by Bill Bonner – Bonner and Partners.com:
On Friday, the Labor Department released a shockingly weak March jobs report. The feds and their cronies on Wall Street spent the weekend trying to put a bag over its head.
Former Pimco CEO and Bloomberg columnist Mohamed El-Erian gave this quick reaction:
The US employment machine notably lost momentum in March, with just 126,000 new jobs added – far fewer than the consensus expectation of around 250,000 – and with revisions erasing 69,000 from the previous two months’ total, according to the Labor Department. The lackluster result ends an impressive 12-month run of job gains in excess of 200,000.
Yes, the employment numbers were ugly. They confirm the other evidence coming in from hill and dale, industry and commerce, households and homesteads all across the nation, and all the ships at sea: This is no ordinary recovery.
Nip and Tuck
In fact, it’s no recovery at all. It is strange and unnatural, like the victim of a quack plastic surgeon.
But the damage was not an accident. No slip of the hand or equipment malfunction produced this horror. It was the result of economic grifters plying a fraudulent trade.
The Dow rose 118 points in Monday’s trading. A 0.7% increase, this was neither the result of honest investing nor any serious assessment of the economic future. Bloomberg attributed it to scammery from the Fed:
New York Fed President William Dudley said the pace of rate increases is likely to be “shallow” once the Fed starts to tighten.
His comments were the first from the inner core of the Fed’s leadership since a government report showed payrolls expanded less than forecast in March.
While data signaling rates near zero for longer have previously been welcomed by American equity investors, concern is building that economic weakness will worsen the outlook for corporate profits.
Get it?
“Shallow” rate increases. Translation: Savers will get nothing for their forbearance and discipline for a long, long time.
Instead, the money that should be rightfully theirs will be transferred to the rich… and to gamblers and speculators… as it has for the last six years.
A Frankenstein Economy
Back to El-Erian who, having seen the evidence of this botched operation, then goes goofy on us. He calls upon the authorities to “do something.”
As if they hadn’t done enough already!
The feds were the ones who injected the credit silicon, hardened the upper lip and created the Monster of 2008.
And then, when the nearest of kin started retching into the hospital wastebaskets, they went back to work. Now, the economy is more grotesque than ever.
But here’s El-Erian, asking for more:
The report is a further reminder of how much more the US economy could – and should – achieve if it weren’t for political dysfunction in Washington and a “do little” Congress that preclude more comprehensive structural reforms, infrastructure spending and a more responsive fiscal policy.
El-Erian is not the only one. One of our favorite knife men, Larry Summers, is suggesting more nip and tuck on the whole world economy.
It was Summers, as secretary of the Treasury between 1999 and 2001, who helped stitch this Frankenstein economy together.
He and his fellow surgeons are responsible for its unsightly lumps and inhuman shape. Their trillions of dollars of EZ credit leaked all over, causing bulges almost everywhere.
Does China have too much industrial capacity? Does the world have a glut of energy? Are governments far too deep in debt? And corporations?And households? Didn’t nearly every central bank in the world try to stimulate demand with cheap credit… thus laying on a burden of debt so heavy that it now threatens the entire world economy?
Poor Larry Summers
Now, Summers waves his scalpel in the air and can’t wait to get the patient back on the table.
He worries that the US should have given the International Monetary Fund more money, which would have “bolstered confidence in the global economy.”
He thinks the world’s problem is that “capital is abundant, deflationary pressures are substantial, and demand could be in short supply for quite some time.”
Poor Larry can’t tell the difference between capital and credit.
Capital – what you get from saving money and investing it wisely – is an economy’s real muscle. EZ credit – what the quacks pump into flabby tissue to try to make things look more fetching – is what has turned the economy into such a freak.
Alas, failing to give more money to the IMF, says Summers, may mean “the US will not be in a position to shape the global economic system.”
That would be a real pity.
Article originally posted at
by Simon Paul Harrison – ICPA.org: A number of years ago I had the pleasure of teaching a class of 9 and 10-year-olds in my native England. We were in the middle of a history lesson when an incident occurred that created a profound change in my understanding of how to best support children. One of the children asked a question, and, after thinking about it for a few moments, I answered, “I don’t know.” You would have thought I had just announced that I was in fact an alien sent from outer space to suck out the brains of the children before me. Thirty mouths took an intake of breath, and thirty pairs of eyes swiveled toward me, all looking aghast. “But Mr. Harrison, you’re a teacher,” said one of the children. “You’re supposed to know everything.” The other children nodded in agreement. This was the way the world is, according to them. Teachers know everything, and students learn from teachers. Naturally, I explained that teachers certainly did not know everything; nobody does. I added that when anybody tells you anything, you should question it to see if it’s right for you. This went down well with some children, but most of them were visibly shocked by my admission of ignorance. I have spent the best part of a decade in various forms of teaching, which has allowed me to see a wide variety of different educational models. I cannot stress how much damage the “teacher as oracle” culture is wreaking on the long-term development of our children. Just because this model of doing things is normal, it should not be considered healthy. One of the major problems it creates is that it sets up an environment where children learn that all the answers they need in life are to be found and acquired from an external source. Children come to a point very quickly where they discard their own paths of discovery and substitute their teacher’s answer for their own. This leaves the child in a precarious position: What will happen when the teacher is no longer around to give answers? At best they accept someone else’s version of the world, and live by the creations of others. The worst-case scenario is that, without the prompting of a teacher to ask questions, independent exploration and discovery simply cease. One of the saddest things to see is a child who has lost the passion to explore life. If a child cannot find answers internally, or does not have the life experience that has fostered a desire to find answers, what will happen to his creativity? What will happen to his confidence? And what will happen to his independence? We have set things up like this, deluding ourselves that retention and regurgitation of information constitutes success. Maybe it is success, if we’re trying to create a society of robots. However, it goes without saying that a human being is a creature whose very nature is to want to discover every last nuance of life. It is the very core of us, our soul, that drives us to want to go on adventures, discover the universe, and find out who we really are. If the answers come thick and fast from an external source—an oracle—they deprive children of the opportunity to respond to the calling of their souls. And, once the connection to our soul is lost, it’s very difficult to get it back. Apathy runs deep with children in our modern society, and a large reason for this is that we have taught them that answers come from outside themselves. It seems the oracle is not really an oracle at all, but a system that has completely lost sight of who we really are. Next time a child asks you a question, see if you can answer not with the little snippet of information, but with another question that helps the child use her creativity to find the answer for herself. Watch as she takes delight in responding to the call of her soul. Watch as the next time she has a question, she has the confidence and ability to find out the answer for herself. My experience is that when we support children like this they discover the most amazing things. They dive deeper into life than even we may have, and they in turn teach us. This long-term approach obviously requires love, and it requires patience. If we cannot find these basics of life in our relationships with children, it might be time to stop considering the role of the teacher and adult to be that of an oracle. It should quickly become obvious we actually have very few answers at all. Article originally posted at ICPA.org. by Frank Shostak – Mises Daily: Originally, paper money was not regarded as money but merely as a representation of a commodity (namely, gold). Various paper certificates represented claims on gold stored with the banks. Holders of paper certificates could convert them into gold whenever they deemed necessary. Because people found it more convenient to use paper certificates to exchange for goods and services, these certificates came to be regarded as money. Paper certificates that are accepted as the medium of exchange open the scope for fraudulent practices. Banks could now be tempted to boost their profits by lending certificates that were not covered by gold. In a free-market economy, a bank that overissues paper certificates will quickly find out that the exchange value of its certificates in terms of goods and services will fall. To protect their purchasing power, holders of the over-issued certificates naturally attempt to convert them back to gold. If all of them were to demand gold back at the same time, this would bankrupt the bank. In a free market then, the threat of bankruptcy would restrain banks from issuing paper certificates unbacked by gold. Mises wrote on this in Human Action, People often refer to the dictum of an anonymous American quoted by Tooke: “Free trade in banking is free trade in swindling.” However, freedom in the issuance of banknotes would have narrowed down the use of banknotes considerably if it had not entirely suppressed it. It was this idea which Cernuschi advanced in the hearings of the French Banking Inquiry on October 24, 1865: “I believe that what is called freedom of banking would result in a total suppression of banknotes in France. I want to give everybody the right to issue banknotes so that nobody should take any banknotes any longer.” This means that in a free-market economy, paper money cannot assume a “life of its own” and become independent of commodity money. The government can, however, bypass the free-market discipline. It can issue a decree that makes it legal (or effectively legal) for the over-issued bank not to redeem paper certificates into gold. Once banks are not obliged to redeem paper certificates into gold, opportunities for large profits are created that set incentives to pursue an unrestrained expansion of the supply of paper certificates. The uncurbed expansion of paper certificates raises the likelihood of setting off a galloping rise in the prices of goods and services that can lead to the breakdown of the market economy. Central Banks Protect Private Banks from the Market To prevent such a breakdown, the supply of the paper money must be managed. The main purpose of managing the supply is to prevent various competing banks from over-issuing paper certificates and from bankrupting each other. This can be achieved by establishing a monopoly bank, i.e., a central bank-that manages the expansion of paper money. To assert its authority, the central bank introduces its paper certificates, which replace the certificates of various banks. (The central bank’s money purchasing power is established on account of the fact that various paper certificates, which carry purchasing power, are exchanged for the central bank money at a fixed rate. In short, the central bank paper certificates are fully backed by banks’ certificates, which have a historical link to gold.) The central bank paper money, which is declared as the legal tender, also serves as a reserve asset for banks. This enables the central bank to set a limit on the credit expansion by the banking system. Note that through ongoing monetary management, i.e., monetary pumping, the central bank makes sure that all the banks can engage jointly in the expansion of credit out of “thin air” via the practice of fractional reserve banking. The joint expansion in turn guarantees that checks presented for redemption by banks to each other are netted out, because the redemption of each will cancel the other redemption out. In short, by means of monetary injections, the central bank makes sure that the banking system is “liquid enough” so that banks will not bankrupt each other. Central Banks Take Over Where Inflationist Private Banks Left Off It would appear that the central bank can manage and stabilize the monetary system. The truth, however, is the exact opposite. To manage the system, the central bank must constantly create money “out of thin air” to prevent banks from bankrupting each other. This leads to persistent declines in money’s purchasing power, which destabilizes the entire monetary system. Observe that while, in the free market, people will not accept a commodity as money if its purchasing power is subject to a persistent decline. In the present environment, however, central authorities make it impractical to use any currency other than dollars even if suffering from a steady decline in its purchasing power. In this environment, the central bank can keep the present paper standard going as long as the pool of real wealth is still expanding. Once the pool begins to stagnate — or, worse, shrinks — then no monetary pumping will be able to prevent the plunge of the system. A better solution is of course to have a true free market and allow commodity money to assert its monetary role. The Boom-Bust Connection As opposed to the present monetary system in the framework of a commodity-money standard, money cannot disappear and set in motion the menace of the boom-bust cycles. In fractional reserve banking, when money is repaid and the bank doesn’t renew the loan, money evaporates (leading to a bust). Because the loan has originated out of nothing, it obviously couldn’t have had an owner. In a free market, in contrast, when true commodity money is repaid, it is passed back to the original lender; the money stock stays intact. Article originally posted at Mises.org. If you are one of the majority of Americans that dutifully brushes with Colgate Total® on your dentist’s recommendations, you may be doing yourself more harm than good. What is first in the eyes of the dental dictocrats may be the last thing you want in your mouth. American Dental Association (ADA)-approved Colgate Total® claims to be the only toothpaste “clinically proven” to “protect both above and below the gum line.” It has a patented formula for “12–hour” protection against cavities, gingivitis and plaque, due to the active ingredients: fluoride and triclosan (paired with gantrez, an adhesive copolymer). Let’s start with fluoride. Now, listen closely: fluoride might cause cavities. Sounds like heresy, doesn’t it? But this has been known since 1942, when Proctor & Gamble’s own initial clinical studies found a 23% increase in dental caries among children who used their fluoride toothpaste. The reason: for fluoride to bond to teeth, it must remove calcium—that’s called fluorosis. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), which currently runs de-fluoridation programs for the World Health Organization, says: “Agreement is universal that excessive fluoride intake leads to loss of calcium from the tooth matrix, aggravating cavity formation throughout life rather than remedying it.” Sorry, water fluoridation is quite likely a bust. And that’s not news. In 1999, the New York State Department of Health completed an unprecedented 45-year study comparing children in Newburgh, New York, which had fluoridated water for 45 years, with Kingston, New York, which never had fluoridated water. Conclusion: there was no significant difference in the amount of cavities between the two cities, but statistically there was more dental fluorosis in fluoridated Newburgh. This critical study effectively nullified the prior findings of the benchmark 10-year 1955 survey comparing these same towns. The 1955 study allegedly found 70% fewer caries in fluoridated Newburgh and stood as the ADA’s primary clinical “evidence” for the nationwide fluoridation policies that followed. Again, the 1999 findings were no revelation. In 1988, the National Institute of Dental Research and the United States Public Health Service completed a massive $3.6 million nationwide survey to assess fluoridation efficacy. The data (unveiled by a Freedom of Information Act filing) revealed no difference in tooth decay between fluoridated and nonfluoridated communities. Similar findings had been made by public health officials in New Zealand and Canada. Water fluoridation promotion boils down to bad research. A 2000 review of 214 water fluoridation safety and efficacy studies (which censured both fluoridation proponents and critics) found little more than a wealth of poor science. Among researchers’ conclusions, “The most serious defect of the studies of possible beneficial effects of water fluoridation was the lack of appropriate design and analysis.” A similar summation of fluoridation efficacy studies is spelled out in a statistical overview undertaken by the University of California, Davis Department of Mathematics. “The announced opinions and published papers favoring mechanical fluoridation of public drinking water are especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” There’s more. Fluoride may even cause gingivitis. According to a 1998 US patent (#5,807,541) by the pharmaceutical company Sepracor, fluoride activates the very oral “G proteins” that lead to chronic gingivitis, periodontal disease and ultimately tooth loss.Besides, fluoride is poison. EPA scientists rate fluoride as “more toxic than lead, and not quite as toxic as arsenic.” That’s why all fluoride toothpaste tubes warn: “If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control Center immediately.” Fluoride (despite ADA claims) is also a carcinogen. Studies by the National Cancer Institute’s former Chief Chemist Emeritus, Dr. Dean Burke, show that fluoridation is responsible for 10,000 cancer deaths yearly. “In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer deaths, and causes it faster, than any other chemical,” says Burke.Research from St Louis University, Japan’s Nippon Dental College, and the University of Texas show that fluoride stimulates tumor growth rate. The New Jersey Department of Health found the risk of osteosarcoma among males under 20 was up to seven times higher in fluoridated areas. A 1995 peer-reviewed study by Harvard neurotoxicist Dr. Phyllis Mullinex concludes that fluoride also causes brain damage. Her findings were corroborated by more recent clinical surveys in China. Also, in 1999, 1,500 EPA scientists, lawyers and engineers signed a joint resolution to oppose fluoridation because they found that fluoride causes “gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology, and…decreases (of ) about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.” Robert Carton, Ph.D, a former president of the EPA professionals union who spent 15 years as a US EPA toxicologist, says, “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time.” Now, let’s talk about triclosan. It’s a pesticide, technically a chlorinated aromatic, similar in molecular structure to the most toxic forms of dioxins and PCBs. It’s also the antibiotic disinfectant used in kitchen sponges and hospital soap. Microbiologists at the Tufts University School of Medicine believe overuse of triclosan promotes the creation of antibiotic- resistant “superbugs.’’Worse still, findings presented to the American Society for Microbiology over the past several years suggest that triclosan actually helps resistant bacteria thrive, forming resilient biofilms on teeth and water pipes. Moreover, triclosan is a nonspecific biocide. It kills all microbes, the good and the bad—even those flora necessary for digestion. The copolymers used in Colgate Total® keep triclosan active for 12 hours after you brush. Lastly, triclosan may even contain true dioxins. A report from Quantex Laboratories, in Edison, New Jersey, states, “Polychlorodibenzo-p-dioxins (dioxins) and polychlorodibenzofurans (dibenzofurans) can be found in varying low level amounts, as synthesis impurities in triclosan.” Similar findings were made in 2003 by researchers at the University of Minnesota. Triclosan is also used in Crest®, Mentadent®, Sensodyne® and Macleans® toothpastes, all of which also contain fluoride. And let’s mention sodium and potassium hydroxides (also known as lye), the whitening ingredient in many conventional toothpastes. Lye is considered a poison by the Food and Drug Administration. So, what to use? Try natural toothpastes, which battle cavities without potentially dangerous synthetic ingredients. Many natural brands utilize neem (Indian lilac) bark, a natural astringent and antiseptic, containing immunomodulatory polysaccharides that increase antibody production. Neem also increases lymphomatic counts of red and white blood cells, and aids in treating digestive disorders like diarrhea, hyperacidity and constipation—just what you need after a meal. Another popular natural ingredient is peelu, from the East Asian Siwak (chewstick) tree. Peelu’s non-abrasive vegetable fiber gently cleans teeth without eroding them like chalk (widely used in toothpastes) can. Peelu also contains antiseptic tannin, Vitamin C and natural resins that strengthen tooth enamel. Most natural toothpastes also use myrrh, an anti-microbial, astringent immuno-stimulant, beneficial against gingivitis and mouth ulcers—and propolis, an immuno-stimulating anti-bacterial resin. Many contain plaque-fighting eucalyptus, and are flavored and sweetened naturally with fennel, anise and cinnamon, all of which are herbal aids for digestion. Auromere® Ayurvedic toothpaste contains such holistic astringents and therapeutic agents as Indian licorice root (excellent for mouth sores), pomegranate rind (an astringent), Persian walnut, Indian almond, Asian holly oak and geranium extract (an antiseptic anti-inflammatory). Weleda makes a toothpaste with calendula. Nature’s Gate® has goldenseal. Herbal Vedic, made by Auroma™, contains banyan tree bark, wild celery (an anti-inflammatory carminative) and nutrientrich Irish moss. Tom’s of Maine® toothpastes are the most widely available. They don’t do animal testing or use artificial sweeteners like carcinogenic saccharin or aspartame (unlike most major national brands like Colgate and Crest). Perhaps the most innovative alternative toothpastes are those made by Jason Natural Cosmetics®. Jason Sea Fresh combines detoxifying, biologically-active blue green algae with sea salts. Jason toothpastes also use plaque-inhibiting, omega-3-rich Japanese perilla seed extract—and Coenzyme Q10 (ubiquinone), a naturally-occurring, detoxifying nutraceutical. They also avoid the use of caustic foamingagent sodium lauryl sulfate and humectant propylene glycol (a component of anti-freeze), both questionable ingredients of many national-brand toothpastes. Consider also the addition of baking soda, a low-abrasion cleanser, which chemically neutralizes the staph-generated oral acids responsible for tooth decay. The final word: Dental health is more dependent on your diet than your dentifrice. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, Americans per capita consume 34 teaspoons of sweetener per day. And not just in candy. Sweeteners are used in everything from breakfast cereal to pasta sauce. The worst is soda. Acidic, carbonated soft-drinks dissolve tooth structures—and their massive sugar content feeds plaque. And don’t drink too much green tea made with fluoridated water. Indeed, green tea has been shown to inhibit tooth decay. Green tea catechin (epigallocatechingallate, an antioxidant 100 times more powerful than Vitamin C ) suppresses the process by which decay-causing bacteria create plaque, and acts as an anti-bacterial, as well. But green tea contains considerable natural fluorine. Steeped in fluoridated water, green tea can put you way over your USDA recommended daily allowance of what is the new DDT at the Environmental Protection Agency. All in all, consider your options when choosing dental products for you and your family. Make informed choices based on the literature, not the commercials, and try to find practitioners who support your choices and decisions. Article originally posted at ICPA.org. by Hunter Hastings – Mises Daily: Ludwig von Mises was careful to establish the individual actor as the basis for all economic analysis. An individual acts to improve his circumstances. To do so, he chooses among various available means in order to achieve his ends. Those ends are based on his individual values, which are subjectively established. Methodological individualism and dynamic subjectivism are distinctive features of Misesian Austrian economics. The Importance of Economics Based on the Individual Interventionists and Keynesians, on the other hand, use economic aggregates such as GDP and aggregate demand as their basis for analysis. By reducing economic activity to a matter of measuring aggregates, interventionists seek to justify the manipulation of those aggregates in order to establish policy goals, and to design interventionist policies that purportedly are intended to achieve those goals. In order to manipulate such immense aggregates, Keynesians turn to powerful government institutions that, the Keynesian rationale goes, are necessary to manage such a huge economy. These institutions include not only government agencies and regulations, but also their favored partners including big banks (protected financial franchises benefiting from central bank policies and bailouts), big pharma (government-protected pharmaceutical monopolies), and big food (government-protected purveyors of government-approved diets). This regulation and manipulation is supposedly done for the good of “the economy,” but in the face of so much government favoritism and management for the benefit of certain special interests, it is easy for individual economic actors to feel disempowered. And it’s not just a feeling. The more government intervenes to control markets, the less sovereignty the consumers have. How Governments Destroy Competition An example is the increasing domination of the major Wall Street banks in the US. Consumers and small businesses report in surveys that two-thirds of respondents consistently report dissatisfaction with big banks, and three-quarters say it is important to bank locally. Yet, the number of community banks has declined by 24 percent over 2000–2013, while big banks grew their share of deposits — the five biggest banks now hold 47 percent of deposits, and in some counties, as much as 75 percent of deposits. Their low consumer satisfaction scores are a result, at least in part, of higher prices. For example, Consumer Reports found that the ten largest banks charged a monthly fee of $10.27 for a non-interest checking account, compared to $7.45 at small banks and $6.00 at the ten biggest credit unions. Professor Amat R. Admati of Stanford University stated in testimony to the Senate Banking Committee in July 2014 that Too-Big-To-Fail legislation provides an explicit subsidy to large banks in the form of a lower cost of capital, and bemoaned the “extreme opacity of large banking institutions” that grow “to inefficiently large sizes.” Yet customers do not switch. Some of this can be explained by the convenience found in banking with a very large enterprise, but consumers also find it costly to switch to smaller banks in the face of market dominance facilitated by government protection. Things would be different if big banks had to truly compete. In Liberty and Property Mises explained that the real power in the market lies with individual consumers who are making the choices that ultimately determine output and prices; he termed it “consumer sovereignty.” Murray Rothbard in Man, Economy, and State elevated the idea of individual economic power, emphasizing not only the right to choose, but also (and perhaps more tellingly) the right to refuse: “Economic power, then, is simply the right under freedom to refuse to make an exchange. Every man has this power. Every man has the same right to refuse to make a proffered exchange.” To choose and refuse to make an exchange, i.e., to do business with any other economic entity, is the essence of individual economic power. True Diversity in the Marketplace True freedom in the marketplace can greatly shape a consumer’s entire lifestyle. In their financial lives — if true market competition is allowed — individual economic actors can refuse to do business even with big Wall Street or global banks, and choose, instead, community banks or credit unions. In their home lives, consumers can install solar panels or a home generator and disconnect from the regulated energy utility. This releases them from guaranteed price increases, often caused by the need for the utilities to support their excessive pension commitments, and the charges imposed by the forced redistribution of energy subsidies to low-income households. Consumers can refuse to buy from the food companies that hide behind government food regulations and agricultural subsidies, and instead choose smaller, more local and healthier options. They can choose online education in the form of free MOOC’s (Massive Open Online Courses offered by top professors at many universities) or pay per course from online providers like Udemy, and refuse the offerings of pro-government biased content and tenured Keynesian professors. They can choose Uber and refuse the highly regulated local taxi monopoly, which is often typified by old, uncomfortable, and poorly maintained vehicles caused by the high cost of taxi regulations and lack of competition. On the other hand, every government subsidy, every regulation, and every tax-code change that favors one group of businesses over another reduces consumer sovereignty. This interference results in monopolies and oligopolies which are typically the product of government intervention in markets. Nevertheless, short of a total monopoly — such as those often enjoyed by the government itself in law and other areas — the individual economic actor does have freedom to refuse to do business with these government-favored industries. A Partnership of Entrepreneurs and Consumers Freedom of choice is best secured by allowing true freedom for both entrepreneurs and consumers. Entrepreneurs “are at the helm and steer the ship,” Mises noted in Human Action. “But they are not free to shape its course. They are not supreme, they are steersmen only, bound to obey unconditionally the captain’s orders. The captain is the consumer.” Not only is the exercise of individual economic power a choice, it is a powerful tool for directing change, one that we can wield with purpose. As Frank Fetter wrote in The Principles of Economics: “Every individual may organize a consumer’s league, leaguing himself with the powers of righteousness. Every purchase has far-reaching consequences. You may spend your monthly allowance as an agent of iniquity or of truth.” Article originally posted at Mises.org. by Neustaedter, OMD – ICPA.org: Children in rural Crete have an especially low incidence of allergies and wheezing (asthma). The diet among this population is typically high in locally grown fruits and vegetables. These facts led researchers to examine whether there was an association between diet and allergies in these children. What they found can reassure and inspire us all as parents to pursue a healthy whole foods diet for our children. The study included 690 children aged 7 to 18 years living in rural areas of Crete. Parents completed a food questionnaire that rated intake on a scale of six from never to more than once per day for each category of foods. The foods in the survey included vegetables, fruits, nuts, fish, cereal, dairy products, meat, poultry, and margarine. Parents also completed a symptom questionnaire that included a current history (in the past 12 months) of respiratory and allergic symptoms. They discovered that children with a daily consumption of grapes, oranges, apples, and fresh tomatoes had less asthma. Eating oranges, but not other fruits, was associated with less nasal allergies. Eating nuts more than three times per week was also associated with less wheezing. Consuming margarine, however, showed a correlation with more wheezing and allergies. Other suspect food items, such as fast foods and fried foods, were not included in the study. Other studies have shown an increased incidence of asthma in children consuming fast foods. The traditional Mediterranean diet contains a high proportion of fruits, vegetables, beans, nuts, and seeds, and is high in essential fatty acids, fiber, polyphenols from olive oil, and vitamins E and C. In this study children with a primarily Mediterranean diet had a lower incidence of nasal allergies and nighttime coughing. The message from this study is clearly that children with allergies may benefit from eating a diet with a high proportion of fruits and vegetables, and that this type of diet may be preventive for allergies and asthma as well. Parents would do well to make fruits available to children throughout the day, pack fruits in school and camp lunches, and avoid processed foods with added sugar and corn syrup. Never use margarine. And don’t forget to include nuts in children’s diets as well (including walnuts, pecans, and almonds). Article originally posted at ICPA.org. by Ryan McMaken – Mises Daily: Discussing poverty as an advocate of free markets is tricky business in today’s world. If one takes poverty seriously and points out the very real plight of the impoverished, it is often assumed that one must therefore be advocating for government “solutions” to the problem. The knee-jerk reaction of many defenders of free markets is to simply deny that poverty exists much at all, or that if the poor just try a little harder, or aren’t so lazy, they won’t be poor anymore. This sort of reaction is natural for one who labors under the mistaken impression that the American economy is a free-market economy. Since the American economy is so free and filled with opportunity, they think, there’s really no excuse for being poor. But, of course, the American economy isn’t even a mostly free economy. The entire financial sector is heavily subsidized and regulated. The regulatory costs imposed on small businesses are enormous. Trade of all types is regulated, and many goods are prohibited outright. Minimum wages make many entry-level jobs illegal, and one can’t even drive people around for money without facing a bevy of government regulations — and sanctions. With all these millstones tied around the necks of poor and low-skilled workers, it’s a bit nonsensical to declare that poor people should just try harder. Perhaps they did try, and the government sent them the message loud and clear: “just give it up, because we’ve made everything you’re qualified to do illegal.” Yes, it’s true that, to the extent markets are still free, they have led to an abundance of conveniences that even the poor can afford: air conditioning, television, household appliances, cell phones, and more. But at the same time, it would be wrong to sit back and say “they have enough” when an even greater abundance is to be had if the poor were simply given the freedom to work and own businesses without navigating a myriad of government requirements and regulations that often pose an insurmountable opportunity cost. There are several ways that a turn to freer markets would open up a whole world to low-income families and unskilled workers immediately. End the Minimum Wage This is one of the worst offenders since it renders jobs illegal for the most unskilled workers, and hits the poor the hardest. As explained in the pages of mises.org, the primary effect of the minimum wage is to make the lowest-skilled workers legally unemployable. In other words, if the minimum wage is $10 per hour, and a worker only produces $8 of goods or services per hour, he will never be hired. Naturally, with a little experience, an unproductive (in the economic sense of the word) worker becomes more productive with job experience. But with a minimum wage, how is the worker supposed to get his first job? He can’t. As a result, many workers caught up in this catch-22 become long-term welfare recipients or they turn to black markets where they are branded criminals by the legal system. Abolish All Income Taxes (Including Payroll Taxes) Even low-income wage earners pay taxes on income. Social Security and Medicare taxes are nothing more than income taxes that go straight to the general fund — the “social security trust fund” does not exist. That claim by Mitt Romney that half the country doesn’t pay income taxes was never anything more than disingenuous political hair-splitting. Payroll taxes are income taxes, and we all know they take a big bite out of our paychecks, at all income levels. Thus, even the poor pay taxes to finance TARP and various bailouts of the ultra-rich. As if this insult were not enough, the federal government then punishes the poor further with a central bank that punishes them for saving what little they can. End the Fed The Federal Reserve — and central banks in general — have in recent decades functioned largely to push down interest rates and devalue the currency. The Federal Reserve — in addition to giving us the gift of the boom-bust cycle — has been key in bailing out huge too-big-to-fail corporations and has facilitated endless government spending on wars, corporate welfare, and social programs. Whether the amount of money poured into low-income households via social programs rivals the amount of money sucked out of them — in the form of devalued currency and below-inflation interest rates for low-income savers — remains to be seen. What we do know is that the Fed’s commitment to low interest rates has made it almost impossible to save money through savings accounts and other low-risk traditional investments. Once upon a time, it might have been possible to put money in a savings account or CD and receive a respectable amount of interest on those funds, and at least earn an interest rate that exceeded the inflation rate. That certainly isn’t possible today. If you’re poor and try to make any returns off a savings account or CD, you’re out of luck. You’ll be very lucky to get 0.9 percent, and you’ll probably get lower than that. Meanwhile, the official low-ball inflation rate is well above that. So, your savings lose value in real terms constantly. You might as well keep that money in your mattress — where your money will also constantly lose value. On the other hand, if you have $100,000 to put in a CD right now, you might be able to get 1.5 percent at some banks. But poor people rarely have that kind of money lying around. People with more money are able to hire financial advisors and stock brokers and better keep up with an inflationary economy. The poor are just on their own. Stop Regulating Small Businesses Starting small businesses are often the preferred way for low-income, non-white workers to find work and build capital. Immigrants often turn to small businesses because they offer flexibility and work for people who are unattractive to larger established operations. While the wages and incomes associated with small businesses are often lower than they are in larger businesses, many turn to small business employment because they offer many non-monetary advantages over other types of income. Governments work to crush small businesses on a daily basis. Every small business owner must deal with a myriad of government agencies from the IRS, to OSHA, to the EEOC, Obamacare, and beyond. Every new regulation and every new tax makes it harder for a small business owner to make payroll and to turn a profit. The net effect, of course, is to both restrict growth of small businesses and to restrict the number of small businesses. The decrease in competition then lessens benefits for both consumers and wage workers in the communities where these businesses are likely to spring up — in low-income communities. Instead, governments make sure that only large, well-capitalized companies can afford to open new businesses in many cases — probably miles away in higher-income areas. Legalize Poverty Everywhere the government intervenes to “help” we find not more choice, but less. Not more jobs, but fewer. Do you want to start up your own taxi service by driving people around? Forget about it if you have not obtained all the applicable (and costly) government licenses. Do you want to rent out your converted garage to tenants for cash? Too bad. Zoning laws don’t allow it. Do you want to get a job at five bucks per hour for your teenage son who has no skills? Sorry, that’s illegal too. Do you need a loan, but you’re a high risk borrower? Get lost. We’d have to charge you a high interest rate. That’s usury, and it’s not allowed. We’re told every day that the only solution to poverty is more government power, more government regulation, more central planning, bigger deficits, and less freedom. The true solution, however, is better described by a left-wing slogan: “Legalize Poverty.” The left usually says this when homeless people are being thrown off government property, but it’s better applied to the many types of free enterprise that are placed out of reach to the poor by government edicts. So many low-income workers must turn to black markets and low-wage semi-legal work because that’s all that’s open to them. It’s simply illegal for them to find entry-level work in mainstream enterprises, keep all of their meager wages, or start up small enterprises. Needless to say, these assaults on free markets help no one but the government agents paid to enforce them. Article originally posted at Mises.org. by Author Kevin Donka, DC – ICPA.org: Early last week, a practice member of mine named Melissa came in for her weekly check-up. I found that she was clear (i.e., didn’t need an adjustment), so I rang the well bell and congratulated her. She got up off the table with a confused look on her face and said, “But I’m sick! How can I be clear when I’m sick? Are you sure I’m clear?” I asked her what she meant when she said she was “sick.” “Well,” she answered, “I’m congested, I’m coughing and I feel run-down – you know -SICK!” I told her that the problem wasn’t with my assessment of her nerve system, it was with her definition of the word “sick.” You see, traditional medical thinking calls the presence of symptoms “sickness.” But the truth is that you are sick before the onset of your symptoms. The symptoms are really an indication that your body has accurately recognized an invader or toxin and is actively responding to it by creating a fever, mucus, cough, diarrhea, etc., to eliminate it from your body. The beginning of symptoms, what we have always called “sickness,” is really your body getting WELL! Take this short test. If two people go to a restaurant and eat some tainted fish, then one of them throws up within an hour but the other is fine until morning when he also gets sick, which of the two has the stronger and healthier immune system? Most people would say that the second was stronger and healthier because his body was able to tolerate the poisons longer before he “got sick.” But the truth is, the first man has the stronger and healthier immune system because it was able to recognize the invader and start the elimination process sooner than the second man’s was. The first man started getting well the same night, but the second man didn’t start getting well until the next day! So, how could Melissa be feeling so poorly and still not need an adjustment? Being “clear” simply means that there is no interference in her nerve system. This means the body is at it highest capacity to heal – it does not mean that healing is complete. The process is just like cleaning laundry in a washing machine. When the soap and water touch the garments, the grime is loosened, and it rises to the surface. If you were to look in a washing machine during the agitation cycle, you would be repulsed and think that your clothes were actually getting dirtier. But the truth is that they are actually getting cleaner. The thick muck must be extracted and discarded before the clothes are totally clean. If we know the washing machine is working correctly, nothing more needs to be done except to let the cycle complete itself. Similarly, as your body is “cleaning itself” of toxins and germs, it appears at first as though you are getting worse, but you are actually getting better. If we know your master control system (your nerve system) is working correctly, nothing more needs to be done except to let the cycle complete itself. Melissa learned a valuable lesson that day about what sickness is and what wellness is. Plus, she already knows enough to trust her body and allow the clearing process to complete itself without any outside interference from medications designed to simply make her feel better. She knows that these things only stop her body’s own natural elimination and healing processes. Hopefully you too now know the difference between getting sick and getting well. Know to trust your body and allow the natural process of healing to occur when it needs to. And finally, make sure you continue to live your life in a way that not only prevents sickness, but also actually creates health, happiness and wholeness Article originally posted at ICPA.org. by Bill Bonner – Bonner and Partners.com: The key feature of age is that it happens no matter what you think. What does this mean? It means the “old countries” – their assets and their institutions, at least the ones that depend on population, income and credit growth – are “fastened to a dying animal” and are not likely to survive in their present form. Today, these countries, including the US, are victims of demography. Older people get more money from the government. And they pay less in taxes. Old people also slow the rate of GDP, for obvious reasons: They are not adding to output; they are living on it. As people age, the whole society – its institutions, its laws, its customs, its economy and its markets – ages, too. They all become as familiar, comfortable and shabby as a well-worn shoe. An economy is not independent of the people in it. The economy ages with them. And when they reach retirement age, the economy gets arthritis. A Nursing Home Economy Even the Congressional Budget Office has noticed how government debt slows growth: Increased borrowing by the federal government generally draws money away from (that is, crowds out) private investment in productive capital in the long term because the portion of people’s savings used to buy government securities is not available to finance private investment. The result is a smaller stock of capital and lower output in the long term than would otherwise be the case all else held equal (CBO, July 2014, p. 72). Why does the federal government need to borrow so much? Before the invention of the welfare state, almost all large borrowing was done for war. Since the end of World War II, however, most developed countries – with the exception of the US – have borrowed heavily only to pay for social programs. But neither debt nor spending contributes to a dynamic, innovative and growth-oriented economy. Instead, they produce an economy that looks like the people in it – old, creaky and in need of around-the-clock care. As people age, they begin fewer new businesses. “The Other Aging of America: The Increasing Dominance of Older Firms” is the title of a major study from the Brookings Institution. Done by Robert Litan and Ian Hathaway, it showed that American business was becoming “old and fat.” Taken together, the data presented here clearly show a private sector where economic activity is sharply concentrating in older firms – a trend that is occurring in a nearly universal fashion across sectors, firm sizes and geographies… An economy that is saturated with older firms is one that is likely to be less flexible, and potentially less productive and less innovative, than an economy with a higher percentage of new and young firms. Young people try to create new wealth. Old people try to hold on to the wealth they believe they have in the bag. They are less entrepreneurial. They are also, perhaps, more eager to protect their businesses and professions from competition. Part of the reason for fewer business start-ups is that it has gotten a lot harder to launch a new company in America. That was the conclusion of a study by John W. Dawson and John J. Seater (“Federal Regulation and Aggregate Economic Growth”). What they found was that there has been a huge increase in economic regulation and restrictions in the US since World War II. They point out that these regulations have an economic cost. Like debt and demography, regulations reduce output. In fact, they estimate that had the level of regulation remained unchanged since the year I was born – 1948 – today’s GDP would provide every man, woman and child in America with about $125,000 more in income per year. A Glorified Ponzi Scheme It was Alexis de Tocqueville who observed that democracy was doomed. He said it would soon degrade into tyranny. As soon as politicians realized that they could win elections by promising the voters more of other people’s money, it was just a matter of time until they overdid it. Had he imagined how old people would get, he wouldn’t have been so optimistic. As things developed, politicians noticed two important things: that young people (especially those who hadn’t been born yet) didn’t vote… and old people’s votes could be bought fairly cheaply, at least so it appeared at first. When the US Social Security program was first put in place, for example, the typical American male could expect nothing from it. He was expected to live to 61. He’d be dead before benefits kicked in. But as the 20th century led to the 21st, his life expectancy increased, and so did the burden of old people. Early Social Security participants paid in trivial amounts and got a very good return on their money. My mother, for example, only worked a few years at a low-paying job, from which she retired in 1986. She has been collecting Social Security ever since. “Don’t you feel guilty about getting so much more than you put in?” I teased her. “Not at all. That’s just the way the system works.” The way the system works would be illegal for a private annuity plan. It would be labeled a Ponzi scheme. Its promoters would be fined or put in prison. The money that goes into the system is not locked away in wealth-producing investments so that the cash will be available to finance the retiree’s pension. Instead, the contributions of new participants are used to pay benefits to old ones. This has the obvious and fatal flaw of all Ponzi schemes – eventually, there is not enough new money coming into the system to meet its obligations. This point was reached in the US system in 2010. Since then, the system has been running an annual deficit. You’ll see why in the chart showing the retirement-age population. Everybody knows Social Security, the Affordable Care Act, veterans’ pensions and other support programs are dangerously underfunded. What is not appreciated is the effect that this has on GDP growth and stock market prices. The crankshaft of age leads to the universal joint of social spending, which then goes to the axles of debt. Finally, where the rubber meets the road, the wheels turn more slowly. This is not just a problem for government finance. Companies make money by putting out products and selling them. But when people grow old or population growth declines, so do both supply and demand. Then, companies earn less money. Their shares are worth less. Personal incomes go down. Capital gains retreat. And tax revenues fall, too. When this happens in an economy that is already deeply in debt, it triggers a crisis. Article originally posted at Bonnerandpartners.com. by Sean Manning, DC – ICPA.org: The purpose of the immune system is to allow us to live in harmony with our environment. In fact, most of the trillions of foreign cells present within our body coexist peacefully, and in some cases even contribute to our health and well-being. In spite of this, chronic diseases such as allergies, asthma, and eczema, which were rare several decades ago, have risen exponentially, especially in children, quadrupling during the last two decades. The number of asthma sufferers in the United States is expected to double by the year 2020, affecting 1 in every 14 people and outnumbering the combined projected populations of New York and New Jersey. A growing number of scientists now believe that the routine measures taken to suppress and prevent infections actually weaken certain responses of a child’s immune system, allowing other less appropriate responses to operate without control. The reduction of childhood diseases has been heralded as one of medicine’s finest accomplishments, yet there are growing suspicions that infection intervention may be having an adverse effect; as childhood infections have decreased, chronic afflictions have increased. The immune system has two different aspects: the cell-mediated immune system and the humoral immune system. The cell-mediated immune system involves white blood cells and specialized immune cells which “eat” antigens, or foreign particles in the body. This helps drive the antigens out of the body causing symptoms such as skin rashes and the discharge of pus and mucous from the throat and lungs. The cell-mediated response is associated with the beneficial acute inflammatory illnesses of children, and represents the externalization, or driving out of the infection. The other aspect is called the humoral immune system whereby antibodies—special defense proteins—are produced to recognize and neutralize the antigen. It is a persistent humoral response that is associated with chronic allergic-type diseases. In order to be healthy, a child must keep a balance between the cell-mediated system and the humoral system, with the cell-mediated system predominating. The cell-mediated response is activated by the natural exposure to bacteria and viruses, in the way children are exposed by interacting with their friends. Through repeated exposure to infectious organisms a child develops a diverse repertoire of immune response patterns. It is the cellmediated response that protects a child from future illness, and develops the type of immune response we commonly associate with life-long immunity. The cell-mediated system suppresses the activity of the humoral system. The more active the cell-mediated activity is, the less active the humoral system is. However, if the cell-mediated system is not properly stimulated it does not fully develop, leading to an abnormally high production of humoral system antibodies. A humoral system that is continually engaged will overdevelop, creating a hypersensitive environment. When infants are exposed to germs early, their immune systems are pushed to go in an “infection-fighting direction.” Without this push, the immune system’s shift to infection fighting is delayed, and it becomes more likely to overreact to allergens—dust, mold, and other environmental factors that most people can tolerate. Early life experiences are believed to play a crucial role in the formation and patterning of a child’s immune system. Sensitization begins in utero and the first few months of life are crucial, for once cell-mediated/humoral imbalance occurs it tends to persist until specific measures are taken to shift the immune system back to equilibrium. There are several ways that pattern the reaction of the immune system toward either the cell-mediated response or the humoral response based on their timing and frequency. The important thing for a parent to understand is that their child’s immune system will react based on the way it has been patterned and programmed to react. If your child’s current immune capacity is poor, then it is possible to improve it by making better choices in the future. Hygiene There are numerous reports that suggest the excessive cleanliness practiced in modern society may be partly responsible for the increased incidence of allergic diseases. Repeated exposure while young to various types of bacteria and spores found in dirt, dust, and animal dander may actually protect against the development of allergies. A molecule known as an endotoxin naturally occurs in the outer membrane of bacteria. When the bacteria die the endotoxin is released into the environment. Children are exposed to these endotoxins by breathing them in, or by ingesting them when they put their hands or other objects into their mouths. The exposure to bacteria, viruses, and endotoxins is essential for the maturation of the immune system; less exposure leads to imbalanced immune responses. Children’s early exposure to allergens and infections prime their immune systems to resist them later on. Although children in daycare seem to get sick more often than other children do, this is not necessarily a bad thing. These colds and other infections may be giving their immature immune systems a health workout, resulting in a lower incidence of asthma. Children with the highest degree of personal hygiene are the most likely to develop eczema and wheezing between the ages of two and a half and three and a half years. In 2000, a study of 61 infants between the ages of 9–24 months found that the more house dust an infant was exposed to, the less likely that they would suffer allergies. Antibiotics Antibiotics given in the first year of life quadruple a child’s risk of developing asthma. Children given antibiotics after age one year are still one and a half times more likely to develop asthma than children not given antibiotics. What is particularly concerning is that every course of antibiotic treatments a child increases the occurrence of allergies and that treatment with broad spectrum antibiotics, such as streptomycin, tetracycline, and Cipro®, appear to be more likely to be associated with allergy development than is ordinary penicillin. Antibiotics enhance allergic reactions by sidestepping the normal immune system response. Whenever the immune system successfully deals with an infection it emerges from the experience stronger and better able to confront similar threats in the future. Through the process of developing and then conquering infection, the child gets rid of acquired toxins and poisons from the body and receives a boost to the immune system. If you always jump in with antibiotics at the first sign of infection you do not give the immune system a chance to grow stronger. Antibiotics also act nonspecifically, killing infectious bacteria as well as upsetting the normal gut flora. Substances that are introduced through the mouth are normally ignored by the humoral system. But, in order for this to occur, the normal bacteria in the intestines need to be present. Alterations in the normal intestinal bacteria levels, especially in infancy, allow food proteins and other particles to pass into the blood stream before they are broken down, where the body identifies them as a threat, contributing to a persistent humoral response and the development of allergic diseases. Vaccination Most childhood infections are caused by viruses, and thus do not respond to antibiotics, hence the development of our current vaccine program. Infections contracted naturally are ordinarily filtered through a series of immune system defenses. Naturally-contracted viral diseases stimulate a cell-mediated response, and it appears that because of this, early viral infections are protective against allergic diseases. When a vaccine is injected directly into the blood stream, it gains access to all of the major tissues and organs of the body without the body’s normal advantage of a total immune response. This results in only partial immunity, consequently the need for “booster” shots. Vaccines stimulate a humoral response so their contents are never discharged from the body, the way they would be if the disease were naturally contracted, leaving the body in a chronic state of sensitization. In a study of 448 children, 243 had been vaccinated against whooping cough. Of these, 10% had asthma compared to less than 2% of the 205 children in the non-vaccinated group, suggesting that the pertussis vaccination can increase the risk of developing asthma by more than five times. Dietary Fat Consumption Chicken nuggets, potato chips, and other fried foods, while convenient for parents, are relegating their children’s immune systems to behave badly. Another factor that has been identified as a contributor to the rise in allergic diseases is the increased consumption of omega-6 fatty acids and the decreased consumption of omega-3 fatty acids. It has been known for many years that individuals with allergic conditions have disproportionately high levels of omega- 6 fatty acids in their blood. Omega-6 fatty acids actually suppress the immune system and promote inflammation, and allergic responses are, by their very nature, inflammatory. Sources of omega-6 fatty acids are corn, cotton, soybean, peanut, safflower, and sunflower. Omega-6 fatty acids are also present in most animal products. Inversely, omega-3 fatty acids are known to enhance immunity, reduce inflammation, and protect the nervous system. Dietary omega-3 fatty acids have well documented immunological effects. Sources are flax, hemp, walnut, and cold water fatty fish, especially salmon. It is important to note though that the plant sources of omega-3 fatty acids are inadequate for infants and thus offer minimal benefit early in life. One study showed that children who regularly consumed oily fish were 74% less likely to develop asthma. Other studies show that fish oil supplementation is associated with improved asthma symptoms and reduced medication usage. The immune benefits of omega-3 fatty acids are likely greater during the critical stages of early immune development before the allergic responses are established, so it is recommended that women monitor their fatty acid intake during pregnancy and continue to do while nursing. Once the child is old enough there are omega-3 products designed specifically for children. Subluxation The focus of science has shifted from separate entities of the immune system and nervous system to an interactive immunology model. It is now understood that there is an intimate connection between the nervous system and the immune system, and that neurotransmitters can influence the activities of the immune system. In fact, nerve fibers physically link the nervous system and the immune system and there is a constant traffic of information that goes back and forth between the brain and the immune system. The sympathetic division of the nervous system is the part of the nervous system that reacts to stress. It is the “fight or flight” control center. The sympathetic division of the nervous system also regulates all aspects of immune function, and abnormal activity of the sympathetic nervous system contributes to the cause of conditions where a selection of humoral versus the cell-mediated response plays a role, including allergic reactions. Spinal movement influences the sympathetic nervous system. Changes to the relative position or movement in the spine interfere with the sympathetic nervous system causing the release of stress hormones and altering immune cell function. The result is suppression of the cell-mediated immune response, and in its absence an increase of the humoral response. Early stress and trauma is believed to play a profound role in the development of spinal dysfunction, or subluxation, causing immune imbalance. In his research, Gottfried Guttman M.D., found that spinal injury was present in more than 80% of the infants he examined shortly after birth, causing interference in sympathetic function. Tissue injury to the spine and surrounding soft tissue results in scar tissue deposition in the muscles, tendons, ligaments, and joints. This leads to decreased motion in the joints and surrounding tissues. Neurologic changes accompany the spinal insult. This leads to chemical changes and a general shift in the body to the stress response or the “fight or flight” response. Subluxation in the infant and child has been associated with stress experienced at birth, particularly as the result of interventions, and early falls or other traumas. Restoring proper function to the spine through chiropractic adjustments removes the interference in the nervous system shifting the body away from the sympathetic “alarm” response allowing the immune system to regain equilibrium and reducing hypersensitive reactions. In one study, 81 children under chiropractic care took part in a self-reported asthma impairment study. The children were assessed before and two months after chiropractic care using an asthma impairment questionnaire. Significantly lower impairment rating scores (improvement) was reported for 90.1% of subjects 60 days after chiropractic care in comparison to their pre-chiropractic scores. In addition, 30.9% of the children decreased their dosage of medication by an average of 66.5% while under chiropractic care. Twenty-four of the patients who reported asthma attacks 30-days prior to the study had significantly decreased attacks by an average of 44.9%. Our children are born with an immune system that is capable of operating against anything that threatens it. Our role as parents should be to support the natural responses of their body in every way that we can; in some cases, that means giving the body a chance to overcome an infection on its own with out antibiotics. In another case, it means providing the proper nutrients to restore inner balance. Most importantly, it means realizing that when a child’s nervous system has interference, the body still knows what it is supposed to do, but is simply unable to do it. Let’s start by removing the interference from the body and then getting out of its way—appreciating that the fever and congestion and vomiting are all part of the miracle that is our child’s immune system working properly, not a sign that their body is failing. The less we focus on the eradication of germs and the more emphasis we place on creating a strong, balanced body, free of subluxation, the better off our children will be. Article originally posted at ICPA.org.
Does an Oracle Have All the Answers? Flaws With the Current Teaching Model
Markets Restrain Bank Fraud; Central Banks Enable It
Brushing Up: Smile! You’re About to Change Toothpastes
How Free Markets Enhance Freedom of Choice
Fruits and Vegetables May Protect Kids From Asthma and Allergies
How Truly Free Markets Help the Poor
The Truth About Symptoms
The US Has Become a Nursing Home Economy
How We Are Making Our Children Sick
