Today I’m launching a new website TumblrViewr. It’s a different way to view tumbler, using horizontal, variable-sized tiles so you can quickly scan a blog – something you can’t really do that easily on Tumblr.
As a relatively new father I’ve recently been introduced to the notions of “colic” and “teething”. And why do I group these two issues together? Well, read on and find out.
In the first few months of my son’s life he, of course, did his fair share of crying. On one of those days my brother-in-law pointed out that “Oh, it’s probably just a bit of colic”. Being the type of person that I am, I thought that I should look up this thing “colic” and see what it was all about.
It turns out that the medical definition of colic (from Wikipedia) is simply a baby that cries for three or more hours a day for three or more days a week for three or more weeks. Really? So given that these numbers are obviously completely arbitrary (3 and 3 and 3 – a dead giveaway for abritrariness) then colic is clearly just “crying (a lot)”. Odd then, that the medical establishment would come up with a new word for crying. I substituted “crying” into my brother-in-law’s comment that my son was crying: “Oh, it’s probably just a bit of crying”. Hmm, yes, I could probably have worked that one out for myself.
Interestingly, you can also buy a medication for colic (or crying) called Infacol. You have to hand it to the pharmaceutical industry for creating a medication that can cure crying. That must have taken some doing. Not only that but the active ingredient in Infacol is actually Simethcode, an anti-foaming agent also used in some detergents.
“Oh my boyfriend just left me… sob, sob”
“Don’t worry, just eat this anti-foaming agent and you’ll be fine”
The truth about colic is this: parent and doctors love colic. As a parent there’ll be times when your child cries and you don’t know why. Usually it’s fairly easy to read the signs but sometimes you get it wrong and they ball their eyes out for some seemingly unknown reason. The thing is, there’s actually nothing wrong with this. Sometimes we get stuff wrong. We do. It’s just life. And then you try to work out what you did wrong and you try to not do it wrong again next time. We should say “Yeah, our son’s crying a bit. I’m really not sure what we’ve done wrong here but don’t worry we’ll figure it out – he’ll be OK”. Except that most parents can’t say that. They’re so consumed with being “good parents” that they’ll lie through their teeth to themselves and to everyone else to prove that they’re the best parents and that they never do it wrong and that their style of parenting is the best and the most successful. And when they do get it wrong, colic is the answer. Colic is this thing, this “disease”, this “condition”, something that they can blame that’s absolutely, definitely, not their fault. They couldn’t help it. Most children get colic at some time in their lives and they’re far too perfect for their child to be crying for anything else other than a mystery medical condition.
Then they take their child to the doctors. The doctor doesn’t know why their child is crying either. Why? Because modern medical “science” is so far removed from reality that it’s just absurd. The doctor likes to feel important because people come to him for help so he’s desperate to be able to “help” and to show how useful he is. He says “Oh it’s probably just a bit of colic”. “Phew” say the parents. “We thought we were doing something wrong”. “No” says the doctor. “Most children get colic at sometime in their lives”. Not only that, the doctor as got something else: Infacol. This makes him seem even more important. Not only does he have a scientific word for crying he also has an anti-foaming agent.
And so the parents go home with their anti-foaming agent and convince themselves that they’re “sure he’s crying a bit less now” and the doctor relaxes back in his leather office chair feeling all warm and fuzzy inside for helping some more desperate parents. Infacol make another few quid and everyone’s happy. Except the child.
A few months later, my son started growing teeth. “Teething” as it’s called. Less scientific-sounding than colic. A couple of months after that he started waking up in the night and crying. My wife says “I think it’s his teeth”. Well, I hadn’t really considered this before, so I though… “um, well maybe; I suppose it could be.”
Yet over the next few weeks and months I started to doubt this teething theory. For a start, he only ever cried at night. Could it be that his teeth only ever hurt him at night? Unlikely. If his teeth were truly the cause of this crying then surely this would occur during the day too? At least sometimes. But it didn’t. Well what about other evidence? Almost always where there is pain in the body there is an accompanying inflammation, so were his gums inflamed? No. What about touching the site of the pain? Did it hurt when he, say, ate food? No. Or cleaned his teeth? No.
But surely it must hurt when if your teeth are growing through your gums right? I mean, if I stuck something hard, like a tooth, into my gum then that’s going to hurt. Well obviously this is something completely different. Teeth growing through gums not only grow very slowly but it’s a perfectly natural process and would nature really design such a complex organism with such a huge flaw that it spent half of the first two years of it’s life in continuous pain? Unlikely. I remembered back to when I was a child and my adult teeth grew through after my baby teeth. Did that hurt? Not one bit.
Of course we can’t just say that no child ever has tooth pain. I’m sure that most probably have the occasional twinge, especially when a tooth is very close to the surface and covered my just a tiny sliver of gum. The rare few may have a genuine problem and have inflamed gums, probably do to some nutritional deficiency. But all children spending their first two years of life in all this pain. I don’t think so.
The truth is that teething is just the next colic. If you notice, nobody ever talks about colic once a child has some teeth. Why? Because now they have something else to blame. They don’t need colic any more. They have their semi-plausible pseudo-scientific reason as to why they’re still the best parents around, and that’s good enough for them.
The problem with all this stuff is that by blaming a child’s crying on some random nonsense we stop meeting the needs of the child. If you just turn a blind eye to a child who is upset about something because you have a nice fancy label that you can put on it which absolves you of all responsibility then it’s the child that suffers.
As parents, and for our children’s sake, we have to be brave enough to admit that we get stuff wrong. To admin that we’ve caused our children to cry sometimes. To admit that sometimes we don’t know what we’ve done wrong. There is nothing wrong with this. We are not bad parents. We are human beings. Colic and teething are wedges that are driven between us and our children, that separate us from the oneness that we can share with them when we truly listen to them. They are human beings too.
It’s more complicated than this, but if I were to lean any political way then it would be to the left. As such I have recently started reading The Guardian.
I always like to read the comments section at the bottom of the articles and quite often comment myself. Whilst I do make the occasional positive comment if I find the article particularly interesting or funny, I usually tend to write comments if I particularly disagree with the article. Typically this tends to be on issues of science and health.
After writing a few comments here and there I was surprised to see that some of my comments were being deleted by the moderators. I thought this was probably unjustified so I decided to read the moderation rules to find out exactly what I was doing wrong. However, after reading I still didn’t really think I was breaking any of the rules, although I did think that some of my comments were maybe slightly inflammatory.
With this in mind, I decided on a new tack. From then on everything I wrote would be polite, relevant and reasoned. Even when I was attacked personally by other users I would reply politely, thanking them for their comments and reasoning with them. By doing this I even found that many of my most vocal opponents would warm to the discussion and show much more respect themselves.
However, despite this and many long and interesting discussions, still many of my posts continued to be deleted. This culminated in a discussion about HIV/AIDS where not only were my posts deleted but I was also banned three times (I had to keep registering new users in order to continue the discussion). Even my opponents in the discussion expressed their distaste at how The Guardian deleted not just my posts, but also their posts in reply to mine and to each other’s. Eventually the whole thread was deleted.
I have come to realise that The Guardian, what I once thought was a well rounded, intelligent and forward thinking newspaper is nothing more than a dogma-pushing rag. It is an embarassment to free speech, freedom of expression, scientific discourse, intelligence and reason. It has it’s own, very specific agenda and will not tolerate even a discussion on the matter. It represents all that is wrong with society today, the promotion of blind faith on an unthinking population and the silencing of anyone who dares to express their own thoughts and opinions.
The Guardian appears to be currently undergoing various financial problems – with any luck it will be out of business soon enough.
It can only be a tragic moment when one of the world’s most beautiful women mutilates herself in the way in which Angelia Jolie did when she recently had a double-mastectomy on the advice of genetic scientists.
Genetic causality is the latest trend in medical science, a field so wrought with lies and corruption it can barely be called science but rather a religious institution devoted to it’s own financial gain at the expense of the health of everyone else in society. The utter failure of this institution to cure or even prevent any chronic disease has culminated in the myth that genes are responsible for all of these ills when in fact the reality is something entirely different.
The genetic myth succeeds because it panders to the cravings of particular elements of the human psyche. Patients like to believe the genetic myth because it asbolves them of all personal responsibility. The average person does not like to be told that it is his or her lifestyle that has caused a disease to develop, but rather a cruel and unavoidable twist of fate. The patient then wallows in his or her own self-pity, comforted by the belief that they were not to blame. In turn, this feeds the self-importance of medical scientists who, presented with the helpless and blameless patient, are heralded as the all knowledgeable saviours, ready with their expensive drugs and proceedures which, while largely useless or disease-causing in their own right, form a highly effective money-making opportunity. Finally, the genetic myth is a convenient cover-up for the utter ineptitude of the medical establishment in its complete failure to identify the true causes of disease.
After it was determined that genes controlled particular physical traits in animals it was determined that this might also extend to disease causation. Based on this inference, scientists studied diseased and non-diseased groups and separated the patients based on gene patterns. Once it was determined that a particular gene was common in the diseased group but not in the healthy group it was simply decided that said gene was therefore the cause of the disease (at a given percentage rate). Firstly, this is ridiculous because correlation does not imply cause, and secondly because there are so many different genes that with a relatively small sample of people a positive correlation of some kind is likely to occur simply due to random chance. Based on this apparent evidence we now have genes for everything from cancer to homosexuality. Each gene identification is heralded as a great breakthrough which deserves an almightly pat on the back and another round of funding. What is kept much more quiet though, is that when these inferences are applied to larger groups of the population we find many people who have the gene but not the disease and vice-versa. This, however, is simply ignored and brushed under the carpet.
The reality of disease causation is that it is environmental. Diseases are essentially caused by three factors: Deficiencies in absorption of environmental nutrients and conversely exposure to environmental toxins, and physical lifestyle. The term environmental nutrients represents anything from the food we eat and the water we drink to exposure to sunlight for generation of vitamin D. Environmental toxins are any chemicals in the environment that cause problems with our bodies, such as heavy metal pollution from car exhausts. Physical lifestyle represents anything from exercising to simply being and living in the outdoors or conversely living in a glass box called an office.
Living healthily is something that is very simple to achieve for all people, regardless of which genes you have (in all but the rarest cases). In order to live healthily you simply have to align your lifestyle with the way in which nature intended your lifestyle to be. This is not hard to determine with a little thought. Someone embarking on this journey may start with eating purely natural foods that require no industrial process for creation, spending as much time as possible outdoors in a natural environment and taking regular exercise.
Unfortunately, whilst modern medical science does actually agree to some extent with the lifestyle hypothesis it has, typically, clouded the issue. In the 1950’s, Ancel Keys introduced the “Prudent Diet”, convincing the world to eat the high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet now considered healthy by most people. In this, one of the greatest scientific frauds of the last century, Keys twisted the “healthy lifestyle” to the point where it was actually causing the diseases that it was supposed to prevent, leaving the world in a quandary of “healthy” people becoming ill.
We must learn to abandon the irrational and dangerous money-creation schemes of the so-called “health” authorities, an industry interested in nothing more than it’s own gain, and re-align ourselves with nature in order to live long, healthy and above all happy lives.
I couldn’t have said it better myself so please enjoy this excellent speech by Glenda Jackson…
If only more politicians had the courage to speak the truth.
In testimony to the ease at which the unthinking masses can be manipulated by the media, hundreds of Swansea residents, having previously shunned the MMR vaccine, suddenly, after mass media hype, reversed their well considered opinions and decide that MMR was, in fact, a good idea after all. I wonder how many of them actually bothered to rationalise this logically and how many were simply scared into the decision by ill-considered media spin?
Typically, the media have presented a completely one-sided story of this so-called epidemic which has resulted currently around six hundred measles cases. The pro-vaccine lobby have been wheeled out to blurt the same old retoric into our faces yet we have not yet heard a single anti-vaccine voice in the mainstream media.
These so-called experts have presented us with the arbitrary and completely unproven 95% herd immunity figure yet not a single journalist has mentioned the huge statistical elephant in the room, namely: how many of the current 600 cases of measles were actually vaccinated and how many were not?
It is highly suspicious that this figure, which is surely by far the most important and telling statistic has been completely ignored. I suspect that we will find that a very large percentage of those people developing measles were already vaccinated, hence rubbishing the advice to become so, and that this is why this figure had been kept out of the mainstream media.
If this statistic did indeed support the vaccine hypothesis then we could guarantee that it would have been plastered all over the trashy morning rags and every other media headline. Yet suspiciously nothing of the sort has been mentioned. All we have heard so far is of one man whose three children all developed measles and that all were unvaccinated; yet this is clearly selective journalism at its worst. I wonder how hard they tried to find someone of the opposite statistic?
The reality of the so-called diseases of meales and the other respiratory afflictions is that they are not actually diseases at all. They are not infections and they are not caused by viruses, and certainly any modified version of ramdonly selected particles from someone elses blood will have not a single effect in curtailing them. Whilst we wade around in the dead end hocus pocus of vaccination we are missing the the true causes and solutions to the problem: that these diseases are simply reactions to atmospheric industrial pollution. Somehow we must progress past the nonsense of germ theory and begin to manage our society so that we may live in a clean and healthy world.
This weekend we bore witness to the hideous spectacle of the Diamond Jubilee – a four day event where a writhing mass of unthinking sheep adorn their undeserving rulers with sickening displays of gratitude. Our monarch has, apparently, dedicated her life to us and our country and never asked for anything in return crowed the Prince. Nothing in return, apart from the ludicrously lavish lifestyle that she and her family have enjoyed for the past 60 years. And so he blurted on, backed by what can only be described as an array of the worst members if our society – a lurid cake topped with a fat, reflective pink Elton John cherry. Enough to make anyone reach for the emergency paper bag.
This is what our society has become. These are our heroes and role models, a twenty first century freak show. In these times of hardship surely it should be nothing less than an embarrassment to effect such a display of pomp and riches as others struggle to make ends meet. Yet despite all this the public demand it. Thrive on it, indeed. A once out of favour Royal cohort needed only to throw a party and all is forgiven. We even paid for it. You have to admire that.
Does a true leader not stand shoulder to shoulder with his people, share their pain and their joy? Our so-called leaders direct and preach whilst cowering behind a false shield of riches, terrified that they should ever experience the lives of ordinary men. They cut pathetic and cowardly figures, liars and cheats. The bullied children in the playground turned insidious, callous adults. The worst members of our society. At the top.