Medicine in Australia
The dominant system of medicine in Australia, as in any other western countries, is based upon chemical drug therapy and surgery.
Unlike other systems that respect long traditional use of natural medicines and herbs for prevention of ailments, we neglect other areas of medical treatment. Effective time tested therapies such as homoeopathic, herbal, and physical therapies are relegated to ‘alternative medicine’ and generally considered as inferior options for the treatment of disease. It is only recently that nutrition has been elevated to receive respectable status. Other traditional forms of treatment such as massage, chiropractic, osteopathy, acupuncture, although popularly accepted by public choice, remain in a technological grey zone from the viewpoint of the powerful decision makers within the current medical system.
Public pressure however, has forced health insurance to cover many of these treatments which is a healthy advance welcomed by those who choose the natural lifestyle and do not agree with the dominant drugs and surgery style of medicine. It would seem that we have allowed freedom of choice to be maintained regarding the methods we apply in dealing with personal health issues.
In regard to these choices however, we are suffering vital changes in policy when our public water supply system are targeted for general medication, namely fluoride. The principle ethic in medicine has always been that the individual is unique, with specific personal problems and ailments so medicine is always prescribed according to the individual’s needs. In fluoridation of our water, which provides us with the 70% or more quality content of our bodies, this principle has been sacrificed. Having allowed the system to be adopted, without referendum in many cases, our nation is now anticipating what will be the next ‘medication’ that will be reason for further chemicals to be added to our water. And where does fluoride come from, anyway?
We are not so gullible as to consider the motive behind this unprecedented move is just an attempt to help us with our teeth. If this is a genuine concern by governments, there would be serious moves to train dentists enough to provide a reasonable public service. There are no whisperings that this is about to happen.
So under the current national medical climate if we get an ailment, we consult with a general medical practitioner. Drugs are routinely prescribed directly from the manufacturer’s guide book, and there is little or no health advice given. If we continue to suffer the ailment, we either visit for another prescription or are recommended to a specialist for diagnosis that is beyond the expertise of the doctor. Tests and sometimes hospitalization and possible surgery are next in line within the established system.
Although there are many wonderful repairs and many remarkable technological advances made by medical researchers, surgeons and specialists within our system, and we are grateful for them and for some of the incurred costs being absorbed by our government health system, we are growing more nervous about entering the hospital system. Reports reach the public of careless hygiene procedures, allergies to medications and drugs creating complications, as well as general neglect of suitable care of patients who are forced to take their place in hospitals that are understaffed and where many mistakes are known to be occurring.
It is difficult to have confidence in such a medical system. The individual is left to seek out where to place trust. That ideal doctor tends to become a faceless figment only of imagination. Hospitals are not longer considered safe places of cure and healing. And our medical system has no means of helping us with knowledge how to keep well. We are encouraged to seek for alternatives.
Leave a Reply