.

We lack babies, we lack children, we lack jobs, we lack health care for those who do have children, we have more, not less, troubled children with grave medical or emotional woes, we have less healthy communities that are structured around schools and family place of worship, and ultimately we have less workers and people who participate in the grassroots life and growth of the economy.

While people are yapping about "carbon credits" they are letting their babies (if they even had any) crawl on artificial chemically infested surfaces, letting water get polluted, ignoring sewage treatment plant needs, not researching childhood diseases and conditions as much as they could have been, and letting communities that used to be child-centric dissolve into narcissistic enclaves of "self actualizing" garbage oriented "entertainment."

If I were President Elect Obama I would not sign funding for a single "project" that does not have an "invest in our children" orientation, one way or the other.

Healthy or desperately sick, all children should live within a total network of family and community support. I cannot believe the crap that this country has invested its treasure in while parents of sick children lack proper care and have to fight for the smallest of gains.

That's why I believe that there should be free medical care for prenatal and young infants and children and kick the stupid and greedy insurance companies right out of it. I've blogged about this before, presenting my vision and arguments for why this economy will never recover (say nothing of the country's spiritual goodness) if there is not comprehensive and free prenatal (NOT "market driven") preventative and medical care for prenatal to age of majority children, period.

With such a system you would also address the problems that are now plaguing our children, whether asthma, diabetes, obesity, autism, rare or common birth defects, teenage depression and nihilism, addiction etc. All children need in a just and prosperous society comprehensive medical care and a system of preventative medicine that includes components such as vitamins and nutrition.

I don't understand how economists and other "experts" do not realize that a successful economy relies on a vigorous and loving birth rate in a stable child-oriented community structure nationwide, not on "spending" in and of itself.

Meanwhile, start to educate yourselves about the housing materials that you take for granted. We are all living among materials that are hazardous and unnatural and it is only getting worse, not better.

Some of it is "lazy safety" thinking. Rather than being careful around fire and so forth people started pouring "fire retardant" chemicals onto the fabrics and building substances around them. This is just an example of where what looks like a safety "break through" is the addition of needless chemicals. The same with food additives: rather than cook fresh food people eat pounds of "preservatives" in every bite of food that they consume. I remember the days when things were packaged in waxed paper and glass; now it is plastic and God knows what added to the handy packaging for "microwaves."

Think about Korea and Japan, who used to have traditional housing of wood such as bamboo and even paper. As they moved to modern housing they have also had increases in instances such as the recent discuss of Kawasaki syndrome. Japan is a useful study and I've blogged about this before. Breast cancer among Japanese women was extremely rare until the 1960's when those who moved to the USA and also adopted western diet and probably trigger substances in their environment observed that their numbers now converged on what western women experienced.

This country will not "get back to good" unless it becomes child oriented again and we look long and hard at the environmental pollution of home and work place substances, and until we treat all children, sick and well, for free and comprehensively. I get lots of sheer frustration headaches whenever I think about this topic and look at the horrible mess that everyone is in today.

The Lord God has a question for humans

The Lord God has a question for humans

I am honored to transmit to you humans a question from God.

God, being all knowing, of course noticed that today you celebrate, or should I say, commemorate “World’s AIDS Day.” God wonders why you do not now go ahead and celebrate, or commemorate, a different disease every day of the year.

God suggests that you go in alphabetical order, so as not to provide too great a strain on astrologers, numerologists, and other special interest groups regarding the selection of particular months and dates for each particular disease.

Thus you could have, and this is just me, the blogger, who is not all knowing, coming up with names off of the top of my head, the following in just the “A’s” alone.

World Allergy Day, World Attention Deficit Disorder Day, World Asperger’s Day, World ALS Day, World Arthritis Day, World Asthma Day, World Autism Day, World Anxiety Day…

Would that not be fun and educational for your children? Just like World’s AIDS Day. Thus not a day would go by that there is not sorrow and special school based activities. (After all, we know that children around the world are all caught up in their basic studies and have ample time to spare worrying about adult worries and woes).

And there would be no scheduling problem, since most secular governments have stopped celebrating such events as the birth days of your great men and women, holy days, or days commemorating saints, or even the birthdays of your current leaders. {Even Great Britain, retaining the custom of the Queen’s Birthday, does not celebrate it on her actual birthday). And look at the United States, who no longer celebrates the actual birthdays of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. The 4th of July is safe because it is a big summer beer and barbecue weekend. And we of course know what is happening to the celebration of the Nativity of Jesus Christ, who cannot even be mentioned in schools anymore.

So the Lord God suggests that you have every day be assigned a patron disease, disorder, mental illness or, to be traditional, a “plague day.” Children could learn the symptoms (with high technology graphic pictures, of course), learning to produce and self diagnose themselves (handy when there is no medical care). I guess “World Hypochondriac Day” would have to be an important day as a result. But after all, children do not have enough to worry about. Fortunately you would not have “World Abortion Day” since, well, every day is an abortion day, and further it is a “right” or a “choice” and not a medical condition, so it does not match the criterion for commemoration.

Teachers have a difficult time teaching reading, mathematics, history (secular or faith based) and science, but I notice they have no problem with discussing “gross” subjects with their students. So I imagine that teachers would really shine in the daily “Disease Day” celebratory presentations. Hollywood (and Bollywood) can provide any support for the gory scenes, such as what open sores look like. The American policy of “No Child Left Behind” can really come true, as every child will have access to the nightmare of worry about symptoms of their inadequate and deteriorating health. They can also worry about mommy and daddy, brother or sister (and their dog or cat) coming down with each disease they learn about each day (that’s assuming the child has an intact family, of course). After all, children do not have enough glorious things to honor, or bad things to worry about. Why not go “all the way?”

So, um, I hope that everyone has had a, I guess you’d say, “Meaningful” “World AIDS Day,” and just think about all the good that you have done. Much better to “raise awareness” of a disease on a “special day” than a founding father or mother, honored past leader, honored present leader, saint, holy person, or self sacrificing avocation, such as maybe having “World Alms Day” to raise awareness of charitable alms giving.

Don’t bother writing God a reply! (He already knows what you will say or think since he is, after all, the all knowing).

Important medical advice to parents

Something clicked for me today, realizing another important health care practice that generations of parents have used to protect their children that is totally forgotten today. What clicked for me was the realization that modern parents didn't know this obvious information about babies and young children.

If you look at old pictures or speak to someone as old as me (LOL) you'll see that all babies wore bonnets. Bonnets are close fitting caps with an all around rim, usually ruffles or lace. It has dawned on me that this generation thinks that was a quaint fashion decision, but if you think about it, duh, why would everyone have done it for generations if it was "fashion?" Bonnets were one of the essential items that protected babies' and young children's health in two ways.

One is that they regulate the temperature of the baby. When it is hot the bonnet protects the baby from the sun. When it is cold the bonnet keeps the baby warm (that's why wearing a hat is important in the cold, since much body heat is lost through the head). So bonnets were essential for regulating the proper body temperature of the infant.

Equally important, though, and this should be the attention getter for you modern parents. Bonnets were used to protect infant ears from the wind and drafts which cause... yes, chronic ear aches. Babies and young children have very sensitive ear canals and ear drums. When I was a kid all of us got ear aches when we rode in cars with the window down. Every parent knew this, which was why they wouldn't let kids roll down the windows very far in the cars (remember, this is pre-air conditioning). Whenever a baby got an ear ache the family doctor knew that drafts were likely behind it. And I can testify because it is something I've actually not outgrown as an adult. That is why I wear a "do rag" (what we used to call bandannas) that covers my ears when I am outside on a windy day, or if I have the air conditioner on in the car for extended time periods. I still get ear aches when wind or air conditioning blows near my ear. Also, people have wondered why I wear my very long hair forward so it covers my ears (the subject usually comes up when women have suggested I wear earrings, which I don't, only to discover that even if I wore earrings my hair totally covers my ears.) Because my ears have remained very sensitive to drafts, just as when I was a child, I keep my hair over my ears and do not like a "pulled back" hair do, in general.

Now, all you parents know there has been a so called "epidemic" of "ear infections" in babies and young children that are very painful. Duh. This coincides with the society that stopped putting bonnets that cover the ears on their babies AND inundate cars, offices and homes with the cold air venting from air conditioners. While driving today with my do rag on and seeing a young boy riding in a Jeep (driven by his mom) it suddenly dawned on me that you all don't realize this! I'm telling you that many of the episodes of "ear infections" occur because the infant is not wearing a bonnet and is exposed to direct air blowing into the ear. When we were young we never "needed" antibiotics for ear aches because most of the time they occurred it was because a youngster was exposed to direct air blowing in his or her ear, like I said, if the car window was cranked down too low. Babies rarely had ear aches in those days because like I said, bonnets were constantly worn as parents knew about preventing them from, what we called "getting a draft." A draft was not a beer. A draft is a blowing wind, either the natural wind outside or human caused such as fans or air conditioning, that both chills infants and also inflames the inner ear when the tissue is very sensitive and still growing, thus very vulnerable.

I hope this helps open some eyes. Bonnets were essential health needs for babies, not quaint clothes that are "old fashioned." And the "ear ache" epidemic is from another modern society lack of common sense and knowledge that every parent used to have, and of course, now gets called an "epidemic," a "disease," and medicated. Meanwhile the baby is sitting there directly under an air vent or outdoors in the wind with unprotected ears. Duh! I hope you find this helpful.

Tips to encourage healthy vegetables eating

When I was a kid, I watched the "Popeye" cartoons. Popeye, a cartoon sailor, got great strength to do good and fight evil when he ate a can of spinach. Well, so as a pre-school girl, probably when I was around four years old, I asked my mom to get some spinach. Amazed she bought fresh spinach, cooked it into a hot green goo, and served it to me. As you can imagine I took one bite and said, "Yuck." It was many years before I ate spinach again! She was very annoyed (though not as much as usual) that she had bought a huge bag of spinach and gone through all the preparing and cooking (this was in the 1950's when things still took a lot of time to prepare). This is one reason why I became a very cautious eater and was not "adventurous" in trying out new foods. It's another difference between older generations and the new. When we were growing up mothers who cooked had to spend hours preparing things that people today just pop purchased from the store into the microwave. So people were more cautious about requesting food that they might not like (especially if dad got ticked off at spending his hard earned money on something "new" and mom had to do all the preparation and cooking). So there is a reason that older generations were more cautious in things that younger generations take for granted, and it's not because we were too dumb or lacked sophisticated taste!

Fast forward decades and I am a busy commuter in Manhattan. I'm in Penn Station and starved, so I look for a slice of pizza, but all they have left is spinach pizza. I buy one and to my amazement find I loved it. I reconnected with spinach and now will select it for a variety of dishes. The same with mushrooms. I really disliked them in my youth (partly because of the way they were prepared) and again, I was introduced to them via pizza topping and eventually use and enjoy them in all forms.

Parents need to remember this and be creative in adding vegetables to favorite foods while children are young. Do not introduce vegetables to them as goo or lumps of "healthy but not tasty." Adults develop a taste for vegetables, but children need help with continuity from when they are babies and will eat pureed vegetables, through the solid food stage, and yes, most definitely, as children and teenagers.

So be sure to add spinach, mushrooms, squash slices and other good vegetables to favorite foods from the very beginning so that kids develop a liking for their combined flavors. Spinach sauteed in olive oil and spooned onto pizza is a healthy way to get both spinach and olive oil into a pizza lover's dietary intake.

The second tip is to add cheese. Just about everyone loves cheese. Some years ago a cheese industry advert correctly showed that kids love even "healthy foods like vegetables" when they are topped with cheese. Also, real cheese (not pseudo cheese product) is a valuable source of daily and nutrients, especially as kids AND adults do not drink enough milk. So you can cultivate a liking for vegetables as a side dish for your children by slicing or shredding cheese over the prepared vegetable. Mozzarella in particular enhances the flavor of vegetables for children.

Bills win Superbowl for Tim in heaven

I am so sad about the passing of broadcaster Tim Russert, but rejoice that people can now see the witness of a man who loved his faith and made sure that he was alright with the Lord. I am reminded of my own dad, who also was a devout Catholic, and who also died at the so very young age of 58. My thoughts and prayers are with his family, who I know must be shocked and grief stricken.

One of my first thoughts, which I hope will give his family, friends and colleagues a smile, is that all those Buffalo Bills in heaven (I sure hope there's enough of them to make up a team *wink*) will allow Tim to see that Superbowl victor he longed for on behalf of the Buffalo Bills. And since there are no tears in heaven, maybe the Lord will (or will not) tell Tim when the earthly Buffalo Bills will next win the Superbowl!

People, we must find a way to live on the edge and be ambitious and achieve, but still preserve our health and remove some of the pressures that have a direct impact on people's health. Everyone of middle age and beyond, after consultation with their doctors, should be taking a therapeutic daily aspirin dosage. Also be sure to have a diet that has a steady supply of fish oil and olive oil. That is more help than anti-cholesterol drugs and so forth. Again, as I've cautioned before, do not mega-dose. But every adult should do these three things.

Bless Tim and his whole personal and media family.

Missouri town has cluster of brain tumor cases

This is an interesting and scary article.

http://www.kmbc.com/health/16330197/detail.html

snip

Town Sees Cluster Of Brain Tumor Cases
More Than 12 Brain Tumor Cases Diagnosed In 7 Months

snip

Doctors are only required to report cancerous brain tumors to the Health Department. Most of the tumors in Cameron are large, but benign. So there is no official agency collecting the data.
Drinking water is one thing all of those diagnosed have in common. That is why a local reservoir, a source of the drinking water, will likely be one focus of the investigation.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said it will look at any possible runoff near the reservoir and any possibility of contamination from a nearby hog farm. The CDC asked about manufacturing in the area past and present. Insulation used to be produced at a plant on the outskirts of town. Investigators will also look at pesticide use and the combination of chemicals that might be present, and anything those diagnosed with brain tumors have in common.

Cameron's city manager said the city is not jumping to any conclusions, saying maybe it is just an anomaly or an unexplained cluster. But he said the city is fully aware of what he called the recent "flurry" of brain-tumor cases. He said the city clerk is one of those diagnosed.

In the last few days, the Department of Natural Resources had a crew out collecting air, water and soil samples.

Eckerman said that she has been in contact with the majority of people who have come forward with a brain tumor in Cameron or their loved ones. Some are still recovering from brain surgery. Some have had setbacks. Two residents who wanted to tell their stories on camera are back in the hospital and were not able to talk.

***
OK, I have a few reactions to this incident and suggestions to make or things to highlight. The first is that you should notice that it is citizens themselves who tend to notice these things. Public health and government or medical officials tend to do squat about noticing odd and concerning clusters of illness. For example, notice the state Health Department does not track benign tumors, only the cancerous ones, even though a benign tumor is obviously a serious condition too. People who get benign tumors are ill, need surgery etc just as much as those whose tumors end up being cancerous, yet their numbers are not reported or tracked at all. The point I want to make is that US citizens have grown up with some sort of assumption that officials are looking out for the public health and welfare while in fact they are not since they don't even collect many of the basic statistics.

It reminds me of the huge controversy about thirty years ago when the first statistics for cancer were really collected and discussed and clusters of breast cancer were discovered in parts of Long Island, New York. It seems to me that as a country we have not really progressed much from those days when citizens themselves are the ones to notice clusters of concern and then it gets in the media, but there are few answers and many questions. I think that if anything public health is less a priority these days than it was several decades ago in this country. People need to start asking questions and become self empowered and informed on a grassroots level. (I feel so old typing this. "Grassroots" level advocacy was so much the catch word thirty to forty years ago.) However, it seems that we really need to once again have a grassroots movement toward self and community monitoring of health issues.

Another point I want to make is to have you notice the variety of things the officials will explore that are environmental factors. This shows that there are many things that may or may not be significant and it is very hard to find a "smoking gun" when one is studying cancer. I may have mentioned this before in my blogging but it is worth repeating. Around thirty years ago when people really turned their attention toward the proliferation of breast cancer (First Lady Betty Ford being such a ground breaker in this topic) there were studies that showed that Japanese women had very little breast cancer, while American women had high rates of breast cancer. Some studies showed, however, that as Japanese women moved to the United States their rate of breast cancer started to increase. This set off a lot of speculation about the impact of diet. Years later researchers in general look toward genetic influences too. It is very likely that cancer has a component that is genetic tendency and a component that is environmental trigger. So the people in this town of Cameron have a really complicated situation to analyze. Often the researchers never really reach a single factor or conclusion, to the pain and frustration of those who are suffering from an illness.

Larry King had an interesting show tonight about whether cell phones have an influence on the anecdotal increases in brain cancers that many are observing (for example this show had the widow of the attorney Johnny Cochran). I've been very uncomfortable for many years with the proliferation of cell phones and also wireless devices. I noticed that doctors on the Larry King show danced around saying "yes" or "no," but admitted to using earpieces and so forth to mitigate possible effects. Rural and small town people need to look at this too as they explore possible causes of clusters of brain tumors.

Another thing to keep in mind is that it is difficult for pollutants and organisms to get into the brain. This is why antibiotics usually do not work for infections above the neck region, since the body has a strenuous barrier against chemicals, organisms and pollutants from getting into the brain. If you think about this, it ought to make you cautious about engaging in behavior that can stimulate overcoming the brain and head area's natural defenses. For example, smokers and those who use marijuana or other substances are basically stamping down a pathway between your body and your brain via the substance abuse. Same with alcohol. When researchers look at the causes of brain tumors they need to keep that in mind. Something as harmless as having once been a cigarette smoker may have weakened the natural protective barriers that exist in the brain and head region since the smoke is basically forcing a way into the body and through the bloodstream to the brain. For lack of a better word, think of certain substances as being "abrasive." They roughen up and overcome a body's natural balance and defenses. These must be really soberly considered in any thorough research. So as everyone is, correctly, speaking more about brain tumors, especially in the light of the Ted Kennedy revelation of his condition, people need to also think back over diet and behavior patterns, not in a blaming way, but to have a complete picture of the dynamics that may have caused an individual case or more importantly what might be behind a clustering of cases.

I've offered a number of pointers about how to analyze a problem like this, and the article lists a number of environmental factors that will, correctly, be explored. So you can see there is no shortage of potential causes and triggers of cancers in general, and specifically brain tumors, both benign and cancerous. There is no need to bark up the wrong tree by thinking about "mystical" and "magical" or "karma" causes. It is sad to say that many research dollars toward cancer research have been wasted because there are often secret beliefs of even those who seem the most scholarly on the surface about ridiculous "causes" of cancer, including "astrology" and "past lives." It sounds insane and I agree, and I would never have guessed it until I overheard that I was actually accused of "causing" people to get cancer. People are so much more ignorant, primitive, deluded and sorcery obsessed than any time in their history, and that includes Colonial times. I can't really explain it except to say that it is true that "nature abhors a vacuum." When there is an empty space, such as the space that has been created by the rejection of organized religion and God's role in the public square, other things rush into the vacuum to fill the space. Superstition and sorcery return, sucked into the vacuum in the human spirit caused by their pushing away of God. Then the boundaries between delusion and fact break down. Religion and faith in God used to occupy a well understood component of human life. One could be, and often was, for example, a very faithful and believing man or woman and simultaneously a well educated doctor or researcher. But when one rejects God and organized religion, one soon contaminates the rational and scholarly part of your life with superstition and magical thinking. ("Magical thinking" is the belief that non factual influences cause real events. For example, children go through a magical thinking phase as part of their growing up until they learn how the world around them actually works. Like they will see something impossible in a cartoon and believe it until a certain age when they realize it can't be done but is simply there to be funny.) Many adults in this generation have fallen into magical thinking and it has infested even the scholarly circles that humans rely on for protection in public health matters. Don't waste your time, money and your lives or your loved ones' lives any further with supporting maniacs who think "cancer" can be "determined" to be in someone's astrology sign, for example. I wish I was joking or expressing hyperbole how common this magical thinking epidemic has become. But I'm not.

Hope you found this blogging posting helpful.

To Scientology believers and ex-believers

An Urgent message to Scientologists, Ex-Scientologists and Freezoners

In this very important blog message I am not going to focus on either the argument that there is indeed one True God, whose will is the antithesis of what is presented in Scientology, or am I going to address what I’ve previously explained is geological and other proof against belief in aliens, reincarnation and so forth.

Today I have an urgent message to explain to you the harm in even using the most “innocuous” and “helpful” technical tools. And I do not mean what Anon correctly argues, which is the tools are harmful “fronts” in order to suck people into an insane set of beliefs and rob them of their money at the same time. Instead I am going to explain how the tools are unwittingly harming the physical and mental health of even the most ardent Scientology believer.

Understand that the human body and mind are incredibly sophisticated and polished organisms, achieving an incredible capacity for life over the millions of years of evolution. It is easy to take the human body for granted and even look down on it. But that blasé attitude, or even of contempt for body capabilities and functions, is an affectation and unconscious consequence of prosperity. People who still have to fight each day to provide a meal and housing for their family tend to have a greater and more accurate appreciation for the human body than, say, a jaded surgeon who actually sees how remarkable the body is first hand. Appreciation for how the human body has evolved tends to be directly correlated to people who still have to rely on the marvels of the human body, and its survival instincts, for their day to day existence. So far from being full of flaws, the body and the mind are optimized for LIFE. Far from being full of issues, rejects, flaws and failure, the human body and mind are AMAZING in their near perfection for BEING ALIVE. Even a birth defect is not a curse! It is the body’s attempt at introducing a new survival trait, but one that ends up hindering rather than helping survival. That is the pattern throughout biological evolution. New genes and even broken genes and mutations come spontaneously into being “just in case” that development becomes a survival advantage.

Now, before I explain the danger of the Scientology technical tools, let me introduce one valuable analogy. Suppose you have an incredibly engineered high performance racing car. I’m no car expert but let’s say a Porsche. This race car example is a low slung beauty that can reach high speeds and be very responsive to steering. You love this car and use it for both day to day enjoyment and some race car “motoring.” But suppose that someone, a friend who has nothing to do with cars and no knowledge of cars, tells you that you could “do better” if you modify the car. The friend points out that you don’t drive as perfectly as AJ Foyt did, or Jimmy Stewart. Now you are not a professional and in fact, you had been pretty happy up until then, though you have the usual stresses of life (let’s say the car payments, or nowadays the price of gas). But the friend insists and waves a book at you with a volcano on the cover that looks like it has a big car exhaust coming from it so you figure the friend (and the book) must know what it is talking about. You give him your car to “work on.”

He hooks up some tin cans and meters and reads them, shaking his head. He tells you that your car is “stressed” and “traumatized” because it is so low slung to the ground compared to other cars, especially SUV’s. He tells you that if the car was not so worried and depressed about being so “short” that it would be “balanced” and “perform better.” He convinces you to get a Plexiglas hood (kind of what is on top of the Popemobile) and place it on top of the Porsche, so that the car is now five feet “taller.” He plugs the meter in and “confirms” that “now the stress of being low slung has been removed from the car.”

Next he frowns and says, “But the meter tells me that the car is traumatized by being measured by you. It does not like the fuel gauge. That gauge has a meter that sticks into its gasoline and that is irritating and traumatizing. You need to get rid of the gas gauge. A fully actualized car does not need to have its fuel measured. And if YOU were a really balanced and good driver, you would KNOW when it needs gas. So we must get rid of the fuel gauge!” (He does not tell you that the sensor strip that sticks in the fuel to measure the level was actually an irritating device invented by evil aliens to agitate cars, since you are not sufficiently advanced to have that knowledge). So he removes the gas gauge and the accompanying equipment, like sensors, that were attached to the fuel tank. (He does not notice that in doing so he left a hole behind where the gauge had gone into the fuel tank, so now gas fumes leak through a tiny hole where the sensor was once installed).

He hooks the tin cans and meters once again and nods at you encouragingly. He tells you that the car is “much better” and feels “clear” about being low slung and irritated by that bad aliens (oops, he slipped) fuel gauge sensor strip. He tells you that while the car is better, it still needs much more work. But you’ve paid him handsomely for the work done so far, and now you can take it for a spin and use the car until the next “improvement session.” You schedule your next session. But first he makes you promise two things. One is to spread the message that low slung cars should have Plexiglas hoods bolted on top of them and that fuel gauges and their sensors should be removed from cars to AS MANY OTHER people that you can. You have to agree to spread these “improvements” to as many car drivers and owners as possible. And second, if anyone, especially car mechanics, “disagree” with you, you must cut them out of your life and never talk to them again. This includes anyone in your own family who questions the Plexiglas hood or the removal of the fuel gauge and sensor instrumentation.

You drive off in your car. Maybe the gas fumes ignite and blow you up that very day. Maybe they don’t because through grace and luck there is enough ventilation that the hole you have now put in your fuel tank never sparks. You can’t get the car to drive as fast and smooth, especially in windy weather, because of the hood. But you figure that rather than taking a step backward, a DANGEROUS step backwards, you are just a beginner learning to wield this awesome car renovation power and that is why it’s not working as well as it was before you began your modifications. You convince lots of people to do the same, especially the young people. You don’t notice that as time goes on, some of them die because their cars blow up from the pinhole leak in the gas tank where once the sensors were. They run out of gas a lot, but your “friend” opens a set of “approved gas stations” everywhere with an emergency service for those “believers” who run out of gas and are stranded. He makes more money off of them. So rather than leaving gas gauges in the car, he makes money building gas stations every mile and has a “rescue service” that brings gas to stranded believers, but at a high price per serving. Others you have persuaded have car accidents as their hood top heavy cars tip over on turns, over bridges, or cause collisions because of reduced visibility. You don’t notice because you feel “empowered.” Even though your car no longer performs as it once did, you feel good because “you are in control” and “have the answers.” You sneer at idiots who are still driving their unmodified Porsches. You mock when you are with your friends the vacant stupid smiles on their faces because they “just enjoy driving their cars” and ‘don’t know that they could do better; they don’t know the truth!” You even take pictures of other Porsche drivers in embarrassing positions, or looking especially dumb, to show to other potential believers that this is how stupid and crass are the “unenlightened” Porsche drivers. Your friend teaches you how to make money for yourself and the organization.

And one day you are driving and “BANG!” Your car explodes from gas fumes and you are dead. And before you know it you are facing God and find yourself in hell, because you are responsible for all the others you persuaded to remove their fuel gauges and leave the sensor gas tank holes unplugged.

Friends, your bodies and your minds are like the Porsche car and driver. These stupid technical stress tests and E-meters and other tools used by Scientology are used to numb, warp and overcome your body’s own healthy functioning and survival instincts. The more you are taught to numb and not react to “stresses” the more you are teaching your body’s white cells not to react to disease. The more you are taught to numb and not react to “stresses” the more you are taught to micromanage the body functions that you are focusing on, and reduce blood flow to the parts of your body and mind you just are not focused on. The more you are taught to numb and not react to “stresses” the more you are ignoring signs of pain or disorder that the body is trying to send to you so that they can be addressed and fixed while there is still time to treat a disease. The more you are taught to numb and not react to “stresses” the more you are trying to cleanse out hormonal and other bodily functions that you must have in order to survive by suppressing them thinking they are “bad.” The more you are taught to numb and not react to “stresses” the more you reinforce mental and bodily pathways that are unfavorable to survival, and allow atrophying the pathways and bodily functions that allow you maximum health and survival potentiality. The more you are taught to numb and not react to “stresses” the more you are stressing the bodily cells and nerve endings that you are focusing on “distressing,” since you are hindering them from doing their jobs. For example, adrenaline flow becomes hindered because some of the symptoms of adrenaline are viewed as “stressful.” So your body does not produce adrenaline when it should and/or it has to send the adrenaline to inappropriate places in your body, where it acts like a toxic acid. The more you are “purging” and “cleansing” the more you are sending your gas fumes out of the tank and into the car into random spots. The more areas you “remove stress from” the more you spray your brake fluid into the spark plugs, your oil into your fuel tank, your exhaust fumes into the passenger compartment, your windshield wiper fluid into your trunk to spew over your possessions and emergency tire changing kit. Of course your spare tire no longer matters or works because you were told that the E-meter indicates your spare tire was “too fat and therefore stressed” so you let the air out of your Porsche’s spare tire.

There has never been any validity to any “biofeedback” or other technical device. In fact, they are all harmful. They “feel good” because you think you are empowering yourself. I could have gotten the same effects if I told people that all stress comes from canned pineapples. Once people think that the stress in their life comes from canned pineapples, they feel empowered. They can avoid that aisle in the store. They can demonize the number of the aisle where canned pineapples are found at the local supermarket. They can “wisely” and “sagely” tell others of the evil of pineapples. They can sell special hemp aprons that are “anti-canned pineapple wave detectors” so that when people go into grocery stores they can wear these aprons if they must walk down the aisle where the canned pineapples are from. They feel less stress about their real problems, because now they are distracted in the war against canned pineapples (and the top guys make money off the aprons and other tools). When the canned pineapple people go out of business ,you nod wisely knowing you defeated some aliens. And you feel much less stress and when you do feel stress, you know it is the stress of the warrior, the one who “knows the truth” and “must fight the fight against the evil canned pineapple alien proliferators.” And then one day the true problems in your life that you had been feeling legitimate stress over strike you down and perhaps kill you, because you neglected, and even fought, your own body and mind’s attempts to warn you of the problems.

Technical devices destroy your body and your mind’s workings. I use the pineapple example for a reason. Traditionally the pineapple is a historic sign of hospitality and greeting. It tastes great and provides vitamin C. Stress tests and E-meters and other devices are just like taking a healthy symbol of hospitality and demonizing it. They make as much “sense” as declaring that a fruit that is a sign of health and abundance is a “hidden demon” in the body “causing stress.” When you fall prey to these so called technical tools you might as well declare war on breathing, white blood cell counts, vitamin C, hospitality and the chi flow within the body. I include the chi flow example for the benefit of legitimate Chinese medicine practitioners. They especially should appreciate what I am saying, as the use of Scientology devices is like telling the chi that it should not flow in the natural places it has always flowed in the body because chi “causes stress.” I mean, gosh it is so unfair, the chi flows where it has for millions of years, but other parts of the body are “deprived” and so let’s take the chi from where it should go and send it to the rectum to “expel it” in a “purging way.” I wish I was exaggerating or joking but I’m not.

The stress test in the street is the beginning of telling your body to become dysfunctional, rather than correct it. The stress test is the beginning because it doesn’t just hook you into an expensive scam, but it is the beginning of dark and evil indoctrination that survival instincts of the mind and body are “stressful,” “wrong,” and “should be overcome.” Let’s give the example of the widely laughed about “silent birth.” You fools! What if the body has evolved over the years so that the woman shouting during childbirth releases hormones and body chemistry that both mother and child need for good health! You idiots! All you think about is your daft “the baby should be born into comforting silence.” Well what if nature evolved so that “comforting silence” suppresses the release of healthy biochemical secretions? Panda watchers learned something about this when they watched the National Zoo panda mother give birth and the tiny baby squirted out and actually hit the wall. Everyone was horrified, but they learned that this happens to stimulate breathing. Likewise the giraffe baby drops like six feet to the ground when he or she is born. Nature evolves each organism so that the mother gives birth the “right way” just as she does. So a woman who might scream and rant during childbirth might have a natural detector that her muscles and hormones must go into a higher gear to safely deliver the baby. Quiet is not always “pleasant” and “stress free.” Stress tests and E-meters and whatever other stupid devices are used by Scientologists and other cults are the front line to disconnecting a person from his or her own properly functioning body and mind. The first time you answer one of their stupid questions you are being tacitly brainwashed into applying judgment calls to bodily and mental functions. These are judgment calls that humans are too ignorant to have. Because they are cult driven they are demented agenda driven, and thus pineapples and fuel gauges become “bad” and ignoring your body’s proper function and diverting its good health toward warped purpose is “good.” RUN don’t walk away from this crap.