When it comes to providing care for the sick, we have had the luxury of mostly ignoring the economic issues involved. We won’t have this luxury for much longer.
When people think of mental disease, they usually think of those suffering from conditions we call psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, although this only represents a very small percentage of those suffering from mental disorders.
Less than half a percent of people have these disorders, and while that is no small number by any means, it is pretty small percentage wise compared to conditions much more prolific, including ones that we may not normally think of as mental disorders, such as dementia and autism.
When we look at the projections for mental disease over the next few decades, the question needs to come up about how we are going to manage to pay for all this, looking at the problem from not only from the standpoint of all this human suffering but the economic consequences of this crisis continue to escalate over time. It is the economic side of things that may be the most scary since this does involve practical limitations that will really explode the rate of suffering from these conditions.
As we spend more and more of our financial resources on health care, which includes both spending more and more of our income and our savings on this, like anything that you spend a higher and higher proportion of your income and wealth on, there will come a time where you can no longer keep up with rising costs and will have to cut your spending.
Our approach thus far has been to ignore the cost-benefit analysis that is normally used in allocating resources, which is never wise, and while we may feel that people have a moral right to this, when morality battles economics, economics always wins. Ignoring the economics of anything has is acting uninformed. This always has consequences, and in the case of how we approach health care spending, this has us marching directly toward a very steep cliff.
Spending more on health care does not even mean better outcomes, and the United States, who spends about twice as much on this as comparable countries do, pounds this point home loudly, given that these other countries achieve better levels of health while spending considerably less.
Every extra dollar spent on health care is a dollar that you cannot spend on something else, and the fact that the U.S. now spends 17% of GDP on this, and rising, means that this already takes a big chunk out of our overall spending even without this rate set to continue to rise. However, the real specter of this isn’t even what we will spend on health care itself, it is the exploding rates of incapacity that we are seeing on both ends of the age spectrum, the old and the young.
Among the two, the incapacitation of more and more young people is perhaps the most disturbing, even though we are seeing dementia rates continue to grow at startling rates. It used to be that we had more dementia patients because people simply lived longer, keeping the body alive longer but exposing their minds to the greater risks of mental decline, but life expectancy is expected to level off, which has already begun, and this is not even expected to slow down the growth of dementia in our elderly.
The rate of dementia is expected to double from 2020 to 2050, and given how much we spend on this already, that should disturb us plenty enough, but the projected growth rate of autism specter disorder, a disease of the young, is even more startling, and much more so in fact. This is being driven by something, and the only possibility is changing environmental factors, factors that we must control lest we lose the ability to pay for it all due to needing to spend more and more on this, and be left with both an economic and health crisis.
This is all on top of the escalation expected in other mental disorders. Clinical depression already affects over 7% of Americans, and over 16% have clinical anxiety disorders, and both are expected to continue to increase. Both of these have significant economic consequences, but they are a drop in the bucket compared to all the coming droves that will require care due to mental incapacity, due to both dementia and autism.
Autism used to be a very rare condition at one time, but has experienced a parabolic rise over the last 40 years. We’re now up to 1 in 40 children being diagnosed, and as bad as this is, it is nothing compared to what has been forecast to come, with the dire prediction that we may see a full half of our children suffering from this debilitating mental disorder by 2035.
It’s not even the cost of this that should worry us the most, which is estimated to be $2 million over the lifetime of an autistic child, as the question of who is to provide the care that they need is an even bigger one. This has placed an enormous burden upon our educational system as it is, as well as impacted the lives of the parents of these children, and we cannot even imagine how bad seeing this disorder multiply 20 times from here will be. On our present path, we will learn this soon enough.
On the other end of the scale, seeing dementia double may not be as concerning, but at least it’s a crisis that is at least being talked about, while we have managed to continue to successfully ignore the coming autism explosion, which involves a discussion that remains suppressed by the media, although more and more people are waking up to this disaster in the making each day.
We are living in the Vaccine Era, and while the CDC and other health authorities continue to pretend that the two have nothing to do with each other, the scientific evidence clearly tells us otherwise, but if all you have to do is deny the evidence and continue to be believed by the majority of the public, you can keep this out of the public mind pretty well. Their version of science is just to deny it, nothing more and nothing less, although we can ill afford to maintain this denial very longer as more and more of our kids are taken by these vaccines.
As the evidence and prevalence continue to mount as we pump our kids full of more and more vaccines, starting on the first day of birth onward, it will be harder and harder to stuff the truth out of sight. As the costs to manage this continue to explode, it will be harder and harder to ignore both the bill and the loss of productivity that caring for all these sick kids require.
It currently costs about $65,000 per year per child to treat autism, including the value of lost wages. Just the cost of childhood treatment alone could break the bank as the incidence of this condition among children explodes, as the cost of this starts being measured in the trillions per year, taking us way beyond our capacity as this monster grows.
Autism is not just a disease of children, as it is a lifelong affliction, which might be the scariest part of this. While it is a condition that manifests in early childhood, you don’t just grow out of it, and the reason why the great majority of people with autism spectrum disorder are children is that this is a disease that has exploded during the relatively short lifetimes of these children, as the masses march toward adulthood and beyond in the coming years.
Therefore, half of all children suffering from this in 15 years won’t represent the entire population of autism sufferers, as those who have it now won’t be children anymore, and these graduates of childhood affected will also continue to explode. There’s no reason to expect that the childhood rate will just stop at 50%, and on our present course at least, we are left to guess just how worse this may become beyond this period.
The Foxes Are Completely in Control, and the Chickens Don’t Even Know It
With such enormous potential for increased harm, with hideous economic consequences, we might think that we’d be talking about this issue a whole lot more than we do, but not with the degree of censorship that corporate medicine has managed to keep up. The truth is bleeding through more and more though, those who question more and more our giving all these vaccines to our kids which seek to prevent diseases that people no longer die from, and its not that the vaccines eradicated them because this is not even something that vaccination is capable of even if they were not gone by the time vaccination started.
The vaccine makers are the kings in this drama though, and they rule with an iron fist. The parents are supposed to be provided informed consent, but the coercion provided by physicians knows no limits, including refusing to treat kids who do not get the full schedule. If doctors do not do this, they risk losing their medical license, as Dr. Paul Thomas found out.
Dr. Thomas instead chose to actually let the parents decide, as he is ethically bound to, where some chose the full list, some a partial list, and those who wished to opt out of vaccinations for their children altogether we allowed to. Dr. Thomas noticed that those who didn’t get vaccinated were hardly at his office, while the vaccinated kids were regulars, and ended up using his data over the years for a study where they looked at the incidence of a number of conditions among the unvaccinated versus vaccinated population of his patients.
The results showed an alarmingly higher rate of every condition tracked among those vaccinated, including autism, with the results also showing that the more vaccines a kid received, the higher the incidence of conditions. There was even a higher incidence of things like chicken pox and mumps among those vaccinated for these things than those who were not, which is only surprising to those who buy the myth that these things are protective.
These are not things that the establishment wants you to know, so after he had scientists publish a study using his data, they promptly revoked Dr. Thomas’ license to practice. It’s not that these things weren’t known, as the evidence here has always been completely one sided, all of it damning and no valid studies to show otherwise, but having one of their own do a study like this was too much for them.
This is the level of corruption that we are up against, and what is so broken with the current system, where the concept of informed consent is just a myth, where protocols are demanded to be complied with unquestionably that in practice serve to increase rather than reduce disease, which the ever-increasing costs to manage it.
It is not just the $40 billion dollars that people spend on vaccines themselves that is at stake here, as if you are in the business of providing medical solutions to illness, the greater illness that these vaccines cause does expand the market overall for this a lot. When you look at what we spend to treat medically caused illness, $40 billion is just a small ante in this game.
In spite of how many people are naïve toward the corporate health care businesses, perhaps thinking that their goal is to reduce the amount of suffering in the world, they are like all businesses, whose goal is to maximize profit. This is not to say that maximizing profit is a bad thing, and this is actually what makes the world go around, but for this to work, this requires a certain level of transparency, where we actually assess the costs and benefits involved in order to decide wisely how to spend our money.
As it turns out, having these issues become more transparent is our only way out of the existential economic crisis that spending more and more of our money on these things is about to bring on in the coming years. We need to be looking at both the health and economic outcomes of this overspending, and when both are increasing dramatically, this is not an issue we can continue to ignore.
While we have at least some idea of how vaccine induced harm and exploding rates of autism may affect our economy in the coming years, we do not have the slightest idea how bad these new Covid vaccines will be, and permanently altering the genetics of this many people may end up being catastrophic.
Nothing speaks to the economic insanity of vaccines more than these do, as they seek to vaccinate everyone this time, to seek to reduce the symptoms of this viral infection. That’s a laudable goal, but we need to keep these things in perspective, and subjecting the world to a potentially hideously dangerous medical experiment to treat a condition where 99.6% of cases only experience mild symptoms is beyond insane from a risk to reward perspective.
What really stands out here is just how powerful corporate medicine has become, where they have essentially ruled the world with no real opposition for a long time, but have really upped the stakes lately. The people behind this obviously have no interests but their own, and in fact are really stopping at nothing to try to drive away attempts to treat this and other conditions.
We’ve shown that Covid is not only a minor ailment in the overwhelming majority of cases, we’ve also shown much prowess in treating it, with very good results using an assortment of protocols, from correcting nutritional deficiencies such as Vitamin D to several inexpensive pharmaceutical medications that have shown to be far more effective than the expensive ones they are trying to sell us, without the huge risks that these vaccines represent.
They have taken a protocol, vaccination, which has already been well documented to cause great harm, and added in a new technology which changes our genetics in a way that no one has any idea what will happen with, other than our knowing that altering genetics is a dangerous practice in itself. The risk with vaccines is that they overstimulate our immune systems to produce autoimmune conditions like autism, and these new ones add in the danger of genetic modification.
Those who are concerned with genetically modified organisms, GMOs, because we just don’t know very much about how this might affect our own genome over time, need to be much more worried about these vaccines, which make us GMOs. Vaccine makers have refused to sell their vaccines in countries who do not give them at least 4 years legal immunity, but a small trial over a couple of months is supposed to reveal whatever dangers there may be from genetic modification. It doesn’t even speak to this risk, but we’re just told it’s safe and we just believe.
A properly working immune system maintains a balance between using the gas to attack pathogens and the brakes to keep from overdoing it and attacking ourselves as well, and while in the past, before we started using these vaccines, almost all immune conditions involved weakened immunity, vaccines have taken us into a new era, where the overwhelming majority of cases are from self-attacks, autoimmunity as they cause it, and this is likely to simply explode if you can manage to vaccinate billions of people and further skew the balance toward the attack mode. The potential for profits here is enormous, well beyond what we could even possibly spend on health care, and that’s where the big cliff lies.
The industry claims to have our interests at heart, to be using science to improve the human experience, but they cannot continue to claim this while ferociously opposing alternatives that actually end up producing superior outcomes but cost them profits. We might think that the job of regulators would be to prevent this from happening, but not when the regulators are your own people as is the case.
You make a lot more money, as it turns out, by deflecting people’s concern away from nutritional deficiencies such as Vitamin D, which is only one of several basic nutrients that the majority of people are clinically deficient, or if there actually is an effective broad-spectrum treatment for viral infection such as Ivermectin and Chloroquine. You make more from sick people than you do from those who are well, and therefore it is in your economic interest to not promote health but to oppose it, if you have such a stranglehold on the health care market that they do.
We do not normally allow for monopolies, and while this is actually an oligarchy, there is still a monopoly at work here, a philosophical one. There is a particular aspect of the philosophy of corporate medicine that in itself maximizes profits, one that sees treatments that negatively affect overall health outcomes, making the disease itself worse in the name of superficial outcomes at best.
We Cannot Survive Economically Without Slaying This Beast
Aside from any other criticisms of this model that we may have, this is simply not sustainable from an economic standpoint. The real problem actually lies deeper than just the amount that we spend on their treatments continuing to rise skyward, it’s the loss of productivity that this increasing level of illness that this extra spending causes that is an even bigger worry.
Heath matters from an economic perspective as well of course, and as we see autism and other childhood diseases continue to explode, the ones that they don’t get better from, where an alarming half of all children are now diagnosed with a chronic disease, when this used to be pretty rare not so long ago, this is going to lead to a whole lot more unproductivity as the crisis explodes.
What is happening to our elderly is also very alarming and our current path is also leading to dire consequences. Dementia is already a huge problem, leaving a greater and greater percentage of our elderly population unable to care for themselves anymore, and waiting for us to fall off the cliff over this one is not the wise option.
We at least have organizations like the Alzheimer’s Society to sound the alarm a bit, but the best they can do is tell us things like how many more people will be afflicted in the coming years, but unable to come up with even any practical suggestions on how we are supposed to manage this better.
They also tell us that we do not even have a means of slowing this down, let alone treating it, which leave people at the mercy of others for their care, either their own families who have members that leave the workforce to care for their elderly parents for as long as they are able, or to place them in care facilities at great expense.
Medicare will help you with this, but only if you are indigent. Otherwise, we’re down to the resources of patients and their families, and while you can buy insurance against this, insurance only makes sense in cases where the incidence is very low but the impact is very high, not where both are very high, as is the case already.
The opinion of there not being an effective treatment for this comes right from corporate medicine’s mouth, and when translated, this means that they do not have any effective treatments themselves, that they have not yet been able to patent something that has been shown to help even slow down this disease.
This is not to be confused with the fact that there is no science out there on this. We understand quite a bit about dementia as it turns out, what causes it, and what has been shown to help it, but unless the solution involves something that a big pharmaceutical company can patent and make billions of dollars themselves from, they own the clubhouse and make the rules, and create the reality.
They do not want us to know that dementia beyond natural occurrences, which we have moved so dramatically beyond, is caused by environmental exposure, particularly with the damage that heavy metal poisoning does to the brain. It turns out that, with the kids, vaccines play a role with the old folks as well, where we inject them with heavy metals such as aluminum and mercury at a time in life where they are particularly prone to the neurological damage that this has been shown to cause.
It is not a coincidence that dementia and the administration of the flu vaccine has risen and continues to rise in tandem, as they do contain levels of aluminum far beyond levels deemed safe if they were not put into a vaccine, and the link with aluminum in the brain and Alzheimer’s is very well established. They claim that the amounts are not significant, and when science shows otherwise, they just proclaim whatever they want without any evidence and no one is allowed to ask any questions lest they be accused of denying their “truth.”
Corporate medicine certainly does not want you to know that the main reason why toxic levels of aluminum accumulate in the brains of the elderly is due to a deficiency of the essential mineral magnesium which the science has discovered. They are not interested in any science that does not increase their profits though.
The majority of Americans are clinically deficient in magnesium, and this deficiency rate is especially high in the elderly who suffer from poorer nutrition due to failing digestion and the ability to absorb nutrients. More people knowing this would definitely hurt their bottom line badly by having more well people in society, which is just bad for business.
In the absence of magnesium, our brains come to prefer aluminum, and while preferring neither may be worse, as this is a defense mechanism, aluminum isn’t a particularly healthy substance to have in your brain at all, as it is a neurotoxin. Correcting magnesium deficiency apparently isn’t on the list of proposed treatment options if you don’t sell it, and especially given how much money you can make if it stands uncorrected, and dementia is one of a long list of conditions where magnesium deficiency has been shown to cause.
There is no magic bullet available though, nor is one even possible as this condition is too multi-faceted, and we need to both treat the propensity of this disease and its progression once inflicted. The majority of the impact that we can make with dementia is making people less likely to get it, not just wait until it is manifest at a point where the damage has been done and all you can do at this point is manage the disease as best you can.
Magnesium deficiency also plays a role in the pathology of a lot of conditions caused by childhood vaccination, including attention deficit disorders and autism, which are all a part of the same spectrum. 92% of children are deficient in this mineral, leaving kids not only more prone to neurological conditions but making the onset worse once one does get afflicted.
Given that autism has been shown to be precipitated by toxic overload, low levels of glutathione are an even bigger deal, where their livers have a reduced capacity to detoxify. We inject our kids with a battery of vaccines, they get sick, and we give them acetaminophen, which blocks glutathione in this time of crisis and piles on to the risk notably.
The glutathione deficiency remains untreated as the disease progresses, which is why supplements like NAC, which increases glutathione, have been shown to improve the condition. However, this also reduces the profits of the big corporations, who they have no interest in this sort of thing and oppose at every turn anything that we may to do help ourselves no matter what the science says. The only science they care about is economics.
Corporate medicine isn’t really interested in preventing things or even seeking to treat them effectively. There’s a lot more money to be made when you do neither. Their medical bag only gets opened after you get struck with something, so they won’t be doing anything to help us as we await the doubling of dementia cases or the explosion in autism, that is on the horizon, where both our kids and our old folks are rendered incapacitated, sacrificed to the beast of corporate medicine and have us heading toward an apocalyptic future.
We Need to Focus on Actually Improving Health Outcomes, Or Else
We can’t neglect promoting the health of our brains in the way that we do, and especially should no longer tolerate the widespread nutritional deficiencies that the majority of people of all ages suffer from, especially the young and the old, when we know for certain that this seriously impacts their present and future health outcomes. The “health care” that we practice, the one that is set to bankrupt us eventually, is not health care, it is the opposite, health abuse.
The costs of just these two exploding health crises, autism and dementia, will rise in time to be completely unbearable, whether we consider the enormous expense worth the money or not. Coming up with solutions other than our laying down and enduring an ever-increasing level of physical and economic pain will no longer be optional when we exceed our capacity to pay for these things.
Economics is essentially the management of limited resources, the science that studies how to best allocate them to best promote individual and collective good, but the key point to realize is that economic resources do have limitations. When spending and illness go up together like this, with no end in sight, there will be a time where we will have no choice but to explore alternatives.
It would only seem rational to approach health care with a far more inquisitive mind than the establishment may wish, and their propaganda remains strong enough to keep those who actually wish to improve things on the fringe. As long as you can keep the people dumbed down enough, this will continue to succeed, but only for so long, only for so long as we can pay their ever-increasing costs of paying the bills for this.
A more functional approach to health care, where we care for people by seeking to improve function rather than oppose it, where we seek to treat underlying conditions and not just symptoms where the condition is ignored and can only regress, has been gaining traction over the last few years. This movement is growing at a far slower rate than the explosion of the diseases they wish to improve, although this situation worsening enough will serve to wake us up more, as we are less and less to manage the massive increase in disease that is ongoing and is set to continue to worsen.
People measure the quality of the health care they receive by how much it costs, even though they should wonder why Americans spend a lot more on it than any other country per capita and have more disease and a lower life expectancy than other developed countries to show for it. From an economic standpoint, the saying that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure rings true, at least a pound.
We may choose to continue to be guided by the designs of corporate medicine, but this comes at a high cost to both health and finances, and while people may choose to give up more and more in both the present and the future in order to pay for this campaign to maximize profit and worsen health outcomes at the same time, there is a limit to how much we can pay. This monster is powerful enough to swallow up enough GDP to drive us on a spiral downward, where the percentage of health care spending together with continuing losses in productivity creates a viscous circle leading to an eventual economic collapse.
Our movement toward a more functional approach to medicine will continue to be less and less optional, until we reach the point where the old ways have knocked our train completely off the rails, when the price of our ignorance has become so enormous that we can no longer pay the price no matter how much we want to.
This issue could even serve to bring down the U.S. government itself should it choose to chase this escalating battle that we are being massacred with and end up throwing so much money at the problem themselves to bankrupt the country. Meanwhile, seeing your life savings being burned up in a brief period of time as dementia does is dramatic enough, the product of a lifetime of work being burned like tinder alongside our minds.
To say that we need dramatic change in how we approach health care is an understatement, and we have hardly begun to even discuss this, let alone become committed to seeking improvement. We have already glimpsed the future, like Scrooge in A Christmas Carol, although Scrooge had the will to change. Our being willing to change will not come so easily, but it must.