THE CONTROVERSY OF COEXISTENCE EXPLAINED

QuestionPlanet earth has been around for approximately 4.543 billion years according to Wikipedia. When do you think viruses and bacteria first came to our planet and how do you think they arrived? Scientific American has published research with multiple hypotheses, yet the overwhelming belief is that these living forms began in the beginning of time. As we have undergone evolutionary changes to survive a dynamic environment, so too have these simple living structures. This means that we have co-existed for billions of years. Keeping this history in mind, why do we believe that good health and survival can only continue with the successful annihilation of these living cells?
History has demonstrated successfully that co-existence is possible. Viewing these entities as the enemy has distorted our understanding of health and disease. Today, we wait for disease to take hold of the individual before we choose a course of action. We believe that good health exists if symptoms are not clearly discernible. Our current passive approach to health has removed individual responsibility in many cases. An apathetic attitude (in general) has resulted in a belief that doctors are responsible for our health concerns and needs. The following example provides historical evidence why this approach needs to be re-evaluated.
In the 1960’s-1970’s a “disease” known as Keshan Disease was found in the Keshan province in the county of the Heilongjiang in Northeast China. It caused congestive cardiomyopathy (heart muscle disease) that resulted in heart arrhythmia, (abnormal heart rhythm) congestive heart disease and death. Western science successfully found the organism that “caused” this disease. It was identified as the Coxsackie B Virus. Western medicine approached this disease by developing a vaccine. The plan was to vaccinate all children and adults in these regions. This approach seemed to make perfect logical sense.
minerals-health-smallIt was reported that a group of researchers were concerned that this “infectious disease” was only found in specific provinces in China. A truly infectious disease would likely spread beyond such limited borders. These researchers began to investigate environmental factors that might have influenced the development of this disease. They successfully found a common environmental link associated with the disease. Those who lived in these specific provinces were identified to have a nutritional deficiency allowing the virus to overcome their immune system attacking the heart and causing this disease. It was discovered the soil was depleted of selenium and the local people were found to be depleted of this important and necessary mineral as well. As the people began to receive selenium supplementation the disease and the panic associated with it was assuaged. The vaccine was never needed or used for this disease during its 10 year history. In China today, if a person develops this disease it is typically treated with a herb called ASTRAGALUS. Astragalus works by accumulating selenium from the soil.(This same herb is used in the United States to address, colds, flu’s and other respiratory conditions as an alternative to pharmaceutical prescriptions)
Assuming this historical event was factually accurate, was this disease the result of a damaging virus (that should have been treated by vaccination) or a nutritional deficiency (that should have been treated utilizing healthy food sources and supplementation?) In other words, was the ROOT CAUSE of this disease the Coxsackie Virus or lack of an essential nutrient that prevented the body from maintaining a healthy environment? Is it possible, in general, that environmental factors (as well as other factors) play a substantial role in causing various deficiencies in our bodies reducing the effectiveness of our immune systems from maintaining optimal health? Is it possible that chemicals and preservatives in our foods, toxic substances in our cleaning products used in the home and work environment, air pollution, pharmaceutical drugs (which alter healthy gut bacteria necessary to absorb nutrients from foods) all contribute to the weakening of our immune systems resulting in opportunistic infections (diseases?) Do we blame these diseases on bacteria and viruses or do we blame these diseases on the toxicities in our environment? If these possibilities exist, why is our INITIAL approach to disease the development of synthetic drug compounds (vaccines) that kill bacteria or viruses, when these living elements may NOT be the ACTUAL CAUSE of our diseases?
If a gas leak causes a house fire, should we build a canal to provide unlimited water to continue to spray on the fire, or correct the CAUSE of the fire (the gas leak?) In regards to bacteria and viruses, should we continue to toxify our environment (global environment and internal human environment) because we can develop “unlimited vaccines?” Are we not ALWAYS better off treating the underlying ROOT CAUSES before using any secondary sources to provide any remaining needs the body may have?
If we continue to be the ROOT CAUSE of our own disease, and continue our attempt to kill bacteria and viruses that have co-existed with us for billions of years, what makes us think their capabilities to survive and thrive won’t surpass our own limited technology? How many more “SUPER BUGS” must we create; how many more lives must be sacrificed before we realize our approach may need rethinking? This world began with organic origins. We can either wake up and recognize the damage we are causing by coming full circle and returning to a lifestyle of healthier living or continue on a path that will likely destroy a natural state of homeostasis; an essential balance needed for the survival of this planet.

vaccines-awakeningphases

‍Arguments can be made supporting all 5 statements. Tolerance and open-minded discussions lead to changes in thinking and better outcomes. Those unwilling to listen will never have the opportunity to see and understand different perspectives. It is important to realize that yesterday’s truths may become tomorrow’s fallacies. Should we ignore new information because it conflicts with our current beliefs?
Advertisements

6 comments

  1. Your post has vital information for all of us. One of my children developed minor seizures after receiving his 12mth old immunisation. They only lasted a few months, but we attended a few talks and forums about this subject, and were overwhelmed with how many parents particpated in these talks with stories about the side affects their children developed after receiving vaccines. I am a huge advocate as you know, about finding the root cause of any disease. I have made sure all my children are immunised against common disease but, I realise how much there is to learn and how open we all need to be for change.

    Thanks for keeping us updated.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you for sharing your personal family’s situation regarding this topic. There are many good arguments on many different sides and therefore, new credible sources of information need to be available to people. There are few situations in life that remove all options for only ONE TRUTHFUL CHOICE. This topic needs further dialogue to help people decide for themselves and their families the best informed decision. Government and healthcare institutions need to respect the rights and decisions that parents make on behalf of their families. Mandating healthcare compliance with policies that create “necessary unavoidable injuries” (as quoted by the Centers for Disease Control regarding vaccinations) is a dangerous precedent to establish. It would likely be smarter and safer to teach and implement lifestyle changes that reduce the risks for disease. If families believe vaccinations should be part of this lifestyle choice, so be it. If they oppose this procedure, this healthcare decision should receive the same level of acceptance. FEAR without OBJECTIVE INDEPENDENT RESEARCH based on short term and long term studies does not justify court ordered medical procedures for anyone.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I often experience conflict within regarding the value and safety of vaccination protocols, but I think in almost every situation less government oversight is a good thing!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. One overly simple solution to most complicated questions can be found by turning to an independent person or group that has personally experienced or researched various sides of an issue without any conflict of interests. Bias and compensation are two factors that potentially create policy. Health decisions should not be part of a process that includes these variables. What is the motive for those independent people with nothing to gain other than the desire to share honest reliable information? It is honest information to help people decide for themselves.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. That’s a very informative post and you’ve given me a lot to think about. I’m generally pro vaccine but I do think we need to leave room for discussions such as this. We certainly don’t know everything there is to know about it and you bring up some good points about not getting to the root causes and potentially destroying the good stuff.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanking you for reading this with an open mind. My intent is never to tell people what to do; my intent is to provide information they may never have been exposed to so they can make their own best informed decision. I appreciate your feedback very much.

      Liked by 1 person

Your comment can positively impact the lives of others.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: