Ludicrous Lingo

Last updated on June 16, 2022

My primary care doctor retired last year. I liked him for the most part. He was an old fart who’d been practicing medicine since the late sixties, and he had plenty of horse sense. He was strictly by-the-book, don’t get me wrong. It’s just that his book was written a long time ago, back before the medicine game got weird, back before doctors became pill-pushing ne’er-do-wells.

One example: In my last visit with him, just before he retired, he asked me about the old Covid shot. He wanted to know if I’d had mine. I told him no. Then he asked me (politely, mind you) if I’d care to share with him why that was so. I told him that I thought the whole Covid thing was a scam. He went silent for a moment and gave me a penetrating look, with one raised, grey, woolly eyebrow. During the pause, I took the opportunity to ask him if he had received his Covid shot. (Why the hell not?)

“Actually, no, I haven’t been jabbed for Covid-19,” he replied.

“Just out of curiosity,” I asked, “why not?”

“Personal and professional reasons,” he said flatly, as if reading a prepared statement.

I decided not to press on that. But I did press a little on something else. “Can we take these masks off?” I asked.

“Don’t see why not.” He gave me another penetrating look as he removed his mask and I removed mine.

“Last of the Mohicans,” he added with a wink.

What’s up, Doc?

I’m in a lurch now, in need of a new doctor.

I guess. I mean, it seems like a good thing to have a go-to relationship with a medical professional, right?

If I had my pick, I’d love to find another old-timer. Someone whose head is screwed on fairly straight. I had a go with someone a couple weeks ago, did the new-patient uptake / check-up visit thing.

Doc #2 is old-fartish enough to suit me just fine. But, unfortunately, he’s old in a Bernie Sanders kind of way. What I mean is this: I get the distinct feeling that this new doc would prefer to practice in Canada, trusts 100% in the Powers That Be, writes a shit-ton of prescriptions that he actually believes in, and sleeps like a baby at night while the whole world goes to hell in a bucket. I bet this new doc weaseled his way out of Vietnam.

Why do I think this, you ask? Allow me to share a snippet from our recent conversation.

“What’s up, doc?” I asked, in an attempt to break the ice with a common-ground reference.

“Can you please pull your mask up over your nose?” he replied.

“Umm. I was hoping we could go ahead and take these things off,” I replied.

“Take them off?!”

“Yeah. Aren’t masks just a formality at this point? I mean, we’re kind of done with them now, right?” I asked.

“Please pull your mask up over your nose.” He said this without blinking or winking or anything else. He was being serious.

Needless to say: I don’t think I’ll be going back to this quack any time soon.

Creepy Newspeak

It turns out that old Doc Sanders ran the most extensive blood panel that I’ve ever had done on me in my whole life. I figure he must have been looking pretty hard for something to get onto me about, something to sink his creepy old hooks into. I’ll never know, since I don’t plan on going back to him.

The blood test results were emailed to me, strange but true. It feels a little uncomfortable to me to have any kind of information about my biological being converted into a bunch of ones and zeros and then echoed back at me via email. But OK. At least I got something to look over, something to study, on my own, in advance of any kind of Follow-up Visit. I can’t really complain about that aspect.

But here’s something: In the multi-page write-up there were a number of blood tests that I’ve never, ever heard of before. So, of course, I just had to look them up. You know me. I dig digging in.

A bunch of the unknown-to-me tests related to this or that hormone level. And boy, oh boy, did I ever get a big, fat surprise when I looked them up on the handy-dandy interweb.

Here’s one example: When I did a web search for the Luteinizing Hormone (LH) blood test – just one of the many line items in my lab write-up – I was able to get the gist of it, able to learn the basics of what it means. However, I also stumbled upon a load of weird language that got my fur up and inspired me to write this article.

For example, WebMD currently [as of today, May 31, 2022] displays a pretty clear description of the LH test. It says, in part:

LH helps your reproductive system: specifically, a woman’s ovaries and a man’s testes. It’s also called lutropin and interstitial cell stimulating hormone. It’s made in your pituitary gland, which is about the size of a pea and sits just behind your nose.

It also says that there are…

different reasons you might get a luteinizing hormone test, and that these can differ depending on your sex and sometimes, your age.

It goes on to detail some of these reasons in descriptive sub-sections related specifically to Women, Men, and Children.

Makes sense to me. Thanks, WebMD!

But here’s where things get weird. If we happen to take a gander at what the Cleveland Clinic website currently says about the LH test [again, as of today, May 31, 2022], we find something … well … a little different. It says, in part:

Think of LH as a chemical agitator that spurs your reproductive system to action. Your sex organs produce either steroids or hormones (progesterone, testosterone) in response to LH.

•  In the pituitary of people designated female at birth (DFAB), LH is released only in the second part of the menstrual cycle. That is, after an initial surge causes the release of an egg (ovulation), LH is released at a constant pace for two weeks. This stimulates ovarian progesterone production.

•  In the pituitary of people designated male at birth (DMAB), LH is released at a constant pace over time and testosterone is produced at a constant level, as well.

Luteinizing hormone in women or DFAB

LH stimulates changes in your ovaries that maintain your menstrual cycle and support pregnancy. LH causes these changes in people designated female at birth (DFAB), including cisgender women and some transgender men and nonbinary people with vaginas.

Luteinizing hormone in men or DMAB

LH stimulates your testes to make testosterone, a hormone your body needs to produce sperm. Testosterone is also responsible for secondary sex characteristics, like a deeper voice and more body hair and muscle mass. LH causes testosterone release in people designated male at birth (DMAB), including cisgender men and some transgender women and nonbinary people with penises.

Love Language

Is it just me, or does this language sound a little nutty? No pun intended.

Here are some snippets that I find particularly odd:

“…LH as a chemical agitator…”

people designated female at birth (DFAB) / people designated male at birth (DMAB)

cisgender women / cisgender men

transgender men / transgender women

“nonbinary people with vaginas / nonbinary people with penises

Beyond the ha-ha nuttiness of it all, I find this language to be, well … disturbing. I mean, it worries me to think that people are getting exposed to this nonsense while innocently searching for authoritative medical information.

I wonder if anyone else feels the same. I wonder who injected this weirdness into the Cleveland Clinic’s vernacular. I wonder who reviewed and approved this for their website.

Was Doc Sanders involved?

Phil’s Two Cents

My wife asked me why I give a damn about any of this. It’s a valid question. She also challenged me to take a minute or two to ask myself if I’m harboring any secret prejudices against guys who want to get sexual with other guys and/or girls who want to get sexual with other girls. It’s a valid challenge.

Here’s the honest truth: I don’t give a rip about what individual people desire or do. I mean this in a general sense, not just sexually. What I do give a rip about is coercion, the act of imposing someone’s will upon other people who are not capable of providing consent.

To me, the language cited above reeks of coercion. I don’t believe for a second that this terminology is the result of grassroots movements aimed at elevating personal freedom and equality. I think the above language is top-down Newspeak. I think it’s an expression of the Will of the State. And I feel sorry for all those who are falling for it, especially those who are struggling with issues relate to their self-worth.

If someone is feeling so bad about themselves spiritually or emotionally that they wish to reject their bodily container in this lifetime, the last thing they need is State-issued name tags and platitudes.

If you think I’m off my rocker for calling this out, I respectfully offer the following from MedicineNet [as of today, May 31, 2022], which says, in part:

What are the 4 genders? / What are the 7 other genders?

The 4 genders are masculine, feminine, neuter and common. But many people refuse to be classified as male or female, either because they do not identify themselves as male or female or because they are transitioning to the opposite gender.

There are about a dozen broad categories of gender, which include: Agender (a person who does not have a gender); Cisgender (a person who believes there is such a thing as biological sex); Genderfluid (a person who does not identify as male or female, but rather as one or the other depending on the day); Genderqueer (a person who may identify as male or female, as between or beyond genders, or as a mix of the two); Intersex: (a person who is born with chromosomes, genitalia, and/or secondary sexual characteristics that contradict the traditional definition of a male or female body); Gender nonconforming (a person who either by nature or by choice does not conform to gender-based expectations of society); Transgender (a person whose gender identity differs from the one assigned to their physical sex).

So there are more than a dozen genders now? That’s a news nugget. And an obvious crock.

For me, it’s pretty simple: I’m not buying what they’re trying to sell here. This feels like a load of top-down bullshit. Although, I have to admit that I like the definitions of both “Cisgender” and “Gender nonconforming.” I mean the definitions, not the labels. But I’m going to kick both these labels to the curb, because they’re labels.

Sorry all, but labels seem fundamentally divisive and restrictive to me. And those who vehemently choose to proclaim and defend any labels that have been bestowed upon them from On-High – or worse, choose to absorb a label into their personal identity – seem, to me, to be lost somewhere in deep woods.

If this notion of top-down labeling agendas doesn’t quite resonate, I respectfully point to Goal #5 in the following, UN info-graphic. This comes to us from our good friends at the United Nations. So we’re all clear, that’s pretty close the top of the Pyramid, where the Big Eyeball sits. And I’m going to wager that it’s directly related to the gender-related lingo up above.

Make no mistake: The UN is a collective cesspool that delights in scheming up new ways to enslave humanity. Energy Harvesting is their #1 game, plain and simple. Their mission in not to “serve humanity” in a straight-forward sense, but rather to “serve humanity” in a different, on-a-dinner-plate sense.

I’d say it’s worth having a hard look at all 17 of the UN’s creepy “goals to transform our world.” What weirdness do you think might be lurking just below the surface of these seemingly benign and noble agendas?

In what ways do you see movement toward these goals playing out in everyday, local occurrences and in everyday talk from various “social planners” and “experts?” In what ways are we blindly accepting and repeating a load of creepy labels that, ultimately, serve to undermine our sovereign identities and sense of personal worth, our beautiful and unique physical manifestations of spirit?

– “Phil”

Be First to Comment

    Leave a Reply