5 ms·

> why is "taking a pill for life" a bad thing in itself? I would strongly suggest watching the two videos I posted. This should answer your question to a suff

> why is "taking a pill for life" a bad thing in itself? I would strongly suggest watching the two videos I posted. This should answer your question to a sufficient depth. The simple answer: Because taking a pill does not fix root causes and the consequences of eating poison. In other words, the net result is not a healthier society at all. In fact, I think I could make a solid argument that this would create and perpetuate multi-generational sickness the likes of which we simply do not understand. Perhaps the single most important element in this is that poisonous foods destroy gut bacteria. The microbiome is supremely important for health at levels most people don't understand. Taking a pill does not fix this at all. Even worse, taking a pill while continuing to eat garbage is likely even worse. I am not a purist at all. I struggled with food most of my life, eventually being rewarded with type 2 diabetes. Years later, after a years-long effort to rectify bad eating habits, I reversed by diabetes and got off the meds --which are a formula for ever-worsening health. This started with saying "Enough!" and finally understanding why both fasting and attending to your gut bacteria are extremely important tools for both getting healthier and staying healthy. Lots of haters down-voting, insulting me and posting hateful comments. Yet nobody seems to want to stop for a moment and consider the idea that a human being did not evolve to eat the shit our food system produces and that it is this food that is making us both fat and sick. To the haters I say: You are part of the problem. Grow up and learn something before you attack people who are essentially saying: You can be healthy without drugs. Because, you know, that's a hateful and selfish message, isn't it.

spondylosaurus 2y ago
> You can be healthy without drugs. The example I gave, Trikafta, is a treatment for cystic fibrosis. Without drugs like this you would not be remotely healthy and are all but guaranteed to die young. You're entitled to your beliefs about "poisonous foods," but I think people may not be receptive to what you're saying because it seems a bit like you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater here. Yes, eating well should be our ultimate goal. Yes, using drugs to mitigate the effects of a poor diet is a band-aid solution. (Although band-aid solutions are still a net good—that's why we have, you know, band-aids. Sometimes it's not possible or easy to fix root causes and the best you can do is stop the bleeding.) But framing long-term medication use as a bad thing in itself is generally not convincing to anyone but the crunchiest of hippies or anti-establishment types. Prescription drugs restore a lot of people to normal functioning that they otherwise wouldn't achieve. I agree that it would be better if we could prevent people from developing autoimmune diseases, or cancer, or unhealthy eating habits in the first place, but in the meantime we have... drugs. Which is better than not having drugs at all.
- robomartin 2y ago
  >> You can be healthy without drugs. > The example I gave, Trikafta, is a treatment for cystic fibrosis. Without drugs like this you would not be remotely healthy and are all but guaranteed to die young. Oh, c'mon, why don't you add colon, pancreatic and lung cancer to your list. What a fucking ridiculous non-argument. Of course there are afflictions that have a requirement for drugs and serious medical intervention. Do you think I told my mother to eat better food while she was dyeing from pancreatic cancer last year? Don't fucking insult me. Grow the fuck up and learn to have an adult discussion! Fuck me.

spondylosaurus 2y ago

> You can be healthy without drugs. The example I gave, Trikafta, is a treatment for cystic fibrosis. Without drugs like this you would not be remotely healthy and are all but guaranteed to die young. You're entitled to your beliefs about "poisonous foods," but I think people may not be receptive to what you're saying because it seems a bit like you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater here. Yes, eating well should be our ultimate goal. Yes, using drugs to mitigate the effects of a poor diet is a band-aid solution. (Although band-aid solutions are still a net good—that's why we have, you know, band-aids. Sometimes it's not possible or easy to fix root causes and the best you can do is stop the bleeding.) But framing long-term medication use as a bad thing in itself is generally not convincing to anyone but the crunchiest of hippies or anti-establishment types. Prescription drugs restore a lot of people to normal functioning that they otherwise wouldn't achieve. I agree that it would be better if we could prevent people from developing autoimmune diseases, or cancer, or unhealthy eating habits in the first place, but in the meantime we have... drugs. Which is better than not having drugs at all.

robomartin 2y ago
>> You can be healthy without drugs. > The example I gave, Trikafta, is a treatment for cystic fibrosis. Without drugs like this you would not be remotely healthy and are all but guaranteed to die young. Oh, c'mon, why don't you add colon, pancreatic and lung cancer to your list. What a fucking ridiculous non-argument. Of course there are afflictions that have a requirement for drugs and serious medical intervention. Do you think I told my mother to eat better food while she was dyeing from pancreatic cancer last year? Don't fucking insult me. Grow the fuck up and learn to have an adult discussion! Fuck me.