One of the biggest problems of having the government administer health care is that the United States Government does nothing very well you see. Additionally as we see other nations with National Health Care coverage we note that there are often lines for specialist services so if someone has a serious condition there is a likelihood that they will indeed perish before getting service.

We cannot allow this to happen in the United States and whereas we may indeed have Hillary Clinton as the first Woman US President, we must make certain that any comprehensive government health care system takes into consideration priority cases so people do not die. We must learn from all the other socialist countries and how they have screwed up their health care systems.

Just because one lives in a nation where the government provides health care does not mean it works, because on closer scrutiny most often it does not work very well? Surprised, well you shouldn’t be because no government ever runs smoothly, efficiently or does anything very well.

Therefore if we want government to run it in the United States of America, expect it to cost taxpayers 3 times as much as private enterprise could do the same job and only 20% as good as it was purported it would be once completed. Do not be snookered America, just look at the piss poor performance of our government in every other endeavor, I rest my case. You decide. Consider this in 2006.

Lance Winslow - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

Share This

As you grow older, housing may pose more and more of a concern, especially if your health is failing. If you are worried that you may not be able to take care of your basic needs as you age, such as cleaning, cooking, bathing and maintenance, then looking at your long term health care options is an important choice. Let’s start right away with your options.

In-Home Care
In-home health care is the best option for people who have a higher level of fitness, and want to remain as independent as possible throughout their later years. In this situation, home health care nurses may come and visit you daily, or every couple of days, to take care of your everyday medical needs. Also, a housekeeper may be utilized, as well as a personal health care attendant, who would be responsible for more of the day-to-day living help - such as a companion, driver, cook or the like. In-home health care is quite easy to locate; just contact a nurses’ association or look in the Yellow Pages.

Continuing Care
An intermediary between nursing homes and independent living, continuing care, or retirement communities, offer a wide variety of health benefits and services to their inhabitants. These communities are usually all-inclusive, where dwellers receive lodging, meals, social events, varying levels of health care, and sometimes other perks as well.

Entrance fees for these establishments can be quite high (ranging from $10,000 to over 300,000); added to their monthly fees (ranging from $800-4000), and this option can prove to be expensive health care. However, services are guaranteed for the remainder of your life if you choose this option, and if your health falters, you can always be moved to the nursing home portion of their health care facility.

Because of the all-inclusive nature of this kind of health care, you’ll want to read the fine print carefully in your contract. What are all of the recurring and one-time fees? What exactly is covered with those fees? What health care options are, and are not offered? Do you need to purchase extra health insurance to cover your specific care costs? Also don’t forget to check up with the Better Business Bureau about the status of the facility you are interested in; if you plan on living there the rest of your life, you may want to double check it’s reputation, too.

Nursing Homes
In a very simple sense, nursing homes will take care of your health care needs when you are no longer able to. This may be for a short period of time while you are recovering, or for a longer period of time as you age. Nursing homes are the whole meal deal of health care for the elderly or otherwise incapacitated. If this is an option that you think you may require, there are many things to discuss and consider when looking at your options. Does the home provide the type of care that you will require? Research the history of the nursing home; are there any black spots on their record? Talk to people who have lived there, have used their services, or who are still living there now, if at all possible. Get their viewpoint.

For more more information about health care please visit http://www.1health-center.com/articles/How-To-Jump-Rope-For-Health-and-Fitness.php

Share This

I had no idea what a can of worms (or “germs,” more literally) I would open as I set out to determine the most politically correct title for a new page on my website. It began with what I thought would be a quick definition look up on the internet and turned into an all night study.

My starting premise about the type of health care one would consider “the real health care” was formed during childhood, and based on brief medically related snapshots such as these:

From my four-year-old perspective, it seemed that our family doctor’s concern over my allergic reaction to the miracle drug Penicillin meant that I was living in great danger. So concerned was the doctor, I was denied the experience of attending Kindergarten. (Apparently there aren’t as many germs in first grade.)

The next medical memory was made a few years later. That time however, I was present at a school, along with the entire community. We had come as families to wait in line for our sugar cubes on a Saturday morning. The sense of relief and security was evident with each family as they received and swallowed their cubes of vaccination against the polio virus and threat of a future in an iron lung.

Now, put my childhood memories together with the fact that I tend to be a real left-brain thinker (compartmentalized facts, details, logic - rather than getting the big picture first). I think you will begin to understand why I embraced what is now most commonly known as conventional practice as “real health care”.

You know the conventional medicine I’m referring to - you get “sick,” go to the doctor, have some pills prescribed, take them, suffer through any ill-side effects, and get “well” within a week. Perhaps conventional medicine was easy to accept because we didn’t have to work at anything, like learning to take better care of ourselves in the first place, or worry about who to blame when we became too sick to repair.

I knew that not everyone would be as comfortable as I was in omitting alternative medicine from the “real health care” category. Therefore, I was not surprised when the search engine results for definitions of “holistic,” “natural,” and “alternative” medicine revealed a trail of controversy between two schools of thought.

What I was shocked to find is that this trail of controversy is not a “new age” split in thinking; but rather it leads to France, dives back into the late 1800s, and begins with two men of science.

The name I recognized was that of Louis Pasteur. Pasteur did pioneering work for decades in many aspects of biomedicine. This brought him both accolades and lots of strong criticism from his peers, although he remained a relative unknown to the world at large until he came up with a treatment for rabies in the mid 1880s.

The other man, Antoine Bechamp, was also an active researcher and biologist. He taught in universities and medical schools, and was widely published on cell biology, disease, botany and related subjects.

While both Pasteur and Bechamp studied cellular biology and it’s relation to disease, they worked with markedly different theories.

Pasteur believed that the basic unit of any organic life is the cell, and that cells are aseptic. In other words, disease comes from micro-organisms (germs) outside the body. He felt that germs are designed to do one thing and one thing only: to cause a particular disease; and that every disease is associated with a particular germ.

Pasteur apparently gave no regard to the condition of area of the disease or of the person, in regard to the likelihood of a disease striking them. His narrow focus led him to believe that to cure a specific disease a specific defense would have to be created by finding a drug that would kill off the germs without killing the patient.

Bechamp saw a bigger picture, and noted the “nanobe” as the basic unit of organic life, a unit with the capability of change. He believed that diseases come from micro-organisms (germs) within the body.

Normally these germs would be working to build and help the processes of the body, but when the body or a portion of it dies or is injured - either chemically or mechanically - the germs stop what they are doing and change to help in the disintegration (getting rid) of the injured area.

More poetically put, his work showed that diseases are always processes of rescue or repair — and life; and are only serious when the medium is in poor condition to start. The conclusion from Bechamp’s work is that disease is built by unhealthy conditions and that to prevent disease we have to create health.

So we see here in two different men of the same era, both members of the French Academy of Science, the very basis for the two schools of thought on health care.

Conventional Medicine, which positions us somewhat like sitting ducks at the mercy of random raging germs and focuses on beating back each illness or disease after the fact, is to a large degree based on the work and conclusions of Louis Pasteur.

The studies and findings of Antoine Bechamp are the scientific root of what has come to be commonly known as Alternative Medicine. Here’s the concept: get the body healthy, keep it healthy, and facilitate the body’s work as its own best defense to prevent or cure disease.

When I saw it stated in those terms, I must admit that a signal went off in my logical left brain.

I read further and found that Pasteur critics believe that his overshadowing of Bechamp’s work is due to his “genius of publicity and public relations.” Some have gone further, citing Pasteur’s own lab notes (released only after his grandson died in 1975) to deem him a “fake scientist,” and accuse him of stealing ideas (mainly from Bechamp), falsifying experimental data, and making claims which had no basis in fact.

At this point I’m beginning to believe that my left brain has been duped into following accepted customs in health care that have little to do with science or logic. My right brain, in this case, agrees by deeply resonating with Antoine Bechamp’s thoughts on Pasteur’s theory

“The [Pasteur theory] is monstrous fatalistic doctrine which suppose that at the origin of the things, God would have created the germs of the microbes intended to return to us sick” ~ Professor Antoine Bechamp

Footnote: Louis Pasteur, who avoided handshakes due to his fear of germs, died of a stroke at age 46. Antoine Bechamp was still clear on his theory and giving interviews until weeks before his natural death at age 93.

Want your health benefits company to cut your cost on all types of health care whether conventional, alternative, natural, or holistic? Send your request for a complimentary brochure to brochure@4-health-benefits.com. Bev Van Engelen Brett has over 17 years experience working with patients as a health care technician, and now specializes in helping people obtain quality health and dental care at significant discounts. Visit her website http://www.4-health-benefits.com/ for details. If you wish to publish this article, it must be published in it’s entirety along with active links and this resource box.

Share This