|
Post by thequirkyduo on Jun 7, 2010 17:57:53 GMT -5
I think that the healthcare bill would be a great thing for America. Everyone should be able to have healthcare, regardless of how much money they are making. It shouldn't matter if you are homeless or you are very wealthy, your life shouldn't have any less value than the next person's... The only problem with this is where you propose to get the money from - I think that this is issue is where you start to get the debate.
Not whether or not there SHOULD be universal healthcare, but HOW there can be universal healthcare.
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 7, 2010 19:28:31 GMT -5
@kryzch32 Fixed the spelling error there. My bad. qooqǝɯɐƃ The fact that you've never taken a genetics class does, indeed, make your knowledge of the mechanisms of the human body incorrect. Crash course: Cosmic radiation, particularly solar, is constantly bombarding the Earth. UVC rays are almost entirely absorbed by our atmosphere, UVB are partially absorbed, and UVA are minimally absorbed. UVA rays are the strongest and therefore the deepest penetrating of the ultraviolet rays. UVA rays penetrate deep into the subcutaneous tissues of our bodies. Here, their energy can have profound effects on the structure of some molecules. Particularly, fragile molecules like the base pairs in deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA. This can cause any number of different kinds of mutations within the genome of the cell. These mutations, especially among proto-oncogenes, can directly lead to a cell becoming cancerous and possibly malignant. This is just one of I'm sure thousands of examples of how your "diet prevents all illness" theory fails. binini You're right, and I too think that is the most important point here. Regardless of the other ramifications, we're saving countless lives with healthcare reform, and isn't that the point?
|
|
|
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Jun 9, 2010 21:56:23 GMT -5
qooqǝɯɐƃ The fact that you've never taken a genetics class does, indeed, make your knowledge of the mechanisms of the human body incorrect. Crash course: Cosmic radiation, particularly solar, is constantly bombarding the Earth. UVC rays are almost entirely absorbed by our atmosphere, UVB are partially absorbed, and UVA are minimally absorbed. UVA rays are the strongest and therefore the deepest penetrating of the ultraviolet rays. UVA rays penetrate deep into the subcutaneous tissues of our bodies. Here, their energy can have profound effects on the structure of some molecules. Particularly, fragile molecules like the base pairs in deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA. This can cause any number of different kinds of mutations within the genome of the cell. These mutations, especially among proto-oncogenes, can directly lead to a cell becoming cancerous and possibly malignant. This is just one of I'm sure thousands of examples of how your "diet prevents all illness" theory fails. Ok, I'll be honest, I didn't know that, so really I can't say much else except I'll tell you what I think. The human species has been around 200,000 years or so, and animals for hundreds of millions of years. I really do not believe that after all that time we did not evolve a mechanism to prevent this kind of mutation. With proper nutrition these mechanisms work, without a proper diet - like 95% of Americans - these mechanisms can fail, and do on a frequent basis. You may think I'm just being stubborn, but I have good reason. You should give 'alternative' health studies some credit, and maybe even read a book or two on the very stuff you try to refute. I don't know if I'd go as far to say that a proper diet will keep you cancer-free, but apparently it can help prevent cancer. You're probably right, there could be numerous factors that have just arisen in the last 200 years since industrialization. But I'm willing to bet that before then the healthiest societies were cancer-free. And just to clarify, that video you linked doesn't promote what I'd consider the healthiest diet. Also, if the guy looked at what you can take out of the diet as well as what you add to it, he would have come to an even bigger discovery. But for some reason he chose not to... Btw GO CHICAGO!!!
|
|
j
Moon
Posts: 127
|
Post by j on Jun 9, 2010 22:45:00 GMT -5
I agree that a Healthcare reform was needed, but congress rushed this too fast. This is not something that needed to be rammed through on a vote just so we can say we have universal healthcare... three years from now. And did anyone else facepalm/rage when Pelosi said "We have to vote the bill through in order to find out what's in it."?
I am against people being forced to have healthcare. If you do not feel like you need healthcare, you shouldn't have to have it. If you're rich enough to pay out of pocket every time, go for it. People should NOT have to have healthcare if they do not want it.
You also don't have to be even remotely rich to have healthcare. I get it through my job and only make about $800 a month and get EXTREMELY good coverage in both physical health and dental for about $60 a month (less than my car insurance). Then again I do have the luxury of working for a chain retail store, so their ability to provide insurance to employees is much greater than a smaller corporation.
As for the current discussion going on about how genetics play a part in health: They do. Looking at my family for example, my grandma and every single one of my aunts on one side of my family have had breast cancer at least once. This goes beyond proper diet since all of them ate differently from not so good to really good. Also heart defects are hereditary. All of my great uncles died before their 40s because of a genetic heart defect. There is a reason why doctors and optometrists ask for family history and it is ignorant to say that genetics play no part in health.
|
|
|
Post by swan on Jun 9, 2010 23:31:16 GMT -5
The idea is that diet can influence the growth and spread of cancer, but it has nothing to do with the creation of cancer cells. Diet does not effect genetic mutations, so it cannot prevent the creation of cancer cells, but it can limit the development of the disease so that cancer never becomes a problem. This is because diet effects the regulation of the biological process of angiogenesis, which plays a key role in the growth of cancer (as well as other things). You're probably right, there could be numerous factors that have just arisen in the last 200 years since industrialization. But I'm willing to bet that before then the healthiest societies were cancer-free. Well there are multiple things to consider, the first of which is an increase in life expectancy. Since most cancer develops later in life when the body begins to degenerate, I think it makes sense that cancer wasn't very prevalent prior to industrialization since people didn't live as long as they do now. Secondly is the emergence of processed foods since about the roughly the 70s. Processed foods generally have high glycemic levels which means that they release sugar into the blood stream very rapidly. Since angiogenesis is a process that involves the bloodstream and plays an important role in the growth and spread of cancer, I would assume the two are related. Now I am neither a dietician or an expert in human biology so this assumption is unfounded on my part, but I know there have been at least a couple of studies that have linked soft drink consumption (which have a lot of sugar and caffeine) to a large increase in susceptibility to pancreatic cancer, so there is some statistical evidence to support such a claim. And just to clarify, that video you linked doesn't promote what I'd consider the healthiest diet. Also, if the guy looked at what you can take out of the diet as well as what you add to it, he would have come to an even bigger discovery. But for some reason he chose not to... To be fair the guy only has like 18 minutes to get his message across, and I think he did a fine job of showing that diet can influence the development of cancer. He certainly doesn't provide any kind of outline as to what the ideal "cancer-prevention" diet might be but I'm sure if you looked into it you might be able to find an article or something based on what he talks about in this video (I haven't read the book you linked to earlier so I don't know if it talks about the same thing that the video I posted talks about, other then the fact that they are both talking about the influence of diet on cancer).
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 10, 2010 14:36:08 GMT -5
Pancreatic cancer is more common with sugars/caffeine because of the effect those can have indirectly on your pancreas, as they force it to overwork on regulating blood sugar/chemical levels. Not sure if that's a direct link to cancer, but rather a link to the susceptibility of a particular organ to cancer.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Jun 10, 2010 18:35:16 GMT -5
@swan pegged it down. Remember that the key "goal" of evolution is reproduction of DNA. Cancer generally occurs late in life and so avoided evolutionary fixes in two ways:
a) Most humans died before cancer became an issue. b) Even those who survived would already have reproduced if they were going to. (Ergo, cancer-ridden DNA was no less capable of reproducing than those more immune to cancer.)
In short, evolution doesn't care if we die, it cares if we die prior to procreation.
|
|
|
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Jun 10, 2010 18:46:05 GMT -5
I've created a Thread to continue our discussion, it's called Nutrition and Disease, cuz I think we're kind of going off topic.
|
|
|
Post by mynameisnotimporta on Jun 11, 2010 22:34:24 GMT -5
The only reason people resist the bill is because its extremely long and half of the people who voted on it didn't even read it. I belive that the government shouldn't takeover healthcare, but regulate and get rid of insurance fraud and whatnot. Like the time i broke my arm and had to get a cast, the doctor guy wet some thing, wrapped it around my arm and charged the insurance company $1000 dollars for "surgery". If all of this was gone then health care would be affordable for everyone
|
|