Sunday, August 15, 2010

On "corporate hatred"

I listened to BBC Business Weekly this morning (Sunday) – ‘A glimpse of the future’ during which Lucy Kellaway commented on why corporate hatred is rampant these days.

She identifies emotional response to the credit crunch, executive pay, corporate image building, and the Internet as driving this hatred, but I would add these really important reasons why we "hate" or are very disillusioned with many giant corporations:


  • US health care reform that protects drug and health insurance companies, and almost guarantees continued escalation of health care costs
  • Proposed fresh food safety legislation that threatens to ruin small organic/ecological farms, while paying no attention to the refined, processed foods that are the real source of many of our health problems
  • Raw milk wars that have nearly eliminated the easy availability of this ancient healthful food, driving farmers out of business and driving access underground
  • Corporate-influenced medical school accreditation guidelines that eliminated the excellent nutrition oriented medical schools of days past, and brainwashed physicians (and the FDA and the media) into thinking that drugs and high tech are the answer to every health problem
  • Attacks on doctors who eschew conventional therapies and rely on nutrition and detoxification to bring healing to their patients
  • Corporate efforts to demonize anything that threatens to cut into their profits (which seems to cut into media coverage of low cost alternatives of merit).

And in case you are wondering, here is documentation of these serious charges…

Trust Us, We're Experts! How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future, by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber

Doubt Is Their Product – How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens Your Health, by David Michaels

The Oiling of America by Sally Fallon Morell and Mary Enig, PhD

More on my Blog – ‘Sorry to get political!’
and on my website - Politics and the Environment, Health and Freedom

While there is occasionally an admirable media effort to cover the controversial issues raised above, the need to provide "balance" covering the other side of the story leads to the "experts" spouting official lies and deceptions, while claiming ‘There’s no scientific evidence that XXX is true!’ insisting that the defendants provide "scientific evidence" of their claim because they are relying on mere ‘anecdotal’ evidence.

But I would counter that there is no good, valid scientific evidence that XXX is not true, and I would challenge the ‘experts’ to pursue the leads raised by the anecdotal evidence, though I doubt that there is any money to do this very difficult and often unprofitable research, considering the complications, complexities and near impossibility of doing high quality valid double blind studies of human beings that is their ‘gold standard.’ The anecdotal evidence is often so powerful as to preclude such research ethically.

These are serious issues that affect the entire planet! I would challenge the high quality, supposedly impartial media, like BBC and Public Radio, to be fully aware of and report on the ways in which powerful interests manipulate the science to their advantage, and do some in depth reporting on these justice issues and alternative ways to pursue health.

My thoughts for today. Seems like I've covered some of this same territory before! Is anyone listening?


No comments:

Post a Comment