Notices
Results 1 to 26 of 26
Like Tree2Likes
  • 2 Post By adelady

Thread: Resonant Entrainment and the Body.

  1. #1 Resonant Entrainment and the Body. 
    Rae
    Rae is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7
    Hey there I'm new here and I thought for my first post I'd ask members their thoughts on the subject of resonant entrainment, frequency technology and the possible use of these technologies for physical applications.

    Through the work of cymatics we know that certain vibrations generate specific geometry that we normally don't realize, but are very much real and are a part of the make up of all sorts of different forms of life and matter.

    It's also strange how certain tones generate harmonious and symmetrical designs, and others generate nothing.

    Here's an article about how nerves actually communicate with sound and not electricity.
    Scientists say nerves use sound, not electricity - Technology & Science - CBC News
    317.83 - Frequency associated with Liver
    319.88 - Frequency associated with Kidney
    I'm wondering what everyone's take on the positive application of specially generated, audible frequencies. Using information like this to create a positive effect for say the liver, or kidneys. One's that could be made to positively effect things like the physical body and not just brainwaves.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    My take is twofold. Firstly, I haven't the scientific expertise to have any reasonable view of the scientific process advanced - esp in such a specialised field as anaesthesia.

    Secondly. Most importantly resonance, vibration and the like are far too often embraced by the snake oil salesmen of unscientific alternative medicine. With a supporting chorus from advocates of "The Secret" and similar nonsense. When I see words like resonance or vibration, my initial reaction is the same as when I see 'quantum' bandied about casually in advertisements for devices claimed to have beneficial effects. Suspicious. Negative. Dismissive. Take your pick.

    I'd want a lot more, a great deal more, scientifically confirmed observations and analysis before dipping any more than a cautious toe into this pool.


    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    This doesn't belong i Physics. It's how can I say it delicately?... garbage.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Rae View Post
    Here's an article about how nerves actually communicate with sound and not electricity.
    Scientists say nerves use sound, not electricity - Technology & Science - CBC News
    317.83 - Frequency associated with Liver
    319.88 - Frequency associated with Kidney
    I'm wondering what everyone's take on the positive application of specially generated, audible frequencies. Using information like this to create a positive effect for say the liver, or kidneys. One's that could be made to positively effect things like the physical body and not just brainwaves.
    The article mentioned above does not give any references, nor does it list any verifiable evidence whatsoever. All it really does is give a long list of unsupported claims and conjecture. Nerves do not "communicate with sound"; neurons interact via chemicals known as neurotransmitters :

    Neurotransmission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    While I would normally find myself in complete agreemment with Wayne and Marcus on this occassion I say: pause for a moment. The idea is probably wrong, but like adelady I lack sufficient knowledge in this area to be competent to call foul. The research has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. It is true that papers submitted by members of the Academy are not subject to the normal peer review process. Nevertheless membership of the Academy is not open to recognisable charlatans.


    Heimburg, T. and Jackson, A.D. "On soliton propagation in biomembranes and nerves" PNAS July 12, 2005 vol. 102 no. 28 9790-9795 Link here.

    Abstract
    The lipids of biological membranes and intact biomembranes display chain melting transitions close to temperatures of physiological interest. During this transition the heat capacity, volume and area compressibilities, and relaxation times all reach maxima. Compressibilities are thus nonlinear functions of temperature and pressure in the vicinity of the melting transition, and we show that this feature leads to the possibility of soliton propagation in such membranes. In particular, if the membrane state is above the melting transition solitons will involve changes in lipid state. We discuss solitons in the context of several striking properties of nerve membranes under the influence of the action potential, including mechanical dislocations and temperature changes.

    Bold and underlining are my emphasis.

    Forty eight papers cite the research, though some of these are later papers by Heimburg or Jackson. Nevertheless their work on lipids appears to be valid. What is under question is their interpretation of its significance in nerve behaviour. Nevertheless the hypothesis has evidence, it has a proposed mechanism and it should not be summarily dismissed simply on the grounds it runs counter to current theory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    John, on second thought I must admit that you might have a valid point here. Perhaps I was too hasty. I have never before questioned the neurotransmitter model, but then again I don't really know much about the subject over and above standard college knowledge.
    Isn't this awkward
    I won't delete my previous post, however; sometimes we just have to be able to admit that we were not thorough enough on something !!!
    ( Note to self : stick to your area of expertise... )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke;303117The article mentioned above does not give any references, nor does it list any verifiable evidence whatsoever. All it really does is give a long list of unsupported claims and conjecture. Nerves do [I
    not[/I] "communicate with sound"; neurons interact via chemicals known as neurotransmitters
    Neurotransmitters communicate between nerve cells. Nerve signals within a nerve are [currently thought to be] transmitted as electrical signals potentials carried by changes in ionization.

    I am no expert, either, but I thought that this had been so widely studied and the mechanisms so well understood that there was little doubt. It does seem unlikely that nerve signals are transmitted by sound and not electrical signals; perhaps they both play a role.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Rae
    Rae is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7
    I hadn't meant the use of specialized sound frequencies or silent frequencies used for anesthesia necessarily, but rather for speeded up healing, to en train your own bodies frequency output into one of a healthier state by playing back one that is of a healthier state.
    I know that the body will resonate differently depending ones health. That is the reason for bio-feedback mechanisms. But if frequency can be directly converted into sound, why wouldn't it be possible to get similar effects with sound?

    Some experiments I read about in the book, "The Secret Life of Plants", somewhat proves the theory that living cells can react to sound in such a way.
    Plants that were left in a room alone with Acid rock music would slowly but surely move to grow as far away from the sound as possible. As if the chaotic sounds were causing it distress. And harmonious music like that of Ravi Shankar or classical music was played separately in a closed off space the plants grew right onto the speakers, as if they craved to be closer to the sound, or else the geometric form of the sound itself, because sound IS 3 dimensional not just flat streams of sound waves. The angles and planes of sounds therefore must have resonated better with the plant and it's structure, lending a healthier, less chaotic environment to grow in.

    SO if we are much more in need of sound, because without proper hearing it is known that a young child has a high chance of impaired cognition. (Learning disabilities and the like.) Effects of Hearing Loss on DevelopmentAlso See: the mozart effect, origionally coined by the man who 'invented' or found the tomatis effect.
    "Tomatis adapted his techniques to target diverse disorders including auditory processing problems, dyslexia, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorders, autism[4], and sensory integration and motor-skill difficulties. It is also claimed to have helped adults fight depression, learn foreign languages faster, develop better communication skills, and improve both creativity and on-the-job performance. Many musicians, singers and actors also claim to have found it helpful for fine-tuning their tonal and harmonic skills.The Tomatis Method uses recordings by Mozart and Gregorian Chant as well as of the patient's mother's voice. Tomatis' use of Mozart is not to be confused with so-called Mozart Effect popularized by American author and music researcher Don Campbell. Although Tomatis coined the phrase, his sense is in not directly related to claims that listening to Mozart increases intelligence, for example." -wiki for alfred a. tomatis


    Sound IS important to us for proper functioning. Frequencies are being found to be part of the very basis of life itself. Nothing can exist without it's own signature resonant frequency.

    You really just have to connect the dots when you look at how much sound effects us on much more than just taste. Just as frequencies effect us much more than we might think. Think cellphones and electrical devices, televisions, etc.

    "A healthy body is rich in oxygen, its electrical frequency is high, the cells are well supplied with water, the red blood cells are well-rounded and free to move around individually like marbles in a shoe box, while an unhealthy body is low in oxygen, the electrical frequency is low, the cells are depleted of water, and the red blood cells are wrinkled and clumped together like they have been covered with molasses. "


    Just take a look at the work of Royal Rife!

    "Subtle Energies
    The basic unit of life, the cell, exists only because it is held together by energy. The atoms and molecules that make up a cell also exist because a bond of energy holds their various parts together. Essentially, everything in the universe as we understand it is energy, manifesting in light and sound. Perhaps, as Einstein believed, there is only a single energy, “a unified field,” but if so, it has countless faces. Numerous cultures describe a matrix of subtle energies that support, shape, and animate the physical body.
    Your body is made up of “energy fields” that form the foundation of your health. Modern medicine uses only “vitality” but has no concept of a circuit for this vitality.
    Ukrainian quantum physicists, studying Giga-energy (billions of cycles per second) found:
    · Human DNA vibrates at 52 - 78 Gigahertz
    · Animals at 47 Gigahertz
    · Plants at 42 Gigahertz"

    "The book Energy Medicine states that disturbances in meridian energies correlate with ill health. Because disrupted meridian energies often precede illness, meridian readings are sometimes used to predict health vulnerabilities and prevent disease. Some government employees in Japan, for instance, are routinely screened during their annual medical examinations by a machine that has twenty-eight electrodes attached to the meridian endpoints. Only people with abnormal meridian readouts are required to go through further diagnostic testing!
    Dr. Candace Pert, a research professor in the Department of Physiology and Biophysics at Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, D.C., believes that the meridians may be the pathways that are followed by immune cells as they move up and down an anatomical highway."


    " Every part of the human body, whether interior or exterior, including hair and nails, is measurable in hertz frequencies. The body, and all its parts, oscillate between 62 and 72 hertz for a perfect "disease free" environment. When the normal frequencies in any part of the body deteriorate to lesser frequencies, disease sets in. The Energy Wellness instrument uses vibrational sound wave frequencies to gradually bring the body's lesser hertz frequencies back to normal without affecting any other areas. This action destroys the disease, and the causes are excreted by the body through urine, feces, sweat, etc. Therefore, it is important to drink the necessary amount of water to flush out these causes.
    The Biofeedback instrument contains a combination of two types of frequencies and harmonics: Rife and Biofeedback.
    Rife frequencies are believed to modify the energy patterns of viruses, bacteria, fungi, amoebae and parasites. These pathogens have been linked (by Rife in his research) to degeneration in the body.
    Biofeedback frequencies are the result of work done by dedicated scientists in the years after Rife's death. These frequencies are designed to balance patterns in our energy pathways, which are believed to trigger normal cell functions and regeneration in the body. They are used to stimulate detoxification, regenerate nerves and tissue, aid in cosmetic enhancement and assist in life extension.
    The Biofeedback Instrument Group of scientists and physicists have carried out related studies using mathematical equations for the output of the frequencies and harmonics within a given range for the Mortal Oscillatory Rate (M.O.R.) destruction of causes contained in any illness."

    -RoyaL Rife

    "
    The empirical investigation of the sensory stimulation of cortical potentials also dates from Caton's invention of the EEG. Various forms of rhythmic stimulation such as flashing lights or pulsing sound have been found to entrain the electrical activity of the brain through the frequency-following response (FFR). Another form of auditory stimulation which may invoke a FFR, although much more subtle than bursts of sound, is binaural beats."

    "
    Auditory StimulationResearch also indicates that auditory stimuli can be used to entrain the electrical rhythms of the brain (Neher, 1961; Picton, Woods, & Proulx, 1978a; Picton, Woods, & Proulx, 1978b). Auditory entrainment of cortical rhythms can occur through two different routes. One may achieve entrainment through bursts of sounds such as through drum beats, or one may achieve entrainment through the less direct and more subtle route of binaural beats.
    The range of the electrical rhythms of the human cortex is 0 Hz to about 40 Hz. Since humans have an auditory range of 20 to 20,000 Hz, it is not possible to directly entrain cortical rhythms below 20 Hz with pure tones. However, the phenomenon of binaural beats, an auditory brainstem response, allows the entrainment of frequencies below 30 Hz through the interaction of pure tones within the superior olivary nuclei."
    Binaural Beat Stimulation Combined with Alpha Biofeedback

    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Rae
    Rae is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7
    oops double post
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Pseudoscientific nonsense.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Rae
    Rae is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Pseudoscientific nonsense.
    Royal Raymond Rife (May 16, 1888 – August 5, 1971) was anAmerican inventor and early exponent of high-magnification time-lapse cine-micrography.[1][2] In the 1930s, he claimed that by using a specially designed optical microscope, he could observe a number of microbes which were too small to visualize with previously existing technology.[3] Rife also reported that a "beam ray" device of his invention could weaken or destroy the pathogens by energetically exciting destructive resonances in their constituent chemicals.[4]
    Rife's claims could not be independently replicated[5], and were ultimately discredited by the medical profession in the 1950s. Rife blamed the scientific rejection of his claims on a conspiracy involving the American Medical Association, the Department of Public Health, and other elements of "organized medicine", which had "brainwashed" potential supporters of his devices.[6]

    a
    ahh i see..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
     

  14. #13  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Thank you for providing the quotes that supported Strange...

    Edit: This rerply to post #11

    Regarding post # 12, a patent does not mean it has to work or be true...only that it is unique, as many wackos are.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14 I don't know what to think about this group 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4
    I've just joined this group and I must say that there are certain members of this list who appear to be as dogmatic practitioners of the religion of science as those worthy of scorn for believing in "garbage" and "charlatans" and "pseudoscientific nonsense." The level of fear and insecurity behind such remarks is palpable. I have nothing against critical examination but the true scientist stays open to the truth. Thanks to Rae for daring to ask a question about resonant entrainment on such a list. And many thanks to those willing to admit that first reactions might need to be re-evaluated.

    The first sources I suggest one read are: mathematician Steven Strogatz' (2003) seminal book, Sync: How order emerges from chaos in the universe, nature, and daily life, and biophysicist Mae-Wan Ho's (1998/2005) groundbreaking book. The Rainbow and the Worm: The physics of organisms. Strogatz makes the case that the human body and its various systems are all oscillatory in nature; and that the human body (and indeed the mind as well) is thus subject to the same rules of such oscillatory processes of “resonance,” “synchrony,” “entrainment,” and “coherence” as any other oscillator. And Ho takes it from there.

    It turns out that the concept of resonant entrainment in the body exists in the literature of many fields. The automatic tendency to emotionally and physically mimic, mirror or synchronize with others has been variously referred to in the fields of biology, psychology, sociology, anthropology, linguistics, consciousness, and music and dance literature as “emotional contagion” (Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1994; Collins, 2004), “inter-personal entrainment” (Clayton, Sager, & Will, 2004), “harmonic transmission” (Goldman, 1992/2002), “sympathetic vibration” (Conrad, 2009), “sympathetic attunement” (Kossak, 2008), or “embodied empathic resonance” (Adair Nagata, 2002, quoted in Kossak, 2008, pp. 37-38). These references to synchronization of rhythms are all terms for the phenomenon of “resonant entrainment.” Resonant entrainment in social interaction appears to be ubiquitous, and it is a “catching” or “contagious” phenomenon. One famous early example of research in this area was conducted by William S. Condon (1971), who described the brain wave synchronization that occurs when two people have a good conversation.

    The concept of “rapport” or “pair synchronization” is well-documented in psychology literature (Crabtree, 1985; Baker, 1990; Bischof, 2005; Duane and Berendt, 1965; Grinberg-Zylberbaum et al., 1987 & 1992; Wackerman, 2004; Standish, 2003 & 2004; Cade, 1989; Bearden, 1995), yet not well-explained. The classic definition is a commonality of perspective between two or more people. This term is colloquially used to refer to a sympathetic relationship or emotional affinity between two people. Though scientists typically attempt to explain rapport in terms of “synchronized brainwaves,” the reports of rapport in hypnotic settings indicate a much stranger, sometimes even “paranormal” phenomenon; involving an unusual sharing of sensory experience that can only be explained in terms of a merged sense of identity or self between subject and hypnotist.

    If you want to know more, the bibliography for the dissertation I am working on is over 900 sources. They can't all be "charlatans."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    dogmatic practitioners of the religion of science
    Inaccurate cliche.

    The level of fear and insecurity behind such remarks is palpable.
    Another cliche. Presumably the reason for all these boring inaccurate cliches is your fear fear and insecurity.

    If you want to know more, the bibliography for the dissertation I am working on is over 900 sources. They can't all be "charlatans."
    I fail to see the logic there. The number has no relevance to whether they are charlatans or not. It would be trivial to gather a list of 900 charlatans (an index of astrologers would be a good start). It is the quality of their evidence that counts.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Moving to pseudo. What started out as something that might turn out to be interesting has quickly devolved into the usual blathering of alternative medicine proponents.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,878
    It is almost unnecessary even to read your posts. The mere fact that they are rendered in CrackPotFont(tm) tells me pretty much all that I need to know. Sounds terribly closed-minded, I know, but the correlation between cranky font style and cranky content is actually quite high. It's all very scientific, actually. And upon reading your posts, I find additional confirmation.

    It is too bad that this thread has veered off so quickly into loonyland. The first post made me aware of something I'd never heard of before. I was unaware that the melting point of cell membranes was so close to the nominal body temperature. The soliton model is intriguing, even if it ultimately turns out to be wrong. For that, I am grateful to the OP. I will have to spend the upcoming weekend gathering and reading papers on the subject.

    That said, all this noise about "resonance" and magic frequencies is complete bull feces.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    I've just joined this group and I must say that there are certain members of this list who appear to be as dogmatic practitioners of the religion of science as those worthy of scorn for believing in "garbage" and "charlatans" and "pseudoscientific nonsense." The level of fear and insecurity behind such remarks is palpable. I have nothing against critical examination but the true scientist stays open to the truth.
    I believe my post #5 demonstrates clearly and convincingly that I am not a "dogmatic practitioner of the religion of science". Perhaps, then, you will be willing to heed some advice from me. If you wish individuals or groups to listen to your arguments it is best not to open the discussion with a direct, vitriolic attack on those persons: especially when you lack either the familiarity, or skill set to understand that your characterisation is flawed.

    i have Strogatz's book in my library and shall revisit it this evening. My recollection of his underlying thesis would strongly suggest your interpretation of his conclusion is flawed. Your opening, emotionally charged remarks are acting as a strong disincentive for me to explore any of your further evidence. Perhaps that is unfortunate; perhaps you'll think more carefully next time you post.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4
    If you want to know more, the bibliography for the dissertation I am working on is over 900 sources. They can't all be "charlatans."
    I fail to see the logic there. The number has no relevance to whether they are charlatans or not. It would be trivial to gather a list of 900 charlatans (an index of astrologers would be a good start). It is the quality of their evidence that counts.
    Since I clearly listed a number of those sources, you are not left to guess about their credentials. You may check at your leisure.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4
    Your opening, emotionally charged remarks are acting as a strong disincentive for me to explore any of your further evidence. Perhaps that is unfortunate; perhaps you'll think more carefully next time you post.
    Dear John, I apologize that my opening remarks offended you. I took from general tone of the preceding discussion that offending remarks are not restrained on this list, as I found many of them offensive as well.
    Last edited by KALSTER; April 11th, 2012 at 02:36 AM. Reason: Fixed your quote tags
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Moving to pseudo. What started out as something that might turn out to be interesting has quickly devolved into the usual blathering of alternative medicine proponents.
    Here is an example of a comment I find personally offensive. There is a blatant assumption implied here that mainstream Western medicine has more evidence and verifiable facts on its side than "alternative" medicine. That is a lie. Do you, for instance, know the process by which anti-depressants are invented and prescribed? They are usually found by accident, when the substance is being explored for other uses, then they are cynically marketed by a pharma industry for maximal profit, and then prescribed by physicians and psychiatrists by means of trial and error (because as this point, the medical profession actually has no way of knowing which medicine will help which person). Ask you psychiatrist friends.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    If you want to know more, the bibliography for the dissertation I am working on is over 900 sources. They can't all be "charlatans."
    I fail to see the logic there. The number has no relevance to whether they are charlatans or not. It would be trivial to gather a list of 900 charlatans (an index of astrologers would be a good start). It is the quality of their evidence that counts.
    Since I clearly listed a number of those sources, you are not left to guess about their credentials. You may check at your leisure.
    I was not commenting on the status of your sources. Just your statement that there are 900 and [therefore] they can't all be charlatans.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    There is a blatant assumption implied here that mainstream Western medicine has more evidence and verifiable facts on its side than "alternative" medicine. That is a lie. Do you, for instance, know the process by which anti-depressants are invented and prescribed? They are usually found by accident, when the substance is being explored for other uses, then they are cynically marketed by a pharma industry for maximal profit, and then prescribed by physicians and psychiatrists by means of trial and error (because as this point, the medical profession actually has no way of knowing which medicine will help which person). Ask you psychiatrist friends.
    Science has all sorts of serendipitous moments. Where do you think we got post-it notes from?

    As for doctors not knowing which medicine will help which person, doctors are fully aware that when they prescribe antibiotics or painkillers or insulin or thyroxine that different patients will respond differently. They may have to adjust the dose or change to a different formualtion or a different drug entirely. In fact, Some patients may even be allergic to such medications. In case you've never heard the expression before, bear this in mind and keep it close. "Every prescription is an experiment."

    Why do you think all advanced countries maintain records of adverse events for all drugs?

    And if this criticism relates to a belief that 'natural' is better, be warned.
    Yet more evidence that "natural" doesn't necessarily mean "safer" : Respectful Insolence

    Of course, not all herbal products predictably cause cancer. Just as not all sophisticated medications cause problems either.
    KALSTER and Strange like this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    Here is an example of a comment I find personally offensive. There is a blatant assumption implied here that mainstream Western medicine has more evidence and verifiable facts on its side than "alternative" medicine.
    That is obviously true. Mainstream medicine is based on science (and therefore evidence) while alternative medicine is, in general, not based on evidence. In fact, it frequently ignores evidence (e.g. homeopathy ignores all the evidence that magic water does nothing).

    Which is not to say that there are not some "alternative" treatments which are effective. But as someone said: what do you call alternative medicine that works? Medicine.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Moving to pseudo. What started out as something that might turn out to be interesting has quickly devolved into the usual blathering of alternative medicine proponents.
    Here is an example of a comment I find personally offensive. There is a blatant assumption implied here that mainstream Western medicine has more evidence and verifiable facts on its side than "alternative" medicine. That is a lie. Do you, for instance, know the process by which anti-depressants are invented and prescribed? They are usually found by accident, when the substance is being explored for other uses, then they are cynically marketed by a pharma industry for maximal profit, and then prescribed by physicians and psychiatrists by means of trial and error (because as this point, the medical profession actually has no way of knowing which medicine will help which person). Ask you psychiatrist friends.
    No assumptions. Experience. I have been to the Rife forum. I went there to investigate an idea I had about killing viruses by destroying their protein husks with resonance. I was not impressed. Also, in my time on the internet, I have come across legions of alternative medicine proponents and the vast majority of them, after investigating it, turn out to be based on pure pseudoscience and/or blatant lies. A large proportion of it is based on "resonance", "frequencies" and vague references to "energy" and the like. The kind of references you give displays, yet again, that you know very little about the scientific method, understand little about the science and are grasping at various straws based largely on wishful thinking and ignorance. If you find that offensive, so be it, but it is an honest assessment. I am open to being convinced otherwise though, but you are not going to do it with hand waving and alternative medicine buzz words.

    But as someone said: what do you call alternative medicine that works? Medicine.
    Indeed.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    Your opening, emotionally charged remarks are acting as a strong disincentive for me to explore any of your further evidence. Perhaps that is unfortunate; perhaps you'll think more carefully next time you post.
    Dear John, I apologize that my opening remarks offended you.
    You misunderstand me. Your remarks did not offend me, they identified you as someone who probably had little to offer of value. I remain open to the possibility that I am mistaken in this regard, but extensive experience suggests otherwise. It would be pleasant to be proven wrong on this occassion.

    Quote Originally Posted by swissms View Post
    I took from general tone of the preceding discussion that offending remarks are not restrained on this list, as I found many of them offensive as well.
    By application of this concept, if I see someone posting unsubstantiated nonsense, then it is right and proper for me to post unsubstantiated nonsense. I trust you see the illogic in that approach.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Acoustic Entrainment
    By Rae in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 19th, 2012, 10:50 PM
  2. Brain to body or body to brain communication question?
    By Whataday in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: November 15th, 2010, 01:20 PM
  3. How can we find that resonant synchronization?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 3rd, 2009, 12:37 PM
  4. Building an air core resonant transformer.
    By Gmano in forum Electrical and Electronics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 12th, 2009, 11:18 PM
  5. Hello every body
    By neel_bmx in forum Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 18th, 2006, 08:38 PM
Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •