You don't know Health! Why we need Personal Health Freedom.

I believe in Personal Health Freedom. Why do I believe we need Personal Health Freedom?

Because: You don't know health.

Our medical system is designed to treat disease. It works by diagnosis of disease, and treatment based on diagnosis. This is a very powerful technique that has developed a powerful suite of tools to treat disease.

However, we know almost nothing about health. Health is poorly defined, typically not defined without  reference to illness. Health is not measured. We have no idea how to measure health - as opposed to illness. Most measurements of health consist of zero or 100 percent: unhealthy or healthy.

I have tried, and tried to find a useful definition of health, to guide my own personal actions.

If we surf over to the World Health Organization, for example, their homepage lists hundreds of links about illness and medicine.  There are a few links labeled 'health...', but when you view those links you soon learn that the word health should be replaced with illness. Health Care Technology says "see Biomedical Technology". Health Services quickly reverts to 'medical services'.  Health surveys 'measure many topics including mortality, disease occurrence,  intervention coverage and risk behaviors'.  Health surveys do not, it seems, actually measure health. This is understandable.  Many of the people on our planet are ill.  Maybe even 'most people', if you look closely enough.  The World Health Organization focuses its attention on that majority.

You can search 'alternative health' sources with similar results.  Alternative Health providers are not studying, nor providing 'health'. They are providing alternative medicines and alternative medical approaches.  I applaud them for their efforts and their results.  But they are not about health. They're about treating and avoiding illness.

There are literally thousands of unanswered, even 'unquestioned questions about health'. These are the subjects of my blog. Many of these questions might never be answered. I believe the only way we can answer these questions is by exercising our personal health freedoms.

What don't we know about health?

What is health? Is there a model of health that provides a complete picture of many aspects of health (nutrient health, cellular health, organ health, etc) in an appropriate hierarchical structure where we can see how each affects the other? (I have created one because I could not find one).  And while were at it, what is illness?  What are the primary causes of illness?  I created this model as well, after searching in vain for a useful model of illness.

How do you measure health effectively? How do you measure the health of a person?  Is your father 80 percent healthy?  50 percent?  How do you measure the health of a diet on a scale of zero to 100 percent? With what level of accuracy?  When is a non-diet (fasting) healthy?  How healthy? How do you measure the health of your muscle cells?  Your connective tissues?  You heart, your liver?  How do you measure your mind health (awareness, memory, calculation, etc).  How do you measure your spiritual health?  Your community health?

What nutrients are recommended to optimize health in humans?  In what amounts?

The situation with Vitamin C is a perfect example of the incomplete results from the medical paradigm.  We know that Vitamin C is 'vital'.  It is required for a healthy life.  But check the research into Vitamin C and you will find a minimum of facts and a maximum of BS.  The only facts to be found are the disease (scurvy) caused by severe deficiency of Vitamin C , the treatment program for scurvy; the recommended minimum daily consumption amount of Vitamin C; and some discussion of the maximum amount of Vitamin C that can be tolerated without 'side effects'.  Side Effects are a medical term that applies to the treatment of an illness.  Side effects do not occur when taking Vitamin C for health - there are simply positive and negative health effects.

The BS about Vitamin C is huge.  Does Vitamin C prevent the common cold?  The Flu?  Should you take mega-doses of Vitamin C, or not.  Does Vitamin C prevent heart disease. The news media pays attention to the controversy, as if it was a political argument. But when you look closely, you will see that the BS is about Vitamin C and illness, not about Vitamin C and health.

The important question is ignored, not researched and not newsworthy.   How much Vitamin C is healthy?  How does Vitamin C improve your health?  How does Vitamin C interact with other nutrients?  How should Vitamin C be consumed to maximize the health benefits?  Which of the 8 or more different types of Vitamin C available is the most healthy?  Which is least healthy?  Is a combination the most healthy? Does the healthiest consumption level of Vitamin C improve some health areas, while decreasing health in other areas?
 
These are some of the 'personal health' questions about Vitamin C. At present, there are no answers, and not even the slightest clue among scientists with regard to 'how to go about answering' these questions.  The same issues exist with many health factors.  There is no controversy because there is little awareness that questions exist.

Why don't we know the answers?  Why is there no research into health, as opposed to illness? Because we don't measure health.  We cannot measure health effects until we can measure health. 

Are certain exercises likely to improve, or degrade health? Does competition in sports, at various levels, improve or degrade health status in the short term, medium term, long term?

How does a healthy diet relate to mind health? How do toxins, like caffeine, alcohol and lead consumption affect mind health?

Is health the same as 'well being'? What are the current theories, or philosophies of health? What is the matter with Mary Jane?

Is Thanksgiving good for your health?

So many questions, so few answers...

Every day, we each make our own, personal health decisions. Many of these decisions are restricted by corporations and governments, placing limits on our freedoms - without a clear understanding of health or health objectives.

You don't know health.  But you do know yourself.  You know more about your health than anyone else.  You know much more about your individual, personal health and how it ebbs and flows than you could ever tell your doctor in a 15 minute visit about a specific problem.  You know about your health - and you have the right to make decisions based on your objectives, and your knowledge. The right to information. The right to learn. And the right to make choices. And the right to change your mind.

We all have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of healthiness.   These rights are unconditional.
You have a right to Personal Health Freedom. 


Yours in health,
tracy

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 

What is the difference between health and illness?

Our medical systems do not study health and hardly study illness, preferring the concept of 'disease', which is controlled by the medical profession.  As a result, there are no useful definitions of health or illness to be found in medical reference texts. There is also no simple definition of disease. We can only say that "a disease is what a doctor diagnoses".  It is sometimes said that "A patient visits a doctor with an illness, and goes home with a disease."

Summary

Healthicine, the arts and sciences of health and healthiness, provides clear useful definitions for health and healthiness:

Health is a general term covering all aspects of healthinesses.
Ill is a general term covering all aspects of illnesses. An illness is a specific instance of ill.  An illness consists of a cause (the drop in healthiness or increase in unhealthiness) and the negative consequences of that cause.

A healthiness is a specific instance of health. We can compare healthiness, not health, to illness.

This diagram illustrates the difference between healthiness and illness.

Health is whole. An illness is a hole in health. A healthiness is a specific instance of health, a whole, consisting of healthinesses and unhealthinesses.

Illness appears when healthiness drops to the illness threshold. It is cured when healthiness rises again, above the illness threshold. However, when unhealthiness breaks through the illness threshold, it might fall much farther due to other consequences of the illness, as shown above.

Discussion

To clearly understand these basic concepts of health and illness, we need first to clarify what we mean by 'health' in the study of healthicine. In English we often use the word 'health' to refer to illness, or medical care. Health Care is actually care for those who are ill, and would more accurately be called 'Illness Care'.  Health Insurance insures against high cost of medical illness.  It pays for medical expenses in case of illness.Health insurance is actually 'medical insurance' or 'illness insurance'.

We also need to recognize that health is a general concept, while an illness is a specific case in a specific patient. Health, or healthy, is the opposite of ill, or sickly, general statements, not specific cases.

Instead of asking, "What is the difference between health and illness?" we need to ask:

What is the difference between a healthiness and an illness? 

Disease

What about disease?  Should we, be asking about the differences between healthiness and disease?

No. There are many important differences between illness and a disease..

A disease is a very specific illness defined such that it can be diagnosed by a medical professional. 

An illness must be present before a disease can be diagnosed.  Some illnesses cannot be diagnosed as diseases. Some are diagnosed incorrectly, or over diagnosed or under diagnosed. Many illnesses are not diseases, some diseases are not illnesses. The ICD10, International Classification of Diseases, Version 10, is a list of about 16,000 disease names used for statistical tracking of diseases, medical conditions, and mortality. However, the goal of the ICD10 is to be inclusive of anything that might be diagnosed worldwide.  As a result, it distinguishes poorly between signs and symptoms, disabilities and handicaps, diseases and more. In some cases even specific tests billed as a disease. Diseases, the concept of a disease, is very poorly defined in modern medicine, because the goal is not to create a scientific classification, but to be inclusive of every conventional doctor around the world - although not every medical practice.

Is illness less well defined than disease in current medical practice.  A patient can have an illness that has no name. However, an illness must be present before it can be diagnosed as a disease. An illness might arrive and be cured by natural activities, or by the health of the patient, before it is diagnosed. Many, perhaps most cases of illness, like the common cold, influenza, and food poisoning, are never diagnosed.

To understand the differences between healthiness and illness, we need a clear, simple definition of illness.

In healthicine: an illness is a single, measurable instance of 'ill'.  

A simple illness, an illness element, is defined as:

The intersection of a single cause, or causal chain, and the resulting negative signs and symptoms:

• every illness has a cause. Every cause is part of a chain of causes identified by asking 'What is the cause of this cause?' when a cause is identified, or by digging deeper with questions like "what causes of illness are caused by this cause".  In order to better understand the illness, and to better search for cures, we might also ask the question: "How is the patient benefiting from this cause?"
• every illness is a negative judgement with negative signs and symptoms, resulting from the cause.

An illness is a concept, not a thing.  It exists as a concept, when we link a cause with negative consequences.  The cause, in itself, is not the illness.  It is possible to have the cause without illness being present.  The cause does not always cause an illness. It is also possible to have the signs and symptoms of a specific illness, without having that illness.  There is overlap between signs and symptoms of many different illnesses. A specific illness only exists when a specific cause leads to negative signs and symptoms.

A simple illness is an illness element. A complex illnesses consist of combinations of simple illness elements, with a single cause.  A compound illness has multiple causal chains, consists of multiple
illness elements.

In healthicine: a healthiness is a single, measurable instance of health.

Health is not a single thing, any more than illness is a single thing. An indication of healthiness requires two measurements that form a percentage to create an indicator of healthiness or of unhealthiness. Health is whole.  A healthiness is a measurable instance of health. The corresponding unhealthiness is the inverse of the measurement of healthiness. When we measure a healthiness, or an unhealthiness, we can calculate the inverse, because by definition, healthiness and unhealthiness add up to 100 percent. When healthiness grows, unhealthiness shrinks.  When unhealthiness grows, healthiness shrinks. Together, they make up the wholeness of health.

A simple measurement, like blood pressure cannot be a measurement of healthiness in itself.  It can be a useful measurement if it includes another measurement - for example, a health goal.  If a person's blood pressure exactly matches their health goal, their blood pressure healthiness is 100 percent.  In most cases, their blood pressure healthiness does not exactly match the goal.  For example, if the patient's blood pressure healthiness is within 90 percent, higher or lower, than their goal, their blood pressure healthiness is 90 percent, and their blood pressure unhealthiness is 10 percent. Of course a single measure of blood pressure is a very weak measure of healthiness, because blood pressure varies widely throughout the day, and as a result of exercise and restful actives.

At present, there are no standards for measuring healthiness, no standards for measuring unhealthiness.  We can develop standards, and improve them, but today, there are none. Healthinesses are many, rich, varied, compound and and complex. 

Hierarchy of Healthiness

We can see a big picture view of healthiness in a hierarchy of healthicine which includes both components and processes.

At the foundation, healthiness begins with genetics, and nutrition.  Genetics is the template,  the master plan for how our individual health will become us.

Nutritional healthiness is the health of our diet, with regards to nutrients necessary and responsible for health. Many nutrients affect our health positively, and many affect it negatively.  Even nutrients that affect health positively, can also affect health negatively when they are deficient or when excessive.  In addition, a nutrient that is valuable for one person, or one life entity, might be dangerous to another.

Cells arise when genetic elements successfully cooperate, with the aid of nutrients, to create living cellular entities. Cellular healthiness is health of the cells, including healthy bacteria. Our bodies are made of hundreds of different types of cells. Many of them are not 'ours', not human cells.

Tissues, and tissue healthiness emerges when cells cooperate.  Healthy tissues require cells to act in competition - to create healthier cells, and in cooperation to create healthy tissues - muscle tissue, connective tissues, etc.

Organs and limbs emerge when tissues cooperate.  Healthy limbs and organs require cells to compete as individuals, and to cooperate as tissues. They also require tissues that compete and cooperate in health as individuals and as members of the community - the organ or limb. Heart and lungs, arms
and legs, are made up of cooperating communities of tissues.

Organs, tissues and cells cooperate to function as systems to create healthy circulatory systems, respiratory systems, digestive systems and more. Limbs cooperate and coordinate to create healthy, complex patterns of movement.

Thus, in cooperation, genetics, nutrients, cells, tissues, organs and systems comprise healthy bodies.  But that's not sufficient to understand healthiness. We also need to study intentions, or spirits. Cooperation drives to the next level.  But at every level, intentions are the life spirits of individual entities.

Every cell has individual intentions, to live, to grow, to reproduce, to evolve, to eat and excrete.  As long as it acts on those intentions, it is alive.  When it ceases to act on those intentions, or when those intentions cease to be, it is dead. Intentions are the spirits of life.  When a cell loses its life spirits, it is dead.

Every tissue also has intentions of life.  They are different intentions, at a higher level than the intentions of a cell.  However, we can see that the tissues also want to live, to grow, and to evolve. 

Each individual tissue type has other intentions - which, from our egotistic perspective, we call functions, as they serve our body. Connective tissues intend to hold parts of the body together.  Bone tissues provide structure. Muscle tissues facilitate coordinated movements. Nervous tissues sense internal and external environments and communicate what is sensed to other tissues and cells. When a tissue loses its intention, its life spirits, it might go astray, and become a cancerous tissue, or simply die. In many life entities, the loss of some tissues is not a problem.  Plants, trees, and even some animals can shed tissues, limbs and other body parts, and continue to grow and thrive.

Nervous tissues work with bodily organs and limbs to coordinate and enhance function and to ensure coordination with the whole body. As the body rises in sophistication nervous tissues form into nervous systems, a system that senses and communicates information about sound, information about sight, and information about smell. As nervous tissues cooperate, they raise the complexity and create brain modules, nervous tissues that can filter information, remember past events, even calculate and predict future events. These tissues have intentions to encourage cooperation throughout the entire body.  Those intentions become our most important intentions, or spirits of life.

When these brain components begin to cooperate, a higher level life entity develops, one that gradually - as complexity rises, gains conscious sense of self, even conscious of the mind itself.

The mind emerges from the cooperation of processes in nervous tissue bundles, of brain components and sensory components. However, the mind is an active cooperation and competition not of physical components, but a cooperation and competition of memories and processes. Ideas and memories in the mind develop into life intentions and spirits of the individual. The mind rises above the status of a simple organ or organ system, even above the physical body.

The intentions of the mind, the spirits of the mind, are the spirits of life in higher level animals. If the spirit wants to live, and pushes the body to live, sometimes to unbelievable, or seemingly impossible actions.  Sometimes, the spirits decide there is no point in pushing, the entity loses the life spirit, and dies. When the highest level spirits, or intentions of a life entity fade and die, all lower layers of spirits also die quickly.

The primary layers of healthiness are genetics, nutrients, cells, tissues, limbs and organs, bodily systems, body, mind, and spirits. Each layer interacts with every other layer in the symphony of every individual life entity.  Our cells interact with our organs.  Their spirits interact with the spirits of tissues, organs, and every other layer.  The interaction of two different layers of healthiness is a secondary aspect of the study of healthiness.

Health exists in every individual component, and in every process and every community. Communities in lower layers become individual components in higher layers competing with other components, cooperating to raise the bar to the next level.

 You can learn more about the primary and secondary disciplines of health here.
There is one more layer in the hierarchy of healthicine.

Community is the final layer of the hierarchy.  At every layer, as noted, the path to the next layer is through cooperation, through community.  Communities of genetics and nutrients give rise to living cells.  Communities of living cells give rise to tissues.  Communities of tissues create limbs and organs.  Communities of organs create organ systems and the body. Communities of process build the the mind, and the spirits.
Many animals also live in communities, families.  When we look closely, even simple living plants live in communities, competing and cooperating.  Humans take this farther.  We create communities for many purposes - and the healthiness of these communities affects and is affected by all of the members.  Our healthiness does not stop at our bodies, it is affected by, and has effects upon our communities.

If we want to measure health, or healthiness, completely - we need to measure the health of each layer. Which brings us back to the question.  What is the difference between healthiness and illness?
Healthiness is the opposite of unhealthiness. Unhealthiness is the opposite of healthiness.
What is illness?  An illness is a hole in health. An illness is the absence of specific aspects of healthiness. As stated, every illness is negative.  Every illness is a judgement.  Every illness has a cause, and negative consequences.  Because of the complex hierarchy of healthiness, an illness in a single area might have negative consequences in many different areas of healthiness.

Illness

Simple, or elementary illnesses have specific causes.  Scurvy is caused by a deficiency of Vitamin C (in theory), a single cause, a single causal chain.

There are three basic types of elementary illnesses and they can be represented in a circle:
 - causal illnesses elements have an active cause. The cure is to address the cause.
 - injury illnesses elements consist of damage to body, mind, spirit, or community. The cause is gone.
The cause is in the past.  Injury illnesses are cured by healing.
 - blockage illnesses elements block the natural healthy flows of life. The cause is gone, in the past. Blockage illnesses are cured by transformation, which often causes damage that must be healed.

Most illnesses are cured by health, by healthy activities. Each illness element requires an individual cure. A single cure cures a single illness element.

A complex illness consists of two or more elements of a simple illness element, with a single cause.  For example, a case of scurvy might be so severe that it not only causes signs and symptoms of scurvy, but also causes injuries. A complex illness requires two cures.  A complex scurvy illness requires a causal cure - to address the cause of the illness, and a healing cure, to heal the damage done by the illness.

Compound illnesses - are the result of multiple causes, with similar or overlapping signs and symptoms, often interacting over long periods of time. Many common compound illnesses can also exist as simple illnesses.  Depression can be a simple illness, with a single cause - or a compound illness consisting of several depression illness elements, each with individual causes or causal chains.

Our medical (health care) systems focus time, energy and money on prevention of disease, treatment of disease and (occasionally) curing disease. In current medical theory, most diseases cannot be cured. Little attention is paid to healthiness. Health insurance will not pay for you to improve your healthiness - if you have no disease.  If you have no disease, you cannot go to a doctor or a hospital and expect treatment.

Improving your healthiness is personal, it's up to you.

to your health, tracy
Founder: Healthicine
Note: This post was first published in 2011. It has been updated several times, with a compete revision in November 2017, as the study of healthicine progresses and provides new insights.

Mercola on Health Liberty

Today, Mercola issued a blog about a new organization called Health Liberty.  It appears to be a loose coalition of a number of organizations with specific health or illness objectives, with little overall focus on true health freedom.  You can find them here. http://www.facebook.com/health.liberty 

Although I believe this is a valuable coalition, it falls far short of an initiative that might reasonably be called 'health liberty'.   There is little or no reference to health, or understanding health (as opposed to illness).  And virtually no reference to liberty except in specific situations (vaccinations, dental mercury, organic foods).  How can you recognize someone who is truly working for health freedom?   Check these three simple objectives:

We need to support the Universal Declaration of Health Freedom at: http://personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2010/11/universal-declaration-of-health-freedom.html as a minimal starting point to health liberty.

We need to work to better understand health: nutritional health, cellular health, tissue health, organ health, system health, body health, mind health, spritual health and community health.  An overall, structural understanding as opposed to trying to tackle specific health areas where there are controversies, see: http://personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2010/07/primary-and-secondary-disciplines-of_27.html for a starting point.

We need to focus on optimal health, instead of simply trying to avoid illness. We have a right to pursue optimal health in all aspects. How much Vitamin C should you consume for Optimal Health? How much coffee? How much exercise? We need to learn to measure health effectively to answer these questions.  Measuring illness is insufficient and counter productive when pursuing health freedoms.

As for illness?  Once we understand the primary causes of illness:deficiencies or excesses of genetics, nutrients, parasites, toxins, stress, and growth and healing. http://personalhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2010/08/primary-causes-of-illness.html

we can progress to cataloging, by cause, many of the primary illnesses that are ignored today because they are below the threshold of a diagnosis.  Then we can move to catalog complex illnesses by cause.

When we work on these foundational initiatives, we will move in the true direction of health and health freedom.

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 

What is a 'primary illness'?

We have a definition of health, from a health perspective, as opposed to the more traditional 'medical perspective'.  We have an understanding of the primary causes of illness, from a health perspective as opposed to a more traditional medical perspective.

We can define 'primary illness' as an illness that is the result of a single primary cause.  Scurvy is a primary illness caused by a deficiency of Vitamin C.  Dehydration is a primary illness caused by a deficiency of water. Water intoxication is caused by drinking too much water.  Broken bones can be caused by too much physical stress.


We have identified 6 primary illness factors, 12 primary causes of illness - deficiency or excesses of genetics, nutrients, parasites, toxins, stress, growth and healing.  Each of those may have hundreds of 'primary illnesses', many of which are not studied by our medical establishment.


The primary cause of illness, and the causes of all primary illnesses are simple imbalances.  Once we realize this, we can see that many illnesses have no name and are not studied.   In this article, I focus on primary nutritional illnesses:

a) we know of over 100 individual nutrients that are essential to health. We do not have scientific agreement on which nutrients are essential to health.

b) therefore, over 100 individual primary illnesses can be caused by deficiencies of individual nutrients

c) and, presumably, over 100 individual primary illnesses can be caused by excesses of individual nutrients

Some of these illnesses are clearly understood when the deficiency is severe, but not well studied when the deficiency is not severe. Severe deficiency of Vitamin A is known to cause blindness, poor immune system function, and poor bone growth.  Mild Vitamin A deficiency?  Not studied as far as I know. Is the name given to mild Vitamin A deficiency - 'Vitamin A deficiency' or is there no name?  What is the test for Vitamin A deficiency?  I believe is no well accepted, effective test for Vitamin A deficiency - I can only hope that someone proves me wrong someday.

Vitamin B1 deficiency causes beriberi - or is beriberi the name of severe Vitamin B1 deficiency? What is the name of, what are the symptoms of low level Vitamin B1 deficiency? What is a good test for minor Vitamin B1 deficiency?

Nutrition is the foundation of health.  Nutritional deficiencies and excesses can, in many cases be prevented by simple positive or negative actions.  Consume nutrients that are deficient, avoid or minimize nutrients that are in excess. Nutritional prevention is the most powerful tool of Personal Health Freedom, because it is most easily affected by personal choice. Personal choice is especially important in light of the poor quantity and quality of information about nutritional deficiencies and excesses.

Nutritional illnesses are also very easy to acquire.  Simple in-attention to diet, dietary drift, or dietary simplicity (meat and potatoes diet, pizza diet) can easily result in minor nutritional deficiencies in a very short time period - and severe nutritional deficiencies over a long period.

But are they detected? Health deficits (illnesses) is typically ignored until they become severe illnesses.

We often think of ourselves as Perfectly Healthy, in truth we are probably all suffering from some health deficiencies that are not measured.  Our bodies have amazing power to overcome the dis-advantages of minor health deficits and even severe health deficits.  The medical paradigm does not recognize a health deficit until it becomes an illness to be treated. By this time, may primary illnesses or health deficits have combined to create a complex web of causes, symptoms and illnesses.

Illnesses are mysterious entities, identified by symptoms, not by causes. Thus, the natural reaction is to treat the symptoms rather than search for causes.  If you go to a doctor because you have a bad cold - the cold may be treated.  It is unlikely that your immune system will be tested, and less likely that you will be tested for any of the many primary causes of a weak immune system.

From one point, this is understandable - the medical establishment is, as they saying goes, 'up to their ass in alligators'.  But it is time to think about draining the swamp.

We need a methodical, scientific study of illnesses and primary illness if we are to move our understanding of health beyond the current medical paradigm.

And until we have the results of these studies, and maybe long after - we need the freedom to choose our nutrients, our foods. Many of governments are actively working to limit the nutrients we can consume - and also to limit the foods that can be studied in scientific studies. These limits are put forth as 'consumer protection legislation' - they are often simply health freedom limitations and a recipe for a health deficient future.

Health be with you.

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 

Health and Illness = Light and Darkness?

I like to think in parallels.  Can we draw a parallel between the concepts of light and darkness and our understanding of health and illness?

Illness is easily compared to darkness, or dark corners.  It is often hidden away, difficult to discern or recognize.  We can imagine a transition from light to darkness, corresponding to the similar transition from healthiness to illness. We often speak of the darkness of mental illness, the blackness of unhealthy tissue, and we know that black stools can indicate internal bleeding.  Health is viewed as bright and alive with colours.


Like most parallels, this comparison provides some useful insights.  It closely matches the 'medical paradigm' where illness is bad and health is good.

It is a useful metaphor - but its weakness is a focus on illness.  We need a metaphor that has a focus on health.  And as we develop a metaphor for health, as we view illness and health thru a different lens, we will see things that could not be seen thru the medical paradigm.

Healthiness is not measured by brightness, nor colour, it is measured by balance. The more our nutrition, cells, tissues, organs, etc are in living balance - the healthier we are. Health is the living balance between deficiency and excess. Our bodies are always working to maintain the balance - when we lose balance - we become ill and may die. When we view health as thousands of balances, and illness as being severely out of balance - it is easy to imagine that we have many small illnesses all of the time.

We cannot shine a light on illness to create or improve health.  We cannot improve health by 'cutting out' the darkness (illness). We can only improve health by changing the balance.  I often use Vitamin C as an example, but you can substitute many health factors and come to similar insights.

Viewed through the medical paradigm, scurvy is illness, or darkness.  Scurvy can be prevented by consuming sufficient Vitamin C.  If scurvy is present, it can be treated with Vitamin C. The effects of severe scurvy cannot be 'cured' - if you lose teeth because of scurvy, Vitamin C will not grow them back. This is a useful paradigm to prevent or treat illness, but a poor paradigm to optimize health.

Viewed through the healthy balance paradigm, scurvy is not simply an illness, it is an imbalance - a prolonged deficiency of Vitamin C. If you are suffering from a deficiency of Vitamin C - you can improve your health by adding Vitamin C to your diet. It is useless and trivial to say "Vitamin C prevents scurvy" because it is the same saying "Vitamin C prevents Vitamin C deficiency". Vitamin C does not 'cure' a Vitamin C deficiency.  Vitamin C does not prevent, nor cure scurvy.  A deficiency of Vitamin C is scurvy.  The medical paradigm only recognizes this when the deficiency is severe and prolonged. It may well be that people who are exposed to prolonged minor deficiencies of Vitamin C, or severe short deficiencies of Vitamin C develop conditions exactly like scurvy - but on a much smaller scale, not recognized as 'illness'.  When we can accurately measure 'healthiness', as opposed to only measuring 'illness', we will see the effects of Vitamin C deficiency earlier and understand much more about healthiness.

The challenge, even in the simplest situation, is to determine what is 'out of balance'.  The symptoms of prolonged severe Vitamin C deficiency are well documented and easily recognized - and named scurvy.  However, a minor Vitamin C deficiency has symptoms in common with many other problems.  So, how can you know if you are suffering from a minor Vitamin C deficiency?

Medical researchers do not attempt to define the 'healthiest' intake of Vitamin C.  Medical researchers cannot even agree on the recommended 'minimum intake' of Vitamin C.  The United Kingdom Food Standards Agency recommends a minimum of 40 mg per day.  The World Health (so called) Organization recommends a minimum of 45 mg per day (although they claim to be a 'health organization' they do not make a recommendation for optimal health). Health Canada (so called, they also do not make a recommendation for optimal health) recommends 75 to 90 mg per day as a minimum.  The National Academy of Sciences in the USA recommends 60 to 95 mg per day as a minimum.   Although each of these numbers may be presented as the 'recommended healthy intake', the numbers are very specifically designed to be used by prisons, armies, schools, etc to ensure that minimum nutritional needs are met.  No official organization recommends a 'healthiest daily intake of Vitamin C', or of any nutrient.

How can you decide what is healthiest intake of Vitamin C for you?  This is your personal health decision. You need the right to decide for yourself - your personal health freedom.

Vitamin C is a health factor that has a very wide 'healthy balance' area.  Our bodies can compensate for low or high consumption of Vitamin C quite effectively.  Vitamin C is very well tolerated in excess, or as  deficiency for short periods of time. In contrast, a deficiency of oxygen can have rapid, severe consequences while selenium and iron can have toxic effects at very low levels.  In each case, health exists at the balance between deficiency and toxicity.  If we try to understand this using the light vs darkness paradigm, it is as if there is only light in the centre - and darkness at both ends of the balance.

A healthy body maintains thousands of health balances, as best it can.  When one or more of the health components goes out of balance, your body does its best to compensate and to bring you back to balance.  When you lose your ability to maintain the balance of life, you tip and die.

Can you be perfectly healthy?  Can a light be perfectly bright?  Maybe, just before it destroys you.  I love photography, but I can't take a picture unless I can see both light and darkness.

Can your body be only 'healthy' with no 'unhealthy' components? No.  Your body is composed of hundreds of different types of cells.  Each cell type lives, divides and dies at a clearly understood rate.  Some of your cells are young and vigorous.  Some are dead or dying.  This is a normal aspect of our healthy state.  Our healthy balance does not just exist for a moment, it is a living balance always adjusting and moving forward.

Is health and illness like light and darkness?  This useful metaphor is insufficient to a full understanding of health, and of health freedom.  We need to move beyond it - to a new paradigm with a focus on health. A healthy balance.

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 

Toothpaste Rant

Today is senior's day at the local drug store - time to stock up on supplies.  But not toothpaste evidently.  I generally buy Sensodyne Original.  I used to buy it there. Not that I'm partial to Sensodyne, just that it is one of, possibly the only toothpaste commonly available (outside of health food stores) toothpaste that does not contain fluoride.  But, as the clerk said "If it's not on the shelf, we don't sell it."

My local drug store, like most big chains, has over 50 different flavours of toothpaste.  I say 'flavours', because there is only one basic 'formula', and only four or five different brands - most of the 50 different entries made by Crest or Colgate, followed by Sensodyne.  Every one of the 50 different toothpastes contain fluoride.

I have seen studies suggesting that fluoride reduces cavities.  Ditto for triclosan.  I'm not interested.

I would be interested in scientific studies if they were 'scientific' enough to take ALL of the known recipes for toothpaste and test them against each other, and publish all of the results.  And if a new toothpaste recipe is proposed, let it go thru the same tests.  Using scientific tests to find the BEST TOOTHPASTE would be a great idea, and a great ongoing project - where short term and long term results could be measured.  That's how scientific studies of medicines should be designed.  What are the short term results?  What are the long term results?  Most people use the same toothpaste recipe for decades.

But, scientific studies seldom, if every take the holistic approach to science - because they are designed to help market a specific drug or product.  So called 'scientific studies' are generally battles between A (the proposed new product) and B - and are only published if A wins by a conclusive margin. If A loses, the study may need to be re-defined. That's one of the reasons scientific studies are generally 'short term'.  The company wants to get the winner to market.  Most company funded 'scientific studies' are about as useful as the 'scientific study' showing that n percent of people prefer pepsi over coke.  You can make the test as 'scientific' as you like - the results are still garbage.

So much for Health Freedom in the toothpaste department.  As near as I can tell, Crest does not produce a toothpaste without fluoride.  Colgate produces many different toothpastes - only one that does not contain fluoride.  Ditto for Sensodyne.  My local drugstore does not sell a single toothpaste that does not contain fluoride.

Now maybe fluoride is good for your health.  Maybe not.  I do know that more than 10 countries have banned the addition of fluoride to water supplies - but still allow fluoride toothpaste.  I know that fluoride toothpastes have warnings on the package that say 'do not swallow' - and frankly, I don't want to brush my teeth with something that is not safe to swallow.

I want the freedom to make my own decision. I’d rather choose between 2 real toothpastes instead of 50 flavours of a single toothpaste recipe.

So, I will not buy toothpaste at my local, big chain, grocery store, and I will not buy toothpaste at my local, big chain, drugstore - because they restrict my freedom to choose a toothpaste that does not contain fluoride.  I find it a bit strange that our so called 'freedom based capitalist system' results in stores that limit my choices to flavours instead of substance.

I believe in Personal Health Freedom - if you want to purchase a toothpaste that contains fluoride, more power to you.  If you want a toothpaste that does not contain fluoride - I hope you have a nearby health food store.  I'll be driving a few extra miles to get mine, when my Sensodyne Original runs out.

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: 

Is Ramadan Good for Your Health?

We've come to the end of Ramadan and I thought I'd do some checking to see if Ramadan is good for the health of participants.  Turns out there is surprisingly little investigation of this question, and no definitive statements from medical researchers.  We might expect that - medical researchers are not HEALTH researchers after all.

There is surprisingly little definitive research results of whether fasting is good for your health.  Ramadan is a very special type of fasting - and perhaps more difficult to research. But why don't we know if fasting is healthy?

Studies of the effects of fasting on health fail due to the medical paradigm. A typical statement from the medical systems are like this WIKI quote " Benefits include reduced risks of cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, insulin resistance, immune disorders, and more generally, the slowing of the aging process, and the potential to increase maximum life span". Duh.. These are mostly medical benefits, not health benefits.  And the next step taken by the 'medical paradigm' is to measure the 'side effects' of fasting, as if fasting was a 'medicine'. I think trying to study health using the medical paradigm is a bit like trying to study darkness by shining a light on it.

Why don't we know if fasting is good for your health? Because we don't measure health.  We only measure illness.  And we don't have a solid framework to define and study health.  How can you measure health effects without a clear definition of health?

If you read my blog - you may know that I have developed  a framework for understanding and studying health, as opposed to illness. The primary components of health are nutritional health, cellular health, tissue health, organ health, systems health, body health, mind health, spirit health and community health.

With this framework we have useful way to study the effects of fasting on health. One step at a time.

What are the effects of fasting on:

Nutritional Health: at first glance we might think that fasting could not possibly improve nutritional health, but looking closer we can see at least two nutritional advantages.  First, if we eat the same, or similar foods repeatedly over a long time period our bodies are exposed to the toxins in those foods.  Every food contains some toxins.  By fasting, we stop our exposure to those toxins for the length of the fast, giving our bodies time to clear out and recover.  Secondly, many people fast by avoiding on some foods.  This may force consumption of more 'different foods'.  If the standard diet is deficient - the fasting diet may provide missing nutrients.  Both of these areas are potential rich areas of study - if we study health.  The first major stumbling block is that we don't have any validated, commonly used techniques to measure nutritional health.

Cellular Health: does fasting make our cells healthier?  I'm not sure we have any method of measuring overall cellular health. Can you imagine going to your doctor and she says "I'm sending you to the lab to test the health of your cells" - or even a subset "I'm sending you to the lab to test the health of your blood cells"  or "your skin cells". When we can measure cellular health, we can take the next step - to measure whether or not fasting improves cellular health in the short, medium and long term.  Of course we might learn that fasting improves the health of some types of cells and degrades the health of some other cells - there are hundreds of different types of cells in the body.

Tissue Health: does fasting improve tissue health?  Health proponents claim that fasting helps the body to clear toxins and improve tissue health.  Medical practitioners say... ?  Well, medical practitioners do not measure tissue health on a regular basis, so what could they say? Suffice to say they don't have any meaningful agreement on any meaningful statements. When we can reliably measure tissue health - we can take the next step and measure the effects of various types of fasting on tissue health.

Organ health: do you see a pattern here?  Medical practitioners research organ illness, but do not measure organ health in any useful fashion. It is not at all uncommon for someone to have a medical, be given a 'clean bill of health', and then rapidly succumb to organ failure that was not detected.  Because we don't measure organ health. When we learn to measure organ health effectively, we can measure the effects of fasting on organ health.

System Health: does fasting improve or degrade your circulatory system?  your lymphatic system?  your digestive system?  We don't measure system health, so how can we know?

Body Health: is the whole more that the sum of the parts?  The body is more than the sum of the cells, tissues and organs.  We need to learn to understand this more clearly.  To define 'body health' clearly enough that we have useful measurements of body health - separate from measurements of illness, before we can measure the effects of fasting on the body.  And when we speak of the effects of fasting on the body - our statement should be separate from statements about the effects of health on the liver, the respiratory system, etc.

Mind Health: is fasting good for your mind? Does it improve your memory?   Your calculation abilities? Your planning abilities?  In the short term?  Medium term?  Long Term?  We have techniques to make these studies - but there are no 'standard lab tests'. When we can reliably, expertly measure mind health - we can study the effects of fasting on mind health.  Mind Health studies may be the most difficult for our society to accept as a general practice, but it is an essential component of health measurement.

Community Health: does fasting improve community health?  Studies have shown that there are fewer crimes committed during fasting periods, like Ramadan. That is one component of community health.  What other components we should measure to understand community health?

Spiritual Health: does fasting promote spiritual health? It is an interesting question in light of the fact that most people fast based on spiritual beliefs.  But how do we measure spiritual health?  At present, we have no way to measure spiritual health - although we might have two fleeting impressions.  One - spiritual health exists and can be strong or weak in different individuals and in the same individual at different times in their life.  Two - measuring spiritual health might be dangerous from a religious or political perspective.

So.... Does fasting improve health?  We don't know.  Frankly, we don't reliably know if anything improves health (as opposed to avoiding or curing disease) - because we don't measure health.

I believe in Personal Health Freedom.  I believe we need to study health, separately from our studies of medicine, if we are to truly understand health.  This is one necessary first step to true 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: 

Health Protection vs Health Freedom

Last night I attended the FREEDOM IN CRISIS LECTURE TOUR lecture by Shawn Buckley.  It was a very interesting, enlightening presentation.  Shawn is a tireless (and as far as I can determine, mostly 'paidless') worker for health freedom, with great knowledge, insight and initiatives. There were many threads, and perhaps because I have researched health freedom - only one shocked me with it's intelligence. 

In Canada, as you may know, our governments are pressing for strong 'consumer protection' legislation.  Our government wants, not only the arbitrary restriction of your rights to purchase foods, medicines and even teddy bears - they also want very strong rights to order product recalls, to trespass and seize products deemed to be 'offending the regulations'.  

Shawn gave many examples of government's attempts and ability to protect us from healthy living. The True Hope story, where our government acknowledges that suicide deaths resulted from product restrictions.  The heart disease cure that brought hundreds of people back to health - how Shawn protected the seller in a legal challenge from the BC Medical Association.  And finally, how our government shut down production and sales of a Teddy Bear - because it has a heat pouch containing white rice, a dangerous health risk. 

Then Shawn reminded us about peanut butter.  Of course we all know about peanut butter.  Every year, people die from peanut butter.  But anyone can go to the supermarket and buy a big jar of peanut butter.  We need to ask, how can our government justify protecting us from white rice teddy bears, while allowing purchase and consumption of peanut butter.  

But then he took the leap that surprised me. Shawn has issued 'access of information' requests when he wanted information about government reasoning and activities.  Shawn is a lawyer - and legal processes are his forte. 

He has issued an 'access for information request' about risk.  But not what you might expect. You might expect Shawn to ask for the governments 'risk analysis' on several restricted products.  But no, that would be to simple.  Although it is clear the government has not done any risk analysis - it might be possible for them to create a risk analysis to justify the restrictions. 

Shawn Buckley has asked the government if they have assessed the risk created by restrictions!

Brilliant!  If the government is going to restrict our freedom because of a potential risk, they need to assess both sides of the risk. 

If our government is sincere about protecting our health, they need to demonstrate that sincerity with analysis and processes that protect us from regulatory errors.

We know that, in the case of the True Hope product, EmPowerplus, our government actions to 'protect the public' resulted in suicide deaths of several bipolar patients.  Government actions were taken against EmPowerplus without an assessment of the 'risk to the public'. And they were also taken without an assessment of the 'risk to the public' presented by the government regulations.  In the end, the courts decided in favour of TrueHope, and issued a ruling:
====================================================================
court ruling
‘The Defendants [Truehope] are not guilty’

Necessity. ‘The Defendants were overwhelmingly compelled to disobey the D.I.N. regulation in order to protect the health, safety and well-being of the users of the micronutrient treatment [EMPowerplus] and the support program.’ 
========================================================================================


Truehope was compelled by the courts to disobey the government regulations.  Our government did not appeal.  


If governments are to create regulations that restriction health freedoms, it is important that they:
 - weigh the risks associated with the regulation
 - weigh the risks associated without the regulation (eg. health freedom)
 - make a decision based on a comparison of relative risks
and be prepared and have a process to re-evaluate all restrictions when new information comes to light.

Or our courts will continue to tell our citizens to ignore the regulations to keep our health freedom.

Tracy is the author of two book about healthicine: