Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Fix Medicine In America: Make Everything OTC

There is bad service, misdiagnosis, socialism, and general stupidity in medicine today.

And, when you go to a doctor, they are happy to keep you on a merry-go-round of appointments, tests, and whatnot- none of it designed to get you well, but instead designed to keep you coming in the door.

One of the ways they maintain the status quo is via the need for prescriptions.

I can easily imagine a scenario or three of cheap, low side-effect medications that I could and should just try, just to see if they would help me.

I can also imagine the retarded medical sector. $50 out of pocket, but certainly more, in the range of $100-200 for an appointment with a specialist. Said specialist will not give me the mostly safe drugs without tests, and all told the tests will easily hit $500, probably more. And, as I have found out before, they tend to not find anything wrong- until, of course, things have gotten really bad.

So at least $750 up front, before I even get to a prescription or two- and these should be dirt cheap generics, but they probably aren't anymore because of the psychotic monopoly powers our government has granted pharmaceutical companies.

Just make it all OTC. And when I say OTC, I don't mean we've got to go completely crazy- a pharmacist probably ought to advise, and potentially even turn someone down if they don't think the person has the wherewithal to make good decisions.

End the tyranny of the prescription pad. You will find medical costs rapidly become much cheaper.

Monday, February 20, 2017

Why The Media's Strategy Against Trump Will Fail

The constant attempt to paint Trump as a liar fails because most of us know we are being lied to, and Trump does not sound like a liar, but like someone trying to arrive at the truth in an age of uncertainty.

Trump knows there are big lies, but he is not always sure what the big lies are. He remembers Climategate, so he knows much of global warming is fraud. But, like all of us, he is regularly exposed to the media. So, for instance, he appears to think Russia invaded Crimea.

This is a lie and is probably promoted both by the intelligence agencies and the media.

Previous to American meddlers like Victoria Nuland helping overthrow an elected government in Kiev, after which, of course, nefarious people like her presided over the sort of pretend elections that she likes, the Russians had a deal with Ukraine. They have a naval base in Crimea.

Now, think about what this means. It means the Russians were always there. They didn't invade.

They simply responded. First, and perhaps most importantly, to defend their base. Secondarily, the Crimeans had a referendum to join Russia. A referendum that seems a lot more honest than the elections in Kiev, given the fact that the Russian base is there and the locals are likely to have been living and working with Russians for quite a long time.

Despite appearing to believe the media's lies about Crimea, Trump still says we should get along with Russia.

Which is why the media's strategy of calling Trump a liar won't work. He doesn't look like a liar; he looks like one of us, trying to figure out what right. In two ways- one, what is actually true- and two, what is the right thing to do. Trump hammers this point home when he points out what would be politically advantageous to him versus what he is trying to do. I hope the American people are smart enough to understand this. Certainly the middle class, having seen the incredible rise in Obamacare prices, are thankful he doesn't want to wait until even the poor start screaming about how broken this system is.

The false narratives that they continue to embrace will bury them. Meanwhile, Trump sometimes get things wrong. So do I. So does everyone trying to figure out what is really going on. Trump will pass or fail on what he actually gets done- not on his speeches. Indeed, he's already won on his speeches.

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

That Lying New York Times: Pocahontas Edition

And this is only a critique of the headline, because why would I bother reading this crap:

Shutting down speech by Elizabeth Warren, GOP Amplifies Her Message

No. By shutting down her speech, they didn't have to listen to her anymore.

Yes, I know, you are going to write about her. Stupid leftist media is going to put her on T.V.

But guess what? I can avoid all that. So can the Senate.

We can just turn your stuff off.

But, if Warren is allowed to speak drivel in the Senate, then they will hear her, unless they leave, or tell her to shut up.

It just so happens to be a bit more economical for her to shut up, rather than to have everybody else walk out.

Now, hopefully, the milder gentler sort of Republican figures out now, before they get assaulted, that accusations of racism, etc... is a prelude to violence against the persons identified as racist. Individuals have already been attacked, and anyone who is not a leftist is a racist in these people's eyes.

It is no longer the time to be timid about stopping these people. Indeed, the politicians tend to be slow on the uptake, because they've got more protection than the average guy. So, while people get pepper sprayed and beaten with poles, we've still got people who should be on our side whining about how we should be 'nice.' Screw nice.

Shut the violence, and the pretext for violence, down.

Monday, February 6, 2017

Is There A Laser Microphone Aimed At The White House Window?

The media is particularly happy to lie about Trump, but I have noticed that

A: They often have photographs of Trump through the White House window, with the slats and the panes clearly visible in the shot.

B: They often present information (like the phone call with the Australian) as if they are there in the room and can hear what people in the room say.

There is a possibility that the whole place is bugged, but I do hope Trump has at least some people loyal to him capable of scanning the place.

One would also assume a laser microphone pointed at the window might raise some alarms, yet we have to realize they are letting these photographers point their cameras at it. It may or may not require someone looking the other way, but it is not as unlikely as a whole roomful of bugs not being noticed.

Given their tendency to have both these pictures and a tale, well, it seems likely. Additionally, now the media is saying this is the 'leakiest' administration. Part of that is likely true, as there are both SJWs as well as establish conservatives that still need to be kicked out. But some want to suggest people close to Trump want to and regularly leak. I think some advanced eavesdropping is more likely.

The Insulin Hypothesis Is A Good Map For Weight Loss

Taubes has written another book. Much writing ensued, back and forth. The in group cannot countenance the out group; and the out group can read. Nothing has been settled since the last time Taubes wrote a book.

But I am also thinking about this belief/unbelief thing. More and more, I think this is a very bad road to go down, especially if you are a Christian. I know, you think (or feel) that it is very important what you believe. Meanwhile, global warming people think it is very important you believe too. And I wonder if the enemy doesn't also think it is very important to think what you believe is important. If we are honest, we can point to things we thought were true, things most likely perpetrated upon us by the media, or teachers, that we later found out was not true.

What if they teach you to fear what is beneficial, and love what is harmful? What if you are sincere in your beliefs? Sincerely misled?

We like to think this can happen with small things, but not the higher order things.

Anyway, I am going to suggest a very simplistic insulin hypothesis:

When insulin is low, you can burn fat; when insulin is high, you can't.

It may be wrong in some way, but it is a good map. You remember maps, don't you? Back before your phone told you where to go you looked at piece of paper. Maps were usually were not high resolution photographs, but blocky graphics and lines giving you a general idea of where things were in relation to other things.

So this insulin hypothesis helps you figure some stuff out. Things that promote insulin, like refined carbs, are probably not good to be eating all the time.

But it also might help you to infer other things- like, if you are going to cheat, you might want to go for something really awesome and satisfying, have an insulin spike, and get back on track. Complex carbohydrates, it seems to me, are probably the most overrated things in the world. They are usually grains and less nutritious than a range of other things. The idea, is that they won't raise your insulin too much, but they do raise your insulin- not as high as a fast carb, but it's higher than it could be for longer.

Fat seems to move insulin the least, protein moves it a little, and carbohydrates move it a lot. The more refined your protein and carbohydrates, the more likely the spike will be high.

Additionally, I have noticed a banana will leave me hungry again in an hour, but brisket can mean not being hungry for hours. Our responses to foods differ, but this is one I am pretty sure the nutritionist crowd consistently ignore.

What is interesting is that this simplistic hypothesis also works if you do have superhuman will and can eat that banana. So you have the iron will of a god and don't give in- eventually insulin falls to the point where you can start burning fat again. So your 500 calories banana diet can work. Fasting works.

But generally, people need hacks because they don't have the iron will.

So, I basically did the Shangri-la Diet, plus paleo, plus low-carb, plus I started limiting my calories to 1500 when I realized I wasn't as hungry anymore.
But I also tended to have something sweet on the weekends. I like to pick things with no gums, fillers, etc... Haagen Daz tends to win here. You do still have to read the labels because some of their lines have crap in them.

And if folks were thinking along these probably faulty, simplistic insulin hypothesis, I bet they could do it too. Yes, the Shangri-La diet helps blunt appetite, but picking the brisket instead of the banana is at least as strong. Throw everything at it, and get prescription for UDCA from your doctor, to head off any gall bladder issues, if you actually start losing a lot of weight.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Can A Libertarian Cut A Deal?

Well, I still have some idiot in someone else's comments trying to explain money to me, so it got me wondering about Rand Paul's Obamacare replacement.

I'm going to assume Rand Paul has written the closest thing to a libertarian bill, given that he is the closest thing to a libertarian.

The big question is, can he cut a deal with Trump, or will he waste his chances by lecturing Trump?

Soon, the traitors will do something. John McCain is practically spastic with the need to do something traitorous. Paul Ryan probably feels the same way. There are still a lot of guys addicted to the old regime ways, and they are technically still stuck in old regime nonsense- they still get their money by playing the same ball they did last year.

Trump would have to radically change campaign laws to change that game, and he hasn't had a chance yet. I don't know if anything is even on the agenda that would actually change what Congress suffers from.

Rand Paul is a bit of an outsider to those schemes, especially compared to all the others. He would be a natural ally, much like many libertarians would, if they could accept Trump needs to deliver on his campaign promises.

But again, do libertarians know how to stow the lecture and ask Trump what he needs. That's what I'd be doing right now if I were Rand Paul; Mr. President, I've got this bill, I think it's a great bill, and I'd like to know what you need in it, so that you are satisfied that you are delivering on what you promised.
I might throw some libertarian stuff in there, but I'd try really hard not to sound like a professor, but like a businessperson.

This is especially important as we have seen Trump usually has one or two issues he is firm on, but he seem flexible about everything else. He's really firm about getting more jobs for Americans. Especially if the cost imposed by government on hiring employees is significantly reduced, Trump can get what he wants, and we could have a better, freer, overall framework here in the U.S. Possibly even the world. Despite people apparently insane, I haven't seen much in the way of isolationism; I have seen a President very interested in bilateral agreements. And foreign countries, and investors, very interested in them too.

So it seem, even with trade, libertarians could help shape policy if they understood how to help Trump deliver what he promised, while keeping the costs of those promises lower than the costs we currently have.

That would be awesome.

The Successful Female Candidate

If you want a female president, don't run Hilary. But it isn't just Hilary. Don't run anyone who looks like a schoolteacher.
Many of us Americans, of every race, creed, and gender, have had bad schoolteachers.

And often, these bad schoolteachers were cultural Marxists.

They perpetrate a form of child abuse. And it just gets worse over time.

Recently I heard that they separated the little kids, the boys from the girls, and that they encourage the girls to tell on the boys. The slightest touch, and suddenly there needs to be an investigation, etc...

I suppose this has escaped the attention of all the female aspirants to high office, but if you look like the creeps who put us through crap, you aren't getting in, especially if you talk like those creeps too. Hilary failed because she fits this archetype like a glove.

I know that there is, in some way, a resurgence of identity politics because young whites are noticing they need to defend themselves on the identity level.
But, in some sense, Hilary's loss should signal the end of the more traditional identity politics game, because the jig is up.

Incidentally, I suspect Tulsi Gabbard might know some of this. She went to Syria, and promotes what I believe to be true about Syria. Right now she's more trustworthy to me than Paul Ryan, who still calls Assad a butcher. It would be highly sensible of her to fund research into what sort of things signal schoolteacher, and then avoid them.