Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Br's avatar

Great read and all so right on the money!

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=let%27s+talk+sh+t+-+the+book&crid=1GG96VF2W3SVL&sprefix=Let%27s+talk+sh%2Caps%2C143&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_13

The Sabine book link is denominated in a different currency. This link is for U.S. dollars.

Expand full comment
David Roy's avatar

While your diagnosis of America's healthcare paradox is astute - highest pharmaceutical profits yet poor health outcomes - your proposed solution of nutraceuticals merely substitutes one reductionist approach for another.

The fundamental flaw lies in our obsession with dissecting wholes into their smallest components. When you cite Hippocrates' famous "Let food be thy medicine" quote, you miss its original context. Hippocrates, unburdened by microscopes and modern technology, spoke of food holistically - its natural form, taste, and essence. He wasn't suggesting we reduce foods to isolated compounds and nutrients.

The body doesn't recognize our mental constructs of "fiber," "vitamin C," or "protein B." These are human categorizations, based on the blind identification with the mind as the sole arbiter of life, - useful for study perhaps, but far removed from how the body actually functions. This disconnect exemplifies our current predicament: highly intelligent people who've lost touch with the fundamental nature of being.

Here lies a subtle but critical trap: the very mindset of "eating healthy to prevent disease" creates an unconscious relationship with what we fear. When we orient our choices around preventing illness, we inadvertently maintain a constant relationship with the very thing we're trying to avoid.

If we're consuming specific foods to prevent high cholesterol or taking supplements to ward off potential ailments, we're actually engaged in an unconscious struggle with these conditions. This paired opposition can create a self-fulfilling prophecy - as our fears increase, our health may actually spiral downward.

What's more troubling is how our technological advancement has created an illusion of control. We mistake information accumulation for understanding, drowning in data points that overwhelm rather than illuminate. These endless metrics and measurements serve primarily as placebos, calming our anxious minds with a false sense of mastery over the unknowable.

True health isn't maintained through checklists, calorie counting, or supplement regimens. While these tools might have value, they're secondary to the body's innate intelligence and individual blueprint. It's about resonance with one's natural frequency, not adherence to universal protocols.

This brings us to a crucial point: there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Current policy approaches fail to recognize that what benefits one person may harm another. We've developed collective science seeking universal formulas while neglecting individual science - the understanding of differentiated needs based on blood type, body type, personality, and countless other factors. Yet this individualized approach remains largely undeveloped, with personalized testing often prohibitively expensive.

Which leads to the elephant in the room: how can we speak of a "wellness revolution" in a country without universal healthcare? It's paradoxical to discuss optimization through nutraceuticals when basic medical access remains a luxury for many. When an ambulance ride of 150 yards costs $1,500, we're not discussing freedom but systemic imprisonment. Even developing nations surpass America in providing basic healthcare access.

True revolution in wellness must begin with fundamental systemic change, not just exchanging one set of supplements for another. Until we address these core issues - our reductionist mindset, the need for individualized approaches, and basic healthcare access - any talk of a wellness revolution remains premature.

Expand full comment
25 more comments...

No posts