One size fits all – does it?

By Baldmichael Theresoluteprotector’sson

Obviously not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_size_fits_all

Nevertheless, within certain parameters one can be adapted to fit many, such as wrist watches, belts and safety helmets, the latter with an internal ring fit system.

Whether it fits well is another matter of course.

Yet so many organisations, or organizations if you prefer, seem to think this is the answer.

This is a useful article

In 2020, Let’s Debunk The One-Size-Fits-All Approach To Success     Feb 12, 2020

Paste link into browser to make it work.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2020/02/12/in-2020-lets-debunk-the-one-size-fits-all-approach-to-success/

It sets out the following misconceptions:

– To be a leader, you must be extroverted.

Those who make the most noise are not going to make the best productive leaders. It is written in the Bible for example “Be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to anger.”

– You should be the first to arrive and the last to leave.

Merely working long hours is meaningless. Whilst studies can be seriously suspect the following seems reasonably obvious.

– But a study from Stanford University and the Institute for the Study of Labor found productivity per hour declines sharply after working 50 hours or more a week. After 55 hours, productivity drops even more, to the point where those working 70 hours a week get the same amount of work done as those who put in the 55 hours.

It is too easy for people to appear to be busy without actually being any more productive than someone working less hours.

– Working remotely means you are slacking off.

I have my own experience of working remotely, both out and about surveying buildings on my own and later in life working at home from the computer.

It gave me freedom to do other things to break up the day and manage my workload. I always had my own deadlines in mind, especially when getting a survey report out after inspection of the property.

Anyway, given the current COVID ‘crisis’, I thought the One Size Fits All approach is what we see in the industrial medical complex, as it can be called, and the approach of allopathic medicine.

Allopathic and heroic medicine

For those that don’t know allopathic medicine is apparently described this by Wikipedia.

Allopathic medicine, or allopathy, is an archaic and derogatory label originally used by 19th-century homeopaths to describe heroic medicine, the precursor of modern evidence-based medicine.

Bear in mind this is Wikipedia so using the terms ‘archaic and derogatory’ is designed to make you think homeopaths are being mean rather than realistic.

It goes on.

The terms were coined in 1810 by the creator of homeopathy, Samuel Hahnemann. Heroic medicine was the conventional European medicine of the time and did not rely on evidence of effectiveness.

Who cares about evidence eh?

From

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allopathic_medicine

And heroic medicine is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroic_medicine

Heroic medicine, also referred to as heroic depletion theory, was a therapeutic method advocating for rigorous treatment of bloodletting, purging, and sweating to shock the body back to health after an illness caused by a humoral imbalance.

Rising to the front of orthodox medical practice in the “Age of Heroic Medicine” (1780–1850), it fell out of favor in the mid-19th century as gentler treatments were shown to be more effective and the idea of palliative treatment began to develop.

and

Heroic medicine became less favoured with the rise of safer treatment methods such as hydrotherapy and homeopathy. Even during its heyday, heroic medicine faced criticism from physicians and alternative medicine healers, who pushed for more natural cures.

and

While it is easy to discuss and question the ethical implications of such a severe course of treatment, it is important to remember that in that time period physicians were operating under their best understanding of the body and its physiology. There were dissenting voices at the time, but heroic medicine remained an important, legitimate part of the medical tradition in that era.

Now if you have been thinking this through as you read you may wonder how, in God’s good earth, let alone heaven, how anybody can justify broadly justify heroic medicine like this.

To paraphrase the above, physicians were doing the best they could. In reality they were pig ignorant or wilfully deceitful and went on blithely with harming and murdering their patients.

For money no doubt, as this paragraph from the link states.

Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English write that heroic medicine was created to justify medical billing. Traditional healing techniques were mostly practiced by women within a non-commercial family or village setting. As male doctors suppressed these techniques, they found it difficult to quantify various “amounts” of healing to charge for, and difficult to convince patients to pay for it. Heroic medicine helped convince patients the doctor had something obvious and tangible to sell.

And to sum up that, the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil.

Poor George Washington was clearly finished off by his doctor. Again from the link.

Heroic medicine was used to treat George Washington on his deathbed in 1799. He was bled repeatedly and given Mercury(I) chloride (calomel) and several blisters of cantharidin to induce sweating. Washington died shortly after receiving this rigorous heroic treatment.

Rigorous??? How about poisonous?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury(I)_chloride

Mercurous chloride is toxic, although due to its low solubility in water it is generally less dangerous than its mercuric chloride counterpart. It was used in medicine as a diuretic and purgative (laxative) in the United States from the late 1700s through the 1860s.

Calomel was also a common ingredient in teething powders in Britain up until 1954, causing widespread mercury poisoning in the form of pink disease, which at the time had a mortality rate of 1 in 10.These medicinal uses were later discontinued when the compound’s toxicity was discovered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantharidin#

You can read up on it but essentially it appears to be a vigorous anti-oxidant, of some use against parasites but not generally a good idea to put into humans unless you are into heroics.

Indeed the ethos of Heroic medicine seems to be in essence ‘Take your poison and act like a man. What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger (but don’t ask us to prove it). If you are the one in ten who dies, well it’s all for the greater good.’

Of the physician’s bank balance.

Mind you, I have no sympathy with George Washington who poisoned his troops by making them have the smallpox inoculation, but not after they joined his army. See

https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/smallpox/

While Washington believed wholeheartedly in the efficacy of inoculation, in May of 1776 he ordered that no one in his army be inoculated; violations of this order would result in severe punishment. The summer campaigns were about to begin and Washington could not afford to have a large number of his men incapacitated for a month, vulnerable to attack by the British.

Washington eventually instituted a system where new recruits would be inoculated with smallpox immediately upon enlistment. As a result soldiers would contract the milder form of the disease at the same time that they were being outfitted with uniforms and weapons. Soldiers would consequently be completely healed, inoculated, and supplied by the time they left to join the army.

As they say, tell that to the marines! Smallpox inoculations/vaccines were always a scam by heroic doctors against an imaginary virus.

Even Wikipedia exposes George’s stupidity.

 It was not long after this that Washington initiated the inoculation of the American troops. Washington recognized the dangers of inoculating these men; many patients died as result of the infection caused by inoculation. However, the importance of keeping his men healthy outweighed the risks, and almost all Continental soldiers were inoculated against smallpox.

Many died, but it was worth the risk. Hmm, where have we heard that before?

Going back to the allopathic medicine link at the end it says

Most modern science-based medical treatments (antibiotics, vaccines, and chemotherapeutics, for example) do not fit Samuel Hahnemann’s definition of allopathy, as they seek to prevent illness, or remove the cause of an illness by acting on the cause of disease.

Really? Well antibiotics kill bacteria and sometimes bacteria may be found in the wrong places and cause disease.

But while vaccines may seek to prevent illness, in reality they cause it. I repeat once again that putting poisons into people is not good for health, long or short term.

As for chemotherapeutics these are toxic and whilst they will kill malignant cells, this ignores the reasons why they are malignant in the first place. As I have seen chemotherapy from the inside as a cancer patient in 2020 I understand this.

Here are some interesting anagrams.

‘Allopathic medicine’ can anagram to

– Chemical depilation

– Hid lice cleptomania

– Inept Alec homicidal

– Idiotic napalm leech

– I catholic pile admen

– I lethal cio pandemic

– A lie demonical pitch

‘Heroic Medicine’ can anagram to

– ie medico enrich

– Ere homicide inc

– I mediocre niche

– IE demonic Reich

– her mini ecocide

– ie hide crime con

Which should give you pause for thought.

But I haven’t really addressed to assertion of modern western pharmaceutical medicine and One Size Fits All.

This is I think most obvious with vaccination. Setting aside the fact that vaccines are a vile idea and pointless at best, a set amount of a vaccine is typically given to someone without regard for body mass and little regard for their existing health beyond some basic parameters.

I understand children, even babies, will receive the same dose as adults. And we wonder why so many youngsters today suffer what is called autism etc. as a resulted of being poisoned at the developmental stage.

The problem continues with drugs in general, and again setting aside the fact that most drugs are neuro-toxic and harmful, they are given with only limited, if any, concern for the individuals body chemistry.

In my case I was offered neuro-toxic sleeping pills when I first visited the doctor after my facial palsy occurred in 2018. But I was never asked by any doctor of any sort what my diet was.

As I have explained elsewhere, I was and still am suffering from the effects of sodium nitrite (E250) poisoning, no doubt added to by other things injected by the ignorant doctors.

Then there are the issues of diseases as a whole where western medicine largely fails to understand the causes of disease and lumps things into a group of symptoms.

We are each individual, with a body and mind in varying states of health needing to be kept in balance. We are not a herd as modern medicine would have us believe although we may share common factors with others.

I know from my work as a building surveyor that even estate built houses or terraces will vary a little. This is even more so as they age and are looked after differently by the various owners.

The same is true of the human body, a dwelling place if you will, for the soul.

So, as I tried not to assume that a certain house would be similar to a matching neighbour, so physicians should not assume that people are going to be the same, despite showing similar symptoms.

Some physicians will treat you thoughtfully, but most assume vaccines are useful and that neuro-toxic drugs generally will help people get better

Of course the One Size Fits All is what big pharma want as it is profitable. It will not make lots of money out of individual drugs, even if they do work.

And it definitely doesn’t want you to know that you can eat and drink yourself well as its business model will collapse.

This is a very useful article. Paste link into browser to make it work.

Modern medicine and the one-size-fits-all approach: A clinician’s comment to Alexandra Pârvan’s “Mind Electric” article    15 August 2018

by Heinz Katschnig MD

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jep.13003

I highlight the headings and especially relevant paragraphs

2 MEDICINE IS A COMPLEX UNDERTAKING WITH MANY DIFFERENT CONTEXTS OF THE DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP

It says

My hypothesis is that the “scientific medicine” described by the author is rather something presented by professional medical organizations to the outside world for showing how “professional” they are.

That is, making themselves look good rather than looking after the good of the client.

2.1 Clinical categories are more important during medical education than in actual daily practice

It says

After leaving medical school and being confronted out there on my own with persons coming to me with different states of physical and psychological suffering, I quickly realized that what I had been taught was not of that much use as expected. 

That is, theory is not the same as reality. Or another way, what you find in the laboratory and classroom is not the same on the ground, in the ‘real’ world if you will.

2.2 Clinical categories are more relevant in acute and emergency situations than in long-term care provided by general practitioners

The heading in itself says enough; because in acute and emergency situations there is a short-term need. Of course how that short-term need came about is another matter.

The article says at the end of this heading

…with young doctors striving more often to become specialists than generalists.

And therein lies much of the problem. Yet this has been going on for years as specialisation suits big pharma’s agenda, divide and rule the medical profession to make money.

And the specialists get paid more too.

I was seen by a whole range of specialists after the initial referral by the GP, all of whom ultimately failed to ask that one vital question ‘What have you been eating?’

But the GP’s were no good either.

2.3 Specialization enhances the use of clinical categories and one-size-fits-all approaches

In other words, a blinkered approach, narrow minded and not thinking outside the box. Medics become technicians only in so many cases.

The article says at the end of this heading

The development of specialized medicine is irreversible—there will never again exist a universal genius like Hippocrates or Paracelsus.

I disagree. The development of specialised medicine must be reversed in certain aspects as it fails us miserably. We can keep the worthwhile bits and discard the rest.

And never say never to another universal genius.

2.4 It matters what kinds of ill health the doctor has to deal with

It says

A large proportion of patients, especially the ever-increasing number of elderly patients, suffer from multiple diseases, and guidelines how to deal with such combinations (called “multi-morbidity” by scientific medicine) are not that clear-cut or do not exist at all…

Again, disease is not properly understood by ‘modern medicine’. I know as a building surveyor that more than one defect may exist in a building and until one deals with the obvious the other cause/s may not be apparent.

But unlike most doctors nowadays, I had to examine closely the building and investigate where I could. That is I visited site, I did not rely on pictures and description of issues.

Modern medicine and One Size Fits All might carry out a physical check, even carry out certain limited tests, but will rarely see you in your own home and environment to see if there are factors not evident at the surgery or hospital.

The article says at the end of this heading

“Ownership of a specialized body of knowledge and skills” is the central point here, both inwardly for increasing knowledge and socializing its trainees and outwardly for justifying the existence of the profession. But actual daily practice of “professionals” can be much different from what the profession declares as standard knowledge.

That is, the profession sets itself up to justify financial rewards, status and power but not to really help the individual (unless they can pay for it).

3 PSYCHOPATHOLOGICAL PHENOMENA THAT ARE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM PHYSICAL PATHOLOGY

Perhaps it enough to point out the obvious that the state of one’s mind affects the body.

And the reverse can be true as the state of the body can affect one’s mental well-being.

Yet psychology is largely separate as a specialism and when dealing with people this separation breaks the continuity.

Most of time it seems psychiatrists, who can prescribe medications, assume the poisonous things will heal. I have seen comments from people online who say drugs have helped but by and large they do not.

Drugs used seem to be always neuro-toxic and with various side effects.

A lot of people’s mental health issues stems from non-physiological issues which cannot be solved by chemicals.

That is my review of the article in brief but I noted it refers to George Bernhard Shaw’s play “The Doctor’s Dilemma”. This might warrant another post but here is a link. Well worth reading through and quoting.

https://www.online-literature.com/george_bernard_shaw/doctors-dilemma/0/

It starts with THE DOCTOR’S DILEMMA: PREFACE ON DOCTORS.Note the date 1909, over one hundred years now. I highlight this item from the list at the end.

2. Of all the anti-social vested interests the worst is the vested interest in ill-health.

Let’s move on to some anagrams. They seem quite remarkable and revealing. I include amusing ones as well.

But if they are too much, skip to the Summary and final thoughts where I select my best.

Anagrams

‘One size fits all’

Single word anagrams include:

Alienists

Essential

Falsities

Loftiness

Loneliest

Sanitizes

Sleaziest

Felonies

Inflates

Isolates

Laziness

Lifeless

Oiliness

Safeties

Silliest

Zionists

Easiest

Finesse

Illness

Laziest

Lefties

Lintels

Oneself

Zealots

Aliens

Allies

Elites

Lies

Life

Phrases include:

Lo Zen falsities

Lionize falsest

To file laziness

File laziest son

Silliest oaf Zen

A fez on silliest

By http://content.bt.com/distribution/btvision/freemantle/images/im1/Cooper-Series4-Ep4_im1.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20391986

fa silliest zone

of silliest naze

El finis zealots

Fins lie zealots

Life sin zealots

AZ into lifeless

AZ left lionises

AZ left oiliness

AZ lefties lions

flo Stalin seize

I sole fez Stalin

Fatso senile Liz

Fits senile Zola

Liszt senile oaf

Follies zaniest

Of nil sleaziest

Inflates lies oz

Isolates life zn

A lie Liz softens

Left ass lionize

Is lintels AZ foe

Enlist loaf size

AZ lifeline toss

At fees zillions

Nazi +

Lo lefties Nazis

Itself Leo Nazis

Eel if lots Nazis

Nazis flee toils

Nazi sells foeti

Nazis ole stifle

File Nazis stole

Nazis of tellies

I Elle soft Nazis

I.e. Nazi soft sell

To lifeless Nazi

Follies zaniest

Alienists elf oz

Alienist oz self

Alien oz stifles

Zion +

At lifeless Zion

Eli falsest Zion

Falsest lie Zion

Is leaflets Zion

If ate sells Zion

Left aisles Zion

It leafless Zion

Steals life Zion

Summary and final thoughts

These are my favourite anagram phrases:

• Life sin zealots – it is zealots who seek one ultimate solution

• Lionize falsest – the falsest things get praised

• I.e. Nazi soft sell – we get sold the ultimate cure

• AZ into lifeless – reminds me of AstraZeneca pharmaceuticals

• To file laziness – it is a lazy approach

• A fez on silliest – a fez on Tommy Cooper was fun but when it’s surgical masks…

• Follies zaniest – and brings about the craziest things like lockdowns for the ‘flu, a.k.a. COVID 19

• At fees zillions – whilst earning heaps of money for a few

• Steals life Zion – stealing life from the children of God

These all indicate how the phrase itself, the words, provide answers to my post heading, giving us clues as to the problem of ‘One Size Fits All’.

I say that when ‘One Size Fits All’ is the solution everything becomes bland, the same. And it certainly doesn’t work for health.

This is the motivation behind One World Government (manmade of course) and the W.H.O. and its push for control of countries health policies. It is all about the money and power for the pharmaceutical Nazi companies and the bankers behind them.

I see that big pharma is now starting to get wise to the One Size Fits All label it suffers from.

Personalized Medicine – from a one-size fits all to a tailored approach

https://www.bayer.com/en/news-stories/personalized-medicine-from-a-one-size-fits-all-to-a-tailored-approach

Of course it is not doing this for free; it wants to ensnare you into its clutches with ‘tailored cancer treatments’ for example.

And conveniently ignoring that big pharma products/chemicals probably caused it in the first place.

This paragraph of mine from the main text sums up the position.

 “We are each individual, with a body and mind in varying states of health needing to be kept in balance. We are not a herd as modern medicine would have us believe although we may share common factors with others.”

And regarding the medical profession

“That is, the profession sets itself up to justify financial rewards, status and power but not to really help the individual (unless they can pay for it).”

I have yet to address germ theory and its nemesis, terrain theory. Someone in a comment said

“Terrain people are individuals, there is no group answer.”

To which I said

“Exactly so, perfectly stated. This is the problem with modern medicine, one size fits all.

Or perhaps given its dominance ‘One Pfizer fits all’!

It is after market dominance and profit come hell or high water, and stuff the consumers.”

Which is why ‘One Size Fits All’ doesn’t fit all.

Look out for the sign of Baldmichael, he will be back!

P.S. my apologies for the delay since my last post. My wife and I had a short break and I came down with a ‘fluey cold which I am just getting over.

Anyway, you may wish to add your thoughts.

Here are some suitable links of mine for those who haven’t seen.

Sodium nitrite (E250) – the poison in your food and how to remedy it.

“Why vaccines do not work” in a nutshell

Vaccination industry in a nutshell

The Big Pharma health business model in a nutshell – drugs

World Cancer Day