The Dialog of Controversy
It is almost impossible to discuss health issues without taking sides between natural vs corporate foods. Where you stand, often depends where you are "invested." This, of course, is no different in any area of discussion, whether it be creationism vs evolution, agri chemicals or politics, religion or whatever topic you want to pick. In most cases, these discussions are not dialogs at all, just two (or more) monologues occurring simultaneously.
On this site, I will endeavor to avoid getting into long detailed scientific discussions. Instead, I will opt to discuss my lifestyle more subjectively. I will state my preferences with little or no detail. Most research will be referenced by a link to another site.
My choice to live more naturally was the result of a last-ditch effort to say alive. I felt I could no longer live with all that debilitating pain of severe arthritis. Other health problems and side effects of prescription-drug use were becoming increasingly harder to bear. Something had to be done. Research gave me hope, but little else. The more I studied health issues, the more confused I became. Everybody had an argument. It was either for and against the same thing.
As time went on, a few things began to stand out:
My takeaway has been:
When the science is confusing, go with the natural route, unless there is a compelling reason otherwise.
Whether it is a hundred years or thousands of years, the body has done a pretty good job of adapting. It's the current onslaught of chemicals and corporate intrusion in our food system that worries me most. The body simply has not had the time to adapt (if it ever will).
Give nature a chance, it has worked for thousands of years.
The best way to live healthy, and really the only way, is to live as naturally. For me that means living a simple life in the country, with little or no corporate food.
Today, I live pain free without medication. And BTW, I'm three years past Statistics Canada's due date!
I will leave this introduction with the following quote:
Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore, part of the mystery that we are trying to solve. - Max Planck
(it is alleged that Albert Einstein built his theories on this person's scientific breakthroughs).
While a lot of our maladies are attributed to genetics, it is also true that genetic attributes can and are switched on and off. Genetics and many other subjects about the human body are little understood.
However, no science has changed more in the last 50 years than genetics and is continuing to expand on an almost daily basis. Our genetics is not constant as we were originally taught.
Besides generational mutations, there are the numerous other areas of genetic studies. One being epigenetics, where environmental expressions can turn genes on and off. Every organism has genes that are easily turned on and off. I've done a lot of breedings, both in bees and grapes and have seen this first hand.
One tiny chemical contamination maybe just what can cause a problem. The trouble is we never know which one it might be of the thousands we are exposed to. Alternatively, how many are causing problems. The only thing you can do is to live as free from them as possible and hope for the best.
What has this to do with my health? I have seen how changes in my life style have turned off autoimmune disorders, namely arthritis. These changes I suspect are at least partly the result of genetic switching.
In any case, genetic deficiencies are not necessarily always a life sentence.
Read this very enlightening picture essay on understanding your liver.
Is aging reversible?
As interesting discussion of aging related discoveries from the Harvard Medical School.