Doctors do know alot but as long as we are all alive we will be learning.Its all research either way. Alternative or not its still experimentation in diseases that have no cure or when no matter what the doctor says you can't seem to get better. I don't take the doctors word and no other word because I've known people who have died that way. Not to say people aren't help, I know they are but the alternative way is not evil except for people who are trying to make a buck off false statements but the medical profession has done the same thing as I understand it. I guess the main thing to me is do your own research and make sure what ever you do or take in your body is safe and will be good for you no matter if it helps you specific situation or not.

Instead of snide remarks and insults why don't you explain why you disagree and then provide some solid scientific proof that you are correct and all the universities, professors, and textbooks have been wrong for the last 100 or so years.
That's all most thinking people are looking for, some form of proof based on good Science and research. We are not stupid people, give us some verifiable facts please. hopinso

We seem to have a comunication problem.

In this instance I must agree with moreless. (which hurts me I must say....;-)

I'm not real sure I can help define it however, so we could get on the same page.

Well, here goes anyway. Bare with me please.

In Gary Klein's The Power of Intuition He demonstrates that logic is useful and needed but has limitations when used by itself.

He shows that people DO NOT form beliefs or make judgements by the use of logic. At some point of absorbing data the person who thinks they are using logic alone, will get a slight gut feel.

It is after this occurs that they will say they have reached a decision.

They will continue to sit on the fence stating they need yet more data until this "gut feeling" happens. (All the while thinking they are making a rational, logical decision)

He also shows that the more college you have (assuming you haven't developed your intuitive (or gut feel) side) the more "stupid" you become. Stupid is of course the wrong word, in this case it means they are more susceptible to twisting of words.

Take the case of free-range organic chickens. To me this means they are not penned in close quarters aside from no Antibiotics etc.

Yet if the commercial polutry group came in and changed the letter of the law by stating if you had X square feet of space for each chicken even though this was 100 times what an organic free-range would have, you can call your chickens free-range. Thereby getting more money for them.

This is common. This is legal-ese, this is intellectualization, more college educated people will accept this hogwash than people who have not gone to college.

They never developed the BS alarm that sounds when something is NOT right and should NOT be accepted. It becomes ok because it has been intellectualized.

If you were to review how the statistics for cancer were warped by intellectualization you would NEVER dream of getting chemo.

Yet, you will hear time and again statistics for some "extension of life" or some such that shows it to be of benefit. The majority of Doctors can't get passed the "BS". Why is that? How can so many with one or more degrees have their heads so far up their butt?

Sadly their training sets a lot of this up. Ask yourself, how many Dr. Mercola's are there? If we were to make a list of what we thought were "aware" Doctors, how many would we come up with? 100 tops? 2000 maybe? Out of how many tens of thousands of Doctors? How can this be?

Education today does NOT mean you've learned how to think. In fact, it becomes obvious it can be very detrimental. Do I need to be honest? No, not if I can legal-eze my way out. Which just becomes an intellectual exercise for lawyers.

So what in blue blazes does this have to do with moreless's trees?

What's happening is you're giving us trees you really like. They are really nice trees. And yes, they are part of the forest. So? Can you now describe the forest?

This is where you must be better than all the doctors and research. You must learn to reject a huge amout of educated opinion....and go with your gut feel.

You want research, you want data. You want verification of such.

Sorry, you ain't gonna get it. You must create a working model that allows you to become healthy on your own terms. We all would like someone to tell us the correct path. There are quite a few here who are willing to do that, all have different variations. But at some point you must decide and as for the details. You will indeed, be shooting in the dark at times.

I'm sorry this seems such a mish mash of stuff.

Intuition or gut feel is a requirement for being on these boards. If you don't have it, you must become aware of it. Only you can make accurate adjustments for your health. Not a Doctor, not this research or that research can make the final call. Everything, your Doctors, these forums, give you an overabundance of information, they are merely tools that you need to learn to use.


Savagegrace

Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense
Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense
Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense Common Sense


Well, I doubt that provided any information to anybody. I could fill the page with it but it still we would be no closer in understanding.

I don't want claims of common sense. I want explanations. Moreless makes extraordinary claims and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. Moreless is asking us to believe the existence of an invisble pink gorilla, but only he has the power to see it, and questioning him about the veracity of his claim is committing heresy. Common sense did not give us any of the technological or scientific advances that we enjoy. Evidence is not the same as credentials. My local bum can provide evidence without credentials. Evidence is independent of credentials. I don't care about credentials, I care about evidence. So show me the proof, hell, show me a plausible explanation. But if you used implaussible theories first you have to prove them.

What I want:

Evidence.


What I don't want:

Claims of secret research that only he has access to
Claims that I will be put in danger if he tells me
Claims that Bell Labs will kill me if I find out.
Claims that the Universities are wrong without proof.
Claims that all I need or lack common sense.
Bad analogies instead of explanations
To be told to perfom "Simple experiments" that provide no information