Health care is our fault, not the government's job. Three ways to make healthcare fabulous again.

My Recent Posts

Learning that no one in America even had health care before the 1920's,and people did pretty well without it, was interesting.  Doctors took care of people because they cared for them.  Many doctors and veterinarians had barter systems, where those they took care of paid them in food, or some other form of payment, that wasn't money.  With our health insurance system, it has become all about money, and service suffers when people do things just for money.  Because then hospitals, doctors, and nurses go into health care just for the paycheck.  I have a relative who is a nurse, and while she is somewhat compassionate, she simply has a lot of college debt she has to pay off and isn't really in the field because she cares about people.  So the following are three things we can to to return health care to respectability and cure American citizens from the ridiculous idea that it is their employers job or the government's  job to get them health care.


First, alcohol, tobacco, and drugs cost Americans $700 billion a year in costs related to crime, lost work, productivity, and health care.   That is enough to pay off our $20 trillion national debt in 30 years.  Life is tremendously enjoyable without alcohol, drugs, and tobacco.  I know, because I've always lived that way, and have no regrets whatsoever.  I am not desensitized, and I have full use of my mental faculties.  To those who do use the aforementioned three, the brain is neuroplastic, and when you stop using them, it can reshape itself and eliminate any negative effects that you are having from using them.   


Second, the average American wastes 9 fully years of their life watching the idiot box.  This is bad for our nation's health on a number of levels.  Studies have shown that sitting down for extended periods of time is just as bad for our health as smoking.  Also, watching television is a mindless exercise, so not only are we affecting our physical health, but our minds are being literally stupified.  We become incapable of reason, and can only feel.  In other words, if something does not appeal to our senses, particularly sight, and sound, we reject it as untrue.  We don't realize it but television brainwashes us to believe only what we see and hear on it, must be true. Hundreds of millions of humans are unaware they have been brainwashed to believe that they must have a certain kind of house, a certain kind of car, and certain products or cloths to be happy and accepted.  So their happiness is a slave to materialistic nonsense.  Then, when they get what they want, they are even more unhappy, because they learn that things don't make you happy.  All this time in front of the television is  total waste when we consider that just 15 minutes of quality reading a day gives the average American 5 free college educations in our lifetime.  So while we neglect real reading, we embrace mindless activities.  Also, reading requires one to take symbols and transform them into images, which is not a passive activity, like watching the idiot box.  Just as lifting weights is required to strengthen the body, so reading is required to strengthen the mind.  


Third, sex outside of marriage is very damaging to a society and increases the cost of healthcare stratospherically.  We now have 1/3rd of Americans with STD's.  These rates are catastrophically higher than what they were in 1940, before Kinsey's ridiculous and fraudulent Sex studies were unleashed on our nation and which sabotaged us.  Also, porn is ripping apart marriages, leading to more single mothers raising dysfunctional boys and girls, and the cycle keeps repeating itself.  58% of all divorces are due to porn use.  Porn should be illegal.  It is not a free speech issue, it is a case of national survival.  Nations that have low birth rates/fertility rates always do badly economically.  With the legalization of birth control in 1965,and of abortion in 1973 our nation has been destroyed with low birth rates and we have been trying to solve the problem by allowing illegal immigrants in our nation.  Well, that is destroying our culture and heritage.  If a nation wants to grow, it needs to have children.  Also, lost in the shuffle is the fact that health insurance and social security are underfunded because at least 60 million babies have been aborted since 1973, and 300 million have been contracepted away at least.  If we would have had those children, we'd be a mightier nation, and the technologies we have now would be vastly improved as well.  Children that are conceived in a moral society always lead to prosperity.  Also, homosexuality is jacking the price of health insurance way higher, as homosexuals have life expectancy's that are 20 years less than heterosexuals, and have higher rates of AIDS, STD's, suicides, pedophilia, domestic abuse, and addiction.   Since the ridiculous Lawrence decision in 2003 by our clueless SCOTUS, disease and health problems in the homosexual community has skyrocketed.  Foolish Americans don't like to be bothered with facts though.  


So, please don't complain about health care if you are watching television, having sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman, and that includes porn, or using drugs, alcohol, or tobacco.  Fix yourself, and our nation will fix itself.  Let us listen to a man who preached good words but lived a bad life.  JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".  




Bill Kamps Added Feb 26, 2017 - 5:45pm
Ryan, adding to the history, health insurance became popular during WWII when there were wage freezes put in place by the Federal government.  To get around this, companies started offering paid health insurance as a way to pay people more, and get around the ban on salary increases. Talk about unintended consequences.
Since then the whole system has morphed into a situation where people dont even know the costs of tests and procedures when the doctor decides they are needed.  I have asked my doctor in the past what is the cost of a test or procedure and he has no idea.  People dont fix their car or their house without knowing the cost first, but insurance has ingrained us to just accept whatever the doctor decides because its probably covered by insurance.  Its not possible to contain costs, when we have no idea what they are because we make the purchase.
I was doing ok with my private insurance policy, until the "Affordable Care Act" came along and doubled the cost of my premium.  Why giving insurance to the poor doubled the cost of my insurance is beyond me, but it is yet another example of the government messing up something for no good reason.  We should have just given insurance policies to everyone that didnt have one, it would have cost me far less than the doubling of my premium cost me.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 5:50pm
Thank you Bill, that is interesting.  Completely agree, the costs are outrageous, and few pay any attention.  Oh Wow, your premium doubled!!  Another case that proves Obama was lying about it.  
The ridiculous idea Obama and the Democrats have is that it's our nation's duty to have the government tax us to pay for the poor's insurance.  It certainly is not.  And none of us have to stay poor.  There were times when I couldn't afford health insurance, and I prefer to die than to have to rely on government health insurance.  Because when a nation has to rely on government health insurance it is no longer free, it is full of slaves.  I prefer to die free, than to live a slave.   
Dave Volek Added Feb 26, 2017 - 6:43pm
Ryan. I have to agree with most of your points. You put them very well. Unfortunately, most people don't want to see the cause and effect of their actions. There is a "morality dividend" that will increase the prosperity of society if we somehow convince more people to adopt a more moral lifestyle.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 6:53pm
Thank you Dave, yes, you are right.  It is common to think my actions only impact me, but in reality, all our actions impact our society and even the lives of people not born.  
There really is a "morality dividend".  I like that term.  
George Washington said it in his Inaugural address of 1789.
April 30, 1789

There is no truth more thoroughly established than that there exists in the economy and course of nature an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness; between duty and advantage; between the genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous policy and the solid rewards of public prosperity and felicity; since we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.
Dino Manalis Added Feb 26, 2017 - 7:27pm
Emergency health care is a right, we're paying for it, but government regulations have actually made health care more expensive.  We need market reforms, instead, like import foreign prescription drugs; cap medical malpractice compensation; streamline insurance bureaucracy and paperwork; and allow insurers to compete across state lines.  It would help the economy; shrink the deficit; ensure viability of Medicare/Medicaid; expand insurance coverage; and enable more Americans to use preventive diagnostic care.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 7:34pm
No, it's actually not a right.  We are not entitled to other people paying for our health care at all. That is not what the Founders meant when they said the right to life, liberty, and happiness.  It is the job of Christians to look out for others, but it's not the governments job. 
Leroy Added Feb 26, 2017 - 7:47pm
Bill, you hit the nail on the head.  I've taken my wife to the emergency room twice recently.  All I can do is sit back and watch the bills roll in. If I knew that asking her to read an eye chart was going to cost $255, I think I would have skipped it.  If I knew that they were going to perform a $4,000 CT scan for acid reflux, I would have told them they were nuts.
The best way to solve the healthcare issue is to eliminate insurance altogether.  I'm a big fan of the Chinese health system.  You pay in advance for everything.  No pay, no service. You know exactly what it is going to cost.  There are multiple tiers of service.
Leroy Added Feb 26, 2017 - 8:00pm
Ryan, I imbibe alcoholic beverages on a regular basis.  I enjoy it.  We've tried prohibition before and it didn't work.  Probably had the opposite effect.  It was an attempt by the wealthy to squeeze more productivity out of workers by eliminating a vice.  It was also an attempt by do-gooder (mostly women) to impart their morals on others, namely their men.
As far as nudity goes, I appreciate the beauty of the female form.  I see nothing wrong with it.  I do object the obsession with trying to make anal sex appear the norm.  If one can convince others that an anus is just as good as a vagina, then it makes homosexualism (not that there is anything wrong with it) seem mainstream.  Nothing good can come from this movement.  It is unhealthy and no one can convince me otherwise.
Marriage is essentially a contract where both parties agree to form a family unit with monogamy implied.  Until there is a contract, no one should be obliged to remain celibate.  It is unnatural.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 8:09pm
Personally, I've never drank Leroy. Reason why is because my parents and church never did, and then I didn't want to get into it because it might cause another to drink.  I don't advocate the government banning it, but I know the Bible says "it is not for kings to drink".  Alcohol perverts judgement.   It's good you can handle it, but not everyone can.  
I can tell you, lusting after women is bad for you and bad for them.  I can also tell you, really good women despise men who lust after them.  They hate it, and when they act like they don't, they are only using the man.  Pornography is pure evil, and the effect it has on the brain is worse than crack.
I appreciate the female body just as much as the next man, and am quite enraptured by it.  But, if that desire is taken out of a marriage with a woman, it is like a raging wildfire, and it will hurt me and possibly others.  
All  sex outside of marriage is wrong.  We  used to understand this just fine before we were sabotaged by Kinsey's bogus report.  Now we have been brainwashed to think sex is perfectly natural in all forms, and does not need to be confined to marriage.  All great societies begin with confining sex to marriage between a man and a woman, and they end when they take it out of that context.
No, celibacy outside of a marriage between a man and a woman is hard, but it is possible to those who think it's possible.  Unfortunately science and our society has been lying to us and telling us it's impossible.  Which is why many of us live weak and mediocre lives, never living up to our potential.  Only those who can master the sex urge ever reach their potential in this life and the next.    
Leroy Added Feb 26, 2017 - 8:12pm
I saw a video on Youtube recently.  I think it was on VSauce.  It pondered what would be said about books if they were invented today.  We have a generation of kids who have grown up with the interactive nature of the web.  When you access the web, it is at your command to explore is, well, like a web.  It is not a linear process like reading a book.
One complaint would be that it wouldn't allow one to interact.  You would be forced to follow a linear plot.  You would be at the mercy of the author of the book.  It would dumb down kids, reduce their creativity.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 8:21pm
I somewhat disagree, though it is a novel idea.  Books allow us to explore the minds of others, whereas the internet keeps us trap in our own misguided and misinformed worlds.  I rarely learn anything new from the internet.  Most of it is propaganda that one has to take strenuous measures to protect oneself from.  
Books take concentration and focus, and the internet encourages a lack of concentration and focus.  All you have to do is look at a comment board and the inane replies show that to be the case.  
Rarely do you see wise and insightful FB or comment sections replies.  Most are too crude and foolish to be taken seriously.  
Leroy Added Feb 26, 2017 - 9:09pm
I agree that reading a novel takes focus.  But to learn something, you don't have to read a book from beginning to end.  You don't need a medical degree to consult the web to learn everything you need to know about a medical condition.  I read an article that said that multitasking was not a mark of intelligence.  Perhaps it is true; perhaps I am not so smart, but the internet has allowed me to multitask quite effectively.  My wife has a temporary condition that doesn't allow her to cook.  She prefers home cooked meals.  So, I am in the position of cooking the meals for the family.  I really don't enjoy cooking so I try to make it as painless and quick as possible.  I have my smartphone on the table and Alexa at my side.  I set timers to allow me to do several things at once.  I can get recipes with my smartphone.  Alexa can make conversions from grams to ounces or convert temperatures for me.  I can even enjoy a pale ale in the process.  If I need something I don't have, I consult the web and either find a substitute or create what I need from what I have on hand.  It can seem like chaotic process, but I get it done.  I do a half decent job of passing myself off as a chef, all with never reading a book on cooking.  I do the same at work.  I can do things beyond my training and experience.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 9:23pm
Preparing a meal doesn't take reading a book, this is true, but reading books is what leads to mastery of subjects.  Whether it is astronomy, history, biography, math, latin, english, architecture, science, or whatever other topic, reading extensively will yield the greatest wisdom.  Also, reading, meditating, and applying is the height of wisdom.  In the next five years we will be the same people except for the new people we meet and the new books we read.
Leroy Added Feb 26, 2017 - 9:54pm
How about this.  I didn't have to read medical books from beginning to end to understand my condition.  I was able to gain the knowledge from several sources on the internet and to focus on my specific case.  If I took your approach, I would have spent months in the library and would have likely failed.  In a relatively short period of time, I was able to bounce around the web until I became sufficiently knowledgeable. When I met with my American doctor for the first time, he told me there was nothing wrong with me.  I had enough knowledge to challenge his diagnosis.  He reversed it on examination of the evidence.  I never read a single book.
I am not saying that books are unimportant, far from it.  I am heavily influenced by the books I have read.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 10:07pm
That is also possible. Diagnosing illnesses and cooking a meal are two activities that can be done without reading.  But wisdom is hardly summed up in cooking a meal or diagnosing and treating a medical condition.  
Wisdom is knowing what to do and when for all the vicissitudes that life has in store for us.  You may have seen this, but here is what 8th graders knew in 1912, that 99% of people with masters degrees don't know today.   The common error is to assume that our not using this information means it's irrelevant.  It's not.  Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat her mistakes.  
Dave Volek Added Feb 26, 2017 - 10:53pm
Leroy: Being a responsible drinker is still contributing to an industry that depends addiction and lots of irresponsible drinking for economic survival and profits. The contributions are two-fold: financial and propping up alcohol consumption as a virtue.
Ryan: I went to your link. I'm not a big fan of the "good old days" for I don't think they were all that good for many people. Around 1912, America was just reforming its child labor laws such that 12 year olds were not working in coal mines or dangerous factories.
That Grade 8 curriculum does indeed look advanced. But I would like to ask these questions:
1) If the dumb kids are all working in the coal mine, would that not make the teaching of this curriculum more practical with average to smart students?
2) Were students beaten to study this material?
3) How many students actually passed such an exam?
4) There is a lot of rote memorization in that test. What did the students really learn?
Just some thoughts.  
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 11:25pm
Thank you for sharing the link, I agree, and I like your website.  
The child labor laws were inevitable.  We were barely 150 years into the industrial revolution.  Whenever technology improves, humans are rarely able to use it to their advantage without human nature perverting it, and the industrial revolution saw kids abused to make a buck.  We have the same thing today with the sex industry, and actually, they had it better then, because children aren't used for sex nearly as much then as they are today.  This is an inevitable result of pornography, as the more people who use porn, the higher numbers of rapists, woman abusers, homosexuals, and pedophiles a society gets. 
1) Most kids were not in coal mines.  That was a tiny fraction who were in the inner cities, who the child labor laws applied to.  
2) Corporal punishment was in place then, and I think it should be now.  Kids have grown chaotic and out of control without it.  Compare today's kids with those in 1940 and those in 1940 were fare more behaved.  If today's kids were faced with the challenges young men faced in World War 2, we'd be doomed.  
3) Well, it wasn't a matter of percentage of who passed.  Unlike today's failure schools, you either passed this test, or you didn't go to high school and flunked, having to repeat the 8th grade.
4) Rote memorization of important principles, and historical events and figures is very good.  With it, we have something to compare new information to. Without it, we evaluate ideas based on our feelings, which is a great way to ensure reason and logic are trodden underfoot in a society.  That is exactly what is happening now.  Repetition is the mother of learning, and Genius is an infinite capacity for taking pains.  
The idea that rote memorization is bad is nonsense.  It is fueled by the techies who think their inventions make historical wisdom irrelevant.  They are completely wrong. Egypt, Rome, and Greece were tech leaders in their day, and where are they today?  A society that is disconnected from it's roots, is the kind of society whose youth is led astray just as Pol Pot did in Cambodia, Hitler did in Germany, Lenin and Stalin did in Russia, and Mao did in China.  
Peter Corey Added Feb 26, 2017 - 11:27pm
>One complaint would be that it wouldn't allow one to interact.  You would be forced to follow a linear plot.  You would be at the mercy of the author of the book.  It would dumb down kids, reduce their creativity.
The main value in reading books is in learning to pay attention and sustain it for a long period of time until the the book and the author's argument are finished.
>One complaint would be that it wouldn't allow one to interact.
Not "interacting" is a feature, not a bug.
The interaction with books comes later, after one has deliberated on the author's ideas.
The majority of young people today appear incapable (that is to say, habitually unwilling) to engage in serious, sustained discourse on ideas, especially when the ideas challenge their convictions; convictions that, for the most part, appear to have been accepted uncritically.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 26, 2017 - 11:52pm
Thank you Peter, well said, and I agree.  Today's kids have hummingbird attention spans and as you say, "they are habitually unwilling to engage in serious, sustained discourse on ideas, especially when the ideas challenge their convictions; convictions that, for the most part, appear to have been accepted uncritically."
Patrick Writes Added Feb 27, 2017 - 12:31am
The author's point is valid but in the 1920's polio was still one of the biggest scourges of regular people. It was not uncommon for women to die in childbirth (or of infections). The 1918 Bird Flu a few years earlier had killed something like 20 million people worldwide. And life expectancy was early 50's I believe.  So it's not quite a standard we'd want to replicate. 
Open heart surgeries cost a lot of money. Cancer treatments are expensive. Many prescribed drugs are expensive. And the technology involved in the medical devices like MRI machines is just expensive.
Having said that, the U.S. medical field is vastly screwed up. Nurses in the U.K. make practically half of their U.S. counterparts (when you do the currency conversions). But it's the same job. How does that work? 
Proof here:
Doctors get paid far more in the U.S. than the U.K. as well, doing the same job.
Healthcare is, allegedly, marginally better in the U.S.A. verses the U.K. but for the most part, this is the same work. 
So what is skewing the U.S. costs so high? Medical malpractice suits are a factor. But what is skewing the cost of higher education in the U.S. so high? Government provided student loans.
Could it be that the government via Medicare for seniors (seniors are the biggest consumers of healthcare) simply paying for every procedure for 50 years now--which no downward pressure on costs from Uncle Sam like the U.K. does--has caused rampant inflation in the medical field. 
Patrick Writes Added Feb 27, 2017 - 12:38am
I'll throw one more point out there, diabetes is a killer and is becoming more prevalent (makes you at severe risk of heart attack if your blood sugar EVER gets too high). On a daily basis you're at risk of heart attack if you don't manage this properly.
But type II Diabetes is actually tied to sedentary lifestyle. If you exercise a little bit (simply the equivalent of a 20-30 minute walk each day), you can eat bread and rice--carbs--and it's no big deal. But if you don't do anything physical each day, even eating bread or rice or potatoes is bad for you. The carbs get converted to sugar which can cause your blood sugar to rise. 
Thus, you can't even eat a normal diet if you're at risk of Type II Diabetes (which nearly everyone is) and you don't do SOMETHING of an exercise nature most days. 

So sedentary lifestyle is actually a killer in a roundabout way. People need to manage their own health. Your habits snowball as the years go by.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 27, 2017 - 12:45am
I would argue it's not the quantity of life we have that matters, but the quality.  
Who cares if our life expectancies are longer, if the average American spends 9 years of their life in front of the television? What is the point of that?
I agree on all the health items, especially avoiding a sedentary lifestyle.
Bill Kamps Added Feb 27, 2017 - 9:01am
Leroy and Ryan, think about how you pay to have your car fixed. 
If you need a tune up, they have a price on the wall that tells you how much a tune up costs.  When I take my car in to the dealer to have service done, I get a phone call with the price that says what this procedure will cost before they start the work.  They charge by the procedure because they have done these procedures hundreds of times.  They tell me what the insurance will cover, and what my cost will be.  Does every time they do it take exactly the same time ? no, but it averages out.  If the cost will be too high,  I have the option to take my car somewhere else.
The dealer does not charge me for every screw, every drop of oil, every time a computer diagnostic tool gets used. They charge a flat fee to do the work and they bear some of the risk of the overall cost, it averages out.
Think about how a hospital charges.  They charge for every aspirin, every Kleenex, every use of a bedpan.  Just keeping track of all the consumables alone raises the cost.  You never know what the total cost is until months later when the bills finally stop coming.  What kind of system is that ?   How can we control costs when we dont know what they are ?
Until we know the cost of a medical procedure BEFORE the procedure gets done, we cant possibly control the costs, because we cant shop around for other options.  For 90% of the procedures we should be able to find out the cost first, because they are done LOTS of times and hospitals can average out the  costs.
Rex Added Feb 27, 2017 - 10:57am
Ryan I like the article as someone who had a very different take on as someone who has health care insurance which I use infrequently it is nice to have.
I too subscribe to the non drug and alcohol lifestyle. I have never understood using substances that divorce your mind from your body. Never smoked because I used to get bronchitis and even the smell of other people's cigarette could set off gales of coughing.
I used to like wine but never drank to excess. Only had one hangover and never wanted to repeat that experience. As to drugs even the prescribed stuff I am very careful when taking it.  I am fortunate that I am relatively healthy so except for reflux I do not take pills.
As to your charge about sex outside of marriage; I attribute that problem to the introduction of the Pill at the time when feminism was encouraging women to act more like men when it came to their sexuality.  Too many women bought into that. Too many women still think that to have indiscriminate sex is a badge of how liberated they are. I think that is sad. Also the women who get knocked up would not be my first candidate for motherhood - yet most of them choose to have the kid.
I took my Pill religiously every day at 7 am with breakfast and continued to do so until my doctor took me off it at age 60 - apparently I missed menopause while on it.
I agree that the birth rate is too high. Part of the problem stems from giving additional support to women on public assistance for each additional child they have. The same system prevents the government from tying the tubes of women like this so thank the government for contributing to the problem.
The rampant problem of STD'S is also a result of women behaving more like men i.e. multiple partners. Feminism should be about self respect for ones person - it is a message largely missed by most women of that generation.
I for one am tired of being politically correct to women who are "single mothers". It is an excuse to break the rules of a civilized society. 
I also agree that there are too few people reading - unfortunately I do not see that changing. That too is sad.
George N Romey Added Feb 27, 2017 - 12:22pm
Well isn't the problem with healthcare as a for profit business. Healthy people means less revenues and profits. A population of clueless obese individuals addicted to sugar, booze, pills, and fatty foods means dollar signs all around.  The profit motive means creating demand.
If we lived healthier lives like we did 200 years ago big Pharma wouldn't have a bunch of victims to push their outrageously expensive drugs on.
Peter Corey Added Feb 27, 2017 - 3:21pm
>Healthcare is, allegedly, marginally better in the U.S.A. verses the U.K. 
Healthcare as measured by positive patient outcomes is not "allegedly, marginally better in the U.S.A. versus the U.K." but much better than the U.K. It's more expensive in terms of money, but less expensive in terms of waiting time and follow-up procedures. There is more diagnostic/imaging equipment in the U.S.A. that patients make use of; there are more innovative, cutting-edge pharmaceuticals in the U.S.A.; and there are more innovative, cutting-edge medical devices. Mortality rates for cancer and heart disease are significantly higher in the U.K. than they are in the U.S.A., thanks to the shortages and waiting time imposed on patients by the N.H.S.
Janie Smith Added Feb 27, 2017 - 5:54pm
Who cares if our life expectancies are longer, if the average American spends 9 years of their life in front of the television? What is the point of that?
Amen, Ryan! 
Bill H. Added Feb 27, 2017 - 7:08pm
Janie - If we have no bees, we not only lose fruit.
We will lose all of the food that cattle consume, such as grains and corn.
Ohh, but wait! there is still about 7% of the ocean fish population left that we haven't yet eliminated.
In other words, we will lose all of our food stocks
Ryan Messano Added Feb 27, 2017 - 7:38pm
I agree Bill K, I think we should know the costs before hand so we can shop it.  It's ridiculous the costs the hospitals throw at us, and there is little competition.  
Ryan Messano Added Feb 27, 2017 - 7:43pm
Thank you Nancy, that is wonderful on the drugs, alcohol, and tobacco.  Great line, I love it!!  "I have never understood using substances that divorce your mind from your body."  Me neither.  I love having control of my body and mind, and hate losing it.  
Yes, atheist, feminists introduced the Pill, and it has been attacking the family for awhile.   No longer were children a priority, now sex was a priority, and the consequences be damned.  
I don't really fault women. It's the men.  If they were really men and loved women as Christ loved the church, we'd have a lot less problem with single mothers.  We have tens of millions of men and women who were raised without fathers and mothers who loved them, and who don't know God, who are trying to find love in all the wrong places.  
That is a lot of discipline with the Pill.  It was legalized in 1965, and if we never had it, we'd be a lot better off, IMHO.  
My contention was that the birth rate is too low.  We just found out today that Spain just appointed a sex minister to try and inflate the abysmally low birth rate of 1.3 children per women which is causing the whole countries economy to tank.  When birth rates decline, Islam will step in and take over nations.  Their birth rate is in no danger of declining anytime soon.  
Hopefully people turn back to reading.  If we don't, we are in trouble.  
Ryan Messano Added Feb 27, 2017 - 7:45pm
Good point George.  I talked to a doctor once who said he'd be out of business if it weren't for lifestyle choices.  And I completely agree. Living healthy lifestyles would put psychiatrists, STD doctors, big pharma, and many other medical professions out of work.  Better they find new careers than we pay them to cure issues we have the power to cure ourselves.  
Didn't know that Peter, thank you for sharing.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 27, 2017 - 7:49pm
I'm with you on addressing food, Janie, and barter is great.  
Bill H., our food supply is unlimited.  Necessity is the mother of invention.  If you consider how far our food production has progressed in just the last century, you will soon understand that there is no need the human mind is not capable of finding a solution for.  As long as you have earth, sun, and water, you will have food.  And we still have many agricultural innovations that are not yet invented.  Why is it the liberals are the biggest fear mongers. From climate change, to overpopulation, to the food and water supply they are always doubting.  I guess they were never trained on faith.  Christians understand what happens to doubting people, as we learned what happened to the Doubting Lord in Kings, and the doubting Jews in the wilderness.  
Bill H. Added Feb 27, 2017 - 8:36pm
Sorry Ryan-
If you take bees out of the machine, it will fail. Just as a car engine will fail without oil.
This is not a "Liberal/Conservative" issue.
It is common sense and science.
Thomas Napers Added Feb 28, 2017 - 5:09am
Of the three ways to make healthcare fabulous again, the first makes no logical sense, the second has nothing to do with healthcare and the third is totally ridiculous.  I mean, do you really believe that if we stopped having premarital sex it would make one iota of difference on the type of healthcare we'd receive?  Did we ever have fabulous healthcare?
wsucram15 Added Feb 28, 2017 - 9:53am
Ryan..I was really going to give you hell for this article. But I cant, you have a point. Neuroplasticity is something most people dont understand and I commend you on that.  However, the things you mention drugs, Alcohol (which is a legal drug) and tobacco (also a legal drug) damage your body in ways you cannot even imagine.
Drugs do damage they are just now discovering and some they have known about for some time that dont regenerate.
People will argue this with me, but smoking weed is  not as dangerous as a cigarette, it can cause microbes that usually cause bronchitis. Which over time and repeatedly wears down the lungs.
Other drugs have been shown to have long lasting affects, such as bone deterioration, dpt, liver failure, kidney failure, lung damage(as discussed), heart failure as well as long lasting psychological affects.
Good article, really good, I cant agree with all of it but your points about risks to health, even sex are well made.
Mike Haluska Added Feb 28, 2017 - 11:05am
I'm with Bill H -
Let the bees be.  And while we're at it, let the bears bear. 
Seriously - do you know how many insects have gone extinct due to human interference?  ZERO!  The bees (primarily honeybees) are under attack by a mite (another insect) NOT humans!!! 
Mike Haluska Added Feb 28, 2017 - 11:13am
According to the US Surgeon General, 80% of all health care costs are for the treatment of preventable diseases!!!
Treatment means care AFTER the disease has taken hold.  Preventable means that the patient could have avoided getting the illness with proper healthy lifestyle (diet/exercise/avoid tobacco, drugs, alcohol). 
As much as most people don't want to hear it, you can't abuse your body the first 50 years of your life and then expect the doctor to "fix you" for $49.99.
Rex Added Feb 28, 2017 - 12:51pm
Ryan the Pill was a great boon for men in the united states it allowed them to have indiscriminate sex - with out the usual consequence of a baby. It was a shortsighted approach because it ignored the rampant STD's and the epidemic  that continues to haunt us.
I am glad the Pill was available for me. At the time the Pill was introduced women were not allowed to get themselves sterilized to prevent pregnancy - unless the procedure was medically necessary!
To me it always seemed that that rule was a way to make women for pay for having sex outside of marriage. If you have ever read the literature of the period it always has a mysoginist tinge. Men can have unmarried sex women cannot- without some penalty. 
Ryan Messano Added Feb 28, 2017 - 12:53pm
Thomas, the first makes perfect sense if individual citizens did it in their own lives.  I'm not for government compulsion, except when it comes to drugs.  
The second has a ton to do with health care.  Sitting down for 9 years of your life is tremendously unhealthy.
And health care costs are dramatically less in societies that embrace sex in marriage alone between a man and a woman.  STD's, divorce and it's associated trauma on spouses and children, among many other costs make that blatantly obvious.  If we stopped having premarital sex it would drive health care costs way down, as it would severely reduce STD's, and children born out of wedlock, which not only drive healthcare costs up, but are a burden on society.  We had great healthcare in 1900, when no one had healthcare.  Healthcare is an individual responsibility, not the governments job or employers at all.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 28, 2017 - 12:54pm
Thank you Jeanne.  I estimate, if our entire nation followed these three simple rules, it would save us at least $1 trillion a year.  
Good points on drugs!
Ryan Messano Added Feb 28, 2017 - 12:55pm
Great point, Mike!
"According to the US Surgeon General, 80% of all health care costs are for the treatment of preventable diseases!!!
Treatment means care AFTER the disease has taken hold.  Preventable means that the patient could have avoided getting the illness with proper healthy lifestyle (diet/exercise/avoid tobacco, drugs, alcohol). 
As much as most people don't want to hear it, you can't abuse your body the first 50 years of your life and then expect the doctor to "fix you" for $49.99."
That is crazy, 80%!!!  Wow!  So we really have no one to blame for our health care problem but us.
Bill H. Added Feb 28, 2017 - 1:01pm
Mike - Again, do some research.
CCD (Colony Collapse Disorder) has been traced to mostly being caused by pollen infested with neonic pesticides.
You are falling for the "mite" excuse that was being perpetuated by both Monsanto, Bayer, and Syngenta.
Try using StartPage as your search engine, it will get you out of your "Google Bubble".
Leroy Added Feb 28, 2017 - 1:38pm
Dave, neither of us is right or wrong.  Alcohol likely helped us survive at one point.  Today, it is not true.  If I enjoy it and do not abuse it, then it is not a vice.
I pity those who do not drink.  Many years ago, a wine connoisseur gave me a glass of wine while I was still in France.   It was a very, very large glass. I'm not a big wine drinker, but the bouquet of that wine remained with me for 10 or 12 years.  It is a fragrance that took me back in time, send chills down my spine.  It enriched my life.  It is difficult to describe to anyone who has not had that experience.  Beer is my drink of choice, especially a pale ale.  It is better for me than a sugary drink.
Mike Haluska Added Feb 28, 2017 - 2:10pm
Bill H - I suspect your "search engine" only searches for stories that try and make corporate America look bad!  See link below:
USDA study concludes neonics not driving bee deaths
Excerpt from the above article:
Chensheng Lu’s conclusions discredited:
The new study can also be seen as a direct rebuke of the controversial target="_blank">research by Chensheng Lu, a Harvard University environmental scientist who used doses 10-100 times higher than found in the real world to support his claim, accounted before the embarked on his research project, that neonics were the driving cause of CCD.
According to University of Illinois Department of Entomology Chair target="_blank">May Berenbaum:
The experimental design and statistical analysis are just not reliable. … He never tested for the presence of pathogens, so his conclusions dismissing other likely causes don’t follow from his data. The whole study just doesn’t hold together. And I’m not being a fusspot here. It’s unfortunate this was presented as a Harvard paper because it gives this credibility that it doesn’t deserve.  
Sounds like another example of "pseudo-science" - reminds me of the crappy science of "Climate Change".  Using doses 10 to 100 times than observable sounds a lot like using a "computer model" to support claiming that a 0.1 degree change in temperature will melt all the Polar Ice.
You really need to start listening to me.  I am objective and have scientific and engineering credentials with 30 years experience.  I'm not a 25 year old social studies major writing for Rolling Stone or Mother Jones.
Mike Haluska Added Feb 28, 2017 - 2:21pm
Ryan - keep in mind that although:
"That is crazy, 80%!!!  Wow!  So we really have no one to blame for our health care problem but us."
people through no fault of their own get injured and acquire deadly diseases - especially children.  If we could continuously modify the health behavior of Americans, maybe we could avoid a lot of the expenditures made for treatment of preventable diseases and put those funds towards finding cures for Cancer and other deadly illnesses. 
Cigarette smoking among youth today astonishes me.  I can understand my Dad starting to smoke when he was a kid - they didn't know any better.  Why today's kids would want to start such a bad habit is beyond me.  The same thing can be said for AIDS.  If those who are at risk for this almost entirely behavior spread disease took proper precautions, the disease would be eradicated much like smallpox in a decade or so.    
Bill H. Added Feb 28, 2017 - 2:43pm
Mike - Checked your source and low and behold, it is a front from the GMO food industry! Of course they don't want you to know the truth.
You really need to get out of your bubble.
Read this:
I used both Duck Duck Go and Startpage (both of which collect no info on user searches) and was unable to find your source within the first 4 pages of results on both search engines using "what is killing honeybees", "colony collapse disorder", or "bee die offs". Your search engine has you pegged to a tee!
Janie Smith Added Feb 28, 2017 - 2:47pm
Mike, this study is about the effect of pesticides on bees directly. Even if this study was unbiased, which In guess is under question here, it not the biggest problem. Here is what is affecting bees
Mono-farming: Millions of bees die being shipped to pollinate farms that do not supply a sustainable pollen source outside the few months needed to pollinate the crop.
Pesticides that cause a shortage of healthy pollen: Dandelions and clover are weeds to people but an important early pollen source for bees.
Artificial insemination: Creating new queens using artificial insemination instead of allowing for the wedding flight is creating a weaker bee.  Its important that the queen be inseminated by multiple bees and the strongest of them. 
Inferior nutrition: It should never be ok to feed any animal high fructose corn syrup. Currently, bees live about 1/3rd of their potential lifetime.
The mite is a problem, but its an even bigger problem since we stepped in to try and help the bee by poisoning the mites and now we have super-mites that they can no longer defend themselves against. Also, they might be better able to defend themselves if we were not also tampering with every other part of its existence.
Ignoring issues does not make them not be.  Its like that "name it and claim it" religious practice, just because you want something “to be” or “not be” does not mean that it is.   
Stone-Eater Added Feb 28, 2017 - 4:02pm
I don't care about health care yes or no, as long as people have the choice between healthy food and hazardous food.
And seen the way it is now in the US AND in Europe, we have mostly hazardous food. And THEN the economy and the government are responsible and have to PAY for it.
Right ?
Friend of mine is antibiotics resistent. Cause: Food. Who's responsible ? Him ? It's not that easy, Ryan.
Ryan Messano Added Feb 28, 2017 - 4:35pm
You are right,Nancy, the pill was designed for men.  Men love to have sex with no connection and responsibility,but, they don't realize it makes them weak and miserable, and it makes women angry and hurts them too.  
The problem is, it used to be men's job not to have sex before marriage, and when men are universally agreed on this, women are not getting sex, as men are the hunters and women are the hunted. When men forfeited their responsibility, women followed suit.  
Ryan Messano Added Feb 28, 2017 - 4:36pm
We can all choose land where we can grow our own crops.
Nearly everyone has access to local farmers markets or local farms.
Mike Haluska Added Feb 28, 2017 - 4:46pm
Bill - the source is the USDA.  If you want to read their report, go ahead.
Janie - as I said before, we should "let bees be".
Both of you - pesticides are simply synthetic substances based on the chemicals plants naturally excrete to protect themselves from insects, mold, whatever.  They are chemically identical to the pesticides produced by the plants themselves!  And by the way, just because something is "synthesized" doesn't mean it's not "natural".  And just because something is "natural" doesn't mean it's automatically good for you. 
Syphilis is "natural" - does that mean it's good for us????
It's "natural" for horses to crap in the street, should we get rid of automobiles and go back to horse and buggy????
Stone-Eater Added Feb 28, 2017 - 5:28pm
BTW: The best time in life is ... after death. Because you have SO MUCH time to waste. No bills to pay. no worries. And always a warm environment in my case (wonder, wonder). Better be underground than on a cloud. I could get a virus....;-) 
McAfee is everywhere. That's a calmer.
Bill H. Added Feb 28, 2017 - 6:24pm
Mike - I read the entire study from a link in the article, but nowhere does it say it was conducted or sponsored by the USDA. It was simply a paper posted on PLOS showing independent results of testing effects of non-lethal doses of only one of dozens of neonic-based pesticides.
It appears that the "rel="tag">Genetic Literacy Project" likes using misleading headlines.
Sorry, but I can't trust anything I read on a blog created by the GMO agriculture industry pertaining to what is decimating honeybees, just as I can't trust anything from Big Oil pertaining to how safe the fracking process is.
Dave Volek Added Feb 28, 2017 - 8:07pm
Ryan: You set up a pretty good article that has gone in all sorts of interesting directions. Great job.
I just can't buy into that there was some utopia in education or society 50 or 100 years ago. I often come across critics of the education system (often called the "factory model") who are making some interesting points. Then I say: "So what's your solution?". They often have nothing to say on that line of the topic.  They just want to complain.
I am an educator these days. One of my colleagues was lamenting about how many high school students don't know their times tables (which can make understanding math a lot easier): "We used to chant the times tables every day in Grade 2 and 3," he says. I'm a little younger than him--and we used to this too. Except the low-performers in my time never learned their times tables with this method either. What we did in the good old days didn't always work.
If there is a problem in education, a lot of it comes from the home life many children face. I'm not too sure any education system can fix that. While you and I are on the same wavelength on the importance of morals, I'm not sure Christianity is the social force it used to be. And that could be another topic for WB.
As far as failing students, I come from a time when maybe one kid in 20 failed a grade in elementary school. My anecdotal recollection is that those low performers remained low performers in the repeat grade.  To me, this doesn't seem to be a solution in getting that person to better themselves.
What we have done in Alberta is to not fail kids in elementary or junior high. When they get to high school, they are streamed into three different academic programs. The low performers go into a less challenging stream (basically repeating junior high). They stay there for the three years, get a diploma, and do improve their reading and other life skills. I think this is better than failing a grade--especially when they are young.
And if they somehow grow up and master the lower stream, they move up to a higher stream. It might take them an extra year to get the high school academics they want or need, but this is better than being put into a higher stream when they are not ready for it.
Cuckoo o'clock Added Feb 28, 2017 - 9:47pm
Do people still watch TV all the time? I figured people are just on the internet now.
Back in the early 1900's they didn't have expensive drugs, did they? Maybe some type of antibiotic and maybe morphine.
Nowadays, drugs are expensive! 
 I don't get what sex has to do with any of this. 
But you are right, people do need to read. I was listening to NPR this weekend and they did a study and they found out that you need to read books though, not writerbeat - sorry guys! Too prevent cognitive decline, you have to read books.
Mike Haluska Added Mar 1, 2017 - 9:50am
Bill H - try looking in an obscure location like the ARTICLE'S TITLE:
       "USDA study concludes neonics not driving bee deaths"
There are only 3,170 references to the study - you go read them all!
I don't know what it is with you - do you want a videotape of a honeybee testifying under oath before a Joint Session of Congress, the United Nations and the American Beekeeping Federation????
Bill H. Added Mar 1, 2017 - 10:44am
Mike - I certainly saw the title, but (as I stated) saw nothing in the article or the referenced papers actually showing it was a USDA conducted or sponsored study.
I'm simply saying that this GMO industry source uses the same tactic as many other industry or corporate sponsored "sources" by using a false headline to mislead the reader. From what I could see in the paper, the actual study was done by a group representing the pesticide maker and the objective was to try and prove that one single formula of the many neonic-based pesticides was reasonably safe when used at a prescribed application rate.
Do you call this undeniable proof that pesticides are not killing honeybees? It's like the oil boys stating that there is not one proven case of ground water pollution by fracking waste water injection.
Mike Haluska Added Mar 2, 2017 - 11:58am
Bill H -
Here we go with the "DENIER" tactic to win an argument!  Stop trying to win an argument by calling on the opponent to "prove a negative".  You think this substance is toxic at ANY level or exposure to honey bees YOU MUST PROVE IT! 
Your "prove a negative" claims:
"Big Oil" isn't crooked?  Prove they aren't crooked
"Big Pharma" isn't crooked?  Prove they aren't crooked
aren't sound logically.  Can you imagine the courts charging you with a "crime" and you have to prove you're NOT a criminal???
Let's see how you like it:
The study I referred to was done by the USDA - PROVE IT WASN'T!
Bill H. Added Mar 2, 2017 - 4:18pm
Here is a link to the actual study cited in your source:
The study does not state that is was done by the USDA, but simply that it was "Funded primarily by a Cooperative Agreement with the USDA-ARS Bee Research Laboratory".
Many scientific studies are performed in parallel by various sources in order to obtain an average of results and minimize bias.
This one is simply one of many, and your source (which is a blog of the GMO farming industry) has only cited this one, and they try to make it look as though it was the results of a single study actually performed by the USDA proclaiming that all neonic-based pesticides are safe for bees. It is very obvious to me that they favor the result of this one study, of course.
There is the proof you asked for.
Peter Corey Added Mar 2, 2017 - 6:40pm
Funding: Funded primarily by a Cooperative Agreement with the USDA-ARS Bee Research Laboratory.   Partial funding by the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station.   Funding for Open Access provided by the UMD Libraries Open Access Publishing Fund.   D.J.H. received support from the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) - National Science Foundation (NSF) award DBI-1052875.  The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests:  The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Imidacloprid exposure doses up to 100 μg/kg had no significant effects on foraging activity or other colony performance indicators during and shortly after exposure.
Given the weight of evidence, chronic exposure to imidacloprid at the higher range of field doses (20 to 100 μg/kg) in pollen of certain treated crops could cause negative impacts on honey bee colony health and reduced overwintering success, but the most likely encountered high range of field doses relevant for seed-treated crops (5 μg/kg) had negligible effects on colony health and are unlikely a sole cause of colony declines.
Bill H. Added Mar 2, 2017 - 10:35pm
I read the entire study, and many others before.
This was just one study, and it happened to have results favorable to the GMO guys, so they will push it to no end.
The majority of other historical studies on other neonic-based pesticides show otherwise.
One of the reasons for GMO crops is to increase their ability to tolerate large, extreme, and above normal doses of pesticides and herbicides.
They could care less about bees (and our health), and care more about profit.
Are you falling for this?
Mike Haluska Added Mar 3, 2017 - 4:37pm
Bill H - you come across a study done by a group having no interest one way or another and conclude before you even read it that all corporations want to do is poison their customers and want to wreck the planet.  It seems to me that if the greedy capitalists want to be successful beyond a week from now, they wouldn't kill their customers.   
This is simply a form of narcissism people employ in public to make themselves feel morally superior to the "masses".  It fools liberal arts majors - that's about all.
Bill H. Added Mar 3, 2017 - 10:47pm
Not all of them, Mike- But certain corporations like Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, and Exxon to name a few have been conditioned to favor profits over environmental well-being, and will spend millions to spread misinformation to preserve profits.
Peter Corey Added Mar 6, 2017 - 2:50pm
>a few have been conditioned to favor profits over environmental well-being, and will spend millions to spread misinformation to preserve profits.
It's clear that YOU are the one who has become "conditioned" to favor certain points of view without compelling evidence over other points of view that have such evidence. You're completely driven by ideology AND you're attempts at research are haphazard and biased.

Recent Articles by Writers Ryan Messano follows.