The State of Canada Before The Next Federal Elections

Ask yourself this question are you happy with Canada as it stands right now? If you answered no, dont worry you are in the majority. The reasons vary, but the underlying feeling is pretty much the same.

To get positive result changes, we must identify and expose the weaknesses and segments that have gone rotten.

To begin, let us look at where we came from.

Starting with the Second World War, Canada saw its position in the world propelled forward through the horrors and tribulations of total war. Little Canada grew up in that period and those that lived through that time took the initiative and kept on going.

Canada in the immediate post-war period saw tremendous social change. Soldiers returning from the war, and those that fueled the war machine at home, wanted to ensure that they really did put their lives and effort on the line for more than the freedom of others. They all wanted to see their blood, toil and sweat pay off here at home as well.

Our national industrial base and capacity was greatly expanded due to the war effort. Our farms were maximized and other resource-based industries were brought to full speed. Our ability to play with the big boys had come.

But it was not only what we were capable of doing with our hands that had changed, our attitudes about government and our society had also changed. Canadians came to realize that forging ahead with social change was something that was not only attainable, but also desirable. It was with that prevailing thought that the new Canada was born.

Social ideals and movements were no longer dirty words or bad ideas. The CCF more than proved this and the foundations of our social systems were born. Scare mongering on behalf of the elite did not succeed.

The Canadian people came to realize that the Canada they sought to obtain for themselves, their families and the future generations of Canadians should be based on a social system. It was a system that was compassionate and inclusive. Government had a new role to play, and Canadians were more than willing to be a part of that new expanded role. Governments now had a central role to play in Canadian lives.

Social systems were expanded and employee unions grew in strength and numbers. The Canadian economy grew rapidly to match those strides. The Canadian dream in many ways had become the envy of the world. Many post-war immigrants put Canada at the top of their wish lists. Canada by the mid 1970s was the premier middle power.

It seemed Canada could do no wrong.

But the wheels eventually fell off.

With the post-war period of growth came new ideas and new ways of looking at the present scope of economic events. At the heart of these new ideas was the notion of free markets. Increasingly, the wealthy and powerful in Canada and elsewhere were coming to believe that governments had grown too big and had become too wasteful.

Combined with that general feeling was a sense that corporations and the ultra wealthy were overtaxed and overly burdened by the burgeoning social system, which Canadians had come to enjoy and actually depend upon.

At the core of this new mantra was the adoption of the ideas of Milton Friedman. Instead of using our own bank the Bank of Canada to finance our needs, we acquiesced our economic sovereignty to a handful of private banks. Instantly we saw our manageable national debt explode into what we see today over $500 billion owing with no end in sight of the interest payments due.

Couple the abandoning of our own bank with a constant march of tax cuts for the rich and corporations at the expense of the entire system, we saw the inevitable curtailing of what Canadians had worked so hard to build. Our national social system was now enemy number one, and still is today to those that preach free market fundamentalism.

Groups like the Fraser Institute, the C.C.C.E., and the C.D. Howe Institute have all but declared war on what Canadians have worked so hard to create. To many traveling in those circles, social institutions and pubic entities are just added waste to be trimmed so others may reap the benefit. With that is the idea that governments are not to be central to social planning, but instead private institutions are to take over and take place of democratically elected officials.

Corporations now benefit from yearly record profits while our social system collapses around it. In its place are public entities turned private for profit. This panacea was the solution put forward by the few for the many. Thing is, it has not worked as advertised.

Although, increasingly, those that have pushed these ideas onto Canadians have refused to see the obvious, so they continue to push for more of the same in the insane hope that in the end it will all work out. Like an addicted gambler they are always betting that the next spin of the reel will be the winning spin.

To return Canada to its former glory we must turn back the clock. Rarely is this ever an answer for anything in life, but this is one of those times when exceptions count in the final formula. By once again utilizing the Bank of Canada and moving away from the all out free market craze we can return Canada to its rightful place as the premier middle power that was respected and looked at as a world leader.

Sadly, if this does not happen we can lump ourselves in with the other failed experiments throughout history.

Roy Whyte writes for the fpj.ca - Canadian Federal Politics Journal and bodybeautiful.ca Canada's Body Beautiful Health NewsBipolar Chat Room
Bipolar Symptoms And Signs
Information On Bipolar Disorders
Childhood Onset Bipolar
Bipolar Meds
Bipolar Affective Disorder Type 2
Bipolar Childhood Symptoms
Bipolar Stepper Motor Circuit
Bipolar Affective Disease
Bipolar Conditions
Bipolar Medicine
Bipolar Information
Bipolar
Bipolar Electrolytic Capacitor
Definition Of Bipolar Disorder
Degrassi Craig Bipolar
Bipolar Forums
Bipolar Parent Child Custody
Bp Magazine Bipolar
Bipolar Disorder Support Group
Bipolar Transistor Characteristics
Bipolar Disorder Manic Depression
Bipolarism In Children
Bipolar 1 And Bipolar 2
Bipolar Stepper Motor Driver Ic
Bipolar 1 Disorder
Bipolar Disorder Symptoms In Children
Bipolar Children Support Group
Bipolar Pregnancy
Bipolar Depression In Children
Bipolar Teens
Bipolar Family Members
Bipolar Research Articles
Bipolar Testimony
Bipolar Suicide
Dealing With Bipolar Parents
Bipolar And Borderline Personality
Bipolar Junction Transistors

Chiropractic Is Responsable For The Rebirth Of Homeopathy In America

The history of homeopathy begins with the discoveries of its founder Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), a German physician. Hahnemann's first comments about the general applicability of the law of similars came in 1789.

Maybe the most prevalent reason that allopaths disliked homeopaths and homeopathy was expressed at a 1903 AMA (American Medical Association) meeting by a distinguished orthodox physician. "We must," he said, "admit that we never fought the homeopath on matters of principle; we fought him because he came into the community and got the business." Most physicians, even now, will not admit that economic factors play a chief role in what is practiced and what is allowed to be practiced. It only makes sense then that Hahnemann's principles constituted a philosophical, clinical, and economic threat to orthodox medicine.

The growing popularity of homeopathy in the United States started shortly after Hans Gram, a Danish homeopath, emigrated in the US in 1825.

The first homeopathic school in the US, the North American Academy of the Homoeopathic Healing Art, was founded in Allentown, PA, 1836 , by Dr. W. Wesselhoeft (1794-1858) .

Dr. von Lippe emigrating to the United States in 1839. He presented himself to the sole school of the homeopathic practice in this country - the old Allentown Academy of the Homoeopathic Healing Art. After assiduous application he was granted his diploma from

Dr. Constantine Hering (1800-1880), as President of the institution, on July 27, 1841. Dr. von Lippe filled the chair of materia medica in the Homoeopathic College of Pennsylvania from 1863 to 1868 .

In 1844 they organized the American Institute of Homeopathy, which became America's first national medical society. In response to the growth of homeopaths, in 1846 an opposing medical group formed, which then vowed to slow the development of homeopathy. This organization called itself the AMA or American Medical Association.

Shortly after the formation of the AMA it was decided to eliminate all the local medical societies of physicians who were homeopaths.

In 1848, the Homeopathic College of Pennsylvania was established by Constantine Hering, Jacob Jeanes and Walter Williamson, to provide training in what was then an emerging system of medicine called homeopathy. In 1869, the Homeopathic College was renamed in honor of Samuel Hahnemann, one of the pioneers of homeopathic medicine, as Hahnemann Medical College. In 1982, Hahnemann Medical College gained university status as Hahnemann University. In 2002, the Drexel University board of trustees voted unanimously in favor of merging Hahnemann University into Drexel .

In 1849, the AMA established a board to analyze quack remedies and nostrums and to enlighten the public about the nature and dangers of such remedies.

In 1855, the AMA put into effect a "consultation clause" in their code of ethics which spelled out that orthodox physicians would lose their membership in the AMA if they even only consulted with a homeopath or any other "unorthodox" practitioner. This of course meant that if a physician lost membership in the AMA, that in some states he no longer had a license to practice medicine. The AMA did everything possible to eradicate homeopaths from the practice of medicine, and the effects of these actions are still felt today.

1875 marked the year Michigan legislature voted to give money to a new hospital as long two homeopathic professors were allowed to teach at the University of Michigan.

In a 1890 Harpers Magazine article Mark Twain mentioned the great value of homeopathy: "The introduction of homeopathy forced the old school doctor to stir around and learn something of a rational nature about his business. Good old Mark also proclaimed "that you may honestly feel grateful that the homeopath survived attempts of the allopathists to destroy it."

By the early 1900s, there were 22 homeopathic medical schools, more than 100 homeopathic hospitals, over 60 orphan asylums and old people's homes and more than 1,000 homeopathic pharmacies in the United States.

In 1910, the Carnegie Foundation issued the infamous Flexner Report, an evaluation of American medical schools headed by Mr. Abraham Flexner and of course in cooperation with leading members of the AMA. While pretending to at least be somewhat objective, Flexner in his report established guidelines to endorse orthodox medical schools and condemn homeopathic ones. The report gave the most credits to medical schools with a full time teaching faculty and institutions that taught a pathological and physiochemical analysis of the human body. Homeopathic colleges did not get as high credits because there preference of employing professors who were not only teachers or researchers but also in clinical practice. Even though homeopathic schools included many basic science courses, they offered courses in pharmacology, which the Flexner report found to be a waist of time.

By 1906, the AMAs Council on Medical Education had created a list of unacceptable schools that in 1910, and closed hundreds of private medical and homeopathic schools and named Johns Hopkins as the model school. As you might have guessed, homeopathic colleges, in general, were given poorer ratings by Mr. Flexner's report. One of the implications of the report was that only graduates of schools that received a high rating were permitted to take the medical licensing exams. In 1900 there were 22 homeopathic colleges, by 1923 only two remained.

Between 1930 and 1975 it seemed that the AMA's oppression of homeopathy was complete. By 1950 all homeopathic colleges in the U.S were either closed or ceased to teach homeopathy. There were only 50 to 150 practicing homeopaths in the country, and most of them were over 50 years old.

A chiropractor, Dr. John Bartholomew Bastyr, N.D., D.C (1912-1995), was a third-generation homeopath from Dr. Adolph von Lippe. His teacher was Dr. C. P. Bryant (who had been, in 1939, president of the International Hahnemannian Association). C. P. Bryant had been taught by Walter Bushrod James who had been one of Lippes closest students. He received doctorate degrees in naturopathy and chiropractic from Northwest Drugless Institute and Seattle Chiropractic College, respectively. He became licensed to practice naturopathic medicine in 1936. He is also credited with being the Father of Modern Naturopathic Medicine. Because of Bastyrs influence naturopaths have been at the forefront of the rebirth of homeopathy in this country. He made sure that homeopathy shared equal emphasis with nutrition, hydrotherapy and botanical medicine in naturopathic education. Dr. Bastyr considered manipulation the most important therapy in his practice.

"Bastyr's conversion to homeopathy was an important move for the modern naturopathic profession. Homeopathy had been part of naturopathic medicine for decades, but its role had been much more peripheral. The majority of practitioners had not received such intensive, classical instruction as Bastyr. In the 1950's when Bastyr became involved in establishing and teaching a naturopathic curriculum at the National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Portland, his balanced emphasis of homeopathy as a therapeutic modality coequal with nutrition, hydrotherapy and botanical medicine assured its place in the ongoing development of naturopathic science."

-Kirshfeld and Boyle, Nature Doctors, Buckeye Naturopathic Press, 1994

Naturopathy, which combined nature cure with homeopathy, massage, spinal manipulation, and therapeutic electricity, was developed in America largely through the work of Benedict Lust (pronounced loost; 1872-1945). From 1900-1938, naturopathic medicine flourished in America. Interest then declined, due to the emergence of miracle medicine, surgical advances during WWII, and the growing political sophistication of the American Medical Association (AMA). Chiropractic and naturopathy were taught together until about 1955 when the National Chiropractic Association stopped granting accreditation to schools that also taught naturopathy. In 1956, doctors founded the National College of Naturopathic Medicine in an attempt to keep the profession alive.

Dr. John Bastyr served as executive director. A chiropractor, naturopath and obstetrician, he began his practice in Seattle in the depths of the Great Depression; Bastyr was so revered as a physician and teacher that the Naturopathic College in Seattle was named in his honor. The key to Bastyrs legendary clinical successes lay in his basic philosophy. In a 1985 interview, asked to distinguish between naturopathy and conventional medicine, he said, The basic difference is that in naturopathy its not the doctor who does the curing, its the patient.

In 1978, after twenty years with only one legitimate college graduating naturopathic physicians (National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Portland, OR), the first new naturopathic medical school, Bastyr University, was opened in Seattle, WA. In 1987, Bastyr University became the first naturopathic college to become accredited by the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education, which is the federally recognized accrediting agency for naturopathic medical colleges.

There are four recognized naturopathic medical colleges in the United States today: Bastyr University, National College of Naturopathic Medicine, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine & Health Sciences, and University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine. There is also one in Canada, the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine. Naturopathic medical training begins with a conventional premedical education. The student progresses to a four-year, scientificallybased medical school program. The first two years concentrate on standard medical school sciences such as anatomy, physiology, chemistry, etc. The second two years are oriented toward the clinical sciences, diagnosis and treatment. Standard medical techniques are taught along with mainstay naturopathic medical therapies. The end product of a naturopathic medical school program is a well-rounded family care physician that specializes in such therapies as: nutrition, botanical medicines, and homeopathy.

The Council on Homeopathic Education is the only organization that accredits training programs in classical homeopathy. To date, it has accredited five institutions: Bastyr University of Natural Health Sciences in Seattle; College of Naturopathic Medicine in Canada, Hahnemann Medical Clinic in Albany, California; the National College of Naturopathic Medicine in Portland, and the International Foundation for Homeopathy, also in Seattle. Notice that three of those are actually naturopathic schools fonded by chiropractors.

Brian Inglis (1916-1993), a distinguished British historian, commentator, and author of a two-volume work, The History Of Medicine, has declared: the rise of Chiropractichas been one of the most remarkable social phenomena in American Historyyet it has gone virtually unexplored (Inglis, THE CASE FOR UNORTHODOX MEDICINE, 1965). He was, at the time, unaware of the profound influence chiropractic would have on modern alternative medicine (CAM) as we know today.

Not only did chiropractic saved both the naturopathic and homeopathic professions from extinction in the United States, but it also brougth solid academic grounds for their development towards well recognized health sciences.

Dr Sylvain Desforges, B.Sc., D.C., D.O., N.D. : drdesforges

Dr. Sylvain Desforges is a doctor of chiropractic, osteopathy and naturopathy.Bipolar Info
Bipolar Plates
Bipolar Transistor Junction
Bipolar Disorder Borderline Personality
Bipolar Neurons
Bipolar Mixed Type
Dealing With Bipolar Disease
Emil Kraepelin Bipolar Disorder
Jane Pauley Bipolar
Causes Of Bipolar Disorder In Children
Bipolar Disease Medication
Bipolar Quiz
Bipolar Illness In Children
Bipolar 11
Bipolarity
Children With Bipolar Disease
Bipolar Children Medication
Bipolaris Spicifera
Definition Of Bipolar Depression
Bipolar 1 Disorders
Abilify Bipolar Child
Bipolar Treatment Drugs
Lamictal Dosage Bipolar
Bipolar Manic Depression
Bipolar Manic Depressive Disorder
List Of Medications For Bipolar Disorder
Bipolar Affective Disorder Type 1
Bipolar I Disorder Single Manic Episode
History Of Bipolar Disease
Bipolar Disorder Medications
Famous People With Bipolar Depression
Bipolar Forums Uk
Bipolar Treatment Options
Bipolar Comics
Bipolar Type 2
Hypomania Bipolar
Coping With Bipolar Disorder
Bipolar Chat Groups