Natural remedies "seldom effective"

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


People do not and have not ever lived entirely alone. We are pack animals like so many others.

You seem to be unable to understand that this is just one of many directions we could have taken with our alleged intelligence. We *could* do what's right for everyone. We *could* do what's right for our planet. We *could* forget the idiotic concept of money and ownership. Those are imaginary things in any case! This is what I mean, and what you are unable to comprehend. Our cleverness as a species is very, very badly applied. We have failed. Now it's time to clean up the mess and start doing things right.

Do you understand now or shall I draw you a 3D model? I honestly hope you're deliberately obtuse.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

People do not and have not ever lived entirely alone. We are pack animals like so many others.

This is a misnomer. Everyone is alone and isolated on this little island we call "self" or "identity."

Do I really exist? Or am I merely a sequence of characters generated as part of some subconscious schizophrenic projection of yours?

This is why I say reality is subjective in nature. Ultimately, one must come to an understanding of what they accept to be real and what they accept to be perceptive delusion. Everyone forms their own unique and personal concepts of reality and priorities.

In that respect, we are all alone. We talk, create art, music, and other forms of expression in an attempt to bridge the gap between the concept of self identity... but the one true reality is that we can never truly know the heart and soul of another. Not here, at least (arguably, the prospect of it being possible in an "after life" of some variety has potential - it's a comforting thought, at least).

And we die alone.

You seem to be unable to understand that this is just one of many directions we could have taken with our alleged intelligence.

Why must it be only one direction?

We *could* do what's right for everyone.

That's a very interesting standpoint to take.

What is right for everyone?

Or have you really given that much thought?

If you attempt to apply a one-size-fits-all "right for everyone" to the issue... I doubt you'll find that the one size is actually capable of fitting everyone. In which case... the premise of there being a single act that is "right for everyone" is logically flawed.

If you attempt to apply individualized "right for everyone" concepts... well... what if what is right for me ends up being wrong for someone else?

Now - you can assert that what is "really right for me" is what would "really be right for everyone" - and that if it isn't, then I am some kind of problem.... but you're establishing a dangerous precedent, there, and paving the way for "behavioral cleansing" ... also known as witch-hunts.

After all... if "they" didn't exist, then it would be far easier to do what was right for everyone.

We *could* do what's right for our planet.

There's another interesting one.

What is right for our planet? The ecology and even mineralogy of the planet have evolved alongside the plant and animal life. The pollution of hard-shelled creatures fuels the calcium-rich limestone and sand-stone deposits that make coral reefs possible today.

I think it's safe to say that our planet will one-up us, regardless of what we do. Life is a force well beyond our control. We simply have the illusion of control because we realize that our participation is a voluntary privilege.

We *could* forget the idiotic concept of money and ownership. Those are imaginary things in any case!

The concept of bartering is present in any social animal to some degree or another. Further, it is known that many animals can and will exploit the labor/efforts of another. Hell - there are entire species that do nothing but go around stealing # from others (birds are particularly known for this).

The system of money attempts to present a unified bartering medium that is more fluid.

Communism works on the tribal level, where each individual is known and his/her contribution can be personally felt by those who interact with him/her most. It falls apart on larger scales where people can slack off at the expense of others.

We could try to get rid of the idiotic concepts of greed and sloth... but to do that, we'll need to create a hive-mind self-replicating race of machines to exterminate and replace us.

This is what I mean, and what you are unable to comprehend. Our cleverness as a species is very, very badly applied. We have failed. Now it's time to clean up the mess and start doing things right.

You keep asserting this...

But have yet to even back it up with some kind of logic. You're not even using circular logic, here.... just... "Meh, humans suck. We need to do better than what we are doing, now."

Generally speaking... that's the goal of anyone looking to make a product or service.... make someone's life better - offer something that reduces the time needed to perform certain actions... if you want get really down and dirty with the nuts and bolts of human endeavors - it all revolves around the limited time in a day that we have. Even if we were to eliminate age-related death, it would come down to how much time we had that we didn't have to sleep/eat.

Do you understand now or shall I draw you a 3D model? I honestly hope you're deliberately obtuse.

There's really not much to understand.

reply to post by Aim64C


Your reply shows that you know nothing about me whatsoever. You've never read anything I've ever written here. You, as stated above, make a lot of (erroneous) assumptions.

Know your audience.

P.s. A misnomer is a "wrong name" given to something, not a misconception. Take the comment as it was meant in context and stop trying to be clever. You tripped yourself up badly and embarrassed yourself there, kid.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

Your reply shows that you know nothing about me whatsoever. You've never read anything I've ever written here. You, as stated above, make a lot of (erroneous) assumptions.

That's fine. I made the presumptions knowing full well what they were, and that they stood a high probability of error.

Except that doesn't really detract from what I said, in the slightest.

Know your audience.

They're a pretty diverse group, although one can expect them to be more relegated to the fringe elements around these parts.

P.s. A misnomer is a "wrong name" given to something, not a misconception.

If you wanted to argue semantics, applying the wrong name to something is applying the wrong concept, as well. But this has been noted and filed away for future use.

Take the comment as it was meant in context and stop trying to be clever. You tripped yourself up badly and embarrassed yourself there, kid.

Except I wasn't trying to be clever.

I was being real with you. Across the board.

I can't help but realize you haven't answered a single of my challenges to your logic or assertions.

You list the desired outcome as a solution to a problem. That's simply not the way the world works.

It's like the old fable/parable/whatever.... a bunch of mice are sitting around and deliberating how to deal with the cat. A young mouse speaks up, suggesting that a bell be placed on the cat so that mice could hear the cat approaching and escape. This is met with great applause and joy amongst the crowd of mice until an older mouse clears his throat and says: "Indeed, a brilliant idea. Who is going to put the bell on the cat?"

While I cannot elevate myself to the status of rodent elder - I can say that I have asked you, repeatedly, just how you plan to 'bell the cat.'

Now, I'll afford you a little bit of advice. You're not going to be able to will yourself into winning this one. Unless you actually intend to put something on the line for discussion, I've already sufficiently dismantled your standpoint.

But I'm more than happy to receive further ad-hominem attacks. I enjoy a good round of # talking, if you haven't figured that out, already.

reply to post by Aim64C




Unless there is something of substance coming from this, let's just not, okay? It's really just not interesting. If there's nothing substantial in your next reply, I'm done here.

Jeez....

So, it's settled then.

Few natural remedies actually work. Thanks to the OP for a great thread.

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

People do not and have not ever lived entirely alone. We are pack animals like so many others.

You seem to be unable to understand that this is just one of many directions we could have taken with our alleged intelligence. We *could* do what's right for everyone.

Who gets to decide that? Republicans or Democrats? Chinese Commmunist Party? an Ayatollah? The Pope?

We *could* do what's right for our planet.

Aim has covered that adequately IMO.

We *could* forget the idiotic concept of money and ownership. Those are imaginary things in any case!

And therefore you own nothing and happily take what you want and brush off the objections of others, wafting holistically through the legal system without a care in hte world??

This is what I mean, and what you are unable to comprehend.

O think I comprehend it perfectly - it is fanciful drivel - "warm fuzzy" rhetoric that doesn't have to bother with addressing the reality of how people exist in a real world

The only reason you have the freedom to push such nonsense is precisely the level of civilisation that we have achieved that you deride. Any other time and place in human history you would die in short order.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


It is interesting to note that you allow medical science the status of "practice", thereby forgiving them of their failings and inefficacy. You do not give that same status to any other healing modality. Are you a hypocrit or just generally unfair? Medical science is no more and no less effective in treating illness than the other modalities. Get your facts right. You have a skewed view.

Your world view is your own. I do not share it. My world does not revolve around the past as yours clearly does. I have a hand in a little thing called "the future".

More than a quarter century ago, I was told and shown how the US would change and that I was to leave. I followed that advice and have lived in northern Europe since. Took me a few years to get here but I did it. Your world is falling apart. It is, in the words they used to me, "society will implode". It is doing exactly that. Your fanciful world is soon in tatters. It's not done failing yet. Not just yet. Don't be so proud of the failure. Learn the lessons from it but don't hold onto it. It is as good as dust now.

Please make it a habit to read this:Science Daily - Alt Med Section as it may actually show you that other things work *with no invasive techniques or detrimental results*

And before I leave this tedious thread, I suggest that those of you who are unfamiliar with alternative medicine perhaps should learn about it before casting aspersions. It is very effective and every bit as relevant as medical science. You also need to face the fact that people will die with any form of treatment, regardless of who applies it and how well. People die. We are meant to die. Life is eternal, but not in this meat suit.

Ciao!

reply to post by CosmicEgg

It is interesting to note that you allow medical science the status of "practice", thereby forgiving them of their failings and inefficacy. You do not give that same status to any other healing modality.

You are going to have to qualify "Medical Science" and "any other healing modality" with definitions and/or examples.

For some, "medical science" is a drug prescription and a "have a nice day." For others, it includes herbal remedies, cognitive/behavioral therapies, and even acupuncture as a supporting treatment.

Are you a hypocrit or just generally unfair? Medical science is no more and no less effective in treating illness than the other modalities. Get your facts right. You have a skewed view.

Again, this depends upon what you are talking about.

Some "healing modalities" involve breathing into a chicken and cutting its head off.

Sure - it's going to be about as effective as any other ritual-type placebo (IE - performing a ritual... populations in those locales believe in ritualistic medicine over pill medicine - and the placebo effect requires belief the treatment will work). ... But will it cure cancer?

It depends upon what you are treating. The placebo effect is quite powerful and can diminish pain, improve mood/attitude, and even help improve immune response (in ways that aren't completely understood). But it's not going to do much to late-stage cancers or deep infections.

Further... you must also take the diagnosis with a grain of salt. There have been several cases of psychic-healers telling people they have any oddball disease - only to go to several medical professionals who can find no trace of the disease claimed. .... If you misdiagnose someone with cancer (due to an error or misunderstanding... or deliberate deception), then treat it with your healing regimen... and the person later turns up to be cancer free.... you can't really claim that as a valid success (of course... someone who is cancer free cannot really be proven to have had/not-had cancer at a previous point in time without an examination record).

It's present in "medical science," as well. The U.S. claims very high success rates of treating Prostate Cancer because we are absolutely paranoid about it, over here. Insurance companies and Medicare pay for screenings that are a few times more frequent than deemed necessary by a number of international panels of health professionals. It is often caught very early in the U.S. and treated very aggressively.

That doesn't mean that if you come here for treatment, you will be more likely to survive prostate cancer if you'd been diagnosed some place else.

Please make it a habit to read this:Science Daily - Alt Med Section as it may actually show you that other things work *with no invasive techniques or detrimental results*

Fixed your link. You've got an http:// in front of the url= annotation...

Anyway - just browsing through the headlines up today:

Acupuncture Reduces Protein Linked to Stress in First of Its Kind Animal Study

Quite reasonable. Nothing objectionable about that. Just be sure your acupuncture practitioner keeps their stuff sterile and clean.

Dried Licorice Root Fights the Bacteria That Cause Tooth Decay and Gum Disease, Study Finds

Licorice is #ing awesome. Again - nothing objectionable about that.

Breast Cancer Survivors Benefit from Practicing Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction

Again, nothing objectionable about that. Stress reduction has always been tied with health and wellness benefits. I'm sure it has implications beyond cancer survivors.

Acupuncture May Ease Severe Nerve Pain Associated With Cancer Treatment, Study Suggests

Yes. Reasonable. Note that acupuncture is not being used to mysteriously try and cure cancer. It is a complementary treatment to the direct treatment.

Acupuncture Can Prevent Radiation-Induced Chronic Dry Mouth, Study Finds

Curious - but, again, not objectionable. Notice how these are also backed up with studies supporting the claim.

Herbal Supplements May Cause Dangerous Drug Interactions in Orthopaedic Surgery Patients, Study Suggests

Gee - sounds a lot like what I told you not a few posts back. Again - not objectionable. Plants have drugs within them. ..... However, there's a bit of a problem with the way things work in the U.S. If a doctor knows you are medicating yourself with herbal supplements or remedies and continues to prescribe medications to you. He/she could lose his/her license in doing so. They would not even be able to give you health screenings to see if side-effects were occurring.

As my mother/father had it explained to them when she was diagnosed terminal.

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow


Sorry for the late reply, I've been off line a bit. Here it is. You will most likely get the most effective brands at your local health shop.





Try it, it really works.

reply to post by Aim64C


You know what? I would like to think you're being deliberately obtuse. I really would like to think that. Unfortunately, I more believe something else entirely about you. You are very likely already aware of it. If not, please do consult someone about it. Until then, you have bored me beyond reason and I withdraw from this thread now. I hope you can understand that.

I clearly stated above that you might like to consult that section of Science Daily to help you understand alternative medicine modalities and stop your absurd and unwarranted attack on them. I did not ask you to run down the list giving your commentary. It is again totally irrelevant and uninteresting. Really. Who do you think you are? Even if you were the Surgeon General, I really could not be less interested in what you have to say at this point.

If at some time in the future you do start to have rational thoughts about alternative medicine and would like to know more than what is found online - because a horrible amount of that is misrepresented by obvious charlatans - please do feel free to u2u me. But not until then. Au revoir.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

Until then, you have bored me beyond reason and I withdraw from this thread now.

... Please.... anything but that.

I clearly stated above that you might like to consult that section of Science Daily to help you understand alternative medicine modalities and stop your absurd and unwarranted attack on them.

Where have I attacked the sort of treatments being described in Science Daily?

There's a difference between the kind of nonsense you were preaching in your previous posts and what is being described in those articles on Science Daily.

I did not ask you to run down the list giving your commentary.

If you think Free Speech is a bitch... you should put up with Free Will....

It is again totally irrelevant and uninteresting.

Except you just told me to read through that section. I was simply relaying my reaction to reading that particular section of Science Daily. Since you seemed to be anticipating some kind of reaction from me.

Really. Who do you think you are?

Your messiah. Your antichrist. A person such as myself tends to get placed in one of those two categories. It will get sorted out in the postmortem environment, I expect. I am what I am and will behave according to the characteristics of my soul.

Even if you were the Surgeon General, I really could not be less interested in what you have to say at this point.

Interesting. You're all about peace, helping people, etc... until it's someone who disagrees with you and wants you to actually qualify your assertions and points.

Then, that person is lower than dirt and it is only your opinion that matters.

It's an easy trap to spring upon yourself.

If at some time in the future you do start to have rational thoughts about alternative medicine and would like to know more than what is found online - because a horrible amount of that is misrepresented by obvious charlatans - please do feel free to u2u me. But not until then.

You've not said anything all that useful to really interest me.

But you weren't saying this for my benefit. This is a subliminal drop (whether you realize it or not) to get other readers to drop you a u2u where you can preach at them how they simply need to "unify" their being and it will lead to some mythological state of perfect health.

You attempt to qualify the argument with links to "Natural Medicine" in Science Daily... except that what you have been preaching about and what the articles in Science Daily are talking about are two different things connected only on a few tangents. (If you don't know what a tangent is - it is a line that intersects the circumference of a circle at only one point.... basically - it means that you have one point of similarity - and diverge from there).

Since you really don't have anything to discuss, you simply tell me that I'm wrong, boring, and hope that people curious or desperate enough will bite on your line.

It's like I've said: It's one thing to use 'natural' medicine to treat non-critical problems or as supplements to other treatment programs. A healthy lifestyle helps prevent disease, illness, discomfort, etc. That is true. No one has been saying that in this thread.

What has been said, is that it's not a good idea to go to a 'psychic healer' or go get acupuncture to treat issues like cancer, acute staph infection, etc.

People will do what they will do - but success rates of treating life-threatening infections/diseases using "natural medicine" is not very impressive.

That is to mean - it is more likely you will find someone willing to sell you the hope of a cure rather than a serious natural treatment, to begin with. A serious application of herbs, cognitive therapies, etc will not be presented as a miraculous cure-all by an honest practitioner.

Which is why it is very important to qualify what it is you mean when you say: "Natural Medicine" - because there are plenty of people out there who will flaunt some tincture around as a miraculous elixir that will make you a God(ess) of the bedroom -and- cure any/every illness known to man.

And there are others who will seriously look at your condition, consult reference books, and serve up a carefully measured out dose of some herb that they apply.

Which one you choose to put your faith in is up to you. Which one you preach about is up to you.

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

It is interesting to note that you allow medical science the status of "practice", thereby forgiving them of their failings and inefficacy.

Perhaps you should refer to a dictionary more often, rather than books on woo??

Practice - Noun:
The actual application or use of an idea, belief, or method as opposed to theories about such application or use.

Nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not something is successful or efficient.

Alternative practitioners also practice their trade. Albeit so many of them are ineffective and many are outright charlatans.

You do not give that same status to any other healing modality. Are you a hypocrit or just generally unfair?

No - just ignorance on your part.

Medical science is no more and no less effective in treating illness than the other modalities. Get your facts right. You have a skewed view.

That is laughable - perhaps you would like to tell us what the alternative treatments are for wiping out smallpox? Or greatly diminishing the cost of measles?

Just by way to a couple of obvious examples?? Hmm??

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Natural remedies "seldom effective"

www.stuff.co.nz

Colloidal silver, deer velvet, arnica and rescue remedy are a "waste of time and money" and sometimes harmful, doctors say.

In the latest New Zealand Medical Journal Digest, doctors Shaun Holt and Sarah Jeffries and health psychologist Andrew Gilbey have slammed some of New Zealanders' favourite natural health products as ineffective.

Holt told The Press that of the "hundreds" of therapies and products, about 95 per cent were either not biologically plausible or not supported by research evidence.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.vifab.dk

who's payroll are they on?

who gave them funding?

which golden handshake has been promised?

most of these experts are corporate whores who will say anything if you give them money.

no integrity at all.

...and remember a psychologist can explain anything and prove nothing.