In 1975 Ivan Illich wrote in Medical Nemesis
The medical establishment has become a major threat to health.[…] The threat which current medicine represents to the health of populations is analogous to the threat which the volume and intensity of traffic represent to mobility, the threat which education and the media represent to learning, and the threat which urbanization represents to competence in homemaking. In each case a major institutional endeavor has turned counterproductive.
If we look at a combination of healthcare spending and health sector job growth, we can see that the number of healthcare jobs and the amount of money we spend on healthcare is directly proportional to the increasing number of sick people. Sickness is driving our economy.
The current thought on both liberal and conservative fronts never touches the holy cow of medicine as the culprit. All human suffering or money related discussions accept medicine’s status quo. Opinions only differ where the funding comes, whether private or public entities should be in charge, what kind of medicine should practiced (preventive vs. reactive), and who should be getting the money of the increasingly disabled citizen. Nobody questions the very need to engage in the medical health preservation sham.
Ivan Illich outlines why an overgrown professional and physician-based healthcare system is sickening
- It produces clinical damage that outweighs its potential benefits.
- It enhances and obscures the political conditions that make society unhealthy.
- It mystifies and expropriates the power of the individual to heal him/herself and to shape his or her environment.
The medical and paramedical monopoly over hygienic methodology and technology is a glaring example of the political misuse of scientific achievement to strengthen industrial rather than personal growth. Such medicine is but a device to convince those who are sick and tired of society that it is they who are ill, impotent, and in need of technical repair.
The solution is NOT to have more or better healthcare but to deal with our human weakness, vulnerability, and uniqueness in a personal and autonomous way.
The tyranny of state sponsored “science”-based medicine infringes upon the citizen rights to
- freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment;
- freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance;
- the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers
- the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services […].
Science-Based Medicine misinterprets right to medical care as the obligation to subject yourself to the mercy of a therapeutic state against your better judgement, opinion, worldview, philosophy, or religion. This medicine sponsored blog openly calls to take away freedoms and rights protected in the US Constitution and the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
All children deserve rational, science-based medical care. […] All religious and philosophical exemption laws should be repealed.
Science-Based Medicine political stance is based on several erroneous and contested beliefs, decried by scientific thought itself:
- The belief that there is single truth, tracing its roots to a religious Judeo-Christian idea of a single god.
- The belief that medicine of today is the single truth.
- The belief that medicine is good.
- Denial that medicine of today may be and is most likely to be wrong.
- Denial of a long history of medical wrongs and lies.
- Denial of inherently racist, misogynist, and classist nature of medicine.
- Thebelief that parents have motives and intent to harm their children and that Law, Government, and Medicine will protect your children from you.
Any citizen is free to abstain from any kind of medical care, no matter how justified, proven, logical, approved, right, or effective. Medical care is a right, not an obligation.
Self-care is part of living. It used to be. We used to eat to live. We used to sleep to rest. We used to walk to get to a place. Not any longer. Today self-care is filed under “Medicine” category and marked as an ” intervention“. Apparently, we eat, sleep, and walk “to ensure [we] are physically and mentally fit”. We eat to be healthy. We sleep to be healthy. We walk for health. In a society where medicine is a state sponsored religion, health, the salvation nouveau, becomes the end goal.
Wikipedia elaborates that “in modern medicine, preventive medicine aligns most closely with self-care”. What it means for you, a citizen, is a state authorized interference into the most private and unique areas of your life – your sleep, your food, your inner self. You used to decide that you sleep as long as you need to rest. Today medicine develops acceptable standards of how much sleep you need. Medical authorities will control what food you can and must eat. Government goals include exactly how little walking for health is required.
Self-care today became internalized medicine. You became your own doctor who polices yourself for compliance with the latest medical recommendations. Collectively we used to know how each of us feels, what we should do from day today, and how we deal with everyday living. This knowledge has been eradicated and replaced with the most recent discoveries of British scientists.
In her most recent book A Bun in the Oven:How the Food and Birth Movements Resist Industrialization Barbara Katz Rothman writes about the process of internalized medicalization as it relates to birth but may be applied to any area of lay knowledge and expertise.
“We used to think of medicalization as a process in which medical doctors claimed expertise over given areas of life. But it is no longer externalized, with the power to medicalize located in medical authorities – it’s moved inwards now. We do it to ourselves. It was the different knowledge that midwives and doctors had, and the very different power that they had to act on that knowledge… […] It is, to use a phrase Robbie Davis Floyd used, “authoritative knowledge” that midwifery is contesting, not just the authorities. Doctors no longer serve as gatekeepers to medical knowledge, pontifications, or research. When information was gathered in small groups of women teaching each other, when patients met outside medical settings to help each other in a nascent self-help movement, seeking information was a form of resistance to medical authority. No longer. It is now a form of compliance. Many of the “self-help” online forums are run by the medical and pharmaceutical industries themselves. Whether it is a direct-to-consumer advertising or the less direct marketing done online in patient groups, doctors – for good or for ill, and I could agree either – are no longer barriers between the medical industry and the consumer/patient.
The knowledge, the information, the “facts”, have moved into our own ways of thinking, and we have become our own medical authorities, living and experiencing our bodies in medical terms. (emphasis mine)
[…] Increasingly, people understand their own lived experiences in the language of biomedicine. In this world of medical management, in which every significant human experience, characteristic, emotion, strength, and failing is traced to its genetic and neurological “cause”, how can we think about midwifery and birth?”
How can we think about anything in this life avoiding the lens of medicine? How can we take care of ourselves without the interference of the medical system? How can we SELF-care without medicine instilling its dogma and practice into our daily lives? How can we rid ourselves of medical control?
Ivan Illich proposed that we deal with our human weakness, vulnerability, and uniqueness in a personal and autonomous way.
Drug related harm is always described in modern medical research as adverse effects of drugs, overuse of drugs, or drug interactions. Never in this line of thinking do we question the need to take drugs in the first place. Drug use is an acceptable and scaringly unquestioned tenet of medical religion practice.
There are a couple of immediate harmful effects of taking medication: foregoing non-medicinal ways of coping and maintaining current state of personal or social affairs that may be causing the malady in the first place.
For example, taking acetaminophen/paracetamol (Tylenol) for a headache most frequently forgoes resorting to simple measures like food, drink, rest, and quiet. Chronic use of painkillers for headaches may be remedy for chronic sleep deprivation or stress in life.
Taking blood pressure medicine often allows people to carry on abusive eating ways, eventually worsening the original problem. The same goes for diabetic medications. Muscle relaxants for backaches permit for bad posture, poor ergonomics, prolonged driving, lack of rest and movement to remain as the norm. Antianxiety and antidepressants mask lack of sleep, caffeine abuse, as well as racial, gender, and social injustice and violence.
As a result of wide-spread acceptance of drugs as the first, often the only, way of dealing with a problem, people lose other ways of helping themselves to get better