Have you ever wondered, why the hell producers can write 'source of calcium' on milk? Well, if you are less educated, you will probably be surprised, it is not source of calcium. It contains it, but extreme amount of phosphorus blocks the absorption of calcium and even can lead to loss of calcium from bones. Two mass independent studies measured that per one glass of milk a day, your risk of bone diseases later in life increases by 7%.
Let's move to an example, which can be understood only through logic with no need of scientific evidence. Extruded cereals like these from Nestle mark their packets with list of vitamins and a sentence telling you that this product is healthy translated into 8 languages.
The process of extrudation, which is heating and under high pressure, destroys most of what the food previously was. Then, they add some of the vitamins back. So we have a blend of unnatural disaster and manufactured vitamins. The basic mass is the extruded product - can it be healthy if it lacks almost all, which nature gave it?
A Secret
Yeah, but we like hearing that unhealthy food we eat is healthy. If you are not convinced by the facts above, re-read the label. It contains sugar. Our ancestors had no such excessive amount of sugar in their diets. Nor any animal. Only humans.
In fact, an average American eats the amount of sugar equal to size of small giraffe. Which brings us to a second problem. Fluoridating water with industrial rubbish has never been proven benefical. Except to Nazi empire, of course. Who claims the price? The companies selling the rubbish to the country. Same for extruded cereals, which use lies to grab money.
Science speaks, the layer of fluoride is 10 times thinner than we thought, so you don't even need the fluoride in toothpaste. I am glad for living in Europe, where fluoridation is not allowed.
Double Edge Sword - Both Edges Are Aimed Against Us
Do you like being healthy? Health industry does not like you being healthy. A healthy man brings no money to medical industry. Neither does the dead man.
So once the crap food makes you ill, another rich business comes to offer you aid. They offer pills with promise of curing you. Whoever offers anything wants something in return according to Machiavelli, the man who became an example for many politicians. And he's right.
First, they want your money. Second, they want you to stay ill, so you carry on bringing them profit. Some side effects are mostly desired, so you will need another set of pills countering the side effects, but having other side effects. You may end up taking 20 pills a day, which is 20 more pills, than our ancestors used to take.
Sharping The Weapons
One of already mentioned companies owns both edges. Some of the cosmetic brands belong to Nestle. Their extruded cereals with high glycemic index will bring you acne. You will need cosmetics to cover it up and to give you a hope for complete cure.
Acne is the reason I became interested in nutrition and later politics too. I was just surprised, why all official websites barefacedly lie acne is not caused by improper nutrition. And other websites, which could be called fake news nowadays, were speaking the truth about undeniable correlation between acne state and nutrition.
For some companies, it just worths to invest in well-looking websites telling you lies. BTW Nestle wants to privatize water, they don't consider it to be human right.
Junk food is not the only reason, why people have acne, despite its almost non-existence in previous centuries. But it is major influencer.
Is There a Way for Capitalism to Support Progress
In state owned companies, there is lack of motivation. In private companies, there is lack of control. Good laws could be made. But my opinion is that we have to make such companies, which benefit from our sorrow, partly owned by a country.
For food companies, laws are certainly a way to go. Saying something in huge conflict with current science should be judges as a fraud.
For medical companies, I believe a country should have at least 30% holding. This should be enought to keep an eye on development.
It Isn't Only Medical Industry
Unfortunately, capitalism is like tumour in more areas than discussed above. Ecology of nature is not respected at all. Arms factories benefit from even worse circumstances than the illness is. For them, it is killing people what makes money. Were all US-lead wars really benefical to the world, liberty and democracy, or did only weaponcrafts get their money?
Let me know in the comments if you have any progressive ideas, so if I get into politics later, I will have them.
Thank you for reading!
@greenmask9
Like, resteem and spread a good word about this article to encourage me to write more. I can adapt my posts to what my followers prefer. Share with me your opinions in the comments. Follow me to get all articles of mine into your feed. You can look forward to in the following days:
- 7-5-3 Code: 3 States of Mind
- Education System of Finland (02/01/2018)
- Update on my Training Plan (03/01/2018 - part 1, 04/01/2018 - part 2)
You might be interested in these previous articles of mine:
- 7-5-3 Code: 7 Virtues of Warrior (part 1/2)
- Optimism? Not a Natural Thing
- Why I Don't Believe EU Can Be Sustained for Another 30 Years
- Homemade Coconut Toothpaste - Pros, Recipe
- 7-5-3 Code: 5 Keys to Health
Happines and love to all people@greenmask9
Outstanding article. As I have come upon personal growth I finally started “thinking for myself”. I started realizing that ‘adults’, for lack of a better term, for the most part just fake it until they make it. Ideas of success are driven towards money, which is not bad so long it has a positive impact, yet unfortunately this usual endeavor has many consequences for those downstream.
I am currently in pharmacy school and being taught the mechanisms and information regarding medicines and their effects. I’ve started realizing now that there are many ‘good’ medicines, yet ‘bad’ medicines continue to plague our societies endlessly and contribute to an endless cycle of negatives.
Thank you for your article, I believe there are many people going to be able to learn from the ideas of independent research that you present, as well as hopefully more Steemenians using this platform to benefit and promote the minds of its people to finally think and learn for ourselves. Great way to start the year and I look forward to your future articles!
I have supper-long list of topics to write about. If you enjoy this one, you will most probably like the ones soon in future :)
Great! I plan on writing some information of more natural and holistic ways to approach some disease states for patients not doing so well with their traditional course of treatments. There are so many fascinating factors in the human body, from the gut microbiome to neuroinflammation, that I believe should be approached prior to dispensing a patient their typical medication. I hope to hear your thoughts on the subject in the future! Steem on!
What a nice post there!
I really enjoyed your post. I 'follwed' you so i hope you can 'follow' me back!
I disagree with the characterization. Capitalism, allowed freedom without government influence to skew competition, would be responsible for progressing the given market.
I personally believe that there are far fewer malicious health companies and far more overenthusiastic consumers unaware of how to effectively evaluate claims. I believe that people who create products like essential oils that pose no scientific evidence of benefit believe they are helping people's lives because those people believe in the products. Until we accept scientific evidence as our best indicators for how to get the outcomes we want as a global society, we will stumble over pseudoscience and likely continue to harm one another, regardless of intent.
Your opinion. We both can agree that capitalism is for progress at IT, electronics, architecture etc.
As for essential oils, there is probably less scientific evidence, but there is some. There is also a lot of evidence, which is not scientific, but proves their effectiveness nevertheless.
Competition among companies also enforces some progress.
But there is still that dark side, where only ill person brings income. It goes without mentioning arm factories again.
...
We can argue quantity. The problem I see is a system, which allows the companies like that (like Nestle) survive. It doesn't mean I would prefer socialism. Rather, we need to fix the capitalism.
So the question is how do we banish the malicious companies without hitting the good ones?
Correct, entirely my opinion.
Replicated scientific evidence is agreed to be the highest form. While anecdotal evidence is often a good reason to explore something further, society has the tendency to "believe" something works because it did for someone else. This is a dangerous precedent for approaching something relating with health.
But I encourage you to reconsider this idea that health companies want sick people so they can make money. The "health"industry was created by people who likely wanted to help sick people. People will always get sick, our society doesn't work on sharing accurate base knowledge (pointing to duplicated scientific results) and can not only fail to help, but they can harm too, when they are overzealous about a new anecdotally supported treatment.
As far as what can be done to provide damage to a given company? We stop giving it money. With proper education, consumers could assess the benefit of a given company/product and if it violates trust, the community moves away from it. It is interventions in free markets that allow for large corporations like nestle to choke out competition.
You have a point. These businessman may not understand they need to recommend a proper nutrition. Nobody tells doctors this fact either (which is changing though).
But as I previously stated, only quantity can be argued. Actions speak for companies. And there are many actions, which compel me to belive, some of them are evil. If it means 10% or 30% of the big ones doesn't matter. For small companies, the percent will be lower.
...
By actions I mean just for example denying of correlation of diet and acne, ignoring the trend of natural medicine, which is mainly by food and probably an attempt for making supplements on-prescription, although they are completely safe.
This ignoring may be due to not-knowing or never trying too, but I doubt nobody knows any facts. Progress is too slow.
...
We need more open-minded people to speed up progress by making science a common knowledge :)
As long as scientific evidence is being utilized to progress, we will be working a maximum efficiency. We are, unfortunately, afflicted with pleas to faith as a society that cause people to reject science for something else they really, truly believe in, which suddenly negates hard facts in front of their face.
Blaming the system by which people are most efficiently able to ensure people who contribute may pursue their own happiness does not progress our global society. Free markets, with their upholding of a non-alienation principle, can be argued as the "moral" economic system.
I very much appreciate your thoughful replies; this depth of exchange with global community members is what I was seeking with my participation on the platform. I have followed and would enjoy discussing more topics with you.