In Defence of God

I think that I have reached the ‘anger’ stage of grief over the recent death of our former Prime Minister. He demonstratively cared for the ‘least of these’, and governed this nation responsibly through this time of economic uncertainty. The only way to logically and responsibly govern God’s creation is to cooperate with the Creator.

David attended Combermere School 1972. I followed in 1975. As a senior student, David would care for those in the surrounding community, even convincing the headmaster to allow the boys in the community to use the school’s facilities. During his political career, David meaningfully cared for his St John constituents, and shielded the reputation of his friends and political colleagues from damage, by choosing to be the lighting rod that attracted some of the most damaging political invective. Having been the recipient of such public invective once, for simply suggesting that higher professional standards should be reclaimed by the public sector, I cannot imagine the cumulative effect of receiving it for 14 years. Yet he willingly accepted it, and did not appear to reciprocate.

I do not believe that David should have died from cancer at 48 years old, but he did. Following his death, every commentator that I have heard has accused our loving heavenly Father of taking our Prime Minister. I do not think that such accusations are fair.

It may be too late for me

Despite my change in eating habits (see my last article for details), I must face the possibility that it may be too late for me. Whenever I fall off of the proverbial wagon, and eat what I should not, then I feel the familiar pain in my head and I am reminded that my death is just around the corner. I have accepted that I may succumb to crippling diabetes, chronic heart disease, or painful cancer, because I have poisoned my body for decades. Why would I do such a stupid thing? I did so in ignorance – just like you probably did. Let me explain.

Food science is a discipline that should never have been allowed to leave the universities, because it lacked sufficient knowledge about food, and its complex interaction with our bodies, to make conclusive pronouncements. These pronouncements have influenced the manufacture of processed foods with disastrous, including fatal results for mankind.

Few sought to verify the assumptions upon which food scientists based their most damaging conclusive statements. The institutions that were responsible for protecting consumers from harmful food products chose to protect the food scientists from criticism, by attributing the consumers’ ill-health and deaths to factors other than the obvious culprits.

Did God take me?

When I go to the great beyond, the religious leader(s) conducting my funeral event may try to comfort those in attendance by claiming that God took me. While I yet have control over my faculties, let me declare that unless you see a chariot of fire descend from the heavens to take me home, or some other dramatic exit, then do not repeat such nonsense. God took Enoch, Elijah and Moses. God gave me a body, but I poisoned it with a steady diet of processed products over the past 40 years, and I would have simply reaped the consequences of my actions. God will receive me, for I am His, but He did not take me (unless you see the blazing chariot as previously described), rather, I was deceived into believing that carefully disguised poison was food.

One example should suffice. People have been eating whole foods and animal products for thousands of years. Approximately a century ago, food scientists claimed that butter was bad for us and synthetic margarine, loaded with the artery clogging, and potentially cancer and diabetes producing trans-fat, was a healthy alternative. The food processors did not verify any of the incorrect assumptions on which food scientists based their dangerous claims. Neither did the government regulatory agencies. So the supermarkets sold this poison as food.

I have learned, albeit too late, that government regulators and supermarkets do not acknowledge their ‘gate-keeper’ responsibility to protect us from harmful ‘foods’; and the medical community does not protect us from the food scientists’ irresponsible claims. Actually, the only beneficiaries for feeding us disguised poison appear to be:

  • Food scientists, who remain employed to make further claims when their previous ones are inevitably found to be false;
  • Food manufacturers and supermarket owners, who profit by deceiving consumers that they are offering them healthy products;
  • Doctors, who have a steady supply of clients to treat, rather than cure; and
  • Religious leaders who mislead the bereaved by blaming God rather than the steady diet of poison sold by the supermarket, approved by the Government, and manufactured by greedy individuals who fund the food scientists’ research that sanction their products.

When it is my time to go, please do not blame my Lord. We should accept our basic responsibility of  maintaining our bodies in good health.

So what can you do? As a rule of thumb, if your ‘food’ packaging lists ‘high fructose corn syrup’, or ‘partially hydrogenated oil’ as an ingredient, then either toss the product it in the garbage and ‘go and sin no more’, or put your house in order. I urge you to follow the suggestions in ‘Principles of Good Health’ – the information is free, but the decision to eat responsibly requires fortitude, and the action to carry it out requires discipline. It is now up to you.



4 responses to “In Defence of God

  1. C’mon, man, that isn’t fair.

    Don’t demonise doctors. Believe you me, if we knew a cure, we’d be using it.

    What you are saying makes as much sense as saying that police benefit from crime because it gives them job security. The statement carries the shadow of truth but not the substance of it.

  2. Hi Doc:

    Thank you for comparing the responsibilities of doctors and the police. Allow me to analyse these responsibilities further.

    The police are trained to help communities maintain order. The Police carry out their responsibilities by proactively deploying personnel in various locations in order to reduce the risk of disorderly incidents. When an incident occurs, then the police react by carrying out investigations, arresting any accused persons, and providing credible evidence to the prosecutors.

    Doctors are trained to help communities maintain good health. They can proactively identify substances that are harmful if inhaled, ingested, and/or contacted with skin. If harm is realised, then they can react by, inter alia, investigating the source of the ailment, diagnosing the condition, and prescribing a form of treatment.

    The difference between police and doctors are that the police appear to apply equal effort to their proactive and reactive responsibilities, while doctors appear to be active mainly in their reaction responsibilities.

    Since you appear to be a doctor, please let me know when you have proactively warned us about the damaging effects of margarine, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil, and high fructose corn syrup.


    p.s. The obvious proactive action is to avoid the poison in the first place, and use whole foods. For those currently on a steady diet of poison, the obvious cure is to stop ingesting the poison immediately, and start eating actual food.

  3. The best way to ensure you are eating real food is to grow (and raise) your own.
    A lot of fresh fruit and veg today lacks nutrients they are supposed to have. And though plants can synthesize vitamins, unfortunately they cannot do the same with minerals. If the minerals aren’t in the soil, then it definitely cannot get into the plant. If it’s not present in the plant, then it’s just unavailable for our benefit (especially vegans and vegetarians).

    Treat mineral depleted soils and grow your own foods, as far as you can. Grenville, I hope you have researched the ideas of colonic irrigation and fasting. It may not be too late.

  4. Hi Trini:

    Thank you for your advice. Colonic irrigation and fasting? – been there, done that.

    I suspect that after decades of damage, I simply need to manage the quality of what I injest. Perhaps I do need to plant my own food.


You are encouraged to present your opinion.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s