The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines

How to stay healthy and prevent risks and consequences on your health and public health. occupational disease, industrial risks (asbestos, air pollution, electromagnetic waves ...), company risk (workplace stress, overuse of drugs ...) and individual (tobacco, alcohol ...).
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by Janic » 15/07/17, 12:40

I think that Pascal meant by this a renunciation of the ego, as a condition of access to spirituality ...
Pascal was a complex character from where the apparent contradictions of his discourse as on the role of the disease located at the limit of a redemptive divine curse which must be placed in its context and its time and it is probable that today today he would reason differently. 8)
What is heartbreaking are these anti-religious people who want to give themselves an appearance of knowledge in a field that they just do not know (as for vaccines or H) experimentally. : Evil:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
pedrodelavega
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3791
Registration: 09/03/13, 21:02
x 1311

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by pedrodelavega » 17/07/17, 18:31

Janic wrote:
The scientist verifies and has since verified these cited examples: They have all been refuted

What verification, what rebuttal
Those for example:

The moon and gardening:
https://www.science-et-vie.com/galerie/ ... antes-6129

The dowsers:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sourcier#Exp.C3.A9riences
https://theierecosmique.com/2017/03/28/ ... de-munich/

Magnetizers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESl6vUQyRhM
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magn%C3%A ... 9rimentaux


Janic wrote:The cited cases of firewalls are not scientifically explained, but are an indisputable reality.
... another widely contested phenomenon.

Janic wrote: but you have a memory lapse for the 146.000 dead who have been abandoned by your followers.
Questionable amalgam between "giving up" and "failing to heal" :?
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by Janic » 17/07/17, 20:17

Janic wrote:
The scientist verifies and has since verified these cited examples: They have all been refuted

What verification, what rebuttal

Those for example:

already do not mix everything, the subject indicated above did not concern the subjects below
The dowsing with reward, it is absurd and can only attract margoulins interested in the sum in question.
https://theierecosmique.com/2017/03/28/ ... de-munich/

For your teapot the subject has already been seen and reviewed. As a maternal level, they are champions!


In Germany, following the employment on the foreheads of all doctors who graduated from medical school during the Second World War, magnetizers practiced a lot with the population. necessary] After the war, they created a training course and then a diploma, which still exists, of Heilpraktiker, but according to German regulations it is clearly defined that the practitioner as Heilpraktiker is not a doctor. Magnetizers work there in hospitals, clinics, and are reimbursed by most mutuals. The situation is the same in Italy and Switzerland. In Canada as well as in the United States and in Scandinavia, in front of the multiplication of practices and practitioners, legislation is being drafted aiming to delimit the framework of practice to avoid any amalgam between the practitioners and all the problems of charlatanism and scams of all kinds

For zetetics, this pseudoscientific sect has nothing scientific about it.

Each time you mention people who know nothing about it and engage in phony comparisons like on the H.
janic wrote: The cited cases of firewalls are not scientifically explained, but are an indisputable reality.

... another widely contested phenomenon.

Everything can be challenged in an abstract way, even your nut sites. But there is a difference between experience on the job, indisputable because it's a fact in real life and laughs behind their computer who have had no experience and therefore express themselves on a subject that they totally ignore.
janic wrote: but you have a lapse of memory for the 146.000 dead who were abandoned by your followers.

Questionable amalgam between "giving up" and "failing to heal"

Oh, the linguistic but interesting subtlety! It is surrendering to its tragic fate when they fail to heal and despite everything refuse any mode other than their own.
It is as if a rescuer provided care to an accident victim but refused all help until the death of the injured person, he would end up in prison for refusing assistance to a person in danger, but not big pharma!
The order of doctors prohibits its members from any non-conformist practices or questioning the system (as for Joyeux!)

Example: DR Lagarde (among others) was banned from exercising because he treated his patients with interleukin, which was not authorized in France at the time, but recognized elsewhere and whose value was later recognized .
This interleukin is necessary for the development of CD8 cells specific for an antigen1, both in number and in function2. It stimulates the synthesis of glycan O by the latter, thus contributing to their gathering in places of inflammation3.
Together with interleukin 12 and the interferons alpha and beta, it promotes the proliferation of NK4 lymphocytes via the mTOR5 pathway.
It is also produced by dendritic cells and allows their activation6.


NB: I have a neighbor who has just died of cancer. His family and neighbors saw his health deteriorate with each treatment and he died on the last exposure. Should I say completed rather than abandoned? : roll:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by Janic » 31/07/17, 10:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0l-R4Z9k0Y

drugs lobbies, lies, manipulations scheming
Who does not know how pre-market drug testing is done
A shelling through the menu of what everyone should know.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by Janic » 29/05/18, 08:18


invited to a debate organized by the biased face, Etienne Klein, iconoclast, sets the record straight at the time of the Youtubeur character, a big fan of critics on pseudo sciences. Puffing with impatience, he finally asks his question about what Klein thinks about pseudosciences and the latter, who knows why he was invited, replies that "the sciences are pseudosciences" without further comments, which cuts the quid to Mr. Tronche on the bias.
Yes, the notions of THE science, the real one, the big one, escapes everyone and these are only scraps that we use that tomorrow will be able to be questioned, partially or in full.
Another interesting point that Klein underlines on the concept of origin which is not the origin as we think and use this term, but is, according to him, only a result of what preceded and what preceded, we ignore it.
What was there before the BB? What gave birth to life? What is there beyond the universe? etc ...
So listen to absolutely by pseudo-pseudoscienseurs!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by izentrop » 29/05/18, 23:59

Hello,
Nothing shocking or disrespectful of one towards the other. EK spreads out a lot as usual and gives food for thought, Mendax reframes him because he has imperatives to respect.
The rest is only personal interpretation and humor.

And as usual, nothing to do with the subject. : Mrgreen:
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by Janic » 30/05/18, 08:10

Hello,
Nothing shocking or disrespectful of one towards the other. EK spreads out a lot as usual and gives food for thought,
Who spoke of disrespect? This is the game of the cat and the mouse EK knowing very well or TB tries to bring it, but it is not the first time that it takes part in this kind of debate and it prefers to keep the hand on rather than getting caught in a dead end.
Mendax reframes it because it has imperatives to respect.
To crop EK you have to be strong, much stronger than "mendax"! (Which says "I spend my time interrupting my interlocutors which is rude, I know)
But he too wants to keep his hand and lead EK towards the question that itches: what is a pseudoscience. I quote :
(… 1h05 ') TB: do we have pseudo sciences? We have a lot of people with smoky theories: do we have pseudosciences, in quotes, installed and that we can call pseudo sciences on the question of origins in physics, chemistry, the functioning of matter or the universe?
EK:Okay, I know it's your specialty, but when a scientist talks, it's he who speaks.
Imagine what LA SCIENCE would say if it could speak, it's something no one is really capable of and therefore every time you comment on LA SCIENCE, you are probably saying something other than if SCIENCE could speak. So you could say that all scientific discourse is already a form of pseudo SCIENCE. It's just to tell you that it's not simple about what you can say when you talk about SCIENCE. (…) I often quote Wittgenstein, he is the one who alerted as a philosopher about language games and the fact that when we speak we say things that we don't really think about and that you carry with them a priori clandestine that we do not control and suddenly, even when you talk about time: is not your way of speaking of physical time contaminated by all the speeches that we hear that come from languages ​​as we speak them daily. In other words, are you sure that you do not inject things that come from language and not SCIENCE into your discourse on SCIENCE? Here, in my opinion, a delicate question and as science was created in rupture with language. In his words Newton physical time is a time which has none of the properties that language attributes to time: it is independent of what happens in time, it does not change over time, its way of being time, you can't even put a qualifier on it, because it is the same for all phenomena, etc. (1h08'10 '')
The rest is only personal interpretation and humor.
As stated by EK, above, everything is only personal interpretation, obviously. On the other hand what he says, and he insists on this, is the fact that individuals want to take hold of SCIENCE, (like other of GOD), to manipulate this concept to make it stick to their limited concept of science and therefore this inevitably resulted in a form of pseudoscience. And that for real scientists, so scientists… .. them !!!! : roll:
And as usual, nothing to do with the subject
On the contrary, EK's thinking does not concern a science or pseudo particular science, but rather everything that includes the word science in a discourse, which is parasitized by the culture of the language used. " EK: Well, I know it's your specialty, but when a scientist speaks, he is the one who speaks. Imagine what SCIENCE would say if it could speak, it's something no one is really capable of and therefore every time you comment on SCIENCE, you are probably saying something other than if SCIENCE could speak. So you could say that all scientific discourse is already a form of pseudo SCIENCE. »
So is H a science? In the literal sense of the term: yes! since it explores part of the spectrum of knowledge that other sciences do not.

Science is the body of knowledge and studies of universal value, characterized by an object and a method based on objective verifiable observations and rigorous reasoning.

Is Newtonian science a true science? Of course yes, having regard to the knowledge of the moment and yet it is different from the science of quantum mechanics which will come later. Allopathic science is also ONE science (among others) of the moment, called into question by another science which is closer to the quantum world than to the usual physical world which comes in weight doses. Without that the H knows neither why, nor how it works.
It is therefore Planck's wall of this science and the error, common to all those who want or pretend to know, is to give a rational "Newtonian" explanation to what, for the moment, cannot be explained through this channel.
based on objective verifiable observations
this criterion is met by the millions of observations and reports from around the world. Observations made by SES specialists, like astronomy is the fact of the observations of proven astrophysicists, not by the local pork butcher. The latter can deny this science, of course!
and rigorous reasoning
To have a rigorous reasoning, it is necessary to have all the cards in hand, which, like all the new sciences, can be insufficient as Newtonian physics did not have the cards of quantum physics to explain everything about everything. And if it were necessary to have ALL the knowledge before deciding that such and such a thing is scientific, there would hardly be anything more catalogable.
Now there is no physical scientific explanation outside the field of the observable, otherwise it is only a hypothesis, not even a theory.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by izentrop » 31/05/18, 00:24

Janic wrote:of individuals want to seize SCIENCE, (like other of GOD), to manipulate this concept to make it stick to their limited concept of science
This is exactly you : Mrgreen:
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by Janic » 31/05/18, 06:43

Janic wrote:
of individuals want to seize SCIENCE, (like other of GOD), to manipulate this concept to make it stick to their concept limit science
This is exactly you : Mrgreen:
like all those who want to take hold of a subject, as EK points out and this also affects you, inevitably!
Except that there is a whole, very little nuance that escapes you, is that all science requires many years of study to claim to know a particular subject (such as astrophysics, theology or collecting butterflies) which is obviously not your case. So study first, compare and THEN give an "informed" opinion, instead of stupidly repeating the mantras of your pseudo-pseudoscience. : Evil:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: The dangers of allopathy vs safety of alternative medicines




by izentrop » 31/05/18, 08:12

Janic wrote:Except that there is a whole, very little nuance that escapes you, is that all science requires many years of study to pretend to know this or that subject (like astrophysics, theology or butterfly collecting)
"The habit does not make the monk", I repeat it often to you and there are heaps of examples of luminaries who slip in the pseudo-sciences, high studies or not.
We tell you from the start, science is a fact admitted by everyone, and we often quote the first person who made a discovery as a scientist, but that is not the main thing.
To come back to EK, I will probably express myself badly: Newton fabricated laws on gravity which are still used today in their field of competence and which make it possible to distinguish among other things the difference between weight and mass and the different forces exerted on bodies. To a certain extent the famous formula "weight = 9.81 N" is still useful when it comes to daisies. : Wink:

What Einstein has brought is that when distances become large, the speed of light comes into play and at the cosmic level, gravity is not a force, space and time form a whole deformed by massive bodies and Deduced from laws refined today, but not called into question.
Likewise for Galileo who issued a law on gravity in a vacuum without being able to verify it in his time.

In medicine, the effectiveness of drugs is double-checked, from different angles, and the advantages and disadvantages are drawn, and the main thing is that the benefit / risk ratio is largely in favor of the benefit.
For alternative medicine, it's Russian roulette : Twisted:
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 224 guests