EU a preview of NAU

[sidster]

I was a John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/) hosted event where they previewed
two DVDs they prepared on the topic of North American Union.
One of the videos was a revised (edited) version of The Real Face
of the European Union (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2699800300274168460) (prepared by The Campaign for the Truth
in Europe).

The other DVD was more of a power-point presentation on NAU
and NAFTA, CAFTA and SSP.

I thought the first DVD was pretty good and worthy of sharing. I
can't find a link to the DVD presented by JBS (http://www.jbs.org/), but here is the
original The Real Face of the European Union (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2699800300274168460). It should give one
a good forecast of what is in store for us with NAU!

Things that EU affects ...

UK laws
UK sovereignty
Regulation of alternative medicine; including but not limited to vitamins and dosage control, herbs, etc.
New taxation
No accountability for those imposing new laws and regulations upon UK citizens
...and more


Pretty scary stuff...

[sidster]

*bump*? :o

[Minestra di pomodoro]

The UK doesn't like it but the other countries do. The regulation of "alternative medicine" doesn't bother me a bit, and it shouldn't bother you either. There is no such thing as "alternative medicine", there is either medicine that works, or medicine that doesn't. Medicine that works can pass clinical tests, studies, and regulatory body approval.

[pcosmar]

The UK doesn't like it but the other countries do. The regulation of "alternative medicine" doesn't bother me a bit, and it shouldn't bother you either. There is no such thing as "alternative medicine", there is either medicine that works, or medicine that doesn't. Medicine that works can pass clinical tests, studies, and regulatory body approval.

http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2008/03/shill.jpg

NOT Dr. Ron Paul position.
NOT a liberty or Freedom position.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2008/03/shill.jpg

NOT Dr. Ron Paul position.
NOT a liberty or Freedom position.

http://i29.tinypic.com/2m63a4y.gif

NOT a scientific, safe, or reasonable position.

[pcosmar]

Freedom is not "safe".

[Minestra di pomodoro]

Freedom is not "safe".

Neither is "alternative medicine". That's why it should be regulated, so there is fairness and accuracy in advertising them, and so that the consumer can make a clear distinction between tried and true medicines, and pseudoscience.

[sidster]

The UK doesn't like it but the other countries do. The regulation of "alternative medicine" doesn't bother me a bit, and it shouldn't bother you either. There is no such thing as "alternative medicine", there is either medicine that works, or medicine that doesn't. Medicine that works can pass clinical tests, studies, and regulatory body approval.

Not sure if you watched the video or not. An example given is vitamin C
where dosage of 1000mg are being outlawed.

Are you saying there is something wrong with vitamin C? There are many
advocates of vitamin C that recommend high daily dosages of it.

The thing that worries me, is all the pharmaceutical companies would love
to outlaw these basic vitamin and herbals, in favor of their own medicines.
Getting rid of competition, and getting the governing body to help them
do so seems to be direction here.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

Not sure if you watched the video or not. An example given is vitamin C
where dosage of 1000mg are being outlawed.

Are you saying there is something wrong with vitamin C?

No, just that high doses of vitamin C may be harmful to the body.


There are many
advocates of vitamin C that recommend high daily dosages of it.

There are many advocates of acupuncture. Doesn't make it work any better. Argumentum ad populum.


The thing that worries me, is all the pharmaceutical companies would love
to outlaw these basic vitamin and herbals, in favor of their own medicines.

That's a conspiracy theory, and has no basis in fact.

[sidster]

Neither is "alternative medicine". That's why it should be regulated, so there is fairness and accuracy in advertising them, and so that the consumer can make a clear distinction between tried and true medicines, and pseudoscience.

I beg to differ. The so called "modern medicine" you are advocating
is nothing more than trial and error. Our current medical "science" is
nothing but science. It quackery at best.

It is hideous what they do to patients. To treat cancer they kill the
patient's healthy cells in the process. This is not science. It is barbaric!

How many years has medical "science" been around? Have they ANY
cure for any known disease? NO! They only have treatments.
No cures.

The profession is a hack. I say it, and I have a good couple of doctors
in my family and among friends.

I'm not knocking it completely. But for you to come and try to knock
safe alternatives in favor of greedy corporate medicine pushers, it is
appalling. Have you watched TV in the United States in the past decade
or so? Majority of the adverts are for drug companies. Brainwashing
the public with their clever and very well done commercials.

[pcosmar]

Neither is "alternative medicine". That's why it should be regulated, so there is fairness and accuracy in advertising them, and so that the consumer can make a clear distinction between tried and true medicines, and pseudoscience.

This from a Medical Doctor.
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=920


Americans are justifiably concerned over the government’s escalating intervention into their freedom to choose what they eat and how they take care of their health.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in order to comply with standards dictated by supra-national organizations such as the UN‘s World Food Code (CODEX), NAFTA, and CAFTA, has been assuming greater control over nutrients, vitamins and natural health care providers to restrict your right to choose the manner in which you manage your health and nutritional needs.

I have been the national leader in preserving Health Freedom.

I have introduced the Health Freedom Protection Act, HR 2117, to ensure Americans can receive truthful health information about supplements and natural remedies.

I support the Access to Medical Treatment Act, H.R. 2717, which expands the ability of Americans to use alternative medicine and new treatments.

I oppose legislation that increases the FDA‘s legal powers. FDA has consistently failed to protect the public from dangerous drugs, genetically modified foods, dangerous pesticides and other chemicals in the food supply. Meanwhile they waste public funds attacking safe, healthy foods and dietary supplements.

I also opposed the Homeland Security Bill, H.R. 5005, which, in section 304, authorizes the forced vaccination of American citizens against small pox. The government should never have the power to require immunizations or vaccinations.

Also,
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=406
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=789

And much more.
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=475

[Minestra di pomodoro]

Appeal to authority.

[sidster]

No, just that high doses of vitamin C may be harmful to the body.

So is water in extremely high dosages. Lets outlaw water too.
Have it controlled by big government!

You are silly.



There are many advocates of acupuncture. Doesn't make it work any better. Argumentum ad populum.

In many instances it works. My mom had a condition called "trigger
finger". After many months of going to quack doctors and taking
medicine and been given shots, she finally went to a local acupuncturist.
In two weeks she had 100% recovery.

I on the other hand had a joint problem and went to the same
acupuncturist. In my case, my joint problem was from a side-effect
of another medication I was taking and of course the treatment
didn't work. In fact, the acupuncturist told me that her treatment
wouldn't work for me after a couple of visits.





That's a conspiracy theory, and has no basis in fact.

Sure, if you say so.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

So is water in extremely high dosages. Lets outlaw water too.

Vitamin C is not outlawed, still, the comparison is flawed. It is easier to get vitamin C poisoning than water poisoning, and it is easier still to get cyanide poisoning. They should all be controlled to the extent of how dangerous they are. Your body gives you many signs of water imbalance before it's too late.


Have it controlled by big government!

It already is.


In many instances it works...

Anecdotal evidence.

[pcosmar]

Vitamin C is not outlawed, still, the comparison is flawed. It is easier to get vitamin C poisoning than water poisoning, and it is easier still to get cyanide poisoning. They should all be controlled to the extent of how dangerous they are. Your body gives you many signs of water imbalance before it's too late.





What about alcohol poisoning? You can get it over the counter anywhere..

[Minestra di pomodoro]

What about alcohol poisoning? You can get it over the counter anywhere..

Alcohol is regulated :)

[pcosmar]

Alcohol is regulated :)
Really?
http://www.opensourcebeerproject.com/
http://www.homebrewery.com/
http://www.midwestsupplies.com/
http://www.homebrewing.org/

http://www.coppermoonshinestills.com/

[Minestra di pomodoro]

Really?

Yep

[sidster]

Anecdotal evidence.

you haven't yet given me any proof that "modern medicine" is
capable of curing anything.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

What about alcohol poisoning? You can get it over the counter anywhere..

But there are restrictions for young children and other people at risk.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

you haven't yet given me any proof that "modern medicine" is
capable of curing anything.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[sidster]

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes:

don't roll your eyes at me mister.

modern "medicine" has no cure for any disease. only treatment
of symptoms.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

don't roll your eyes at me mister.

modern "medicine" has no cure for any disease. only treatment
of symptoms.

You could call any condition a symptom. Regardless, "alternative medicine", by those standards, does not cure anything either. If it has been proven through scientific study to cure diseases, it would be adopted by qualified physicians, and would become mainstream.

[dawnbt]

Neither is "alternative medicine". That's why it should be regulated, so there is fairness and accuracy in advertising them, and so that the consumer can make a clear distinction between tried and true medicines, and pseudoscience.

Oh, and the Chicken Pox vaccine that gave my kid shingles is safe? Or the vaccines that cause autism are safe? Go read a book.

[Minestra di pomodoro]

Oh, and the Chicken Pox vaccine that gave my kid shingles is safe? Or the vaccines that cause autism are safe? Go read a book.

Every treatment is a trade-off between the potential good and the potential side-effects. In the case of vaccination, side effects are rare enough that it has been accepted as a standard procedure.

[eckstein88]

minestra, you are 100% missing the point that (i think) everyone else in this thread is trying to make.


The arguement is absolutely not over whether or not "modern medicine" or "alternative medicine" is more effective in treating conditions, or symptoms, or whatever. The argument is that a centralized, bureaucratic, entity which, by the way, is historically susceptible to corruption and special interests, should not be able to tell individuals in a free society what they can and cannot put into their own bodies.


High levels of Vitamin C are bad for me? Cool, I wanna do it anyway because it makes me feel edgy and hip (for example). I don't want or need to do everything in my life because it is the "healthiest" thing I could do. What moral or legal authority does a centralized political entity have to tell me i CANNOT do what I want with MY life, MY health?

You want to have an FDA that makes recommendations to "protect" the general public, fine. I personally have no problem with that. The problem I (and I think most others on this forum) have is when that FDA says I CANNOT do something they do not approve of. The fact that pharmaceutical companies can lobby to get other products off the market is just a side-effect that proves our point.

If I want to go to an acupuncturist and have him shove needles up my @$$ and in my eyes, I should be allowed to. It'd be pretty stupid, and I'd never do it, but this is an extreme example of the perspective I'm coming from, which is that something being "bad" for me is 100% no legal justification for a central political entity (at least one functioning under the US constitution) to prohibit me from doing so.

Similarly, I wouldn't want or expect the government to pay medical bills for having those needles shoved in my eyes. Just protect me from legitimate external security threats, provide standards for interstate commerce, and stay the HELL out of my personal life.



/rant

[Working Poor]

Neither is "alternative medicine". That's why it should be regulated, so there is fairness and accuracy in advertising them, and so that the consumer can make a clear distinction between tried and true medicines, and pseudoscience.


I have used so call alternative medicine most of my life. I find that it is very safe and gentle. I wish people would stop doing foolish things with herbs anything can be dangerous including or especially prescription drugs if one does not use common sense.

[Fox McCloud]

I am also a user of alternative medicine, and I can attest to the positive effects it's had on me, and I'm a naturally very skeptical person....(as a matter of fact, I have severe allergies, and since I haven't taken a particular herb in a few days, my problems have heavily escalated). A couple of friends have recently tried out similar things and had excellent results.

There's good herbs and bad herbs (quality wise), which can effect performance too...naturally, most stuff you get at Wal*Mart is pretty much junk, sadly.

Either way, the reason you don't see alternative medicine in the mainstream is because it's suppressed by the cartel known as the FDA...what the Fed is to the banks, the FDA is to the pharmaceutical companies and medical industry (and when the pharmaceutical companies apparently own most of the medical schools, is it any wonder that alternative medicine is not promoted?). As Ron Paul said (and I think he'd know better than you, as he's a doctor and has been in the profession for years), the FDA is just a revolving door between the pharma's and the itself, and deals are often made under the table, or things are fudged.

You say they're dangerous, I must disagree....sure, you can kill yourself with them, but you can do that with anything.....under your premise and logic, we should regulate everything, since it's dangerous.

remember, the government cannot and should not protect the individual from himself...it's not their place, and it will end up doing more harm than good in the long run. Suggesting that the government should regulate all these things is contrary and hostile to the ideas of liberty (and if you're no fan of liberty, what in the heck are you doing on these forums?).

One other thing I've heard about the EU (don't know if it's true or not), is that the government mandated that doctors cannot refuse to give abortions---if they refuse, the woman can report him, and he will get his license revoked....whether you support abortion or not, I would hope that you would agree that someone who doesn't support it shouldn't be forced into supporting it.