Often I talk with people both lay and professional, about my success in eliminating the symptoms of a rather painful time in my life when I suffered with osteoarthritic hips and lower back. As you can imagine this raises some eyebrows given the main medical decree that there is in fact no cure for osteoarthritis. There is also little doubt in my mind that some people will see me as just another wacko talking nonsense from outside this consensus view. However facts are facts and the truth is indeed out there if one is willing to look. Given the results demonstrated statistically by the trends in our mainstream model of healthcare, there is certainly room for skepticism about its efficiency. Despite the upbeat claims made in the media – ever heralding new technologies, research, vaccines and drugs – the statistics and our recent social history tell a very different story. More drugs, more questionable surgeries, more cost, more iatrogenic illness and deaths, as well as ever increasing numbers of people suffering what's becoming known as the kaleidoscope diseases pervade our current social reality.

The very fact that the word “healthcare” is used to describe the current system has always seemed somewhat odd to me. The word “health” implies a condition that is free of disease. If you attempt to re-establish health by masking symptoms with drugs or simply start cutting out effected pieces of the body, we can honestly call this a valid means of returning to health or for that matter living up to the caring part of health-care ? For that matter, when was the last time you heard about any major diseases actually being cured? It's curious that despite tens of billions of dollars of research spent over the last century all the solutions come in the form of management and / or replacement. One can not help but take note of the fact that these two modalities just happened to lend themselves quite nicely to corporate profitability. In the never ending drive for profit the simple truth is that to the pharmaceutical corporations there is no gain to be had from a healthy population. To lend more context one should also take note of the fact that these same corporations occupy the top spots of the fortune 500 companies.

The way OA is treated with primary medicine is just another example of treatment reflecting profitability and as such is looked at as an independently arising disease. In their view your joints have simply worn out and must be promptly replaced. By refusing to look at your body as a system requiring balancing, the affected areas can be immediately targeted with the most technologically expensive solutions available. In the case of OA this takes the form of shiny new mechanical joints. Although an impressive technological feat, is it always really necessary?

When sufferers go to their doctor in the beginning stages of OA the doctor is trained to see a course of treatment leading to temporary joint replacement. The patient will no doubt be told to exercise through the discomfort so as to stave of muscle deterioration. Muscle groups are still required to support you with your new joints. On top of this they will probably be given a prescription for one of the many non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). There are numerous negative side effects attributed to these drugs but there is one that I find particularly emblematic. It has been known in the scientific literature for at least 30 years that NSAIDs contribute to accelerated cartilage loss. Although, I can see that if one is only looking at replacement as an option this point may be of little consequence other than to contribute to the necessity for replacement.

In the spirit of planned obsolescence the mechanical joints that you ever receive wear out after about ten to fifteen years necessitating further rounds of drugs, surgery and rehab. Given the ever increasing costs of such treatment you might want to consider your ability to keep paying through successful rounds of this mainstream approach. Make no mistake that once you start down this road there is no return and therein lays the profitability of cutting and drugging.

None of us including myself want to consider a health-care system with such a callous pursuit of profit used as a mode for developing treatments but when the facts are viewed as a whole there is certainly enough evidence to be of concern. It seems that as a culture we have been taught to give ourselves over to whatever form of treatment is mandated from on high to service our ails. After all it's the doctor that knows what's best for us after a five minute consultation. Not to mention the convenience of simply taking a pill or having the offending part removed rather than facing up to the consequences of our poor diets, lifestyle choices and bio-accumulated environmental toxins.