I define the terms ‘health care’ and ‘sick care’ as follows: Sick care is treating or healing outbreak of disease. Health care is supporting good health, which prevents disease outbreak.
Some years ago I wrote a short text to a local newspaper. In the article I made the point that approaches to health- and sick care are clearly comparable on an individual- and societal level, at least in the following way.
In the main-stream medical system it’s almost exclusively synthetic chemicals that often disrupt disease processes and disturb other natural processes. Beta blockers, reuptake inhibitors, stomach acid blockers, etc. Also, surgery is another big invasive external intervention. So, invasive and disruptive external intervention when a disease has already taken place.
On a societal body level this mostly equates to state and corporate intervention – coercive surveillance, police- and institutional intervention and disruption, mostly at the late stage of outburst of problem, and now big tech de-platforming, canceling, stifling, shadow banning on very diffuse politicized grounds and now on a larger corporate scale by the covid campaign.
Above is a more recent illustration of a vaster approach to both individual and societal health, with pharmaceuticals for both physical- and mental diagnoses in red.
This pyramid is a representation of all that ought to be taken into account when one wants to improve people’s health. I make a distinction between health care, which is supporting health, and sick care, which is treating clear outbreak of disease. Most of the bottom levels are basic health care, which is often neglected, made difficult, weakened or outright banned. As in the case of many central safe and effective natural medicines.
The image depicts the following about full health- and sick care:
The foundation is our Environment; personal and societal – not only physical but also politically, socially, economically, culturally, etc. This one is taking hits in this virus campaign. I could also add architecture as a big environmental influence. Aren’t most of these a bit toxic, divisive, deceptive, fear- and scarcity-based at the moment?
Secondly, Lifestyle & Diet. This one had also taken hits among a lot of people, as media fear and -confusion, isolation, restrictions has hampered exercise, sleep quality, and the exposure to abundant natural light. Even the breathing might be more shallow and oxygen poor under the masks. The access to food has remained about the same; that is to say, compromised in quality, for the most part, and underutilized in health- and sick care. Supplements could be in this category, as literal supplementation or enhancer.
The next level is Natural- and Folk medicine. Key parts of it have been unjustly maligned and/or restricted for decades. Supplements could also have been utilized in this virus situation, but in health- and sick care in general. So could cannabinoids and natural cannabis rich in all kinds of new cannabinoid variants.
The Psychedelics and entheogens are an effective way to influence personal spiritual, psycho-social growth, which naturally also influences the social, the foundation – Environment.
Then the part in red. It is what we’d call big pharma. That is to say, the pharmaceutical medical branch of the synthetic chemical industry. Their products can absolutely have their place, especially in acute situations, but enjoy disproportionate status and funding compared to all else that is health care. They could easily saddle into a new role of bringing life prolonging, health enhancing, experience optimizing chemicals to market.
