Showing posts with label illness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label illness. Show all posts

Monday, March 12, 2012

What is a drug?



In the USA, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act defines a drug as : (1) a substance recognized in an official pharmacopoeia or formulary (2) : a substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease (3) : a substance other than food intended to affect the structure or function of the body (4) : a substance intended for use as a component of a medicine but not a device or a component, part, or accessory of a device.


The FDA says: "The legal difference between a cosmetic and a drug is determined by a product's intended use."  


In Canada, the Food and Drug Act defines a drug as: 
“drug” includes any substance or mixture of substances manufactured, sold or represented for use in
(a) the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation or prevention of a disease, disorder or abnormal physical state, or its symptoms, in human beings or animals,
(b) restoring, correcting or modifying organic functions in human beings or animals


The European Union  DIRECTIVE 2001/83/E defines a 'medicinal product' as: 
(a) Any substance or combination of substances presented as having properties for treating or preventing disease in human beings; or
(b) Any substance or combination of substances which may be used in or administered to human beings either with a view to restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions by exerting a pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action, or to making a medical diagnosis.

What's wrong with this picture? 

It seems to say that the difference between a drug, and a non-drug depends on the use.  But if you read more carefully, that's not what it says.  It really says, in simple English:

"The difference between a drug, and a non-drug is defined by the way the product is marketed." (intended for use, sold or represented for use in, presented as having properties for). 

If it looks like a drug, and walks like a drug and talks like a drug - it makes no difference at all. It's not a drug until the paperwork is done.

But if the marketing paperwork to the government says: 
in the USA: "a substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease"
in Canada: "substances manufactured, sold or represented for use in
(a) the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation or prevention of a disease, disorder or abnormal physical state, or its symptoms"
in the European Union: "presented as having properties for treating or preventing disease in human beings".


If the marketing department says it can be used to diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat or prevent disease, - it is a drug. That is the only requirement for a drug.  Thus, everything and anything can be a drug - if it is marketed as a drug.  Of course it must pass some significant paperwork hurdles - but these are easily managed by large corporations and their lawyers. 


Note: to create a drug in any of these countries, it is not necessary for the drug to be particularly effective, nor for the scientific or medical community to believe that the drug is effective.  Nor is it necessary for the drug to be safe in all situations.  It is only necessary to pass the paperwork tests. Government offices cannot and do not pass judgement on the efficacy of any drug application.  Governments pass judgement on the paperwork. Many new drugs cannot truly be tested for effectiveness, nor safety, on the general population until after they are in public use for many years, possibly even decades. 

It is easily seen that one of the problems with the USFDA, Health Canada, and European Unions definition of a drug is that there is little said about what is 'not a drug'. Almost everything can be defined as a drug.  

This has lead people to ask if water is a drug - because it can be marketed to prevent and cure dehydration (they failed due to the fact their the paperwork was not completed correctly). And it lead me to blog that the wind is my drug, because I claim it makes me feel better.


We need a different definition of a drug.  


Wikipedia says: "A drug, broadly speaking, is any substance that, when absorbed into the body of a living organism, alters normal bodily function. There is no single, precise definition, as there are different meanings in drug control law, government regulations, medicine, and colloquial usage."


Webster's Dictionary says: "a substance used as a medication or in the preparation of medication".  


We need a definition of DRUG, from a health viewpoint. 

Is there a simple way to delineate between drugs and non-drugs from a health viewpoint.  A definition not depending on a marketing department.  Rather a definition that depends on science and facts about our health and healthiness.

The first thing we should recognize about drugs is that they are almost all toxic by design. Drugs are designed to throw your health system off balance, to counter the imbalance of your illness, not to create health. You need a prescription for drugs because they are toxic.

If we want to define drugs, we need a way to separate the things we consume, through our mouth and other orifices, including our skin, into drugs - and not drugs. All three of the official government definitions make no such distinction.  Everything is a drug.  Everything should be regulated as a drug.  This is, frankly, a ridiculous situation.

Can we define drugs in a useful fashion?  Can we define non-drugs?

A healthicine is a substance that has a direct effect on the balances of healthiness. Healthicines are non-drugs. That effect might be positive, or if the healthicine is deficient or excessive - it will be a negative effect.


A drug is a substance that has an effect on illness.  Drugs have an indirect, usually negative effect on the balances of healthiness. This negative effect is designed to throw the illness off balance and allow your body to heal.  Or sometimes the illness is designed to simply trick your body into 'feeling healthy', by minimizing symptoms. 

Water is not a drug. If you are dehydrated, water still cannot be a drug.  Water cures dehydration, or it restores the balance of hydration - but it is not a drug. Water is necessary for healthiness.  A deficiency or an excess results in an illness and possibly death.

Can we extend this distinction to other substances - it gets a bit more complicated. If you have a Vitamin C deficiency, taking Vitamin C to 'treat' the deficiency is not taking a drug - any more than eating oranges is taking a drug.

Vitamin C can also be used as an injection to treat a serious inflammation.  In that case the Vitamin C is not addressing a normal Vitamin C deficiency, it is being used to tackle a health problem that is best treated by an excess of Vitamin C. Vitamin C has a negative effect on the problem - the inflammation - note, inflammation is normally a healthy response to stress. Administering an excess of Vitamin C, or any substance, for a therapeutic effect separate from the Vitamin C health balance, is administering a drug.

Is this a clear dividing line?  Maybe, maybe not.  The government definition of drugs for sale needs to be a clear, black and white, legal definition.  But the definition of drugs for health, and for personal healthiness, has many shades of grey, ranging from black to white and every shade in-between, possibly even different colours.

A healthy definition of ''drug" needs to be open to dispute and discussion. The government definition is like a proclamation from God, there is not room for argument, not way to dispute the decision. This is not a healthy definition. It is not a democratic definition. It is not a 'freedom' definition.  I believe in Personal Health Freedom.  The freedom to differ.

All illness and disease are be caused by an imbalance, a deficiency or excess of genetics, nutrition, parasites, toxins, stress, growth (including healing and immune systems) - or a combination thereof.http://personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2011/10/hierarchy-of-health-primary-and.html

A drug is always an excess. In most cases, if you are healthy, a drug is toxic to some aspect of your health. You need a prescription - a doctor must sign that you 'need the drug'. When you are ill, the drug may have a beneficial effect. By design. Drugs are not designed to fix health imbalances. Drugs are not nutrients. Drugs are not designed to cure - they are designed to create an 'opposing imbalance' so that your body can heal.

All drugs have 'side effects'.  Why is that?  Because all drugs are toxins - they have toxic effects.  If they didn't have toxic effects, they would have no effect at all.  In some cases, the toxic effects are intended.  That's the 'design' of drugs. But in many cases the toxic effects are unintended, or even unknown. Generally unknown until many people fall ill or die. Mercola tells us that drugs kill more people than car accidents in the USA. 

Are some drugs worthwhile?  Are some drugs the 'best treatment'?  Yes.  Of course. If you have a bacterial infection, the best treatment might be a toxin that kills the bacteria, but has minimal effect on your health and healthy cells.  An anti-biotic.  However,  most, possibly all antibiotics kill some healthy cells as well. 


We need to search for health, not illness. We need to search for 'heals', not 'cures'.  We need honesty and openness about treatments; to measure which treatments have the best effect on any illness, not which is the 'latest (untested on the public at large) drug'. 


New drugs have the most potential for danger. We need a health paradigm, not an illness paradigm. We need a healthicine paradigm, not a drug paradigm


Yours in health, tracy
www.personalhealthfreedom.com







Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Saturday, March 10, 2012

Why all Drugs have Side Effects.

When some people develop a serious illnesses, they try dietary changes - organic, non-processed foods, herbs and possibly supplements.  These attempts are generally random, not directed to specific nutrient or dietary needs.  Our dietary needs for optimal healthiness are poorly studied and poorly understood. Guesswork is often the best an individual can do to avoid the drug paradigm and side effects. If there is no solid diagnosis, or no clearly successful treatment, a doctor might say 'try this prescription, and see if it helps'.

Don't get me wrong.  If you have an illness that is best treated by drugs - I'm all for them.  But if you have an illness that is best treated by healthicines - a drug can only make it worse.

What are medicines? Medicines are used to treat illness. Medicines are defined as drugs.

Medicines generally work against the illness.  If you have an infection (an excessive growth of bacteria) - an antibiotic works to kill the bacteria. If you have a fracture, medicine works to reduce the excess pain and possibly inflammation until it heals.  If you have a cold, medicines work to reduce the symptoms of the cold, your body does the rest.

Medicines help us to live with the illness (reducing symptoms), or by countering imbalances that are excessive: bacteria, viruses, toxins, etc.

Healthicines are used to treat unhealthiness. Medicines do not work against nutritional deficiencies, for example.  If they do reduce symptoms of a deficiency - drugs can make it worse by making it tolerable.

As we saw in the blog: The truth about milk: raw? or pasteurized? we can take a healthiness view of illness, or a medical view.  The medical view is a very sharp tool, designed to diagnose and treat illness.  The healthiness view is a different view, appropriate to improve health balances.

Drugs do not directly counter unhealthiness - they work by changing the illness, often in an effort to facilitate healing.  If you are suffering from an infection, an anti-biotic attempts to kill the dangerous bacteria, leaving your body to heal. Of course antibiotics also kill helpful body cells, resulting in a shifted, or new illness that requires healing.

As a result, all drugs have side effects.  They move your illness, or your healthiness sideways, sometimes even backwards - not towards healthiness.  This is done in the hope that the 'new state of illness' is less severe, or sufficiently different, or perhaps more diffused, that your body can recover and heal more easily.  Antibiotics kill many non-human cells, both beneficial and harmful. Your healthiness is damaged as the illness is attacked.


What are healthicines? Healthicine is the art and science of creating and improving healthiness.



Healthicines are used to improve healthiness. Healthicines are used to treat unhealthiness.


As shown in the diagram, healthicines move directly towards health.  If you are suffering from scurvy, consuming Vitamin C will re-balance your health.  You need to consume Vitamin C to rebalance. If an illness is caused by a nutrient imbalance, a drug might treat the 'symptoms', but it does not treat the cause. This may result in a more serious illness because the cause continues to cause illness.

If you are suffering from arthritis - exercise might be the most appropriate healthicine. Drugs that make the arthritis pain bearable can only be beneficial if combined with exercise to lubricate the joint and promote healing.  Otherwise, drugs will simply lead to a more severe illness - although with less pain.

Some illnesses are well treated by drugs.  Some illnesses are best treated by healthicines. Some are best treated by a combination of healthicines and drugs. What is the true percentage? We don't know.

How many illnesses are caused by nutritional deficiencies or imbalances?  We don't know.

Illness is caused by an imbalance, a deficiency or an excess so severe that it results in a medical condition. An unhealthiness can be a minor health imbalance, or severe enough to be diagnosed as an illness. There are many different deficiencies or excesses that can cause illness. Deficiencies and excesses in nutrients can result in illnesses from scurvy (Vitamin C) to obesity (sugar).  Deficiencies and excesses of exercise can result in flaccid muscles or torn ligaments. Deficiencies or excesses in your immune system can result in more serious colds and flu to autoimmune diseases.

We know that many illnesses are caused by severe single nutrient deficiencies.  We know, for example that scurvy is caused by a severe deficiency of Vitamin C. But we have very little understanding of what illnesses might be caused by a long term, minor deficiency of Vitamin C.  I suspect your doctor will diagnose them as 'old age'.

What illnesses might be caused by combinations of nutritional deficiencies.  Can we name one?  I can't think of one. And I find that very, very strange.  There are over 100 known 'essential nutrients' for the human body.  Given huge variations in diet over the planet, through different cultural groups and over time with individuals - there is huge potential for many combinations of nutrient deficiency. Can we name a single illness that is caused by a minor long term deficiency of TWO essential nutrients?

What might be the result of a prolonged deficiency of Vitamin A, a prolonged minor deficiency of omega 3, and a long term minor deficiency of Vitamin C?

What is the cause of age related macular degeneration? It is almost certainly the result of long term nutritional deficiencies or excesses.  What about other degenerative diseases?  Drug companies are busy searching for medicines, but few are studying or searching for healthicines.

Given the number of essential nutrients - over 100, the number of combinations of two nutrient deficiencies that might occur together is over 10,000.  Many nutritional deficiencies are uncommon in Western societies.  But many are common. According to the USDA's Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals - 60 percent of males do not meet the RDA minimum for Vitamin A; 64 percent do not meet the RDA minimum for Vitamin E; over 50 percent do not meet the RDA minimum for Vitamin B6, and so on....

We don't know what illnesses, or what symptoms might be caused by these, and other deficiencies.  But they should not be treated by medicines.  They can only be treated by healthicines.  By ensuring that people meet their nutritional needs.

You may have noticed the recent flurries of press regarding Vitamin D.  It seems Vitamin D prevents many illnesses - and most of us are not consuming enough Vitamin D.  But the press treats Vitamin D as if it was a medicine.  It is not - it is an essential nutrient, Vitamin D is a healthicine.

If you consume a medicine to solve a healthicine problem - the problem can only get worse. You cannot treat a Vitamin D deficiency by taking a different drug. You can only cure it by getting enough sunshine, or enough Vitamin D in your diet. Healthicine.

Today, 'healthicine' is not a word. Medicine is the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease.  Medicines are drugs that you take to treat or cure illness.

The entire focus of our so called 'health systems' is on medicines.  We need to study healthicines more thoroughly if we are to attain optimal health.

Why don't we know what unhealthinesses are best treated by healthicines?  Healthicines do not have side effects. Because they treat the unhealthiness directly - they simply have health effects. 

You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of healthiness. You have a right to information about healthicines and medicines. You have a right to choose, but choice is best assisted by information.

yours in health,
tracy
http://personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/p/subject-index.html

ps. If you enjoy my posts, please share - and you might LIKE my facebook page
Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Friday, March 9, 2012

A Picture of Health

Medicine is defined, by Wikipedia, as 'the science and art of healing'.  Wrong as usual.  The body heals.  Medicine is the science and art of preventing, diagnosing and treating illness.  If the illness is treated properly - the body heals.  Medicine turns to the next problem.

In many cases, when you visit a doctor, you are given a prescription and told "try this, and let me know how it works".  There is little art, no science with regards to healing. Take the drugs and hope your body heals.

Healthicine is the art and science of healthiness.  After you leave the doctor's office, after you take the prescription, after you are 'healthy' according to the doctor (eg. not sick), you can still benefit from the art and science of healthiness.


This diagram shows the relationship between medicine and healthicine.  Medicine is to the left of  the red line of diagnosis. Once an illness is diagnosed, medical techniques are used in an attempt to treat the 'illness'.  These technique is not always appropriate.

Some illnesses strike from external sources - bacteria, bullets, toxins and viruses.

But many illnesses are the result of declining healthiness. In these cases, a medicine is not the best solution, not an appropriate option.

Healthicine is the entire study of healthiness from perfect health to illness and death. Medicine is a small
subset of healthicine.

In most cases, medicine is not required. Most of the time, you are not sick.  But you can always be healthier. In many cases, medicine is not appropriate. Sometimes, when you are sick, it is because your health has deteriorated to the point where an illness is diagnosed. Medicines are constrained by diagnosis. Diagnosis is an artificial constraint designed to protect the interests of doctors, and marketed to protect the interests of patients.

It is clear that if your unhealthiness is to the right of the diagnostic threshold - you don't need medicines, you need healthicines.  In many cases, when your health is to the left of the diagnostic threshold - healthicines are still the most effective approach. But healthicines are seldom prescribed for illness, just medicines.

Many fields of medicine, and many drug manufacturers, are trying to move the 'diagnostic threshold' to the right, so that drugs can be prescribed earlier. Attempts to 'find cancer earlier' are a common example.  Moving the diagnostic threshold is presented as a 'preventative technique', but it often leads to an increase in 'false positive' diagnoses.  It also leads to the use of drugs, when healthicines are required.

We need to examine the diagnostic threshold more scientifically.  If an illness is really an unhealthiness - maybe the diagnostic threshold should move to the left for that illness. Or we need to examine treatment alternatives more scientifically.   No matter where the diagnostic threshold resides, we need to study all of the alternatives, and continually test the most effective ones - not just the 'latest new drug'.

We use drugs to treat diagnosed illness.

We use healthicines to improve our healthiness.   To reverse unhealthiness.

We need scientific studies of the differences between illness and unhealthiness.  We need to choose the best alternative for every illness and unhealthiness, and keep improving our choices.  We need the freedom to choose - and the ability to study and document choices and results.

http://www.personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/p/subject-index.html
You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of healthiness,
tracy

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Tuesday, March 6, 2012

The truth about milk: raw? or pasteurized?

The debate over raw milk, like many health debates is typically presented in black and white. A healthy debate would have many more colours.

Raw milk is healthier - says one side.  Pasteurizing milk destroys much of the nutritional value of milk.

Pasteurized milk is safer says the other, and just as healthy.  The US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention has demonstrated that raw milk is unsafe, compared to pasteurized milk. http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/11-1370_article.htm#results

This is a classical case of the medical approach vs the alternative health approach. Perhaps more 'classical' than we might like to admit. The medical establishment wants to put an arrow in raw milk.  And the alternative health establishment insists that raw milk is healthy, while pasteurized milk is damaged and unhealthy.

Remember, 'alternative health' is not really about health, it is about alternative medicine.

Each side has a very narrow point of view.  X is bad. Y is bad.  Both sides are using the medical viewpoint. Traditional medicine vs alternative medicine. Look for bad things.  Look for illness, causes of illness.  Look for things that prevent or cure bad things. A medical viewpoint focuses attention on illness - to force a decision. It is a powerful tool against illness.

But it is not a view to build healthiness.

What is a healthy view?  How does a healthy view compare to a medical view?

We need healthy view to understand and pursue healthiness.

The medical view focusses attention on illness in order to diagnose, treat
cure and prevent illness.  This is a powerful view with regard to illness but not appropriate for understanding and learning about healthiness.

In theory, the healthy view and the medical view see the same information - the same milk in this case. But they see from different points of view. The medical view sees illness. Medical practitioners, conventional and alternative, spend their lives looking at people who are ill, trying to make them better.

The medical view often comes to conflicting conclusions as the focus jumps from one illness to another. A factor that seems to 'prevent' one illness can easily shift health balances towards another illness.

A healthy view, on the other hand, examines how we enable healthy genetics, create healthy cells, how they create healthy tissues and organs, resulting in healthy systems and bodies.  Healthy bodies, minds, spirits and communities provide a feedback loop that continues to improve healthiness while minimizing conflict.

People who are not ill - and want to be healthier require a healthy viewpoint for healthy decision making.

What are the health questions? There are many more - oriented towards health, not towards illness. Does milk improve the healthiness of your cells, your tissues, your organs, your body?

Is milk essential, or is milk the optimal food - for babies?  for children?  for teens? for adults?  for seniors? We know that milk is not a vitamin.  It is not essential to health, like Vitamin C or specific fats or proteins.

We know that human milk can be a near optimal food for babies.  In most mammals, milk is not consumed once a baby is weaned.

We don't know if milk is a healthy food for teens, adults, seniors. Why don't we know?  Because we study medicine very thoroughly, but we don't study healthiness.

Is milk healthy?  Is pasteurized milk healthy or unhealthy? Is raw milk healthy or unhealthy (assuming it is not tainted). Is milk actually good for you? Do you need milk for health? What are the truths about milk?

Do we need milk? The answer is clearly no.  Milk is not required for health.  We can get the nutrients that are in milk in many different foods. Consumption of milk, processed or raw is not necessary - it is a health choice - your choice, to consume milk or not.

Does drinking milk make you healthier?  The evidence shows that the answer clearly is 'sometimes yes, sometimes no'.  We know that illness is caused by a deficiency, or an excess.  How much milk is 'excessive'? How much milk does it take to cause unhealthiness?

We need the right to choose.  We need information to support our choices.

Will we ever know the truth about milk?  Which is healthier, raw milk, or pasteurized milk?  I suspect we will never know.  Pasteurized milk fits our marketing practices.  It has a long shelf life.  It's dead, so it doesn't spoil for a very long time.  It has a 'minimum risk' profile - more important to sales than a 'maximize health' profile. There is huge incentive for corporations who sell milk to sell pasteurized milk. No research is necessary.

Raw milk?  No big corporations care. Individual people care, but they don't sell milk to the super stores. And they can't buy milk in super stores There is no financial incentive to do true research into raw milk - or into the healthiness of milk.

If you want raw milk - you need to buy a cow.

You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of healthiness. You have a right to information, and choices.
http://www.personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/p/subject-index.html
tracy
Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Healthiness: Sensing and reacting, Stressing - relaxing, Growing and Healing

The Hierarchy of Healthiness contains the components of healthiness, from genetics, through nutrients, cells, tissues, organs, body, mind, spirit and community.  Any of the components might be deficient or excessive - not in optimal health - and possibly leading to illness. The hierarchy of health defined the primary physical elements of health and thus the primary disciplines of the study of healthiness. Combining each of the primary disciplines in pairs created a comprehensive list of the secondary disciplines of healthiness.

Of course healthiness is not just about components.  Our bodies are moving, breathing, living things.  Many processes and functions are under-way at any single instant.  Some of those are slow moving - and some very rapid.

Sensing, feeling and reacting; growth and healing; and stressing and relaxing are all aspects of healthiness.  Each can be enhanced or repressed through personal choice.  Each can result in illness when deficiencies or excesses are present.

In the blog post What is PAIN?, I discussed the concept that pain is required for health, and that a deficiency of pain is as much an illness as an excess of pain. Pain is a process enabled by the nervous tissues, the nervous system, which can be repressed or enhanced by the body or the mind, in reaction to external, or sometimes internal stimuli.

We need to explore the Hierarchy of Healthiness to find many more aspects of healthy processes and the illnesses associated with their deficiencies or excesses. Some examples:

Genetics: The main processes of genetics in a person come from the activation, repression and modulation of genes and the reproduction of new cells.  As each new cell is created, the processes attempt to create the appropriate cell type for the environment - new heart muscle, new gum tissue cells, or new liver cells. Deficiencies in the genetic processes of cell reproduction result in faulty, damaged cells that do not function or reproduce.  Sometimes it can result in cells that are cancerous and reproduce in excess, out of control and without healthy function. Growth and healing are the result of our genetic processes in action and both can become deficient or excessive. 

Cells: Our bodies contain over 200 of different cell types, each with different purposes and processes. Red blood cells take oxygen from the air and distribute it throughout the body.  Anaemia can be a deficiency in the ability of these cells to carry oxygen - or a deficiency in the quantity of cells.  White blood cells carry out the functions of the immune system attacking foreign cells.  This process can become excessive when the cells attack your own cells instead. With over 200 different types of cells, many involved in multiple processes, we start to see how rich and complex the balances of healthiness are. 

Tissues: Each tissue serves many functions and processes that are part of our healthiness. Nervous tissues are essential to our sensations, from feeling through seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, balancing, to pain and thinking and intuition. Deficiencies in nervous tissues can result in deficiencies in each of the senses, deficiencies in our abilities to sense pain - to deficiencies in functions of the mind.  Excesses of nervous tissue can result in over-sensitivity, excessive pain, hyper-awareness or worse.  Each tissue type is involved in many healthy processes that can be deficient or excessive. 

Organs: Most organs serve multiple purposes or functions.  Each process can be deficient or excessive.  The heartbeat alone can be deficient, excessive, erratic, in many different ways.  In most cases, these imbalances are not serious enough to be diagnosed as an illness - they are simply deviations from optimal healthiness. Our hearing might be deficient, healthy or excessive - distracting us from irrelevant or non-existent noises. Each healthy process can be deficient or excessive to create an illness. 

Systems: the digestive system is probably our most complex system, due to the number of foreign organisms involved and the process balances involved can change from hour to hour, day to day and over long periods of time.  Our nervous system gives rise to the complexities of all senses as well as our mind.  Our immune system is a complex interaction of many body components and processes. It can be difficult to tell if your immune system is mildly deficient. AIDS was not initially diagnosed as an immune system illness. Over-active immune systems, for example in reaction to peanut allergy - can cause  rapid death. 

Body: our bodies require stress and exercise to keep healthy, and to encourage and enable growth and healing.  We also require relaxation and sleep to allow rebuilding and re-balancing. Move it or lose it applies to all aspects of health - when it stops moving, it's near death. The healthiness challenge is to know what types of movement are best for your health - and to be certain you don't overdo it.  With many healthiness processes - the perfect balance is not a mid-point, but a combination of alternating stresses and de-stresses. 

Mind: as with the body - the mind operates with a use it or lose it principle.  Exercising your mental processes creates and improves healthiness.  Rest is also required to facilitate consolidation and rejuvenation. Many of our mental processes can become illnesses in deficiency or in excess.  Thinking is good, but not too much.  Not thinking can be fatal. 

Spirit: a healthy spirit is a balanced spirit. It adjusts your attitude when problems arise - and gives you support.  It keeps you stable in unstable situations. An unbalanced spirit can result in depression, or manic states. 

Community: a healthy community supports you when you can't support yourself.  And if your community is healthy - you support it as well.  Communities also provide ability for people to accomplish things that could not be accomplished by any single person.  We each belong to many communities - with many different functions and processes.  In our communities - we have an opportunity to create goals, functions and processes that provide healthiness for all. However, communities can also be about rules, which may be deficient or excessive - resulting in unhealthy communities. We all rebel against rules sometimes - we need to understand, support and develop communities that enhance our healthiness and to recognize communities that detract from it.

 In the post The concepts of Illness and Disease we noted that an illness is "a condition of the living animal or plant or one of its part that impairs normal functioning".  The key is that illness 'impairs normal functioning' - the body has many variations in cells, tissues, organs, etc. that are in the normal range.  An illness exists when functioning is impaired. 
An unhealthiness begins as you move from the perfectly healthy state towards the excess or deficiency state.  Symptoms may appear anywhere along the range.  In general, symptoms indicate unhealthiness. However, a single symptom does not indicate a medical condition. By the time a medical condition is reached - many symptoms appear.

A doctor will not diagnose an illness unless specific criteria are met, eg. the illness must cross a well defined line between healthiness and illness.  

All of the functions and processes in our bodies, minds and communities, in the entire hierarchy of our healthiness can move from healthy to unhealthy and back again - without a diagnosable illness. 

If we are to move towards optimal healthiness - we need to better understand unhealthiness, and work to keep each health factor in the healthy range, if possible in the optimal range. However, as we can see now, our list of health balances has grown so tall and so detailed that we will need computers to provide useful analysis. The role of doctors - in the field of healhtiness, might be to interpret the results from computer analysis.

Our medical systems currently attempt to provide solutions by understanding illness. In many cases - and when illness clearly exits - this can be a very effective approach.  

However, this approach, studying illness, fails when it encounters unhealthiness that does not meet the criteria for illness.  And it fails badly when it encounters complex unhealthinesses that present many, gradually worsening symptoms as the patient slides down from healthy to unhealthy.  Some 'chronic illnesses' are actually complex unhealthinesses.  However, we don't study unhealthiness with the rigour that we study illness - so we cannot understand those illnesses. 

When we learn to study healthiness and unhealthiness more effectively - some illnesses that cannot be understood by the medical approach will become clear. 

As we learn more about our healthy processes, how they interact, and what choices we have in their regard - we will move more towards health freedom and the attainment of optimal health.

yours in health, tracy
Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Healthicine: The Art and Science of Healthing


Healthicine is the art and science of healthing. The study and practice of health and healthiness.

Healthing, optimizing your health, is personal first, and then extends to your communities - your family, friends and any other community of which you are a member or have an interest.


Medicine is the art and science of healing. The study and practice of treating disease. Medicine is severely restricted in our western society. It is illegal to practice medicine without a license.

Healthicine is a superset of medicine, and includes the field of medicine. Medicine is only a small part of health and healthiness.



This diagram represents the field of healthicine including the field of medicine.

Healthiness is about balance.  For each essential nutrient, we must balance our intake in the healthy range. The RDA (Reference Daily Intake) and the UL (Upper Intake) are numbers identified by the FDA as points where imbalance starts to occur. If the imbalance becomes excessive - we might develop a medical condition. At which point, we may require medicine, the art and science of healing - to recover.

Your personal healthicine starts as your personal health freedoms. As we move to the borders of the healthicine range - our health becomes so unbalanced that we may require assistance to recover. And if we go farther, it is possible to tip - and break some aspect of our health - to the point where we might never recover completely.

There are thousands of balances in healthicine. The hierarchy of health provides a foundation to identify many of those balances.  Balanced nutrition is one area - consisting of hundreds of essential and non-essential nutrients.  We also seek a balance of healthy cells, tissues, organs and bodily systems.  And also balanced healthy body, mind and spirit.  And balanced, healthy communities. There are balances in things - and in processes.  We need to balance our Vitamin C intake - and we also need to balance our sleep and our exercise to optimize health.

Our bodies are remarkably good at compensating for imbalances. If the right leg is weaker than the left leg, in most cases - we can still walk.  A bit wobbly, but still mobile. If the right leg is broken due to excess of physical stress - we might hobble, maybe with crutches, until it heals, straight or not.  If it heals crooked - our muscles can develop to compensate and help balance  or at least facilitate walking.

Illness is defined where one or more of our healthicine balances tips so far - deficient or excessive, that a diagnosable medical problem arises.  If this happens because of a single imbalance (a primary illness) - it might be simple to identify and treat.  In may cases, our illness is the result of multiple imbalances in the healthicine (a complex or compound illness) - making it more difficult to identify causality, and more difficult to treat.

As a result of this complexity - medicine often resorts to treating symptoms.  A technique that can be more expeditious and effective than trying to identify the cause of illness. Many similar illnesses can be effectively treated with similar techniques - without specific reference to the underlying cause or imbalance. For some illnesses - a broken leg is one example, examining the underlying cause is only useful for prevention of future incidents, but of little use in treatment.

There are many healthicine balances outside of the hierarchy of health.

One of the most important is exercise.  Our bodies don't just exist - they move.  Health is facilitated by and depends on movement and activity.  A balance of exercise makes us healthier. A deficiency of exercise makes us unhealthy - as can an excess of exercise.  Of course the FDA does not provide an RDA or UL for exercise - it's much more personal.

Many healthicine balances appear to NOT have a minimum, or a maximum, or the minimum or maximum is so unlikely and infrequent that it can generally be ignored.


Some healthicine balances have a very wide balance point. The healthy range of Vitamin C, according to the FDA, is from 90 mg per day (the RDA) to 2000 mg per day (the UL).  An upper limit of more than 20 times larger than the minimum.

Most healthicine balances have an optimum range.  One of the challenges for the science of healthiness, is to determine most important health balances and identify their optimal ranges.

Some healthicine balances are maintained by the body - in absence of daily attention.  Vitamin A is stored in the liver, and you can stop consuming Vitamin A for many days without significant impact on your health.   Vitamin C, on the other hand, is not stored - and it is important to maintain an adequate daily intake, or suffer health consequences.

What is the optimal intake of Vitamin C?  Of protein?  Of essential fats?   What is the optimal amount of exercise? We don't know. What is the optimal composition of healthy blood?  Healthy muscle tissue? Do we know? Is a specific health balance best attended to daily?  Weekly?  Monthly?  Annually? Or at specific times in our lifetime?

Of course health consequences from a minor deficiency of a single nutrient, over a small period of time, are typically very small. Your body might in many cases, recover when the balance is restored. If your consumption of Vitamin C is zero for many days - you are unlikely to notice any difference.  Only a few nutrients, most notably oxygen and water - can have a severe effect from small periods of absence.

We have spent centuries studying medicine, and comparatively, scant few moments on the science of healthiness. I believe some of the intractable problems of medicine arise because we are treating them with medicine - when the preventative nature of healthicine is a more appropriate approach.

It's time to look more closely, thoroughly, deeply into the art and science of health.

You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of healthiness. You have a right to healthicine.

yours in health, tracy
Personal Health Freedom

This post has been revised as of Feb 21, 2012 from the original posting of December 3, 2011.
Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Friday, January 20, 2012

Are you Sick? Or just Unhealthy?


Mike goes to the doctor with a cough.  Is he sick? Or just unhealthy?

The doctor asks how many cigarettes Mike smokes - a pack a day, for 25 years.  Is Mike sick?  Or just unhealthy?

It's not easy to tell if someone is sick, or just unhealthy.  Even in Mike's situation.  If the cough just came on in the past few days, and there are other symptoms - Mike is probably sick.  But if the cough is a nagging cough that has been present and growing, Mike is probably 'just unhealthy'.

Mike's case is a simple one. It can get much more complicated. Let's look again at Alice and Zizi.  You might remember that Alice and Zizi are the same age, similar in many ways, but Alice gets 5 to 7 colds a year, whereas Zizi gets a cold once every 1 or 2 years. Now, Alice develops a cough.  Is she sick? Or just unhealthy? It might be difficult to tell. Alice might have a cough because she ate something that caused her to cough,, or because she is in the final stages of a cold. Presumably, if she is in the final stages of 'another' cold, then she has a cough because she is unhealthy - compared to Zizi - and because she is sick with a cold.

What is unhealthiness? Is there a difference between unhealthiness and sickness.

Merriam-Webster defines unhealthy as "not in good health : sickly, diseased".

People tend to use the words sickness, illness and disease interchangeably. Medical condition is sometimes used for special illnesses like a bone fracture, or bullet puncture - but, medical condition can also be used to name all variations of sickness, illness, disease and medical condition.

In our studies of health and healthiness, it is important to have a clearly defined meaning for unhealthiness.  Health has been defined as: a measure of the state of wellness of a personor community. Health can be seen as a measure, between 0 and 100 percent, that defines the state of wellness.  It is clear than that un-health should be the other percentage, the state of unwellness. 


For example, if your health score is 80 precent, which might be a higher than average score, then your unhealthiness would be 100 - 80, or 20 percent unhealthiness.  




We tend to think of unhealthiness is a condition that is within personal control.  This includes: 
 - poor nutrition 
 - poor cleanliness
 - laziness (insufficient exercise, insufficient mental stress, etc.)

Where is the line between unhealthiness and illness?  When does unhealthiness become a medical condition?  What does it mean when unhealthiness becomes a medical condition? 
This diagram shows a transition from healthiness to unhealthiness to medical condition. The black line represents the point of diagnosable illness. 

If you are simply 'unhealthy' by one of many measurements, you can change.  An unhealthy diet can be changed, improved and eventually become a healthy diet. Of course you can never be 100 percent healthy.  If you are ill, you might be able to increase your level of health - and become not ill - depending on the illness.

So can someone be 'unhealthy'?  In light of this information, it's difficult to define a specific line where unhealthiness begins.  We have no statistics on the health of 'normal people' so we can hardly define those who are 'unhealthy'. But of course it gets more complicated. 

The hierarchy of healthiness has 10 layers of health, from genetics to community health.

In each layer, we have a health score and, by subtracting the health score from 100, we can calculate an unhealthiness score for that area.

In this example, we can see a Community unhealthiness of 18, a Spirit unhealthiness of 22, etc to a Nutrient unhealthiness score of 32 and Genetic unhealthiness of 22. The overall unhealthiness score is 100-78 = 22.

Is healthiness, or unhealthiness is some areas more important than in other areas? Should some illnesses be classified as 'unhealthiness' instead of illness?  Will that help us to determine the best actions?




When we learn to measure healthiness effectively, we will also learn to measure unhealthiness.  And then we will have a better understanding of the choices we can make with regards to both our healthiness and our illnesses.

Illness (sickness)
 - can be diagnosed
 - often the result of external conditions (virus, germs, etc)
 - often a temporary condition (time heals all wounds)
 - may require treatment

Unhealthiness
 - a result of long term health actions or inactions
 - not a temporary condition - will not change without changes in activities
 - generally not affected by 'treatments' or medicines

We treat illness directly, and we treat unhealthiness indirectly, by healthy actions, for the most effective results.

It is important to ask ourselves, are we sick?  Or just unhealthy?

to your health, tracy
Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


www.personalhealthfreedom.com 

Friday, December 30, 2011

The Arts of Healthiness

Some people think I am against conventional medicines and techniques, and in favour of alternative medicines and techniques.  Not.

I am student of science, and of the arts. I believe in a scientific and an artistic approach to the studies of healthiness.

This diagram on our planet represents the layers of our healthiness, from our genetics to the highest levels of our communities.  Each body is comprised of the layers of the hierarchy of health; genetics, nutrients, cells, etc to the entire body. Each person is more than their body, having a spirit and existing in many communities.  Each of the layers is hierarchical, built on the layers below.  Each layer is greater than the sum of the parts below. All health is connected. Each layer can have an effect, positive or negative, on the health of layers above or below.

Illness is represented by red spots. Illness is isolated by its causes, although can affect all health areas. Illness might exist in a single layer, or cross layers.

Healthiness is larger than illness and disease.  Health is about the whole being, and includes illnesses. We all have some illness. Illness can exist in a single layer, be caused by a single factor, or may exist in many layers and might be caused by many  interacting factors. 

Our medical systems are very sophisticated, with surgical precision, not just in surgery, and scientific rigor. They are designed to search for illness, to identify illnesses, and to search for causes of illness and for treatments.

But they don't search for health. Strange? or normal? Health is all around, but we don't see it.  We are so busy looking for illness - that we can't see health for disease. We don't search for causes of healthiness. The tools we use to measure illness are very sophisticated.  We can use MRI to peer into the body and spot tumors before the cause any problems.  We have standardized tests for blood and tissues to search for signs of illness. The tools we use to measure healthiness are very rudimentary. This is because our understanding of health is very rudimentary.  It is also because the search for illness facilitates and forces a focus of attention.  If we are searching for cancer, we can look for spots that look like cancer. We focus our attention on those spots.

In the diagram above, you can search for illness in the red spots.  Of course illness in your body is not hi-lighted in red, but it stands out from the norm.  Our scientific processes search for something that is 'not normal' when we search for illness.

If you are searching for health, in the diagram above - where will you look?  Health is everywhere.  Even in the places where there is illness.  It is everywhere, and nowhere to be found. Because we assume that 'normal' is healthy - we neglect to measure healthiness. Each state of healthiness has a range that can be measured and should be measured to facilitate healthy targets.

We need to develop powerful scientific tools to understand and measure health.  And when we do - we will gain a much better understanding of illness.

There is a potential danger in our search for health.  The fields of illness, diagnosis, treatment, etc. have been doctopolized (doctor monopolized) by our medical systems.  It is illegal for a non-doctor to diagnose illness, to design, implement, produce or sell treatments, or in any way to 'practice medicine'.  This monopoly is created and upheld on the theory that it minimizes risk to patients. But it has been extended so far that it increases risk for some patients.

In our studies of health - we must not make this same mistake.  We must make it better, not worse.  My blog is about health freedom.  I believe in medical freedom as well.  Illness is a subset of health. Medicine is a subset of healthicine.

We need an open investigation of health and healthiness to understand and improve individual health and health of our communities. We need to apply our science to learn about health.  But not just science.  One of the problems with our medical systems is 'over scientification'. A reliance on science's ability to separate right from wrong. To avoid the wide grey areas we don't understand.  Health exists in the areas we don't understand. Our reliance on 'clinical studies' of illness and treatment has been extended so far that it is no longer science.  Medical science has become dogma, not to be disputed, doubted, or diverged from or challenged - even when it is clearly deficient or incorrect.

We need to develop a science of health and healthiness.  And we need to go beyond that.  Science gives us techniques and tools of measurement.  Science gives us frameworks to understand and to develop further understandings.  But the structure of science limits the boundaries of a search. Science focuses our attention, but limits our view. We don't want to limit the boundaries of our search for healthiness.

We need to study and explore the arts of health.   Individually and collectively.

Science might, someday, tell us what nutrients are essential to health, and what amounts of each are optimal.  But nutrients compliment and conflict with each other. We need people to create and develop foods, meals, diets and supplements that help us to consume healthy nutrients in a healthy fashion. Then we can use science to measure the results.

Artists are the people who create things. 

There are many arts of health.  Music creation, expression, collaboration, and enjoyment are arts of healthiness.  When we are ill, music helps us heal.  When we are well, music makes us better.  When we sing, we feel. Dance is the art of movement - the art of body health. When we create our own dance, we improve our own health. When we dance, we heal. All movement is dance, the dance of life. The creation of dance takes our health to a higher plane. Drawing, painting, designing, writing -- creating; creating is art. Creating is healthy. We need to move our communities from consumption to creation.  To move our focus from productivity to creativity. From commerce to arts. For the health of it.

When we create, we are creating health. We need to create the science and art of healthiness. And then, maybe, we can truly learn the arts of medicines. As long as medicine remains solely the field of technicians - it will continually fail to reach our highest expectations.

We want our children to create beauty.  We want them to be artists - to rise above the mundane creations of builders, factory workers and technicians. We want them to live a better, healthier life.  We are all children.

yours in health,
tracy
Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


Monday, December 19, 2011

I won't make it out to work today, I've got two colds and a flu.

I won't make it out to work today,
I've got two colds and a flu.
I'm sniffing and sneezing,
My head's all stuffed up.
And now I'm hot, and cold too.

My body is aching,
My bones they are creaking,
I'm barfing and running to poo.
I can't make it out to work today,
I've got two colds and a flu.
...
(and I think I'm hung-over too...)

Did you ever have two colds at once?  How would you know? There are over 100 different types of virus that can cause a cold... Surely it is possible to get a cold, and then to get another cold within a few hours, or days, or even a week.

I always wondered about the folk wisdom:

"with proper treatment, you can cure a cold in 7 days,
if you leave it alone, it will go away in a week".

But sometimes a cold lasts 10 days, or two weeks, or maybe longer.  Maybe a 10 day cold is really a 7 day cold and another 7 day cold on day 3 of the first day?  Maybe a three week cold is actually three weak colds?

Maybe it's unfortunate that colds are so common, and so easily cured that few have noticed 'two colds at once'?

And what if you have a cold, and then you get the flu?  Or if you have the flu, and then you get the cold?  Can you have two flus (that doesn't even look like a word) at once?

How many different kind of flu are out there at once? Flu tends to go in waves, epidemics, so in general there is only one wave passing through - although it is possible to get two if you are in a flu area when another wave comes thru.  I think two flu infections are more serious than two colds.

Which is worse, a cold and a flu?  Or a flu and a cold?

No matter which comes first, I'm suspect it weakens your resistance to the other.

But maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe the first one puts your immune system on high alert - and therefore second is weaker.  I'm not sure I want to volunteer for this type of medical study.....

Take care this Christmas season, to your health, tracy
Personal Health Freedom

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 


ps. I'm not sick. I had this silly poem running around in my head.  And I retired 3 years ago, so I don't have to go out to work today, although there are lot of Christmas chores. I just had to share...

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Measurement of Healthiness Part 1: Measurements, Summaries and Goals



How can we measure healthiness?

Healthiness must be measured comprehensively, using the hierarchy of health. We need to measure many components in each layer in the hierarchy: genetics, nutrients, cells, tissues, organs, systems, body, mind, spirits and communities, to create a useful measure of healthiness.

There are many different types of 'health measurement', some of which are more appropriate, more accurate, and more effective than others.

Direct vs Indirect Measurements
It is silly to measure brightness by searching shadows, and superficial to measure healthiness by searching sicknesses.

Health measurements should measure healthiness as directly as possible. Resting heart rate is a direct measurement of healthiness. Heart rate after exercise is a measurement of strength, not a measurement of healthiness.  Erratic heart rate is a measure of illness, not a direct measurement of healthiness, although it can be a useful indirect measurement of healthiness.

Illness and death measurements and statistics are indirect measurements of health, and should be viewed with caution. Death statistics and illness statistics might measure healthiness of a community, or not.  Improvements in medicine can help people live longer without actually increasing their healthiness. Improvements in, or changes to diagnostic protocols can increase illness statistics without actually decreasing healthiness.

Tests against a Scale vs Binary Measurements

Scales of healthiness are more useful than yes/no answers. A effective healthiness scale clearly identifies and quantifies the grey areas that exist in all aspects of health. It is much more powerful, from a health point of view, to say 'your pulse rate is 10 percent above your optimum'. Of course it is extremely difficult to identify optimum health measurements for different groups of people and more difficult for individuals. Difficult should not stop us from trying.

Tests that provide results on a scale, need independent scoring for variations above and below the optimum goal. If your pulse target is 50 beats per minute - and your heart rate is 50 bpm below the target - you are dead.  But if your heart rate is 50 above the target, it is still within the 'acceptable' range from an illness point of view. You could easily be alive with a heart rate well above 100 bpm.

Objective over Subjective

Health measurements that are more objective are preferred over subjective measurements, although both may be relevant. A measurement of your pulse rate by a professional, even by an amateur, is a more accurate and useful measurement than asking - does your heart seem to beat faster than it should?

Targets should be Health Oriented, not Illness Avoidance Oriented

As discussed in a prior blog post: Are You Measuring Illness or Healthiness? a measurement of your pulse that is intended to detect illness uses a different target than a healthiness measurement.  If you are not ill, your resting pulse might be somewhere in a wide range, from 60 to 100 beats per minute. The result of the illness test is binary - you are in the healthy range (healthy) or not (ill). A healthiness test, on the other hand, will have a target - which might be 50 beats per minute - and detect the amount of deviation from the health target - giving a result on a scale.

Avoid tests with Short Term Temporary Variations

A test of alertness is not a test of healthiness - it may be a test of how awake the subject is, or how much coffee or alcohol they have consumed in the last few hours. It is not a test of healthiness. A measurement of illness needs to know 'are you sick right now'.  A measurement of healthiness is more useful if it tells 'how healthy you are this month', ignoring the temporary, short term deviations. Resting pulse rate is more relevant than 'randomly tested pulse rate'.

Summary Measurements

Because the measurement of healthiness is in its infancy, we have not developed any techniques to summarize different measurements to create a healthiness profile for each layer in the hierarchy, nor a overall healthiness profile. As we learn to measure healthiness - we will learn which measurements more accurately represent overall healthiness, and which are less useful.  A fundamental goal for summary measurements is to ensure that the summary for each layer is on a scale of zero to 100 percent.


Multiple Goals are Required

It is important that health scales, against which a measurement is compared, be as comprehensive as possible.  A measurement of Vitamin C consumption might compare the result of the measurement against the minimum RDA (Recommended Daily Allowance), the minimum RDI (Recommended Daily Intake), the maximum UL (Upper Limit) as well as optimal recommendations from various sources.  At this time - there are no officially recognized optimal rates for consumption of Vitamin C for healthiness. We must rely on the best available sources - and not throw up our hands in resignation.

Each person must have the freedom to make their own decisions, and even adjust their own goals, based on information available from multiple sources.  It will be valuable to compare analysis using different sources of target goals.


Presentation of Results

Analysis of the results of a series of healthiness measurements will require sophisticated techniques, that change as we learn more about healthiness.  It is essential that healthiness measurements be stored in a computer system so that they can easily be brought forward and re-analyzed as theory develops.  Let's look at a hypothetical subject: Alice.

Alice has many aspects of her healthiness measured today, and scores calculated for each layer in the HH (Hierarchy of Health). The measurements - are clearly defined. The calculated scores are based on current knowledge about healthiness.

In two years, Alice might have her healthiness tested again. There may be more measurements taken, and some might be no longer considered relevant - therefore not measured. The scoring algorithm will have changed as well. Over time, our knowledge about healthiness will change - but the measurements made today are historical and do not change.

When Alice receives her results, two years from today she will receive a fresh analysis of her healthiness at each level in the hierarchy - and an overall healthiness result.

She will also want to have a comparison of her new results with today's results - based on the new analysis model.  Of course the new model will may have different measurements - some new and possibly some missing.

An effective comparison must compare the measurements that are the same, and if possible extrapolate some measurements that are missing - and then prepare a comparative analysis based on the measurements that are common. This is clearly a job for a computer program - which will also evolve over time as we learn more about meta-healthiness.

Measurement of Healthiness - Current Status

It is clear that we do not measure healthiness in any comprehensive fashion today.  It may be a long time before we develop efficient and effective techniques to measure healthiness. We do have some individual measurements of healthiness, but even those are suspect and may be very poor quality. We have not yet analyzed any health measurements to determine if they are effective in measuring healthiness.

Health Freedom

I believe we might never have absolute answers about health and healthiness.  There will, and should always be, conflicting ideas and opinions.  Each individual must make their own decisions and must be free to make decisions affecting their healthiness. We have much room for our knowledge to grow.

yours in health, tracy
Personal Health Freedom

ps. If you enjoy my posts, please share - and you might LIKE my facebook page

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: