Do you think it has become increasingly difficult to maintain good health in America in 2025? Does it ever feel as if the natural or traditional approaches to wellness — such as using holistic medicine, consuming raw milk, eating chemical-free foods, and toxin-free living — are the most regulated, while allopathic (Western) medicine, highly processed foods, and synthetic chemicals are the easiest to access?
If so, you are not alone. And no, you are not crazy — despite what mainstream narratives might suggest. Some of us simply prefer to take responsibility for our own health, to support our bodies with natural foods, pursue holistic treatments, avoid unnecessary pharmaceutical interventions, and raise our children with medical autonomy.
This is not “anti-science,” it is simply common sense.
Public distrust in allopathic medicine is not a fringe phenomenon. Positive sentiment has been declining for years, but the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated that decline dramatically. According to a recent JAMA Network Open study, public trust in physicians and hospitals fell from over 71% in 2020 to roughly 40% by early 2024. The two primary reasons for this loss of trust were “financial motives over patient care,” which can be blamed on the COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and those that pushed them, and “poor quality of care or negligence,” which is a direct result of introducing “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion”-style thinking and hiring practices to the medical industry.
Somewhere along the way, Western medicine — which, in the grand scheme of human history, is new, only spanning a few generations — came to be labeled “traditional.” Meanwhile, “root-cause medicine,” used globally for centuries, was pushed to the margins. While Western medicine has added a lot of innovative forms of treating illnesses and injuries, we cannot ignore that the medical industrial complex is a multi-trillion-dollar industry that generates billions of dollars in revenue each year. This seems to be a clear incentive for some of the oldest forms of medicine known to man to be dismissed as conspiratorial, unscientific, or even “hocus pocus.”
Even in Idaho, many holistic practices require specialized permits, exemptions, or compliance with complex regulations. Something as basic as drinking raw milk can put families or farmers into a maze of legal requirements. Natural modalities are regulated, and holistic practitioners arguably face more oversight (and more ridicule) than their allopathic counterparts.
This issue fundamentally boils down to people demanding sovereignty over their food, their bodies, and their health. The people have a fundamental right to autonomy. We must defend it.
Additionally, this is a matter of informed consent — the principle that every individual has the right to question, understand, and ultimately decide what goes into their body and what treatments they pursue. This idea is a deeply moral one, grounded in personal autonomy and the belief that individuals — not government or institutions — are best positioned to make decisions for their own well-being.
The Founders argued that legitimate government arises from the consent of the governed, and that personal liberty — especially bodily autonomy and property rights — is the cornerstone of a free society. While it is safe to say they could not have predicted the contemporary medical industrial complex, they understood well that centralized power should never override individual judgment in matters of personal life, family, and self-governance.
In recent years, Idahoans have faced a series of legislative and regulatory battles that directly impact our ability to live naturally and independently. These include: favoring industrial agriculture and large corporations, continued regulation of certain raw products, and regulatory pressure on holistic practitioners.
As recently as the 2025 legislative session, House Bill 303 was introduced to create a “liability shield for pesticide and herbicide manufacturers and sellers,” provided there is a government-mandated warning on the label. This legislation worked to shield industrial producers from accountability for health issues arising from their products. When did we start caring about corporations over consumers?
Despite Idaho’s strong agricultural roots, raw milk access remains a political flashpoint, requiring legal gymnastics to buy and sell. Families who prefer raw dairy must navigate a complicated set of regulations to sell their products.
Holistic practitioners routinely face barriers not applied to allopathic medical systems. Idahoans seeking natural care often have fewer options, not because the community lacks practitioners, but because regulations make it harder for them to operate.
The fight for health freedom is the fight for basic liberty. In order to have a thriving state, we must have a healthy populace. This all starts with policies that prioritize the individual's right to pursue health, autonomy, and well-being above the interests of Big Pharma and government control. The right to self-governance over one’s body is a non-negotiable principle, and it is one we are prepared to defend.
It should not be this difficult to be healthy in Idaho.
We can do better. We must do better.
