Anger and alternative-health and conventional-medicine and Steve Jobs

(Ref http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/04/steve-jobs-and-the-lure-of-alternative-healin/ )
I normally do not comment on others' writings; freedom of speech and all that. All people can have their own say; and it is not my place to refute some things that others have written.

But in this case, an article pushes too many of my buttons and the article is likely to really mislead some folks. The article is titled "Steve Jobs and the Lure of Alternative Healing"

The article starts out with "Steve Jobs’ decision to treat his pancreatic cancer with a vegan diet, herbs, juices and acupuncture rather than the surgery his doctors urged..." and ends with "... questions we should now be asking in the wake of Steve Jobs’ untimely death."

In between she claims her own father died because he took fish oil capsules instead of submitting to major chest surgery.

I think she had some bones to pick, blinding her to some things. (I have the same kind of problem myself, as a writer, at times.)

My reaction is a bit complex, as also was the many themes of the referenced article.

One is that the loss of Steve Jobs is a major loss to the world, and to myself.

Another is that I had never heard that Steve Jobs was at all into any sort of alternative health protocols.

What I do know, and was amazingly not mentioned in the article, was that Steve Jobs had long suffered from pancreatic cancer, and had been away from Apple for a long time because of it, on a previous occasion. During that time, he had a liver transplant, a major surgery, which he clearly submitted to; no fruit and veggies thing. And in itself the doctors overall did amazing things; several people I have heard about recently also died of pancreatic cancer, and invariably it is quick, very painful and unstoppable by anything. So that he survived at all to go back and do more great things at Apple and elsewhere for years, is a major credit to conventional medicine, one of their few successes in the field.

How the author of the article missed that major point, seems hard to understand, unless she was blinded by something, or simply did not do the research for the article ... which is written as if authoritative.

In a liver transplant, an organ transplant normally involves having to severely compromise the immune system, so the body does not quickly reject the transplant. But poor immune function leaves the body at risk from all kinds of problems. He lasted for years after the liver transplant, amazing, and very welcome. But for the contention of the article that we lost Steve Jobs because he did not submit to doctors' advise and their surgery, and instead tried a fruits and veggies diet "instead of submitting to surgery the doctors wanted" seems to have missed some major data; and is very misleading to the reader.

Now, I realize a common misconception of "alternative health" is to eat fruits and veggies instead of Super Sizers, and to workout in the gym. This does not know what it is about, at all.

And, could be that similarly Steve Jobs did not know any more about it either. Alternative health protocol knowledge is highly suppressed by the conventional medical business system; and it takes many years of trying things to learn first hand, for a person to begin to have really relevant knowledge. I doubt he had time for that, busy as he was, a high accomplisher. That he at last minute tried a cleaner diet to help the body have its best chance, considering his medically-destroyed immune system due to avoiding the liver transplant rejection, sounds like could be helpful.

But surely not full use of the Alternative Wellbeing full knowledge set. For example, alternative holistic wellbeing would first deal with suppressed anger issues, known to overstress the liver areas. For someone dedicated to enabling personal computers all his life, and dealing with doing that in the brutal business world, surely caused him lots of anger that he apparently had no means for relieving. Thus, little wonder it blew out his pancreas and liver, per that knowledge set. Deal with causes, and the body function failures are not so likely to happen, and not surgeries, immune destruction etc, needed (and thus less money for those folks, note. Follow the money.)

But that was not his followed path, despite the article's author's contention. He went full bore to get the high tech stuff done, "d__mn the torpedoes" in the harsh business rival world, probably having no idea about needing to be responsible for his own physical well being. If something breaks, take the body, like the car, to a fixer-upper shop; then get back on the road pedal-to-the-metal again.

I particularly have my buttons pushed about this, because his was the electronics world, and there were relevant electro-herbalism technologies developed in time to maybe have saved his life, but the heavy-handed suppression of them here in America probably kept him from learning about them. Even if he did, he, as an engineering-minded person in electronics - like I am - would have probably been too skeptical to even consider it even if he had managed to hear about it. It has taken me many years of testing of the technology personally, for me to grudgingly say that for sure, it can do some incredible things to help maintain a person's health. I would even say that it is likely that if doctors and hospitals had proper use of the same electro-herbalism technology, that thousands, maybe millions of people would remain alive and well that instead die each year. Responsibility? Do no harm? Or is it make highest income, instead? I too can get grumpy and off the edge, just like the article's writer, blaming this and that. And I have direct personal research knowledge of it all, not just hearsay.

I'm not a medical doctor. Am only an amateur scientist, in several fields of science, as hobbies. (Well, I also do formal scientific work in a field of biology as a volunteer, even currently.) The point here is that if it is science - instead of solely what one was taught and accepted without question - it is mandatory that one test, evaluate, the device or protocol, to see what it actually does in your own experience, before one can declare something works or does not work. That is the essence of the Scientific Method: do the unbiased testing in a completely capable mode, and find out what actually happens in reality. Happened that time, anyway. Repeat the test, get the data. See the trends, repeatability. Get others to do the identical test elsewhere, if possible, and compare notes. The general term is to "measure efficacy."

In electro-herbalism experimentation, one gets to test efficacy using the instrument one knows best: their own being, their own body. Evaluate before and after, and the fully described protocol in between. This is so easily done by an individual; it does not need hundreds of millions of dollars of FDA-required formal double-blind testing, to see if it achieved anything for oneself in a given test. there are many thousands of individuals who have already done such testing and generally find it is a working thing. Well worth formal research and inclusion in conventional medical practice.

Problem is, it appears to work too well.

Even the mere basic original Clark-30KHz-zapper does. Works much too well. As a personally owned and used low cost home instrument, in correct usage, my experience is that it would cut down on income in the conventional medical system an enormous amount. A wild guess is that it could cut down on doctor visits by ... 90% ... who knows. Much higher hospital recovery rate and less time in hospital, I would project.

And nobody wants to lose a good job. Medicine nowadays has the responsibility to be a very profitable business; instead of the responsibility to provide low cost consistent long term good heath for all Americans, using all means possible... including electro-herbalism and other alternative protocols that are found to work effectively, an efficacy-based system.

I wonder, what it would be like if the whole medical system's directive was of the latter type, instead of the former.

Quite a dilemma.