Many throughout history have "bent" the laws of Science and have paid a heavy price, losing reputation, being imprisoned, and losing life for their beliefs only for others to find later on in history that they were right.

Such a comment is certainly a disservice to all researchers, both professional and amateur.  ML does more than just “bend” current thinking; he completely ignores it and imposes an unreasonable, irrational model which could not be justified under any circumstances.  His explanations are not “simple” they are wrong.  He is doing nothing more than parroting the ideas of others and offers nothing to as evidence suggest he could possibly be right.  He relies on poorly thought out metaphors and hypnotic repetition of certain phrases to dull skepticism and gain converts.

 I personally know of no scientists that have imprisoned other people (scientist or not) that for proposing novel ideas – no matter who ridiculous.  There have been cases of this happening due to religious or political reasons but never for scientific ones.  Some people have languished with bad reputations for their ideas, yet in the end as the H. pylori case studies shows, the evidence triumphs.  When the idea is good, the evidence will propel it forward and science must then adjust accordingly.  The researchers were not only vindicated but they obtained the highest honor that could be bestowed upon them.  It is the same for almost all Nobel prize winners, they all had to prove their worth, even Einstein had to wait 16 years for the world to catch up to him.  McClintock has similar experiences getting people to accept her work; she too received a Nobel Prize.

 Science is blinded far too often by a very narrow focus AND the "common" belief of the day. This is usually caused by opinions of those who have the most influence and create the loudest ruckus.

Scientists are human after all, and like all other humans they like to think they are right.  Luckily they have something over regular folk, in that they have a number of parameters which they use to determine if they are right, or if another person is “righter.”   Though I would say that it is the strength of their work not the ruckus that determines how much support they get.  Historically all new ideas have had to fight for recognition; round earth, heliocentric model, evolution, atomic model, Big Bang, Mendelian genetics, relativity, string theory, genetic drift, and the list is endless.  None of the current ideas were accepted just because someone wrote a paper on it; they all had to be tested to see if they would crack.   What you perceive as blindness I interpret as skepticism; a skepticism that forces researchers to prove their ideas under fire and weeds out the bad ones.  The common view of scientists as meek little nerds is wrong; when it comes to defending their research are most of them are tigers.

 As far as ML being over simplistic, if you look at Corinthian's guidelines for health...

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=908032#i

BTW that was not a comprehensive treatment of what I consider important, it was just a basic overview.  It is just a simple starting point that must be adjusted to your individual age, gender, genetics, etc.  For example, I recommend strength building (weights) for people entering the last ¼ - 1/3 of their lives – a little bit at any time is good.   But because of age associated muscle loss – I consider it imperative as we enter old age.

 it IS very simple. What is complicated is the science behind it as there are far too many unknowns;

I think you are right about this, the implementation is relatively easy.  Perhaps the real health breakthrough for our society will come in a way to get people to adopt healthy practices.  The difficulty and complications arise when trying to understand the mechanisms involved.   This is where ML screws up royally; he literally has never gotten one explanation right.    Rather than say, I don’t know – a phrase he should use more often, he invents bogus explanations to hide his ignorance.  His explanations ignore reality; worse, go against reality or make no sense whatsoever.

Over 9 months ago #51313 wrote “As for Moreless, instead of just answering some questions he may know the answer to, its turned into a forum where everything from basic chemistry, thru to chelation, my dogs throat tumor, dental health etc etc etc, is explained in some made up, incorrect fashion, just so he can appear to know all the answers to every bloody problem out there.”  This is absolutely right, he would be better of saying he doesn’t know, rather than making up stuff that is so easily discredited.

I don’t understand this.  You write that some things “will never be completely understood” yet you stand by ML’s bogus mantras, “Acid/Alkaline principles rule the universe”, or some of this other garbage.   Surely you agree that just because we don’t have all the answers, it does not justify accepting any crappy idea that comes along.

Garbage like ML’s most recent Ionization = Building New body parts destroys any credibility he may have, and because it is such a basic misunderstanding and misconception of reality it puts everything he offers in doubt.