Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

homestead - Re: [Homestead] Triage - was insurance

homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Homestead mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Clansgian AT wmconnect.com
  • To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Homestead] Triage - was insurance
  • Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:50:41 EST



> I don't understand the two steaks on the grill thing.

It's really the heart of the thing for me. I not only believe that lifestyle
choices swamp out almost all genetic predispositions, but I believe that even
with the onset of disease, lifestyle choices are a major factor in our odds
for surviving and thriving, much along the lines of Dean Ornish's claims that
heart disease can be reversed by means of only lifestyle changes.

I know personally and have had discussions on the internet with a depressing
number of people who's life's hobby is complaining about this or that malady
which seems to be used largely as an excuse for a wastrel life. Unlike some
of
the examples presented in this thread, they were blatantly engaged in
behaviors that exaserbated their condition and likely caused it, or in many
cases
mimicked it and they didn't have the more exotic disease to begin with.
Rather
than deal with the choices that were wrecking their health, they hotly
defended
them. I could go into details but it would be a lot of blather to explain
many of them. But the effect would be like someone being diagnosed with
colon
cancer and saying, "Ah it isn't my alcohol consumption or steady diet of
steaks
twice a day and complete lack of ever moving, it's genetics, that's the
ticket, " ... and then throw two more steaks on the grill, open a bottle,
and lay
back in the lounge chair.



> I don't guess you would.
> Okay, James, here's a question for you....
> If you suddenly had rectal bleeding tomorrow, and had to go to the ER
> where you were admitted and diagnosed with cancer next week, what would
> you say caused it?

More to the point is that I could definately say what DIDN't cause it. It
wouldn't be for lack of exercise, over use of alcohol, no fiber, too much red
meat, ... and it wouldn't even be genetics since no one in my family has ever
had it. Which would lead me to address this:

> There has to
be some unknown genetic factor. There's no other explanation.

Here's where my astrology comparison comes in. No other explanation so it
must be genetics. That's exactly what the astrologers used to say. The view
that human beings are just a mechanical contrivance of a complex series of
molecular pop-beads (I'll bet younger readers, if any there be, don't know
what
those are) that determine everything about us. So, it it can't be explained
by
conditioning, the only thing left is genetics and that PROVES the role that
genetics play in it all.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
you philosophy"

In my misspent youth at college I got to review the raw data for a number of
those twins separate at birth that are stories much as you relate. The thing
that came out of it was that people were strartled and impressed at the bits
of behavior that were the same, but tended to look past and ignore the things
that were different. Only natural, that, A closer look at the data when it
was collected in some statistically significant way was that identical twins
separate at birth had far, far more different about them than the same. One
smart-ass study (or so the astrolo-geneticists opined it) set up a similar
meeting with total unrelated strangers and use the same satistical controls
and
found nearly as many identical behaviors and circumstances by chance as they
did
in twins.

There are alikely a very great many things going on with human beings besides
just genetics and conditioning. The unmeasurable effects of the "it's
written in the genes, nothing we can do about it" is one of them.



>
> James, we know so little about so much in this world...science tries to
> make sense of it, but we have a long way to go.


Exactly. We do know so little. The failing of science to that it does try
to make sense of it all. It can't. It is a limited tool.

>
> If I got lung cancer tomorrow, everyone would say....she smoked for 25
> years and that's her fate. I would probably agree. I certainly
> wouldn't want anyone's sympathy.


I think that's a fine attitude and one we all have to one extent or the
other. My point about genetics vs choices is that their effects do not run
concurrently but rather consecutively, that is, the genetic presisposition to
breast
cancer doesn't override or swamp out the effects of smoking, it makes the
effects of smoking far worse.

But you are in a tiny minority of people who will own the consequences of
their behavior.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page