Robert Thurman: The Sacred Cows in the Health Care Debate

Studies show that over half of all Americans are interested in promoting wellness and preventing disease. But some people are terrified that the food Nazis will come running after them and force feed them spinach.

In a series of upcoming blogs I'll be speaking with thought leaders in integrative medicine and allied fields about the cultural divide on health care. For this blog, I spoke with Columbia University, Professor Robert Thurman, the leading U.S. scholar of Buddhism with a background in Tibetan Medicine.

Alison Rose Levy: Americans have poorer health outcomes than any other developed nation. That must be coming from how we approach health care. What are the blindspots that prevent us from recognizing and getting the health care we need?

Robert Thurman: It's not a matter of fixing this or that institution or changing how we pay for health insurance. It requires a social movement. In Tibetan medicine and most other world medicines, when someone is unwell, they first look at lifestyle and diet because those two things are the major poisoning and major healing of people.

ARL: What is poisoning people ?

RT: When people eat food filled with artificial chemicals, addictive substances, hormones, preservatives, and antibiotics, these substances destroy the flora and fauna of their internal immune system.

ARL: Making them less able to fight off diseases? So are you saying that many of the causes of an individual health problem are societal?

RT: Yes, we have these sacred cows, like the food industry which controls the FDA and produces these horrible meats and milks, and chemicalizes the soil with chemical fertilizer, generally poisoning both the food and the environment in which the whole population lives.

ARL: Well, why is this overlooked?

RT: In medical school, doctors aren't taught about nutrition. They're taught to scorn the idea that food is important.

In high tech, high research, big hospital activity, they are completely removed from the daily life of people. The general practitioners in our system mostly come from abroad because our people are trained and conditioned to go into industrialized medicine and reductionist science, which is almost a distraction from the real health needs of people.

It's an overall corruption that arises from being captured by an industrial mindset that ruins medical practices by making medicine an industry rather than an art.

ARL: Why do people tune out or go into denial about the impact of these forces on their health? Why is this so hard to face up to? Because it's so pervasive?

BT: The whole system is corrupt-- starting with the politicians. They're paid for by the big industries, and they promulgate rules and regulations that don't support the well-being of the population.

Academic institutions are similarly corrupted because the people in the science departments are funded by government and corporate grants given by the very corporations that want to distract people from the real cause of their difficulties.

The problem is also with our rigidified scientific way of approaching health -- we're not being thorough enough in our science.

If we were being scientific, doctors would have to look at how people are afflicted by this poisoned lifestyle. Doctors would really have to go after the food industry, the medical industry, and the pharmaceutical industry and we'd all have to admit to the complete train wreck of what I call industrialized medicine.

ARL With all of the health debate going on right now, there's not a lot of clarity on these points. People tend to believe what they believe about health care without realizing that their beliefs are formed and shaped by media and marketing messages.

RT: People are mis-educated by the media. The final straw was when Reagan allowed monopolies in the media and canceled the Fairness Doctrine. This turns the media into a propaganda machine for the current system-- so people are just totally confused.

You can see this in the debate on insurance reform. Insurance companies put out propaganda that a public option will end up denying and rationing people health care, where the HMOs are denying people and rationing health care right now.

ARL: How can we change this?

RT: It requires a mental and scientific revolution in which the U.S. decides to bracket commercial concerns, and actually analyze the soil, the food and lifestyle of the people--and then go after those who are giving people poisoned substances to consume. That is the cause of all the diseases people experience, and those are the causes of the disruption of the health of people living in an abundant society, like ours.

Sign up for a free integrative health ezine at: www.health-journalist.com

Follow Alison Rose Levy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/healthjournalis

Comments

[littleredhen]

Thank you for this important post. This information has been readily available since the 70's at least but it is about time that an eminent personage such as Dr. Thurman weighs in. We need a critical mass and it will come.

For a healthy life in this country, we must opt out of most of the packaged, convenience and fast foods and drinks that are available to us. I appreciate and enjoy America but this is a society out of control in many ways. We cann really only control ourselves and the choices we make do affect society eventually. Look at the proliferation of Organics, Vegans etc. Hurray - there is good news out there.

Dr. Ann Wigmore's regimen saved my life in 1976 and I've never looked back.

[nyscof]

Actually, those naturally fluoridated areas of the US had calcium fluoride in their water supply. The areas also housed the wealthier and healthier citizens. That's why dentists flocked there as they do today - abandoning the least healthy with the greatest need. Instead, throwing some fluoride in their water and saying "what a good boy am I."

When researchers in the early 1900's discovered that fluoride was the tooth-discoloring culprit, they assumed it was also the cavity-preventing hero. Soon, researchers reported that teeth need calcium. They do not need fluoride.

So today people line up when "mission of mercy" dental clinics pop up in their neighborhoods and display teeth that are seen in third world countries. Tooth decay is growing in our most fluoridated generation - toddlers. And fluoride discolored teeth (dental fluorosis) has grown to afflict up to 50% of the school children, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

Modern science shows that ingesting fluoride does not reduce tooth decay. Fluoride does harden the outer enamel by topical means alone.

There is no scientific reason to fluoridate the water or to ingest fluoride either from the water supply, food or supplements

Fluoridation 101
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

[Lesscancer]

HuffPost's Pick

Great post Alison...
Americans need to widen the focus beyond purchasing their health care -
We need to stop polluting our bodies--especially for exposures that are unnecessary and preventable.

Bill Couzens, Founder Less Cancer

[Alison Rose Levy - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks, Bill, and you know what I find so fascinating is how Thurman's insights-- which really point to society-wide challenges to health-- like the ones that you mention-- are harder to get our arms around then the individual considerations of diet, as in "What should I eat?".

Obviously, we could address many chronic diseases if more people ate a healthy diet -- and I've written on nutrition for over 14 years at this point. I did a three part article comparing raw, vegetarian, blood type and low carb diets-- back in 1995,

So eating right is core-- don't get me wrong.

But what fascinates me is that we've been conditioned to talk about diet, while overlooking food production and quality, industry influence, environmental pollution, and the forces that block insurance access. I wonder whether a lot of people discount integrative approaches because they think they are about nothing but diet.

Would love to hear peoples' comments on why we hesitate to look at the big picture..?

[jozzie]

Why do we hesitate to look at the big picture?

You answered this question with your reply post below:

"People think that someone in charge is looking out for their interests in this regard-- better think again."

We want health priests (doctors) and health cathedrals (hospitals) to officiate over our bodies. Then we want companies (in the form of benefits) or governments (in the form of entitlements) to pay for their officiating when it keeps getting more and more expensive. We we can't control the skyrocketing expense anymore than we can control our our health, so we think. We want to be taken care of.

This is behind why so many people rebel against the idea of healthy food. They don't want to manage their impulses. It's too complicated. There's no proof. I'm too busy. It's too expensive. Now let me eat this cheeseburger in peace while I down it with my Lipitor.

We have created this medical industrial complex. This health care debate that we're having right now is actually a positive step. But I wouldn't expect too much of a societal shift.

[HolliThompson]

Alison, people don't look at the big picture because they don't know the big picture.

The average American is not aware of how horrendous our factory farms are, how influenced our food system is by money and government, how the additives that are now in 80% of our processed foods are genetically modified .
I believe that the average American trusts and believes that we are protected by our government and that if our food were not safe it would not be available.
They believe that the Western Healthcare model must be the right one because this is the USA and our programs for critical healthcare are sought after.

[DrP]

Dr. Jay Wortman is saving the health and lives of his aboriginal patients in Canada by prescribing a return to their Native diet. Since it is difficult even for them to return to the exact foods their ancestors ate (seal and whale blubber?), he is using the basic Atkins induction diet and having amazing results.If everyone with "type II diabetes," obesity, and heart disease followed this recommendation, the cost of health care in this country would plummet.

[rxvette]

The Atkins diet which totes high protein low carbs has been proven to be unsuccessful and dangerous even if you were to look at the unbiased scientific evidence out there. I would recommend reading the works of Dr. T. Colin Campbell, Dr. John McDougall, and Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn. They are the giants and legends in the nutrition field and have spent their whole careers speaking the truth about what works with diet and long term health.

[jozzie]

The aboriginal peoples ate raw whale and seal. Atkins has nothing to do with their ancient practices.

[themainpoint]

Nice post. The heroes with the courage to speak the truth are coming out of the woodwork.

[rxvette]

It all really comes back to the the basics of eating healthy and making responsible lifestyle choices. As a fellow healthcare professional myself these exact topics are the key to any successful reform in order to bring down long term costs. Here's an article I wrote that provides some tips and advice on how to get there - http://bit.ly/9QLV8

[Chironomid]

There's a lot of truth in here, but it's much too much to set the bar for a non-industrialized, chemical and additive free, totally harmonious food production and consumption system, and promote that as our health care solution. People are either too busy, too poor, or both to have the time and money to step completely outside the current system and feed themselves 100% correctly. Unfortunately, the less industrial the food, the more expensive and less-readi­ly-availab­le it is. That's the reality in front of us.

Fortunately, perfect harmony is not really necessary for us to realize massive health gains. We are still largely a burger-and-fries society. Simply choosing the best of what's already available in our industrialized system can produce huge gains in health. I'm one of those who has neither time or money for perfect living -- I shop 95% of my food at WalMart. I can either do that, or go hungry the last 3-4 days before my next paycheck.

I eat low fat, high fiber, lots of fruits and veggies; exercise at least an hour, often 2-4, and embrace tough tasks like chopping an old stump out of the ground or building a rock wall. My blood profile, endurance, and lung capacity are all off the charts on the healthy side. Never sick... and never stressed out about eating the perfect diet or making the perfect lettuce choice.

[rad21]

Healthcare reform needs to think out of the box without re-inventing the wheel. The past tells us that fragmentation of the system causes gaps and exacerbation of irrationalities at every step in healthcare delivery. Delay in reform only compounds the problem, as seen by the fallout in the domestic auto industry and bankruptcy of GM - world's largest corporation. The auto management and UAW unions were reportedly one of the first groups to torpedo Clintons' healthcare reform.

As Congress debates mechanisms for reimbursement, physicians should debate grass-root delivery of care, without demagoging the alternatives. If doctors do not take control of healthcare delivery, others will dictate the terms. Planners needs to develop a new Rewards and Disincentives, best suited for America, and if needed, specifically targeted to regions.

The most logical step is for medical organizations, through scientific studies, develop accepted benchmarks and "Best Practice" patterns, many of which already exist, but not universally implemented. More research efforts, dollars and scientific papers should be devoted to the study of cost-effectiveness of various treatment paradigms.

Work on "comparative effectiveness research" (CER) center has received impetus with federal funding. Knowing the effectiveness and economics of various alternatives will help doctors and hospitals to better practice and accept, or counter, directives of healthcare­-insurers; who are positioning themselves as "healthcar­e-managing­" corporations. These corporations will likely consume even more of the premiums as administrative costs.

[Garybot]

This issue is a lot like Global Warming.

The fact is that people are living longer and healthier lives. People who feel they are experts on health, and what we should do to be more healthy, love to push their views on everyone. The scientific community is constantly finding out that what we thought was healthy, isnt, and vice-versa.

This is the reason people are not interested in being preached to about health and how they shoud live their own lives.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/03/10/MNGV9HLVAA1.DTL

Most people also understand by now that the scientific community has no concensus on why we are getting warmer, or colder, depending on the day. The fact is, we live on a globe with a molten center, which changes all the time. This is not something we can control, and people don't want to spend their money on useless treatments.

[jozzie]

From your article:

"But many Americans still suffer from chronic medical conditions that require constant attention, such as arthritis, hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and cancer. Roughly 80 percent of seniors have one chronic illness, and 50 percent have two."

[darker]

Rbt. Thurman [Uma's dad] is "poetic" about Tibetan medicine.
The alopathic medicine approach that dominates USA medical system will not change
overnight just because someone wants it to do that.

Today's American medical education is dominated by Pharmaceutical Industry.
Everything's about WRITING PRESCRIPTIONS and NOT PREVENTION.

Thurman can start THERE. THAT is the core of the problem along with
all he mentions, particularly "Academic institutions are similarly corrupted because the people in the science departments are funded by government and corporate grants given by the very corporations that want to distract people from the real cause of their difficulties. ".

Finding a cure for ANYTHING = LESS $$$$$$$$$$­$$$$$$$$$$­$ for academic scientists and
pharmaceutical corporations AND those tear-jerk non-profits dedicated to "curing" particular
diseases. You think their administrators want to get paid less or lose jobs because
THEY GOT THE CURE?

No way! What we have is privatized SCIENCE PROFITEERING with all kinds of strings attached.
As a results, there is scant progress in defeating diseases. And improving peoples' quality of life.

[Anastasia]

While a healthy life style is optimal, it's not a panacea. Adell Davis, one of the pioneers of healthy eating died of bone cancer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelle_Davis

Getting people to eat right is challenging enough, without having to counter some of the unrealistic claims out there about diet being the end all be all in medicine. For example, I've heard otherwise intelligent and well-meaning people claim that diet alone can cure cancer. There's no need and in fact it's injurious to the argument to take it so far.

[jozzie]

I am running into this sort of logic a lot on this site all the time. It surprises me how much people will defend illnesses.

Adelle Davis was not a Raw Food proponent. Look up Ann Wigmore and her work. Very thorough and deep reworking of everything we think food and diet is. Through her program there are many, many accounts of 11th hour cancers and other terminal diseases being totally erased.

http://annwigmore.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_foodism

I've done the detox, just for enhanced life benefits, and it's amazing. Also look up Optimum Health Institute. That's where I went. There are a few places that do this great work.

http://www.optimumhealth.org/optimumhealth

[jozzie]

Wigmore:
"It is our un-natural tendencies and lifestyles that have caused us to evolve into civilizations in which death by disease is considered natural."

This is a similar sentiment to the Ayurveda system.

[DrP]

Adele Davis did not follow a healthy diet - it was a grain-based, high-carb diet that provides too mucy glucose and creates high insulin levels and inflammation. Cancer is associated with high blood sugar and insulin levels, because tumor cells feed on glucose (sugar).

[IUAlumna]

Exactly. A healthy diet is important, but even with optimum nutrition every person on earth will one day die. We often act as if the deceased are at fault, as if had they only done everything right they would still be alive. Real Life isn't like this. Real Life includes people who smoke until they die in their 90's and kids who die from cancer.

[Alison Rose Levy - Huffpost Blogger]

I totally agree with you that death is part of the natural life cycle-- and that it's not about doing everything right always and all the time -- or else you are somehow to blame if you fall ill.

However, admitting to the reality that we lack ultimate control doesn't mean that it isn't valuable to become familiar with and address preventable causes of painful, uncomfortable, and hard to bear illnesses.

And I think we can and should do a better job-- both for quality of life and also so that health care costs don't topple this economy.

I'm all in favor of single payer insurance, but that doesn't mean we should think we've got it covered and overlook the range of causal factors that shape the reality you mention where one person lives to 90 while smoking while a child dies from cancer. What are the environmental, lifestyle, and genetic factors? Why spend billions of dollars on research and tens of thousands on costly treatments-- without asking that questoin?

[jozzie]

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! Thurman says it all.

"It's an overall corruption that arises from ... an industrial mindset that ruins medical practices by making medicine an industry rather than an art."

The food industry is a major culprit. But he h*ts the bull's eye with this:

"The final straw was when Reagan allowed monopolies in the media and canceled the Fairness Doctrine. This turns the media into a propaganda machine for the current system-- so people are just totally confused."

Thank you Prof. Thurman.

[christonabike]

I second, that. Without the Fairness Doctrine we have no informed electorate: we have the proliferation of hate speech as political commentary, and we have no source of scientific information that can't be manipulated either politically or for commercial purposes.

[wadenelson1]

There's really only ONE sacred cow in the health care debate. Rationing.

All healthcare is rationed one way or another. Either by cost, or by your insurance company refusing to cover a particular protocol. Or by Medicare, the VA, etc.

We simply are NOT going to do a heart transplant on a 90 year old man.

The issue is whether or not rationing is done in an intelligent, and compassionate way. Or a coldly actuarial one, the way it is done now by insurance companies.

Until we, as Americans, pull out heads out of the sand and ACCEPT the fact that SOME rationing has to occur, we can't make forward progress.

The uber-wealthy, of course, are and always will be exempt from health care rationing. Deal with it.

The article doesn't seem to truly correspond to the headline. Oh well.

[mikies]

"then go after those who are giving people poisoned substances to consume."

Here's a very short list of toxins/poisons identified in the landmark document: "In Harms Way: Toxic
Threats to Child Development by the Physicians For Social Responsibility.

MERCURY: We are still injecting pregnant women and children with mercury, aluminum and other toxic substances that at least a portion of the population can not handle. Autism is now 1 in 38 boys. Are we really so blind to let those pushing toxic substances(ie FDA, AAP, CDC) get away with ....murder­....or at the very least an undeniably inherently dangerous practice.

FLUORIDE: An industrial waste product, more toxic than lead and slightly less toxic than arsenic and we are constantly consuming fluoride in our water, baby foods, non-organic grapes/raisins.

The damage and accountability that these toxic substances do, can be squarely placed on the government and medical community. Its the politics of the practices, not the safety that govern their continued use and damage to our children and society.

The "train wreck" caused by the medical, pharmaceutical and food industry is not just stealing our future, but destroying it. And pharmagovernment gives them the green light.

[wadenelson1]

I'm gonna argue with you on the fluoride issue.

In the '50's they looked at what areas of the country had the most tooth decay.

Surprisingly, those areas that NATURALLY had a very slight amount of fluoride in the water had the least decay.

Mimicking that parts-per-billion level of fluoride led to a lot less decay, and required dental work, and expense.

Whether it is arsenic, fluoride, selenium, or even water, it is the CONCENTRATION that determines whether a particular substance is good or bad for your health.

[mikies]

I suppose we differ on the science which supports our view. Out of curiosity where should the burden of proof of safety and efficacy rest? Should it be with the company who manufactures and sells a fluoride product added to the drinking water? FDA?

[Garybot]

Do you have any problem that mercury has been brought back into peoples' household via "energy saving" lightbulbs? I guess Health and Global Warming are working against each other.

[Erdgeist]

Besides life-styles as a cause of illness, we also need to look at what is being taught in our medical schools. Based on an article in the JAMA** death by physicians (iatrogenic death) amounts to a staggering 250,000 deaths a year—the third leading cause of death in the U.S.

As paradoxical as this might sound health care is "death care" and bears the same censure as would an airline if it were to crash more than one Boeing 747 a day!

http://www.dorway.com/jama.htmlml

[editorjuno]

You didn't include death by insurance company -- I wouldn't be surprised if that number is higher than deaths attributable to practitioner error and/or malfeasance!