Healing Ranges Chart in USBA (RBTI)
Returning healthcare back to individuals, families and neighborhoods
Chapter Seven in two parts, Part one of two
My best guess how to prevent all future pandemics. What needs to be learned.
Serializing Befriending Your Biology; Physical Health from the Inside Out. Available on Kindle now. USBA stands for “urine-saliva biomarker testing,” a new name given to the original method of Dr. Carey Reams.
A Range numbers: Carbs: 1.5 — Saliva pH 6.40 — Urine pH 6.40 — Salts 6–7C — Cell Debris .04M — Nitrate nitrogen 3 — Amonium nitrogen 3
In the 1850s, the causes of physical symptoms and diseases were more UNknown than known. All that was known for sure by early medical doctors was five-sensory observations of diseased lie tissue; and, observations of diseased tissue and organs from corpses. Add to this, a large fraction of the general public lacked even a sixth grade education.
Doctors following Pasteur and Patent Medicine companies — Big Pharma in the time period of the US Civil War — with the Germ Theory of Pathology, uncovered many causative factors and effected some cures. To the uneducated — all but a few college educated persons — doctors were “gods” and worked “magical cures” — sometimes.
Two hundred years later, in the 2080s, “self-connection” and “Nature’s Health Plan, have filled the void vacated by over-worship of Old Doctors and Old Medicine. What determines individual success at meeting and overcoming health challenges now?
- Your self-connection,
- your willingness to heal,
- your self-discipline,
- your cusomized diet-drink-supplement program; and
- testing-consultation with a more experienced practitioner.
Between 1850–1931 no reliable biomarker definition of optimal health existed. In 1931 Reams’ innovated his “formula for perfect health.” Yet, knowledge of his workable health definition remained virtually unknown until around 1970. Between 1970 and Reams’ passing in 1985, thru retreats and classes, his biomarker definition of optimal health was a “fringe” topic, seriously attended to and studied by only handfuls of dedicated doctors and students of health.
With Reams’ contributions, three introductory, journalistic books were produced:
- Choose Life or Death (1977) Carey A. Reams and Cliff Dudley
- No Time to Die (1980) Joanne Fontenot, and
- Health Guide for Survival (1976) Salem Kirban.
USBA students are free to read these; yet, won’t find them in your syllabus. Why? Your Human Nutrition text by Beddoe and class materials supercede these books aimed more at a general audience.
Between 1985 and 2042, Reams’ biomarker definition of optimal health remained virtually unknown in the mainstream, kept alive by only a tiny, yet worldwide, network of practitioners, clients and enthusiasts.
Since 2042 and then the first public Healthcare Colleges later in the 2040s, Reams’ workable biomarker definition of optimal physical health has been given a worldwide stage, for those looking for health. Since the 2050s, mainstream health literature and PubMed has seen a constant stream of news and published papers expanding our knowledge-base of health defined by simple biomarkers. By 2085, it was possible to speak of worldwide public awareness of Reams’ health definition. By 2090 use of USBA (RBTI) testing was spreading as standard procedure in patient intake, across multiple modes of healthcare.
What if…
…there was a visual aid, a chart, showing the range of numerical values representing optimal wellness of our internal, liquid-fluid terrain? Would you be interested?
What if a chart existed of simple, non-invasive biomarkers, signifying optimal digesting, assimilating, manifesting vitality and waste elimination? How interested would you be?
What if anyone with a fresh test-result-number array; plus, a few of their prior arrays, could compare their new numbers to a chart and easily tell in which direction their metabolic processes were trending?
What if optimal wellness of our internal, liquid-fluid terrain defined our body’s potential for vitality and physical basis for emotional optimism? Would this interest you?
What if a chart existed showing an A Range representing your body having the optimal internal resources with which to re-build, replace old cells with new cells? With B, C, D and E ranges representing less well-ordered metabolic patterning? Well, here it is:
dg- © Beddoe estate. Beddoe range zone chart. Two attempts requesting permission to reprint a low-res version have gone unanswered.
Q: Why is a visual chart so useful? Why not a simple list of healthy values?
A: This has to do with the genius of sight. Our visual sense enables directionality more and much better than any other sensory intelligence. Visual aids enable and empower us to perceive how close or far away a given number is to desired target.
Since getting to the A Range for many people involves bringing some values up and some down, a visual aid presents this usefully. This is the genius of many graph and chart teaching tactics.
It’s possible to compare your latest test-result-numbers to this chart and learn how close or far away your metabolism is disturbed-distorted from optimal physical wellness.
Which would you rather have?
The names of all your illnesses? Or a picture of where your metabolism is, compared to the health you wish to have?
Which one of these two above offers you more clear Therapeutic Direction?
Conditions diagnosed (named) by other licensed professionals, are not ignored in USBA. A diagnosed disease is often handy short-code for talking about a case. However, in terms of Therapeutic Direction, nothing so far beats a Range Zone Chart. Any patron can see for themselves if their latest test values are trending towards or away from wellness of their Internal Living Waters.
Note ~ The Zone part of the Chart is not addressed in this text. It is addressed in your lab classes.
Old Medicine paper patient charts
Q: In Old Medicine, didn’t a patient’s medical chart collect and sort various test results into a “picture” of the client’s metabolic condition, strengths, weaknesses and challenges?
A: Yes, they did. However, have you ever seen and read thru an all-paper medical records chart? It consists of:
- demographics,
- vital signs,
- diagnoses,
- medications,
- treatment plans,
- progress notes,
- problems,
- immunization dates,
- allergies,
- radiology images,
- laboratory and test results, not to mention…
Chart notes include admission notes, on-service notes, progress notes (SOAP notes), preoperative notes, operative notes, postoperative notes, procedure notes, delivery notes, postpartum notes, and discharge notes. If all paper, it can be huge, several folders full, many inches thick.
Which would you rather have? A Range and Zone Chart showing if your metabolic indicators were bettering or worsening; or, a large paper chart where you might, or might not, find the info you are looking for easily?
Of course the answer in some cases is going to be BOTH. Both are valuable. Still, for simple cases and for most people in generally good health, the latest USBA number array compared to the A Range provides more Therapeutic Direction more easily.
Q: Before USBA number arrays, how did doctors manage with charts alone?
A: Because the quantity of information is overwhelming, a doctor looking at a large medical chart for the first time tends to go to two things: the diagnosis and the prognosis. Diagnosis tells him what earlier professionals believe is the pathology. Prognosis tells him what earlier professionals believe is the patient’s chances of recovery and in what time frame.
Before USBA number arrays, other than diagnosis and prognosis, charts often had no clear overview equally useful to each and every new specialist.
Notice in the above, Old Medicine charts reference no definition of optimal health. Is a diagnosis and prognosis useful to cut thru all the extraneous information? You bet. Are vital signs useful to see if the patient is close to death or not? You bet.
Is this as valuable as a wall chart defining optimal function; and, how far away from optimal the patient is today? For most cases, no.
We allow you to decide which is more beneficial to a sick person in your care:
Let’s also ask, which of the two methods above are more respectful and cooperative-collaborative with the body’s own ability to heal?
We allow you to decide.
Q: Could Old Medicine have gradually changed over to USBA?
A: Probably not. Why? Because pathology was the primary focus of Old Medicine. Very rarely did Old Medicine recommend nutritional support. If they did, the products often had refined sugar, artificial sugar and non-nutritional additives in the products.
A sign Old Medicine was unlikely to “become enlightened” was the number of Old Medicine hospitals and clinics with Farmers Market in the parking lot on weekends or across the street. From 1900 until the 2040s, this number was exactly one (1): Salinas Valley Memorial Healthcare System Certified Farmers’ Market — https://www.everyonesharvest.org/salinas-valley-memorial-healthcare-system-certified-farmers-market/
Q: Why couldn’t Old Medicine change? Why couln’t it evolve towards defining health thru a few well-chosen biomarkers?
A: Answering this takes us outside of Medicine, to the study of “Homo-Self-destructivus.” This is a college-level study of how and why Western males, in the period 1750–2050 became so exclusively one-sided, competition and domination-obsessed, they were ready, willing, able and wanting to crash and burn SpaceShip Earth to make a buck. The study of the now-extinct “Homo-Self-destructivus” was instituted by the first Iain McGilchrist Chair of curriculum at the Royal Society of Arts in London, UK.
dg-Homo-Self-destructivus
What has changed since the end of Homo-Self-destructivus?
- An inclusive conceiving of Nature’s Health Plan,
- How each human is charged with managing the quality of their lymph,
- A conceiving of the body as the hero, not the doctor, not the hospital,
- A chart of easily measured values showing optimal lymph wellness; and
- A cheap, easy client-centered — not technology-centered — method for assessing a patron’s metabolic condition, as often as useful.
Five ranges A, B, C, D, E
A Range represents optimal health. C, D, E Ranges indicate least healthy metabolic patterns.
A Range shows the optimal healing numbers. However individuals moving from D Range to C Range are healing, as are individuals moving from C Range to B Range.
Comparing your latest set of numbers to this chart shows if your current diet-lifestyle is helping you improve — or not. This empowers you making better choices about what you put into your mouth.
If you are on a diet you like, believing it benefits you, a fresh number array, will inform you how helpful your diet is. The measure will be relative to what your body needs to come into, and remain in your Healing Zone.
Range and Zone Chart is NOT a method
The Chart is not a method. It’s a visual aid guiding viewers to which diet-drink-lifestyle interventions will be be beneficial next. When you compare your number array, it shows you which numbers need to change for you to improve. The Chart is only a visual aid to:
- Facilitate consultant and patron perception of current metabolic conditions and “distance” from A Range, and
- Facilitate and motivate patrons to “stay the course” on their diet-drink-supplement “homework.”
The map is not the territory; and, test-result numbers only support the method. What is the method?
- Being curious about your test-result numbers,
- Each person’s willingness to heal,
- Scheduling a USBA testing appointment,
- Cooperating with food-drink instructions between tests,
- Listening to the interpretation of your latest numbers,
- Actively participating in the brainstorm around which diet-drink-supplement experiments should be priority now,
- Set a date for your next testing appointment at a mutually agreed-on interval,
- Self-connection and self-discipline to make an effort to consistently follow your latest set of recommendations (homework),
- Make a written note of any and all cravings. These are often the most useful information for your next visit.
