Requesting Nutritional Profile Blood Tests
I went to the VA hospital Monday for a followup visit after my vertigo scare. I asked the nurse, whom I’ll call Julie, to request a nutritional blood panel for anything available, including vitamin D levels and a test for gluten sensitivity.
Since it was my first visit to this hospital, Julie asked a lot of questions regarding my current health status, drugs used, past hospitalizations or surgeries, family histories, level of exercise, and social drug use, such as alcohol or cigarettes. She didn’t ask if I drank coffee, but she did ask if I was on any special diet. I told her I was starting the paleolithic diet. She asked how to spell paleolithic.
When I asked her if there was a blood test for gluten sensitivity, she knew of one but didn’t know how to order it because she didn’t know the name of the test. She had to call the lab for the name: celiac panel. I guess this was her first time ordering one, which I find both shocking and pitiful.
We discussed various chronic diseases and Julie said that heart disease was the number one killer. I replied, “I thought iatrogenic disease was number 1.” When discussing vitamin D, she said they prescribed 50,000 IU D2 for those testing low, and I told her about a study that showed that D2 was much less effective than D3. She didn’t care. Who was I, anyway, to teach her anything new?
Nurse Volunteers My Breasts to Mammography Radiation
Julie said, “I’m also ordering a PAP smear and a mammogram.” Did I ask for that? Hell no. I told her I wasn’t interested. Why? Because in the event I had cervical or breast cancer, I wouldn’t do anything different than what I’m doing now, which is improving my health step by step by making better choices. I wouldn’t take chemo or radiation, and I wouldn’t allow surgery.
Nearly all men die of their medicines, not of their diseases. –Molière
So there would be no point in exposing my breasts to crushing metal plates and radiation, themselves invasive and harmful practices. Hell, they just exposed my head to a whopping dose of radiation, and now they want to expose my breasts?
Julie told me how much more successful the survival rates are today compared to thirty years ago, and it’s all because of early detection through mammography. (Hey, what about thermography?) She also said that very few women survive breast cancer who don’t undergo traditional treatment. I should have asked where she got that opinion from, because I would bet any money she was just parroting someone on staff.
Despite the long-standing claims, the evidence that routine mammography screening allows early detection and treatment of breast cancer, thereby reducing mortality, is at best highly questionable. –Samuel Epstein, Danger and Unreliability of Mammography Breast Examination is a Safe, Effective, and Practical Alternative
Statistics on Cancer Survival Deceptive
If you’re considered a survivor five years after detection, the earlier you’re detected, the greater chance you have of hitting five years, right? If you go to see a doctor by the time you can feel a tumor, it may have been developing for five years. Then if you die in three years, you’re a mortality statistic. Though the cancer has been in your body eight years, the time between diagnosis and death is less than five years.
But if you have a mammogram, which detects a tumor one year in the making, and you die in six years, well, statistically you’re a survivor, even though you lived one year less than the previous scenario. That’s because you survived five years after detection. How very tidy.
Cancer centers and public health agencies frequently cite increases in 5-year survival rates to measure the success of the war against cancer. In fact, for many cancers, including the most common ones—prostate, breast, lung, and colon—5-year survival rates have increased in the last few decades.
By this standard, the $45 billion spent by the National Cancer Institute since its inception has paid off. Not necessarily, argue three physicians from the Dartmouth Medical School in Hanover, N.H., in an article published in the June 2000 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
They concluded that the most likely explanation for the increased survival rates is not that patients are living longer, but that cancer is simply diagnosed earlier. –Demystifying Statistics: Experts Discuss Common Misunderstandings
Later the nurse told me I was being irresponsible for not getting a mammogram, but the word wasn’t irresponsible. I can’t remember what word she used, but it carried heavy shame and judgment, like accusing me of not feeding my own child. I was disgusted. I refrained from telling her how deceptive the whole process was. At one point she said, “It appears you don’t want much from the VA other than diagnostic tests.” Bingo!
Mammogram Caused False Positive and Excessive Worry
I was talked into having a mammogram about ten years ago by a nurse who said the radiation received was no more than that exposed to in an airline flight. I was not counseled at all about the risks of mammography. A small abnormality was found and I was scheduled for a biopsy. (The best part was that the hospital decided my breasts were suitable for an intern to practice on.)
I’ll tell you, my immune system took a shock when I started worrying about breast cancer. I was surprised at how much I was holding in when, being informed I had only a cyst, I broke out in tears of relief. I now choose not to subject my soul or my immune system to this sort of unnecessary stress. This is just my choice, one not made of ignorance or superstition, so it’s not appropriate to shame me into getting this procedure.
And since I don’t focus on breast cancer, I don’t carry around this worry in the back of my mind all the time. I concentrate on health, not disease. The whole pink ribbon campaign infuriates me. Like we need reminders! Don’t you know that every month is breast cancer awareness month for women? How many of you women think about getting breast cancer? How many of you worry about it a lot? Your thoughts are powerful things. Control them.
I Have Dominion over My Body
I made it clear that I have dominion over my body. I don’t take drugs. I don’t get vaccinations. And I don’t go to doctors for chronic problems, and seldom for acute ones. I educate myself and give my body what it needs to heal. I don’t run to the doctor for a drug to suppress a symptom so I can keep up my bad habits without experiencing discomfort.
Hey, if I’m in an accident and my body gets rearranged, the allopathic doctors are the ones I want to see. They are the best at putting people back together. But if I collapse in a shopping mall and my heart stops beating, just leave me alone. I’ll come back if I want to. Pounding on my chest won’t do a thing if I want to leave, and pounding on my chest won’t bring me back if I want to stay. And I really resent that I could go to jail for not pounding on someone else’s chest. It’s all just show, in my opinion. The incessant need of the physician to “do something.” Kevorkian understood this, and he was sent to jail.
Most allopathic doctors are meddlers–some well-intentioned–who think they are indispensible, that people like you and me can’t make informed decisions in our own best interests, including the decision to let go of the body and let it die. Death is the end of birth and life continues beyond the body. Thank goodness for doctors like Fuhrman, Mercola, and others who have an open mind, keep up on the latest nutritional research, and teach people to be self-reliant.
How did we get to such a place where I could be sent to jail for giving someone health advice? Why have we handed over our bodies and our wealth to the medico-pharmaceutical cartel? They hold an iron grip on the health of the nation, and if you’ve been doing any studying, you know our nation’s health is pretty poor compared to other nations.
It’s your body. Take dominion.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
And people want the govt. more involved in our health care.