# Anyone seen Thrive - new documentary ?



## tuneinrecords (Nov 27, 2011)

2 hour plus documentary called Thrive just came out on the 11th of the Nov.

Ok for years I thought I was going crazy because everyone in my life thought I was off the deep end. I've read books, watched movies, heard speakers and professionals talking about it. I've always had an open mind and wondered if maybe it was too open and I was wrong. This movie is the best so far at putting the pieces together. My heros in life used to be musicians and they still are to a degree but over the last 5 years my heros have become Nassim Haramein, Graham Hancock, David Wilcock, David Icke, Art Bell, Jordan Maxwell and the like. 

Anyway this movie delves into the construct of reality, free energy, control of information, food, medicine and ultimately all of us and much much more. A lot of it I have been aware of, but like I said this movie really brings it all together in a very eloquent fashion with great computer graphics to drive the point home. I have a very limited number of people in my life who I can talk to about this stuff. I would love to hear opinions and thoughts. I don't want to precipitate hateful bashing and name calling etc.. just a healthy exchange of ideas, opinions etc... even if there are opposing viewpoints.


----------



## Jakke (Nov 27, 2011)

Any movie that gives Chopra any kind of credibility is terrible in my book, because if the filmer has not managed to see Chopra as the quack he is, how is he/she supposed see other things critically?

I am going to see it later, but right now it looks like I have to break out my tin-foil hat first....


Regarding free energy, there is no such thing as a free lunch. That's just how it is. There is no conspiracy, you just can't go against the laws of physics (aren't they a bitch), matter cannot be created.


*EDIT* I just saw that you tagged David Icke.... If he is in a documentary in any other function that to illustrate paranoid psychosis, then I'm probably right in my previous assessment. But I'm gonna watch it


----------



## tuneinrecords (Nov 29, 2011)

Free energy does exist. Watch the movie. You obviously have your mind made up already. Get back to me after you watch it.


----------



## Jakke (Nov 29, 2011)

Double post.


----------



## Jakke (Nov 29, 2011)

Ok, something that the elite of physisists say doesn't exist, but you (without credentials) and a bunch of conspiracy theorists say do...

No, free energy can't exist under our laws of physics, *you can't create energy*!
But I'm sure it is going to be possible if enough people just make movies about it...


David Icke claims extra-terrestial lizards rules the world secretly, and that the Bush family is among them... That is mental illness.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 1, 2011)

But the laws of physics are flawed and just look to see who runs the schools where all these highly credited physicists got their ideas from. It's the same thing in the medical industry. The pharmacy big boys teach the DR's how to treat and not cure diseases. I love how everyone pulls out the "oh you conspiracy people" and David Icke lizard schtick. That negates everything else he has said? I'm sure you use the lizard thing as an excuse to discredit all the other amazing research he has reported on. Explain the rest of the story, not just the easy to poke fun of, ridicule campaign cliched defense. Ever hear of Nikola Tesla? He had the free energy thing down in the late 1800's and the buried him because JP Morgan knew he couldn't make money it. Pioneers in the field of free energy have been murdered as well. Ever hear of Royal Raymond Rife? Same story. He cured cancer in the 1930's and they buried him too. Do the research.


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Dec 1, 2011)

I'm just not going to say anything as it's painfully clear you choose to deny basic physical constraints.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 1, 2011)

*And they are out to get you!*

The video has been removed, so I will have to refute what I can, which is free energy. It's a shame, I looked forward to see it . I admire Tesla highly, but he never got around to free energy, why? Because it is not possible under our physical laws, I have to repeat that over and over it seems. How is even our physical laws flawed?

That you cannot create energy is very easily visualized with an experiment, take a weight, bind it to the end of a piece of string. Now set in motion, what happens with the pendulum? 
It slowly stops, that is because the energy of position it had when you held it is transformed to kinetic energy when it moves, which is converted into energy of friction against the air, that escapes as friction heat. 

Now if energy was able to be created, wouldn't the pendulum speed up then?
The temperature of boiling water in amospheric pressure cannot be rased above 100 degrees celsius, because of the first law, if energy could be created, water could boil to 1000 degrees if you just left it on the stove long enough!
If energy could be created, spontanious self-combustion wouldn't be the stuff of myths.
But, *it's against the first law of thermodynamics*!

The first man who formulated the laws of thermodynamics was Rudolf Clausius, who died in 1888, but I guess he was in on the conspiracy as well?

I would say Icke's lizard idea negates everything else he says, because if he is not a clear enough thinker to see the unreasonable implications of that, how can he be trusted to do any other serious research?


And how, may I ask, was cancer cured in the 1930's?


----------



## K3V1N SHR3DZ (Dec 1, 2011)

Sounds like someone needs CARL SAGAN'S BALONEY DETECTION KIT
Also, RationalWiki is pretty good for debunking.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 1, 2011)

kgad0831 said:


> Sounds like someone needs CARL SAGAN'S BALONEY DETECTION KIT
> Also, RationalWiki is pretty good for debunking.



BUT THEY ARE PART OF THE CONSPIRACY!!!! FOLLOW THE MONEY! FOLLOOOW THE MOOONEY!!!!


Rationalwiki is great, quackwatch.org is also great for more health-related debunking


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Dec 1, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> But the laws of physics are flawed and just look to see who runs the schools where all these highly credited physicists got their ideas from. It's the same thing in the medical industry. The pharmacy big boys teach the DR's how to treat and not cure diseases. I love how everyone pulls out the "oh you conspiracy people" and David Icke lizard schtick. That negates everything else he has said? I'm sure you use the lizard thing as an excuse to discredit all the other amazing research he has reported on. Explain the rest of the story, not just the easy to poke fun of, ridicule campaign cliched defense. Ever hear of Nikola Tesla? He had the free energy thing down in the late 1800's and the buried him because JP Morgan knew he couldn't make money it. Pioneers in the field of free energy have been murdered as well. Ever hear of Royal Raymond Rife? Same story. He cured cancer in the 1930's and they buried him too. Do the research.



[citation needed]


----------



## Jakke (Dec 1, 2011)

dragonblade629 said:


> [citation needed]



Indeed.


----------



## hereticemir (Dec 1, 2011)

since i don't want to watch the movie could you give an example. just want to entertain what have to say


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

dragonblade629 said:


> [citation needed]



As requested - 

Has anyone here ever heard of Nassim Haramein or any of his ground breaking research? He is literally rewriting physics.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

Jakke said:


> *And they are out to get you!*
> 
> 
> And how, may I ask, was cancer cured in the 1930's?



Resonance and frequency. It's like when an opera singer hits the resonant frequency of a wine glass and shatters it. You can do the same thing with cells. Bacteria and funguses for example can be removed from the body this way. You basically rupture the cell. Royal Raymond Rife did this successfully in the 1930's with terminal cancer patients. It's the truth. You just won't hear about it through your doctor because a doctor will lose his license to practice medicine if he uses this technology.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

The fact that EVERYTHING spins is never explained in physics. How about that? That can't explain it. Doesn't that strike you as odd? How can that be? Nassim Haramein explains it. His unified field theory is so much more elegant and simple.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

Jakke said:


> BUT THEY ARE PART OF THE CONSPIRACY!!!! FOLLOW THE MONEY! FOLLOOOW THE MOOONEY!!!!
> 
> 
> Rationalwiki is great, quackwatch.org is also great for more health-related debunking




EXACTLY. Follow the money!!!!


----------



## Jakke (Dec 2, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> EXACTLY. Follow the money!!!!



Yeah, in this case it points to Icke, Chopra and their likes. You don't think they do this out of charity, do you?
See, it works both ways, those guys have earned millions upon millions on their "science". 
Of course they are interested in maintaining that the conspiracy is after you/them/everyone, otherwise Icke won't sell any books, and Chopra cannot continue to adulter real science.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

For anyone who didn't get to see Thrive - Here is another link to the movie if the last one doesn't work anymore.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

Jakke said:


> Yeah, in this case it points to Icke, Chopra and their likes. You don't think they do this out of charity, do you?
> See, it works both ways, those guys have earned millions upon millions on their "science".
> Of course they are interested in maintaining that the conspiracy is after you/them/everyone, otherwise Icke won't sell any books, and Chopra cannot continue to adulter real science.




You can't shoot somebody for supporting themselves through their research. The fact that someone makes money doesn't negate their message. How else can they have the time to do their research? The fact that so many people have bought their books and gone to see them speak is a testament to what they're saying. 

When I say follow the money, I mean follow it to the people who have a monopoly on our medical, education, media, and energy. Yeah it's that wide. Follow the money. 

I couldn't be happier that Icke and Chopra are successful. More power to them.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

Jakke said:


> BUT THEY ARE PART OF THE CONSPIRACY!!!! FOLLOW THE MONEY! FOLLOOOW THE MOOONEY!!!!
> 
> 
> Rationalwiki is great, quackwatch.org is also great for more health-related debunking



Yeah, about your Quackwatch...... BUSTED!!

Homeopathy Critic Stephen Barrett and Quackwatch Busted - Wellsphere


----------



## Jakke (Dec 2, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> You can't shoot somebody for supporting themselves through their research. The fact that someone makes money doesn't negate their message. How else can they have the time to do their research? The fact that so many people have bought their books and gone to see them speak is a testament to what they're saying.
> 
> When I say follow the money, I mean follow it to the people who have a monopoly on our medical, education, media, and energy. Yeah it's that wide. Follow the money.
> 
> I couldn't be happier that Icke and Chopra are successful. More power to them.



So it is okay to be sceptical when _some_ people earn money, but not others?
Just so we are on the same page here...


Mr Icke, a man who also, I have checked now, believes that the moon is a starship, piloted by earlier mentioned reptilians. He frequently associates with characters involved in the Klan and other fringe right groups, this man is not someone to admire, let alone listen to.
Chopra, a man that has a philosophy that he tricks rich western people with, which is rejected by the *entire* medical establishment (but oh yeah, they are all pert of the conspiracy, right? How convenient...). He has no basis in science, and I, as a physical chemist, cringes everytime he uses the word "quantum" to fool people that he has some sort of scientific basis, and that it is not just something he pulled out of his behind and thinks it sounds good.

Have you realized that these sort of conspiracy theorists never has any viable, solid proof for their claims? They toss out accusations, and when people in power refuses to comment, they take it as a confession (as the british royal family refuses to comment on them being reptilians from outer space). 
They fold dollar bills to get some interesting shapes that _irrefutably_ proves that the new world order (the jews) are out to get them. Or when everything else fails, they resort to the book of revelations, a piece of scripture that can, due to it's vague nature, be made to fit any scenario imaginable.

But you are right, there *is* a conspiracy. It is these people that conspire to get your money, your attention, and your time. There is no world-wide consiracy, so they had to invent one themselves. Sadly, people are buying it....


----------



## Jakke (Dec 2, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> Yeah, about your Quackwatch...... BUSTED!!
> 
> Homeopathy Critic Stephen Barrett and Quackwatch Busted - Wellsphere



Again, ask yourself: Who is relaying this information?


In this case, a website that advocates homeopathy (bullshit with a different name). I'd take that information with a truckload of salt...


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 2, 2011)

Jakke said:


> Again, ask yourself: Who is relaying this information?
> 
> 
> In this case, a website that advocates homeopathy (bullshit with a different name). I'd take that information with a truckload of salt...



Wow, really? You explained yourself in that one statement about homeopathy. I can tell it's not even worth carrying on a discussion with you. I'm sure you've done a ton of research into homeopathy and have all kinds of proof that it's "bullshit." Do yourself a favor and stop wasting other people's time with your name calling and posts that have no validation or support. In the future you might do yourself a favor and actually look into the things you're trying to discredit. God forbid, you open your mind up and learn something worth repeating.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 2, 2011)

You guys couldn't be more different... the whole idea of these people is that conventional thinking, conventional science, etc. doesn't work, so of course conventional science won't have anything good to say about them... they don't follow their system! The thing is, science has never known everything, and there are occasionally times when something is learned because science and reality are incongruent. It takes both sides to achieve that knowledge... those who push new ideas, and those who scrutinize them. Whenever something is dismissed because established findings don't match up, someone is missing the point! People have been smart for a long time, and old societies managed to do things that our best scientists, doctors, crafts people and builders can't replicate, so it's not out of the question that some alternative theories actually work... we don't know everything.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 3, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> Wow, really? You explained yourself in that one statement about homeopathy. I can tell it's not even worth carrying on a discussion with you. I'm sure you've done a ton of research into homeopathy and have all kinds of proof that it's "bullshit." Do yourself a favor and stop wasting other people's time with your name calling and posts that have no validation or support. In the future you might do yourself a favor and actually look into the things you're trying to discredit. God forbid, you open your mind up and learn something worth repeating.



Homeopathy has not been able to prove any effectivity beyond placebo.
Lets illustrate with an example:

The smallest active unit that has to be present in a medicine is an atom or molecule, right?
In chemistry, we have a constant called avogadros number, that one tells us how many atoms or molecules there is in one mole (not the animal, it's unit of measurment that is unique for every compound). Avogadros number is 6.022*10^23, so in one mole of gold, ethanol, cyanide, carbon and so forth there is 6.022*10^23 atoms/molecules.

Now, do you know how they make a homeopathic remedie?
They dissolve an ingredient (snake venom, pox spores, a plant, or some other voodoo) into water or ethanol. That is called the mother tincure. They then take one part from the mother tincture and dilute it in 100 parts purified water, that solution is now called "1C". 
I say that we take one mole of table salt (58.44 gram), NaCl, and we make a homeopathic remedie of it.

If we carry this beyond 1C, interesting things happen. Let's find out!

2C = 2.022*10^19 molecules
3C = 2.022*10^17
4C = 2.022*10^15

And since I don't want to bore you with calculations, I'll skip to the interesting part:

10C = 6022 molecules
11C = 60,22 
12C = 0.6 molecules left

Do you also see the problem? At 12C (that is a pretty strong homeopathic remedy, most are diluted even further), we has *less* than *one* atom present, that is called the avogadro limit, there is no actual molecules left!
For a chemist to pursue further is pointless, since we actually are concerned about science. 
There is a probablitity of 0.6 that you will find *one* atom in a 12C solution!
The largest concentration of homeopatic medicine is 3C (diluted one in one million (100*100*100), and I have loaned an example for this: If you would dilute a conventional medicine to this grade.. We say you take a tablespoon(5ml), you have to dillute it in 4,999,995 ml of water, that is about 26 standard bath tubs...
It is not uncommon to have 500-800C "medicines", so if 3C is one spoonful in 26 bath tubs, then 500C is..... 4333 bath tubs worth of water...


You are buying just water, and those extreme trace-amounts that _might_ be present is not effective for jack shit. You do not cure a snakebite with more venom, you cure it with antidote, something modern medical science has developed.

When there is some alternative cure being pushed, ask yourself: what diseases has this branch of medicine eradicated?
Conventional medicine has taken care of:
Smallpox
and 
Rinderpest

We are currently starting to get rid of:
Polio
Dracunculiasis
Malaria
Measles
Rubella

What has alternative medicine gotten rid of? How many children has it saved form smallpox or measles?

-I think you know the answer to that one, and if these dangerous charlatans are allowed to call themselves medicine any longer, people will die. Just as simple as that, they will die.


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Dec 3, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> As requested -
> 
> Has anyone here ever heard of Nassim Haramein or any of his ground breaking research? He is literally rewriting physics.








tuneinrecords said:


> Wow, really? You explained yourself in that one statement about homeopathy. I can tell it's not even worth carrying on a discussion with you. I'm sure you've done a ton of research into homeopathy and have all kinds of proof that it's "bullshit." Do yourself a favor and stop wasting other people's time with your name calling and posts that have no validation or support. In the future you might do yourself a favor and actually look into the things you're trying to discredit. God forbid, you open your mind up and learn something worth repeating.



Want proof is bullshit? 

My aunt had pancreatic cancer, she wasn't sure of surgery/chemotherapy so she got convinced to try homeopathic "medicine". Suffice to say it didn't work, and she ended up dying before the actual medicine could do any good. 

You know who else was a victim of homeopathy? Steve Jobs, for the same reason as my aunt.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 3, 2011)

dragonblade629 said:


> Want proof is bullshit?
> 
> My aunt had pancreatic cancer, she wasn't sure of surgery/chemotherapy so she got convinced to try homeopathic "medicine". Suffice to say it didn't work, and she ended up dying before the actual medicine could do any good.



I'm so sorry man


This was pretty enlightening:

Nassim Haramein- Fraud or sage?


There _might_ be a reason why he is ignored by the physics establishment


----------



## Cancer (Dec 3, 2011)

Free energy is a misnomer. AFAIK no one who is really involved in the "free energy" movement believes that you create more energy than already exist in the universe. It's more about increasing energy efficiency to point where it ceases to be a scarce commodity. We've had (notice the tense) technologies that do just that, and the recent (?!??!?) discoveries into the use of toroids make me confident that energy will cease to be a scarcity in my lifetime......


----------



## hereticemir (Dec 3, 2011)

david icke when he played guitar


----------



## hereticemir (Dec 3, 2011)

you seem to be really open minded and accept anything that is giving in a semi professinal, public format, I'm pretty sure hitler did the same thing when convincing the german the jews were evil reptiles that wanted your money. Oh wait that wasn't true but masses went along for the ride anyway didn't they


----------



## Necris (Dec 3, 2011)

During the winter the skin on my hands occasionally gets dry and scaly. Is that my reptilian DNA showing? When do I get to go fly the moon?


----------



## Cancer (Dec 3, 2011)

So I checked out the video, Thrive, and have a couple of thoughts.

A. Glad to see other sources commenting on the current toroidal theories currently making the rounds on the internet. Much of the of hardcore stuff (like the Rodin coil stuff, and even some of Bryanson "Imaging the 10th Dimension" comments, are really out there, almost too the point where I get the impression that they may be discovering concepts that are so "out there" that their vocabularies are too limited to express it).

B. Alot of the "one-world government" stuff and the fractional reserve has been covered by others movements, specifically the Zeitgeist movement. It's good to see it in other venues, that means the word is spreading. This is a good thing.

C. I could have done without alot of the high-end cg stuff though. Sorry, it just triggers my "cynicism issues", and make me feel like i'm watching a tv commercial, moreso than a "documentary".

D. Despite my "cynicism issues" I find it interesting and fascinating that a video like this is produced by the a "family member of the Gambles" (put in quotes only because I haven't researched it yet). If this guy really a member from the Gamble family (ie. Proctor & Gamble) then this make another example of a member from the "well-to-do" family using their monetary resources to attempt to effect societal change. This, also, is a good thing.

E. He lost me at his "three stage plan" at the end of the video. In the Zeitgeist movement, currently there are two general plans for moving forward, "Remedial" and "Revolution". His plan falls under the remedial plan, which IMO is just a bandage to much bigger sick. His plan still calls for the use of the money, which IMO, if he truly wants a world that he envisioned, it can't have. IMO you will never get the world that he envisioned with a monetary system. If you want end poverty, create abundance, and have any sort of chance of lasting world peace, it must be resource based, with an eye to managing the planet as a singular system (and no I'm not talking about a "New World Order" which is most people think of when you start talking about a singular world system of resource management).

Other than that, good find. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Necris (Dec 3, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> But the laws of physics are flawed...





Overtone said:


> The thing is, science has never known everything, and there are occasionally times when something is learned because science and reality are incongruent.



I love these old fall backs. It's as if you believe that just because new research in one area of science/physics/etc. has found an old theory to be flawed or invalidated entirely that there is some possibility that your viewpoint on an often times unrelated topic will be validated in the future and therefore you can ignore the current accepted knowledge of science/physics/etc. That's not even reasonable doubt, that's pure desperation.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 3, 2011)

Necris said:


> I love these old fall backs. It's as if you believe that just because new research in one area of science/physics/etc. has found an old theory to be flawed or invalidated entirely that there is some possibility that your viewpoint on an often times unrelated topic will be validated in the future and therefore you can ignore the current accepted knowledge of science/physics/etc. That's not even reasonable doubt, that's pure desperation.



It's pretty much a non-theistic variation of "god of the gaps". 


And that is usually an instant :banhammer: in any discussion..



Yeah, I saw my post count \m/, so I'm just gonna reply here for this time

Science is a self-correcting process, so when we are not right, we do over until we are right. Therefore there is no use in listening to these individuals on the fringe, all they do is sow confusion.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 3, 2011)

Nice post count \m/

That's oversimplified, though... you don't ignore the current accepted scientific information, you just try to acknowledge that it's not absolutely correct 100% of the time, and therefore entertain ideas that are currently rejected.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 3, 2011)

I've been making my way through the docu since last night and it's interesting. I don't know about the conclusions or the new ideas, but like Cancer, I think it is good that they are continuing to bring attention to important information like banking, agriculture, etc.. Whether their idea about energy proves to be correct or hocus pocus or what, it's still good to think about it hypothetically... if something like that is out there, who would be suppressing it and why. At the end of the day it might not be torroidal energy but something else, but it'll be the same people opposing it. I'm interested to see what they say about their energy system... so far all they've really shown is that certain patterns are found repeatedly in nature and in different civilizations, which doesn't really prove anything.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 3, 2011)

Interesting watch. But I feel like there is always a problem with these kind of thinkers. It's almost like a self fulfilling prophecy... everything is out of their control because of x conspiracy. They stress out about their world, and the things in their lives, but they are unwilling to leave the life they know behind and get away from the influences they feel are holding them back. Then there are people who don't really obsess over this stuff, yet they've fearlessly pursued a totally different lifestyle than what would be conventional. Most of us won't leave our job, or house, whatever it is, and then there are those who go out to some middle of nowhere place and turn into nature boy. Ultimately that seems to be the bigger factor in how free we are living, and it may be something innate to each person. So being aware of how we are being controlled doesn't do much good if we were born to basically continue the lives we already have. That touches on another issue... are people being controlled, is there something being done to make them compliant, or are they really just ok with someone else being in charge and following traditions and conventions. I think it's the latter. So at the end of the day, they aren't being "wronged"... they get what they deserve because they never aspired to greater freedom and independence. In a nutshell, if you're not already someone who gets out there and lives life on your own terms, it's not enough to become aware of the cage you're in if you want to be free. Blaming Rothcilds or aliens or chemtrails and HAARP won't help you.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 3, 2011)

double derp


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 3, 2011)

Necris said:


> I love these old fall backs. It's as if you believe that just because new research in one area of science/physics/etc. has found an old theory to be flawed or invalidated entirely that there is some possibility that your viewpoint on an often times unrelated topic will be validated in the future and therefore you can ignore the current accepted knowledge of science/physics/etc. That's not even reasonable doubt, that's pure desperation.



I think this stems from not understanding the difference between a scientific theory, like gravity, which is definitely existent but we are unable to explain, with what most people regard as a theory, which is nothing more than an idea they had. 

Gravity is only a theory, so you know, it might not apply to me sometimes .


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 5, 2011)

Overtone said:


> You guys couldn't be more different... the whole idea of these people is that conventional thinking, conventional science, etc. doesn't work, so of course conventional science won't have anything good to say about them... they don't follow their system! The thing is, science has never known everything, and there are occasionally times when something is learned because science and reality are incongruent. It takes both sides to achieve that knowledge... those who push new ideas, and those who scrutinize them. Whenever something is dismissed because established findings don't match up, someone is missing the point! People have been smart for a long time, and old societies managed to do things that our best scientists, doctors, crafts people and builders can't replicate, so it's not out of the question that some alternative theories actually work... we don't know everything.



Very well said!


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 5, 2011)

dragonblade629 said:


> Want proof is bullshit?
> 
> My aunt had pancreatic cancer, she wasn't sure of surgery/chemotherapy so she got convinced to try homeopathic "medicine". Suffice to say it didn't work, and she ended up dying before the actual medicine could do any good.
> 
> You know who else was a victim of homeopathy? Steve Jobs, for the same reason as my aunt.



Hey, all differences aside, I'm truly sorry for the loss of your aunt. I can relate to losing people in my life to cancer. I feel that is at the core of my search for alternatives. I've sadly had 2 aunts and 1 uncle die after receiving chemo and radiation. My mother and another aunt currently are going through treatments of their own. I don't know of any family that isn't affected in one way or another by cancer. In any situation whether it's the radiation/chemo route or the holistic methods, people are all different with varying degrees of illness. Unfortunately some people are simply too far gone to be helped. You can't paint with such a broad brush stroke and state that a given treatment is quackery because not everyone was saved by it. Now I've also got a friend who cured her husbands prostate cancer with a Rife machine. My own doctor uses a Rife machine at home as well. To everyone who has been affected by cancer I'm truly sorry and hope that people will someday be able have all the information and recourses available to cure themselves rather than simply treat their diseases.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 5, 2011)

To anyone who doesn't believe that there is a conspiracy to control money and information in the world, how do you explain the fact that a privately owned bank supersedes all other government agencies and elected officials in the US? Doesn't that alone raise a big red flag? 

There is a war on information in our world today and whether you like it or not, it has shaped everyone of us for better and for worse. I think that is at the center of all of this. Knowledge is power. 

When someone has a toxic body ripe for cancer, the illness or disease is not the cause but rather the symptom. Radiation and chemo don't address the root cause of why one has developed into a state of illness. It's only treating the symptoms. 

About homeopathic doctors. Mine saved my life. Rather than have myself radiated and pilled up, I detoxed my body, went through chelation, changed my diet and now I no longer have a toxic body. I basically rebuilt my intestinal tract by wiping it all out with something called belly jelly. It's made out of soil from France. Yes that's right, soil contains billions of tiny little bacteria which can be very beneficial to us. Anyway, I won't get into all the different supplements and pro-biotics that I took, but basically instead of masking the symptoms of my disease, we went to the root cause of it, addressed the issue and went from there. Anyway, that's just a little bit about how homeopathy worked for me. I still to this day utilize aromatherapy and frequency to help maintain my healthy balance along with a mostly organic diet and some really great supplements. For me it wasn't until I lost my health and lost family to cancer that I got into researching alternatives. What works for me might not be for everyone else but at least I can say I went through hell and back and am a stronger person for it. You might all disagree with me, but that's fine. That's not what matters in my life. What matters is that I'm healthy and armed with the information that will help me stay that way.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 5, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> soil contains billions of tiny little bacteria which can be very beneficial to us.



Yeah? Do know what else is in dirt? E-coli and the botulinus bacteria, and in greater number than any supposed healthy bacteria. There is a reason why we wash salad before we use it. Botulism is some serious shit, you will possibly die.

Let's face it, the placebo effect is some powerful stuff, and the whole detoxing thing has already been torn apart in another thread (thanks USMarine and Explorer for your help), basically:

1. No-onw has been able to prove that a body accumulates toxins the way alternative medicine claims.
2. No-one has ever isolated one of those "toxins".
3. No medical professional recognizes alternative therapies like detoxing (oh yeah, there's a conspiracy...).
4. No-one has been able show any sort of mechanism of the detoxing should work.
5. Chelation has no recognized benefit beyond acute heavy metal poisoning, yeah... You'd notice the difference.
6. It just doesn't fucking work!


You have been taken for a ride, the placebo effect cured you, and nothing more. 
"Well the end justifies the means, right?"- you think
No, it does not, in these matters, truth is important, and these hacks are not honest.
I have no qualms with a vegan diet though, that is the least voodoo.



And regarding modern medicine only hiding symptomes....

May I refer you to a previous post on eradicated diseases. Are you seriously proposing smallpox is "hiding" and is not really eradicated?


----------



## Fiction (Dec 5, 2011)

As Jakke said, the Placebo effect is quite a powerful tool to have, it can swing both ways.. as you have said you've had some bad experiences with family and conventional science, which would relay what I think was coined as Nocebo, which is basically even if it works, you'll still feel terrible.

I found this when looking for some information on Rife Treatment;

Cheating death - Australia's battle with Rife machine quackery

It seems his (the father from the first story) cancer was being cured to begin with after giving up on conventional, to turn to alternative. In the end, what in your words should have "cured" him, it did nothing.. the placebo effect masked some illness, but as soon as he dropped the conventional pills, it took a turn for the worst.. as now it _actually was getting worse. _While deaths still happen with conventional science, there is solid proof that it works unless entitled a theory. But Radiation therapy, or chemotherapy isn't a theory, it has proof that it works.. but sometimes cases are just incurable, its sad, but its the way it is.. and I could not turn to alternative methods with a lack of proof of actually working.

As for Aromatherapy, there is little to no proof that it actually helps in anyway other then mentally, which does help to an extent, but proper medication is needed for some illnesses. While, i'm sure it would be a great thing to compliment conventional methods as a relaxation tool, I would not focus on it to actually help cure it, by itself.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 5, 2011)

I just looked up Rife machines, and as I can see, they are based on a false assumption. Disease-causing agents does *not* emit radio-like frequencies. 
So if a device is made to treat a disease through a certain property of the disease, and that property does not exist... What good does the device then do?

It's kind of like assuming that water is solid, and then taking a strainer to carry the solid water in....


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

Why be so black and white? My experiences have lead me to believe that traditional doctors are helpful, but they're not the only people who can be helpful. They seem to habitually overlook the broader issue and simplify things. I have been to several ENTs because of my recurring sinusitis and only one bothered to ask if I'm sleeping well, exercising, and eating fresh food. The latest one wants to try surgery already just because one month of antibiotics didn't clear it up. I asked her if food could have any role and she said that since I don't have stomach problems, I don't have a food allergy, therefore it's not food related. Then I was chatting with an acupuncturist friend and he immediately suggested I cut down on foods with refined carbohydrates, because the higher insulin levels cause inflammation. Inflammation is exactly why my sinuses get blocked up first, and then infected. I tried his suggestion, in addition to eating as much fresh fruit and vegetables as I can manage, and I'm a lot better! In the ENT's book, she checked the few basic things she always checked, tried antibiotics, and that's the end of the story... she's not going to be thinking about blood sugar or why my tissues might be inflamed, because she doesn't think about the body as a whole system... just my nose and sinuses. It's ridiculous that we hear day in day out about cheerios and blueberries as things that will improve our health, but doctors still aren't considering that diet can have more subtle effects on our health than outright allergic reactions. The condition of the body is without a doubt related to what we eat. Our illnesses are related to the condition of the body. Trying to treat without considering that relationship can lead to overlooking important details. That is why I try to consider more perspectives than the ones that have been approved by the medical community. I am not a scientist or a medical student... I don't have a reason to only consider things that have gone through that process. It seems narrow minded to think that anything that hasn't been supported by scientific research must immediately be dismissed.


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 6, 2011)

Yes western doctors for minor things tend to treat symptoms, however altering your diet doesn't justify the homeopathic nonsense in any way shape or form. Doctors start on an assumption, you are getting proper activity and a good diet. A bad assumption, granted, but that is typically how it goes. The general approach of the recognized doctor even when ineffective, does not magically make the other methods effective though. They are still, largely, bullshit. 

If there is no scientific research to support it, yes there is no reason to believe in the medicine qualities of an item. May as well chase after pixie dust otherwise.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

Well that's why it's good to take multiple perspectives into account. The homeopath may be more focused on the overall things happening in the person's body than the typical doctor, so you end up hearing things a doctor wouldn't tell you. Their assumption is that since the patient is sick, there IS an imbalance in their daily lifestyle, and they immediately try to think of what that might be. In my case I even told the doctor my problems seemed to have a relationship to what I was eating and explained that and she didn't have anything productive to say. That doesn't mean go out and find a crystal healer... just that seeking multiple views can help one procure information that one source may neglect to provide.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

As to your second point, that seems to make the assumption that medical research has completed it's objective in every possible area. A decade ago there was no research to support many of the things that are accepted by default nowadays. It will always be that way. If you only consider confirmed medical findings, you will be limited to the current level of research available. On the other hand, there are traditional (ie. they are going by a tradition passed on from generation to generation) healers who know of foods and herbs that have not YET been confirmed to be useful by the medical community, but they will be in the future. If it doesn't harm you to try their approach, and you can afford to, then why not give it a shot? Scientists are always disputing each other's findings, and what's valid today may be invalid tomorrow, and vice versa. It's a great process for them, but for the patient it can pay off to go beyond that perspective. In the case of traditional medicines (in the sense I mentioned above), at least they have something that has been steady across the generations. They may not always be right, but I think that herbal medicine in particular can be very helpful in ways that are more subtle than what the scientific process has the ability to recognize. I'm talking about things like wild thyme, nettle leaf, etc. that have been used for generations. If you've ever stood in a place where wild thyme grows and taken a deep breath you will know exactly how powerful that stuff is!


----------



## Jakke (Dec 6, 2011)

Overtone said:


> Why be so black and white? My experiences have lead me to believe that traditional doctors are helpful, but they're not the only people who can be helpful. They seem to habitually overlook the broader issue and simplify things. I have been to several ENTs because of my recurring sinusitis and only one bothered to ask if I'm sleeping well, exercising, and eating fresh food. The latest one wants to try surgery already just because one month of antibiotics didn't clear it up. I asked her if food could have any role and she said that since I don't have stomach problems, I don't have a food allergy, therefore it's not food related. Then I was chatting with an acupuncturist friend and he immediately suggested I cut down on foods with refined carbohydrates, because the higher insulin levels cause inflammation. Inflammation is exactly why my sinuses get blocked up first, and then infected. I tried his suggestion, in addition to eating as much fresh fruit and vegetables as I can manage, and I'm a lot better! In the ENT's book, she checked the few basic things she always checked, tried antibiotics, and that's the end of the story... she's not going to be thinking about blood sugar or why my tissues might be inflamed, because she doesn't think about the body as a whole system... just my nose and sinuses. It's ridiculous that we hear day in day out about cheerios and blueberries as things that will improve our health, but doctors still aren't considering that diet can have more subtle effects on our health than outright allergic reactions. The condition of the body is without a doubt related to what we eat. Our illnesses are related to the condition of the body. Trying to treat without considering that relationship can lead to overlooking important details. That is why I try to consider more perspectives than the ones that have been approved by the medical community. I am not a scientist or a medical student... I don't have a reason to only consider things that have gone through that process. It seems narrow minded to think that anything that hasn't been supported by scientific research must immediately be dismissed.



When it comes to medicine, there are peoples lives at stake, therefore it is dangerous and reckless to treat alternative therapies as equal to modern medicine. Modern medicine is proven to work, it is proven to saves lives.

What is now called alternative medicine was once common medicine, the average lifespan was 55, 50% of all children died before one year of age.
Alternative or old medicine had it's chance, it wasn't working, we invented modern medicine.
Now quacks wants us to go back to the superstitious voodoo that once was called medicine, and people are letting them.

Never forget, it's people's lives we are talking about here, would you be willing to gamble with them?


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

It's just as much of a gamble to treat everything a doctor tells you as 100% fact without considering the matter for yourself and seeking alternative perspectives, both from doctors and other people who are not considered doctors but have some kind of knowledge of illness and healing. I know of too many people who have lost their lives or had their lives changed for the worse because the first doctor they saw, or first several doctors they saw, ignored a critical issue. 

6:45 here for an example


Another example is my sister who nearly died, and has permanent brain damage, because the first doctor didn't realize what was happening when my parents brought her in. If they hadn't reconsidered his diagnosis any sooner and brought her to the ER she would not have made it. The daughter of a family friend who died from sepsis that could have been identified in the ER but wasn't... she had a wound that got cut open again and they simply wrapped it back up and sent her on her way. These are all cases of doctors failing to be good doctors, but that is why I first became skeptical and learned to always question the advice instead of accepting it as fact. But now I feel like the profession as a whole fails in certain areas, because I can see multiple specialists and they'll all make the same mistake. I'm not going to ignore or avoid them, but I'm going to consider other views. Cutting down on sugar and eating fresh food isn't going to kill me. Neither will sinusitis that doesn't heal. And I'm sure as hell not going to spend all my money running around doing tests and putting myself under the knife without thinking for myself about what could be wrong, and trying to address the problem... definitely not for a doctor who sits for 2 minutes and basically works through their checklist as fast as they can so they can see the next patient at their overbooked clinic, and won't consider the broader issues such as WHY am I getting sick.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 6, 2011)

Overtone said:


> It's just as much of a gamble to treat everything a doctor tells you as 100% fact without considering the matter for yourself and seeking alternative perspectives, both from doctors and other people who are not considered doctors but have some kind of knowledge of illness and healing. I know of too many people who have lost their lives or had their lives changed for the worse because the first doctor they saw, or first several doctors they saw, ignored a critical issue.
> 
> Another example is my sister who nearly died, and has permanent brain damage, because the first doctor didn't realize what was happening when my parents brought her in. If they hadn't reconsidered his diagnosis any sooner and brought her to the ER she would not have made it. The daughter of a family friend who died from sepsis that could have been identified in the ER but wasn't... she had a wound that got cut open again and they simply wrapped it back up and sent her on her way. These are all cases of doctors failing to be good doctors, but that is why I first became skeptical and learned to always question the advice instead of accepting it as fact. But now I feel like the profession as a whole fails in certain areas, because I can see multiple specialists and they'll all make the same mistake. I'm not going to ignore or avoid them, but I'm going to consider other views. Cutting down on sugar and eating fresh food isn't going to kill me. Neither will sinusitis that doesn't heal. And I'm sure as hell not going to spend all my money running around doing tests and putting myself under the knife without thinking for myself about what could be wrong, and trying to address the problem... definitely not for a doctor who sits for 2 minutes and basically works through their checklist as fast as they can so they can see the next patient at their overbooked clinic, and won't consider the broader issues such as WHY am I getting sick.



So, because not everyone gets cured, you should examine concepts that has been proven not to have any effect at all?


It's very sad in cases like your sister or your family friend that was not treated properly and suffered for that. But some cases are also impossible to detect, how good of a doctor you are. That does not mean that the whole concept is flawed.

When dealing with biological issues, there are no absolutes, a tumour does not look the same with every person, symptoms does not manifest the same with everyone. People get mistreated, that is always going to happen.

But since you brought it up, do you think a homeopath or some other quack would have been able to detect Zappa's cancer and treat it more effectively than conventional medicine?


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

No. Like I said, those cases are where I learned to question doctors in the first place and always seek a second opinion from another doc in what could be a life or death matter. Then I went beyond that and now try to consider other perspectives in treating illness in addition to western medicine, not because of, as I put it, "doctors failing as doctors", but because in some areas, particularly having to do with how diet affects one's health, pretty much anyone from "the system" will fail in the same way. I don't consider it alternative medicine that what you eat affects your wellbeing (and I don't think anyone does), I just think that alternative practitioners are more likely to consider that aspect of your overall health. And when I see a repeated pattern of ENTs overlooking this important information, I have to think independently and see what other schools have to say. After all, it's also reckless and dangerous to take lots of doses of antibiotics and to have surgery performed repeatedly (I've had it done once already) without considering that there could be other factors at play. If surgery and antibiotics can be avoided, it's worth considering alternative perspectives.


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 6, 2011)

Pretty sure Doctors have been telling everybody to eat healthy for quite a while now. 

That's a pretty bad example you've got there.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

Not really... there's a difference between giving general advice like that and failing to see a connection between a specific food and a specific symptom.


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 6, 2011)

Your symptoms weren't from a specific food, they were from a whole type of foods. 

Eating shitty food is bad for you. Doctors have been telling you that forever ("You are what you eat") since you decided to eat shitty food Doctors looked for ways to help you without making you change your life. 

It's a shitty fucking example. It's actually such an unbelievable bad example that I can't fathom why you'd even try and use it as an argument. 

"Change your diet and stop eating those bad foods," isn't even homeopathic medicine so even if it was a good example it wouldn't even be an argument for homeopathic medicine.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 6, 2011)

^
Homeopathy is the notion that water has "memory", and has, as AxeHappy said, nothing to do with diet.

It's a bit like saying a cardiologist deals with the brain, it simply does not compute.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

Right, but after mentioning things like what i was eating to the ent she said there was no connection. The friend who makes a living off accupuncture was the only one to mention to try to cut back on sugar. Hence, homeopaths are likely to give information the doctors dont in my shitty example. The doctor wanted to try surgery before even considering a diet change. I dont know why thats difficult for you to understand, axehappy. If you were in my shoes would you want to pay over a thousand dollars for surgery, be off the job for a week and risk complications right off the bat if you had other options? Use that thing you call a brain.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 6, 2011)

Ok, my bad for using homeopathy as a broad term to refer to alternative practitioners in general, but thats still no reason to be a condescending dick. Is your daddy a doctor?


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 7, 2011)

Nope. My father was an electrician and now runs a print shop out of my parents house. Also, I live in Canada so the surgery would have been free.

Also, Also:
Science has proven that acupuncture is a bunch of bullshit. Oh rather, it works. But it's no more effective that randomly have monkeys jam needles into your body. 

Also, Also, Also:
My whole point is that doctors have been giving you that advice forever. They already gave it to you. And you ignored it. So they moved onto something else. 

The problem is your giving credit to somebody else for something doctor's already told you and then raging at the doctors for not telling you. 

Bad fucking example.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 7, 2011)

And my father was in the military


_Lieutenant colonel_, if I may:squitn:


----------



## Overtone (Dec 7, 2011)

Jakke youre cool, you arent some random weirdo who came out of nowehere. You are persistent, but nothing wrong w that. I was talking to crappy


----------



## Jakke (Dec 7, 2011)

I was just saying that to be safe than sorry


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 7, 2011)




----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 7, 2011)

Overtone said:


> Jakke youre cool, you arent *some random weirdo* who came out of nowehere. You are persistent, but nothing wrong w that. I was *talking to crappy*




Nice.

Not my fault your argument was completely flawed in it's very premise.

It's always good to attack a person instead of ideas though.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 7, 2011)

^'s called Ad Hominem, which is latin for "on the person/human".


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 7, 2011)

Yup, logical fallacies are awesome. They're what makes politics work right?


----------



## Overtone (Dec 7, 2011)

It is your fault you approached it like a sarcastic douche.


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 7, 2011)

Overtone said:


> It is your fault you approached it like a sarcastic douche.



So you ran out of arguments and will persist with name calling? Great work there.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 7, 2011)

Let's chill out, or there will be some naps. K?


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

AxeHappy said:


> Nope. My father was an electrician and now runs a print shop out of my parents house. Also, I live in Canada so the surgery would have been free.
> 
> Also, Also:
> Science has proven that acupuncture is a bunch of bullshit. Oh rather, it works. But it's no more effective that randomly have monkeys jam needles into your body.
> ...




Science has proven.... science is GOD.... science this and that.... Wake up. Science, history, medicine, etc.... None of it is immune to corruption, greed and politics. Are you that naive to believe that things in our world are perfect with only the best intentions for everyone? C'mon really? 

Something like acupuncture which has been around for 1000's of years is wrong because you heard about it on MSN or from some other "trust worthy" news outlet in todays horribly slanted and co-opted media? I don't think so. Acupuncture and all other alternative measures are wrong in the eyes of our mainstream doctors because it's taking away from their profits and control. 

Hey ever notice how no one is allowed to use the word cure? That mainstream doctors and hospitals only "treat" disease? You know why? Because once you cure someone, you can't make any more money off of them. It costs at least 300,000 dollars here in the US to die from cancer. Isn't that interesting? You guys with all your big statements about how all this is bullshit and quackery, I know I'm not going to change your minds on this. 

I'd like to hear your opinion on organic vs GMO foods. How about chem trails or HAARP? BTW there are videos on youtube of cells under a microscope being ruptured and destroyed through resonance. It's not bullshit. It's real. Yes mainstream propaganda will have you believe their methods are it. I can't blame you for your view points, but in my opinion you should let go of how much you know and realize how little you know. It's then that you'll be able to let down your guard and open up to other possibilities. I love how you somehow without even meeting me can assess my medical condition and how my doctor's voodoo advice cured me through the placebo effect. Please. This is too much. 

Isn't it interesting how much effort the government puts into suppressing such info and alternative health measures? If the stuff is quackery then why spend millions of dollars trying to cover it up? I understand the argument that they don't want people to fall for the snake oil salesmen stuff, but this stuff we're talking about is not voodoo despite your efforts to label it as such.

For those of you who blindly trust your Dr.'s advice. Do you blindly trust your politicians advice? Do you blindly trust the car salesmen trying to sell you a lemon?

On a slightly different subject, look up the NDAA now that it is about to be signed into law. I'll see you all at camp FEMA next summer. They're beginning to staff these places and they're getting ready to fill them up - WITH US. This is courtesy of the same system that suppresses information and cures for diseases. Wake up!! I do enjoy discussing these things and trading off on ideas here, but I'm afraid there's a shit storm brewin' and we've all got a long dark road ahead of us regardless of what we may believe to be real and what we believe to be quackery. Truth is stranger than fiction my friends.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Jakke said:


> Yeah? Do know what else is in dirt? E-coli and the botulinus bacteria, and in greater number than any supposed healthy bacteria. There is a reason why we wash salad before we use it. Botulism is some serious shit, you will possibly die.
> 
> Let's face it, the placebo effect is some powerful stuff, and the whole detoxing thing has already been torn apart in another thread (thanks USMarine and Explorer for your help), basically:
> 
> ...



You are making some really big claims here. The body doesn't accumulate toxins? There's no benefit to detoxing? Chelation doesn't work? I disagree wholeheartedly with you. I did have heavy metal poisoning. Lead to be precise. Yeah, chelation worked plain and simple. No it was not a placebo effect. If the body does not accumulate toxins then why do people get sick, get cancer, etc..? 

So what of all those people who won class action lawsuits against their employers for asbestos exposure? I suppose they didn't really accumulate toxins in their bodies and it was all make believe? I don't get your logic. You have so much to say but I'm beginning to wonder if you're being payed by someone to post these things. 

I never said they hide symptoms - they treat symptoms - not the root cause of them. 

And you're right I was taken for a ride by all the other dr.'s who didn't help me until I got my homeopath. You are sorely mistaken in a lot of your view points. I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree here because obviously there's no convincing anyone here of anything. Good day!


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> *Why be so black and white?* My experiences have lead me to believe that traditional doctors are helpful, but they're not the only people who can be helpful. They seem to habitually overlook the broader issue and simplify things. *... acupuncturist friend...* It seems narrow minded to think that anything that hasn't been supported by scientific research must immediately be dismissed.



Ho-lee shit. 

Friend, did you know that accupuncture was heavily promoted at the time of the Cultural Revolution in Communist China as being superior to Western medicine? Meanwhile, as they were distributing faked films to get the peasants to accept the practice, the powerful were actually travelling to be treated with Western medicine.

Here's the thing: You seem to be attributing some sort of bad reputation to things being black and white, while Western medicine actually does use a black/white paradigm: Does it work? If not, don't use it, and move on.

I was fortunately enough to live in the Bethesda area and to work on the NIH campus during the period the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine was established. They try to be nice about things, but areas which didn't manage to muster any evidence through double-blind studies just never rose to the level of medicine. And, if a treatment does manage to rise to such a level, it's accepted. That's the way science (and Western medicine) works, while most complementary and alternative medicines do NOT abandon disproven ideas (like the subluxation, which has failed numerous studies when even trained chiropractors couldn't consistently identify them). 

Here's a nice page they wrote on homeopathy:

Homeopathy: An Introduction [NCCAM Backgrounder]

Given how quickly Western medicine accepted that antibiotics could treat ulcers, and thus undermined the market for ulcer medications, I think I'd have a hard time saying there was a money motive involved. However... homeopathy has managed to remain out of regulatory problems because of the huge amount of lobbying they do, and the money they pay. Interesting, no? 

As you note, Western medicine knows more now than it did a decade ago. That's always true, in the same way that chiropractic still has as a core belief, that misalignment of the spine is the cause of all illness. (Weirdly enough, that's the same simplification which you accused Western medicine of making... although normally doctors will perform a battery of tests to find the root cause of issues, and don't treat everything with antibiotics or with sticking a needle in someone... which, of course, you might view as a perfectly acceptable simplification, for whatever inconsistent reason. 

@the OP - You asked why your topic about chem trails, rife with conspiracy theory, was closed immediately. It's because the rules don't allow trolling in P&CE. You seem to lack the insight which others might have, but let me tell you that you suffer from confirmation bias: you accept things which reward your beliefs, while rejecting better established and mroe reliable sources. 

However, you did put up a few talking points which are easily dealt with:



tuneinrecords said:


> Hey ever notice how no one is allowed to use the word cure? That mainstream doctors and hospitals only "treat" disease? You know why? Because once you cure someone, you can't make any more money off of them. It costs at least 300,000 dollars here in the US to die from cancer. Isn't that interesting? You guys with all your big statements about how all this is bullshit and quackery, I know I'm not going to change your minds on this.



Hey, the Big Cancer Conspiracy raises its head! I love this one!

Here's what the premises of what you're stating:

The fact is that there is absolutely no money to be made by actually selling a cure for cancer.

There are no incredibly rich people with cancer who would pay any price to remain alive. 

There is no pharmaceutical company who wants to make money, either from the super rich or from those who want to preserve the lives of their family members. All those who go into debt to potentially save the lives of a loved one don't really exist.

There is also no doctor alive who is willing to be known as the doctor who can not just treat, but can also completely cure cancer.

Wut?

All it would take was one company, one doctor, to destroy such a conspiracy. Just one to bring such a thing to market. The need to expand conspiracies in order to control everyone is a good test of how realistic/unrealistic such an idea is, and it sounds like your conspiracy covers the field of medicine across the entire world, across all borders, and affecting all doctors. 

Look at how quickly using antibiotics for ulcers swept the medical world, after it was discovered such treatment worked. The huge market of ulcer medicines was made worthless, and yet all those well-financed pharmaceutical companies were unable to stop it, assuming they even tried. Doctors were on board.

Using that example, I'd say your assertion is probably wrong.

Oh, and yes, people *can* use the word "cure" legally... but you have to have a proven cure. Ah, that pesky requirement of evidence will get you every time! *laugh*



tuneinrecords said:


> I'd like to hear your opinion on organic vs GMO foods.



The science out there is that pesticides in food cause many bad effects. Organic foods, just from the different methods of pesticide usage, have much lower levels of pesticides than GMO crops which have been altered to withstand higher levels. 



tuneinrecords said:


> Isn't it interesting how much effort the government puts into suppressing such info and alternative health measures?



Bullshit. There's no suppression of information. There *is* a prohibition on making unproven and/or false medical claims, which prevents someone from selling, say, antifreeze as an anticancer drug. 

You seem to be taking the need for proof as a prohibition against seeking that proof, which it isn't. You're putting the cart before the horse.



tuneinrecords said:


> Material which boils down to :



How have I been home all week with my freaking marshmallow hand and have missed this? This is the most epic recent pseudoscience thread, and I basically missed out until now!

Why didn't anyone tell me? *laugh*

(yes, I'm still typing one-handed. *laugh*)


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

Oh, one more thing:

Part of my work's business touches on alternative treatments, and our main rule of thumb regarding how well it works is... people who are serious don't rely on alternative birth control. 

In other words, if Western medicine has a treatment which is proven to work (yes, that's a black and white judgment), and if the consequences of *not* using a proven method can have dire consequences (an unwanted child), then most people will stick with the black/white method. There are statistics regarding failures (and many of those failures are from misuse), but the odds are good that they'll work

Or, as an OB/GYN friend says, "You know what the medical term is for women who use the Rhythm Method as birth control? Mothers!" *laugh*


----------



## Necris (Dec 8, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> You are making some really big claims here. The body doesn't accumulate toxins? There's no benefit to detoxing? Chelation doesn't work? I disagree wholeheartedly with you. I did have heavy metal poisoning. Lead to be precise. Yeah, chelation worked plain and simple. No it was not a placebo effect. If the body does not accumulate toxins then why do people get sick, get cancer, etc..?



I just want to state that I am having some strong feelings of deja vu. Between this thread and the "Pizza is a Vegetable" thread the arguments in support of homeopathic/new age/quack medicine are nearly identical.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

So just because the commies endorsed acupuncture that makes it a fraud? I don't follow your rationale there. Obviously they wanted to rally against western ideas just like people in the west were doing the same with eastern ideas. 

Treating cancer is WAAAY more profitable than curing it. Why isn't there more info available on preventative measures instead of waiting for diseases to arise? Don't fool yourself. Cancer is a HUUUGE money maker. Don't deny that fact. 

Ever hear of the automobile called the Tucker? It was too good. The big detroit makers were sure to squash it before it ever got off the ground. It was gonna put them right out of business. 

You can't deny that planned obsolescence is a real thing. How many pairs of headphones or other electronic devices have you had to buy again and again? How many cars do you need to own in a lifetime? Profits and money shape our world and it's no different in the field of medicine.  

There's no suppression of information?????? Uh.... okeedokee. whatever you say. 

So chem trails don't exist? I see them almost everyday. I have time lapse after time lapse video that I've personally done to look further into what happens when planes leave these trails. There was never a vote on whether or not they should do it. The gov. has admitted to geo-engineering. Do your research. There's also a new documentary called What In The World Are They Spraying that you might want to check out. 

I don't see how that chem trail vid is trolling. Is the subject really that taboo? I was hopeful that I could connect with other people and share some thoughts. How did this Thrive thread last this long? I really do want to connect with other people, hear opinions (regardless of how different they may be) and start discussions about things that I see are very important and impacting all of us whether we choose to believe they are or not. To me these are the subjects that matter. Sure I love me some ERG's and discussions on fretboard theory, but there is a political section to this site as well. 

I have to admit I am a bit disappointed with everyone's "professional" assessments of what we've been talking about here.. Everyone seems to be an expert and believes that their shit doesn't stink. I'm not surprised. All the tin-foil hat comments and ridicule is to be expected. Whenever new information that rocks the boat is available it is always ridiculed but in the long run, it proves itself to be something much more.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Necris said:


> I just want to state that I am having some strong feelings of deja vu. Between this thread and the "Pizza is a Vegetable" thread the arguments in support of homeopathic/new age/quack medicine are nearly identical.



I have not seen that thread. I just hear a lot of name calling and quackery comments. It'd be nice to get some intelligent comments to ponder, but oh well.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Dec 8, 2011)

Amazon is seling 2 for 1 tinfoil hats op.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Stealthdjentstic said:


> Amazon is seling 2 for 1 tinfoil hats op.



Haha! Any specials on spelling or english tutors? lol!


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Dec 8, 2011)

Well played, no more i-posting for me


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

The reason you don't think there's been any intelligent comments to ponder is that you appear impervious to them.

For example, you stated that there was a conspiracy to suppress a cancer cure. I broke down all the things which would have to be true for your conspiracy to succeed.



Explorer said:


> Here's what the premises of what you're stating:
> 
> *The fact is that there is absolutely no money to be made by actually selling a cure for cancer.
> 
> ...



You came back with something which basically ignored the shaky ground upon which your conspiracy rests, and how only one doctor, anywhere in the world, could end it... while still talking about profit.



tuneinrecords said:


> Treating cancer is WAAAY more profitable than curing it. Why isn't there more info available on preventative measures instead of waiting for diseases to arise? Don't fool yourself. Cancer is a HUUUGE money maker. Don't deny that fact.
> 
> It'd be nice to get some intelligent comments to ponder, but oh well.



Here's a few more ideas, which hopefully will make sense.

Have you ever met a doctor who wanted to help his or her patients?

I have. 

I have a friend who is a pediatric oncologist. We do kung fu together, and don't talk about her job often, but sometimes we do talk about things when she's had a hard day, and when she's been particularly affected by the death of a young patient. 

Now, you're basically saying that she doesn't really want to cure these kids because she wants to profit from their suffering. I call bullshit on that.

I also have friends who go to the worst fucking places as workers for Doctors without Borders. They risk death to help, and it's not about the money... although your conspiracy theory would require such a thing, to prevent there being a doctor willing to do something purely because they're a doctor. 

*All it would take is one doctor to break your proposed conspiracy, one doctor in the entire world. 

Just one.*

And, according to your premise, the conspiracy manages to suppress any single doctor who tries, no matter what country.

Dude, can you really not smell what you're shoveling?

Incidentally, are you seriously claiming there's no information on disease prevention available? Or are you saying that the simple basic rules for living healthier require more literature to outweigh the highly technical writings on, say, how to kill a tumor without killing the person with the tumor? 

I suspect that when/if you finally get to university study, you'd do well taking a few basic science courses, in order to gain at least a basic clue as to the scientific method.

----

*Short version: How do you think the vast cancer cure suppression conspiracy manages to control every doctor in every country? Money wouldn't work in the case of my friend, so come up with an alternate mechanism. Let's hear your intelligent thoughts on this, as opposed to, It just does!*


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Ok, I do retract the statement about no intelligent responses. There have been a lot of ridicule and maybe it's just been getting to me. Aside from that let me clarify....

It's not that I don't think Dr.'s don't want to cure their patients. You have to look at who funds the colleges who teach them. It's all about information control. The pharma-giants fund these prestigious universities where these Dr.'s get their degrees. My girlfriend is a case manager at a prestigious rehabilitation facility in NJ and even she states that hospitals are fucked and horrible places to be at. Her job stresses her out like you wouldn't believe. Insurance companies drop peoples coverage at the drop of a dime. Dr.'s simply don't have the time to check into other info that's out there. They're overworked as they are. 

So anyway, no I don't believe DR's don't want to cure everyone. It's not about that at all. Really it boils down to who controls their education. How and what they are taught. Who chooses what's OK to learn and what's not? It's the same with public schools. Who runs the show? It's not the PTA. 

Unfortunately at university young DR's are indoctrinated to prescribe pills and push other money making treatments. THe pharmers visit the DR.'s office and give away all kinds of cool "gifts" along with their latest drugs. How about all the drug commercials on TV all the time? It's all about patents. That's why the natural cures are suppressed - because you can't patent a natural treatment. Think about it. The whole system is rigged from the top on down. Follow the money trail and look into who runs these universities. 
You can't blame a DR when he or she was never shown the whole picture when they were in school. This is no different in the world of science. There's a great movie called Expelled starring Ben Stein that goes into what happens to scientists who try to rock the boat. They lose funding, their tenure and their careers. It's how the keep the status quo - AND THATS HOW YOU CONTROL ALL THE DR.S OF THE WORLD.


----------



## Fiction (Dec 8, 2011)

This is getting ridiculous.. You're just throwing conspiracy after conspiracy.



> no I don't believe DRs don't want to cure everyone. It's not about that at all


You were just arguing that and now you turn to blame education, whilst still holding your stance on doctors not wanting to cure everyone. I'm on a phone so I really can't be bothered to type up an argument, but you need to hold your stance or accept that you're wrong. You can't just keep bringing in some wacky new theory of yours that is still hard to believe.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

Bullshit. Here's why. 

Universities compete. They compete for prestige, they compete for funds, and so on. 

So do doctors, 

So, you're telling me that there is *no* doctor who wants to be known as the "Doctor Who Invented the Cancer Cure." 

You're telling me that no doctor wants to be more famous than Jonas Salk, or Louis Pasteur, or Joseph Lister. 

If you're serious about money being a motivator, but then reverse yourself to say that the money potential of being the Doctor Who Can Cure Cancer just isn't there... again, that sounds like complete and utter bullshit. 

Here's a different scenario:

Bill Gates and Donald Trump get cancer. They would pay any price to live, to not die of it. 

A university with a research hospital will *not* break ranks with the conspiracy, even though there is money to be made.

Again, saying "Money money money!" as a motivator in one case, but not sufficient in another, makes your case inconsistent. 

----

You're really arguing from ignorance. I doubt you've even known anyone who's specialized in any medical field, let alone survived a few years at the university level yourself. 

You also are ignorant of some of the requirements for continuing education for quite a few specialties, in order to retain licensure. 

And, of cousre, you have no clue how universities drive research, because you've never had to do an original thesis and defend it. You probably don't even know what an endowment is, or why universities sometimes get them. 

*sigh*

Anyway, at this point you're really clutching at straws to defend your assertion that there is a vast conspiracy to stop and suppress all research on cancer cures. You're claiming that the conspiracy only allows certain areas of study. 

And you really wonder why you're being viewed in a particular way?

I've pointed out before that some people lack insight into why others can recognize them as aberrant. This conspiracy thing you have going, with its incredible power which encompasses all nations in the world, is a clear clue as to why everyone sees you as a bit off. 

But you don't get it, and probably never will. It's sad, really.


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 8, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> So chem trails don't exist? I see them almost everyday. I have time lapse after time lapse video that I've personally done to look further into what happens when planes leave these trails. There was never a vote on whether or not they should do it. The gov. has admitted to geo-engineering. Do your research. There's also a new documentary called What In The World Are They Spraying that you might want to check out.
> 
> I don't see how that chem trail vid is trolling. Is the subject really that taboo? I was hopeful that I could connect with other people and share some thoughts. How did this Thrive thread last this long? I really do want to connect with other people, hear opinions (regardless of how different they may be) and start discussions about things that I see are very important and impacting all of us whether we choose to believe they are or not. To me these are the subjects that matter. Sure I love me some ERG's and discussions on fretboard theory, but there is a political section to this site as well.



You mean a time lapse of exhaust condensing in the stratosphere then slowly dispersing, also known as a vapour trail? Kind of happens up there, you do you propose to determine the difference between a jets exhaust and 'chemicals'. Yeah, jets exhaust is made up of chemical compounds, like everything, but what are you going to do. Better watch out for the mind control.

I should add, if you want to make assertations about 'governments admitting it', provide CREDIBLE sources. Then maybe people will listen.



Also to support Explorer above me, academia is one of the most ridiculously competitive markets out there. Universities have been strapped for cash, effectively, for some time. Mostly as in the 70s-80s a lot of them lost a lot of government funding. This lead to lowering of standards, increase of students to keep things moving. But it also makes these few research dollars all the more lucrative. The system was founded in the cold war when scientists were needed and academia was booming, but nowadays, we just have too many phd's as a consequence. It hasn't evolved much, but is still over competitive, and all wants that dollar. The researchers often want fame, glory AND the research dollar, but they are ovften quite obsessed with the fame and glory parts. Academic fame obviously equates directly to research dollars too, to such an extent over turning something by someone famous is more difficult. 

TLR ; researchers are largely egotistical, and want self validation. They would not pass up on such a discovery. EVER.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 8, 2011)

I think Explorer has this handled, but let's continue to keep it civil.


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 8, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> Science has proven.... science is GOD.... science this and that.... Wake up. Science, history, medicine, *ALTERNATIVE "MEDICINE" *etc.... None of it is immune to corruption, greed and politics.



Fixed. Also saying, "...science is GOD..." shows a complete lack of understanding of what science is or how it works.




> Something like acupuncture which has been around for 1000's of years is wrong because you heard about it on MSN or from some other "trust worthy" news outlet in todays horribly slanted and co-opted media? I don't think so. Acupuncture and all other alternative measures are wrong in the eyes of our mainstream doctors because it's taking away from their profits and control.


Ha. Hahaha. You have no idea who I am or what my experience/exposure to media is. Broad strokes...stop painting with them please. 

And peer reviewed studies have show, definitively, that whilst acupuncture does work as claimed it's no more effective than just randomly stabbing yourself with a needle. 

Save yourself some money and just stick a needle into the place it hurts the least. But I guess your acupuncturist doesn't want you to know this because he'd lose out on all the money he'd make treating you. FOLLOW THE MONEY! 



> Hey ever notice how no one is allowed to use the word cure? That mainstream doctors and hospitals only "treat" disease? You know why? Because once you cure someone, you can't make any more money off of them. It costs at least 300,000 dollars here in the US to die from cancer. Isn't that interesting? You guys with all your big statements about how all this is bullshit and quackery, I know I'm not going to change your minds on this.


What? I hear the word cure all the time. Like all the things that "mainstream" medicine has cured. Forever. Diseases it's completely eliminated. 

Doctors use the word, "treat," for things like cancer because cancer is a mother fucker and whilst they can and have cured it in some people in others remissions and other nasty shit happens. 



> I'd like to hear your opinion on organic vs GMO foods. How about chem trails or HAARP?


And I'd love to share it but it seems like it could be fairly off topic?



> I can't blame you for your view points, but in my opinion you should let go of how much you know and realize how little you know. It's then that you'll be able to let down your guard and open up to other possibilities. I love how you somehow without even meeting me can assess my medical condition and how my doctor's voodoo advice cured me through the placebo effect. Please. This is too much.


And....send this entire paragraph right back your way.



> Isn't it interesting how much effort the government puts into suppressing such info and alternative health measures? If the stuff is quackery then why spend millions of dollars trying to cover it up?


I don't know about the US but in Canada they don't. They don't spend money trying to cover it up. It's a huge money making industry that the government gets to tax. Follow the money.



> For those of you who blindly trust your Dr.'s advice. Do you blindly trust your politicians advice? Do you blindly trust the car salesmen trying to sell you a lemon?


False analogy. Doctors have trained for years, decades in many cases, with the sole purpose of healing you. Neither politicians or car salesmen go though training.

And every doctor ever will tell you you're free to get a second opinion. Or you can go home/to the library and look it up yourself.



> On a slightly different subject, look up the NDAA now that it is about to be signed into law. I'll see you all at camp FEMA next summer. They're beginning to staff these places and they're getting ready to fill them up - WITH US. This is courtesy of the same system that suppresses information and cures for diseases. Wake up!! I do enjoy discussing these things and trading off on ideas here, but I'm afraid there's a shit storm brewin' and we've all got a long dark road ahead of us regardless of what we may believe to be real and what we believe to be quackery. Truth is stranger than fiction my friends.


Not American so you'll see me nowhere. Although Canada isn't doing much better right now.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

I can just add my perspective as a swede in the medical debate. We do not have the same sponsorship here by drug corporations to doctors that you have in the states, why? Most of the hospitals are owned by our equivalent of the federal government. So, are our doctors also in on the conspiracy?

Most of our colleges/universities are not private either, there is no corporate interest (I should know, I go to the goddamm largest in Sweden), the curriculum is decided on national level.

So, do you want to try again, or is Sweden the exception to the grand conspiracy?

Also, are you refering to my responses as unintelligent?


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 8, 2011)

Jakke said:


> Also, are you refering to my responses as unintelligent?



In this thread, unintelligent responses = responses that contain things I don't want to read.


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 8, 2011)

AxeHappy said:


> I don't know about the US but in Canada they don't. They don't spend money trying to cover it up. It's a huge money making industry that the government gets to tax. Follow the money.



It's also a huge supporter of Congresscritters, my personal favorite being Orrin Hatch (R-UT), who is pretty much single-handedly responsible for the FDA not being able to regulate - and have very little power to challenge the claims of - the huge "supplement" industry. You know, the one that happens to be mainly based in UT?

Again, follow the ACTUAL money. Ask Steve Jobs how alternative cancer therapy works out.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

eaeolian said:


> Ask Steve Jobs how alternative cancer therapy works out.



That was mentioned faaaar in, but apparently that was an uncomfortable truth, so it wasn't picked up..



-"This disagrees with me, thus I don't see it"


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

Didn't Steve Jobs live quite a long time for someone with pancreatic cancer? I don't know a lot about what his treatments were or what kept him alive, but just outliving a high percentage of others with the same illness can be thought of as success. 

I think the biggest case against the cure for cancer conspiracy comes from a game theory type analysis. If something like that is out there, and most parties agree not to use it, there's always the incentive for one person to screw over the system and make lots of money. The one person who makes the cure available gets to have all the business. Because everybody involved knows this, they would want to do the same themselves. It's very difficult to get everybody to collude together. 

Explorer, well argued but I want to make two things clear. 1) I do not see an acupuncturist. 2) I see a doctor. I research other ideas. There is no one source of information that I deem to be absolutely dependable. The point I'm trying to make is that practitioners of different backgrounds have different perspectives and different biases (they make different simplifications), and for that reason it's useful to sample as many of them as possible. Acupuncture may not survive the scientific method when it's results are scrutinized, but it's possible that an acupuncturist can be correct in his/her knowledge about certain areas. In my friend's case, I've seen his bookshelf and am not a patient of his, and I believe that he has a useful perspective about more than just acupuncture. I believe his comment about the connection between sugar, insulin, and inflammation is not based on acupuncture tradition, but on his overall perspective. In fact, that info probably IS supported by research. But because he thinks of the body as a whole more than my ENT seems to, he was the one who made the connection. At the end of the day I just need to be healthy, and I have seen first hand that only relying on one source is not always going to achieve that end. So while the medical research process is based on black and white (testing for statistical significance), it doesn't necessarily mean that advice from outside of that community has to be dismissed by someone who is not a doctor, not a researcher, but simply trying to improve their health.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

So this is interesting
What you eat can fuel or cool inflammation, a key driver of heart disease, diabetes, and other chronic conditions

I can't say I know what the connection is between my diet and my nasal/sinus passage swelling, but I feel much better and even stopped taking the decongestants I was on before. If it is a matter related to inflammation the fact that it could also be affecting my heart makes me even more pissed that ENTs seem to just want to cut me open rather than addressing what may be the root cause of my illness. They might get rid of my symptoms but leave the underlying cause, leading to an even worse problem later down the road. I guess what I've learned from this is that most ENTs seem to see the organs in isolation and are focused on treatment that alleviates symptoms rather than eliminating causes. I will probably try to find a good doctor who really thinks about patients' overall health and considers the possibility that things like chronic sinusitis could actually be a cause of a health imbalance and try to address THAT instead of just treating the symptoms. I know they are out there, I just haven't had much luck, and it's a frustrating process because you have to let the doctor do their thing without cramping their style, but it's a let down whenever you see that they just want to move patients through the clinic and write prescriptions without trying to make the connection between symptom and cause. I think that after a while for many docs it's just business and they lose the spark that drives them to really care.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> So this is interesting
> What you eat can fuel or cool inflammation, a key driver of heart disease, diabetes, and other chronic conditions
> 
> I can't say I know what the connection is between my diet and my nasal/sinus passage swelling, but I feel much better and even stopped taking the decongestants I was on before. If it is a matter related to inflammation the fact that it could also be affecting my heart makes me even more pissed that ENTs seem to just want to cut me open rather than addressing what may be the root cause of my illness. They might get rid of my symptoms but leave the underlying cause, leading to an even worse problem later down the road. I guess what I've learned from this is that most ENTs seem to see the organs in isolation and are focused on treatment that alleviates symptoms rather than eliminating causes. I will probably try to find a good doctor who really thinks about patients' overall health and considers the possibility that things like chronic sinusitis could actually be a cause of a health imbalance and try to address THAT instead of just treating the symptoms. I know they are out there, I just haven't had much luck, and it's a frustrating process because you have to let the doctor do their thing without cramping their style, but it's a let down whenever you see that they just want to move patients through the clinic and write prescriptions without trying to make the connection between symptom and cause. I think that after a while for many docs it's just business and they lose the spark that drives them to really care.



It's cool that it works for you, and you are no doubt happy about it. 

But if you want to play in the ballpark of science, you have to provide evidence. That is only what is important in science, loose speculations is not tolerated, and that is what these conspiracies are. They come with assumptions, and when they are not denied or confirmed from officials, they take that as a smoking gun.
Funny how they like to mask their agenda as science, but conveniently walk around the demand for evidence...


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

That's just the thing. I have no loyalty to science. I don't dispute that there are snake oil salesmen out there either, and I agree that it's wrong for them to put forth their ideas as scientifically based but then fail to back them up. Where I'm less skeptical is with remedies that are free or cost very little. There might not be science to back up the wild herbs my friend picks but I'm more than happy to make tea with them when he gives them to me. In fact his exact words were that he heard about the benefit of steam inhalation and the herbs are just his bit of whimsical folk medicine, so there was no effort to put that forth as science whatsoever. Those kind of things are the grey area.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

Well, I can see that.

But that fact of the matter is that if you (and tuneinrecords in particular) wants to have your theories accepted by us other members, then buck up some evidence. Until then, I and many others (luckily) will consider it with a healthy dose of skepsis. Even if you do not use the scientific process or are scientifically illitterate (that is no insult BTW), some of us are litterate, and we demand hard evidence.

The scientific process is one of the most succesful inventions in modern history, just look at the track record, it has given us the marvels of modern society. If you want to go around it, fine, but I'll stick to science.


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> I think the biggest case against the cure for cancer conspiracy comes from a game theory type analysis. If something like that is out there, and most parties agree not to use it, there's always the incentive for one person to screw over the system and make lots of money. The one person who makes the cure available gets to have all the business. Because everybody involved knows this, they would want to do the same themselves. It's very difficult to get everybody to collude together.



So your entire conspiracy is based on a hypothesis, which is based in economics, which is the art of trying to fit what actually happens to theory. Even in the best cases economics is terribly simplified, it works only in generality. Once again, a lack of evidence to the contrary =/= evidence supporting. That is the big thing about conspiracies is they assuming what I just said IS evidence. 


If your random diet book works for you, all the power to you though. "Facts" need to be supported by both credible sources and independent replication of experiement, that isn't going to change anytime soon. Weren't we supposed to have cold fusion released earlier this year?


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> Weren't we supposed to have cold fusion released earlier this year?



Yeah.. Whatever happened to that?


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 8, 2011)

Jakke said:


> Yeah.. Whatever happened to that?



Seems to have evaporated, must of been a large collusion by the energy market which kept the guy from getting anything done to get it available. Only logical conclusion of course, it is not as it if was a hoax or anything.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

What I was saying is that when you consider it from a game theory perspective, if there was a cure from cancer, it would be impossible to get every player to collude and keep that cure from reaching the public. I wasn't using economics to support the conspiracy, I was saying that it's very unlikely. Are you trolling me or something? "Case against the cure for cancer conspiracy" should have made it clear what I was getting at.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> Seems to have evaporated, must of been a large collusion by the energy market which kept the guy from getting anything done to get it available. Only logical conclusion of course, it is not as it if was a hoax or anything.



Exactly, the producers must have ganged together, I know that stuff happens, I've read it on the net. 

Do they think we are blind or something? I am onto them!


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> There is no one source of information that I deem to be absolutely dependable. The point I'm trying to make is that practitioners of different backgrounds have different perspectives and different biases (they make different simplifications), and for that reason it's useful to sample as many of them as possible. Acupuncture may not survive the scientific method when it's results are scrutinized, but it's possible that an acupuncturist can be correct in his/her knowledge about certain areas.



There's a saying with a useful corollary:

*A stopped clock is correct twice a day. 

But it's impossible to know exactly when those two moments occur. *

So, if I could own one of three watches, I'd rank them in this order:

A watch which is as correct as possible
A watch which only looses a few minutes a day
A stopped watch (and I wouldn't even wear it)​The problem with saying, well, this person *might* be right about this one thing, even though this other stuff is wrong!, is that you're looking to winnow out what might be true and false at the outset.

It was probably buried in my previous avalanche of text (sorry, I'd blame the drugs but everyone knows it's just me), but you severely misunderstand how the scientific method works... including modern medicine.

*The main goal of the scientific method is to winnow out empirical evidence, while avoiding bias on the part of the individuals doing the science. *

That's why there are blinded tests. Using a medical example, if a group receiving nothing has members who claim miracle cures, or stomach aches, then they can look for a similar rate of non-related false results from those actually receiving the stuff. And, *if something doesn't have a result above noise (placebo) level, then it's discarded.*

And, *if it works, it becomes part of medicine.* I gave the ulcer/antibiotic example earlier, and mentioned Joseph Lister, but there are plenty of things which get incorporated over time. 

Compare that to pseudoscience, including the things they study at the National Center for *Complementary and Alternative Medicine*. Many practicioners *will *never* abandon those things which have never been able to generate a jot of results in double blind tests*, not one wit. 

It's okay for you to make the choice that you'd rather look at a stopped clock or a slow/fast clock to determine how far off it might be, but most would rather look at a clock which is as accurate as possible... especially if it's a matter of their health. Some things are too risky to take chances on.

Which is why, although there are lots of CAM remedies out there, you only find CAM birth control on the very fringes. Most people don't take chances when there's a proven alternative, unless it doesn't really matter.

----

*By the way, if you don't like the manner of the doctor you chose, why don't you change?* My own doctors have all been great, and I can ask all the questions I want. If I want to try something else instead of what's recommended, the most I get is, Well, give that a shot, but let's monitor the results. 

And then I get to look at the results. I get to see the chart showing my blood iron levels, my cholesterol levels, my weight, height, heart rate and blood pressure. 

It's interesting how *good medicine* has gotten at looking for anomalies in blood tests and such, and combining those facts with other things in order to determine what might be wrong. You know how they do that? By* putting together the facts for huge groups of people over the centuries, retaining what works... and getting rid of what doesn't.*


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

I tire of this.


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

I'm sorry... not trying to be a dick, since you did go to the trouble of writing up a long post. But I feel like you are missing the point of what I've been saying and because I've already said everything I care to on the topic several times already I really don't feel like continuing the discussion. It seems like you have your agenda and you don't care what I post anyway. I understand what scientific research, stats, etc. is about and know how to do hypothesis testing and all that, but I feel like there is also something out there called the spice of life and that science fails to describe every single thing out there. It's great for an academic perspective, for a professional perspective, etc. but when it comes to living life you have to use intuition and tradition where they can help you. 

Ultimately I would like to find a better doctor, and will be trying to find a more GP type doc since I've had bad luck with ENTs. If there is an issue with sugar, inflammation or anything like that it's important to get to the root of it. It just costs me a lot of money and time to find a good doctor.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

On the negative side, you guys are much faster at typing at this point than I am.

On the positive side for the rest of you, I'm normally buried in my work day at this point, so you don't have to read all my crap. *laugh*



Overtone said:


> *I have no loyalty to science. *
> 
> *Where I'm less skeptical is with remedies that are free or cost very little. * There might not be science to back up the wild herbs my friend picks but I'm more than happy to make tea with them when he gives them to me. In fact his exact words were that he heard about the benefit of steam inhalation and *the herbs are just his bit of whimsical folk medicine, so there was no effort to put that forth as science whatsoever.* Those kind of things are the grey area.



Actually, you do maintain your "loyalty" to science (perhaps "reliance" is a better word) in matters where it matters to you. Using the example of you even being a member here, you clearly value the fruits of the scientific method when you want something to work. That's why you buy a computer, and appreciate the warranties and protections available.

It's possible you also buy a mouse which says it does one thing... but doesn't. It was cheap, so you don't worry about dropping a few bucks here and there on such things, in the same way you don't mind buying a pair of earphones which don't work. 

I actually suspect you return those things, as they don't work as promised, as soon as it passes a threshold of money/importance/principle.

The problem with people giving creedence to "whimsical folk medicine" which has been unable to survive an actual test is that people then tend to give it creedence in bigger ways. The huge smokescreens thrown up by supplement and homeopathic remedy companies is one way in which bad medicine hurts people.

I have no doubt your friend is sincere, incidentally. I think you were making the case that you'd rather talk with someone pleasant, even if that person's advice is wrong.

I can understand.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> but I feel like there is also something out there called the spice of life



Hmmm, spice of life you say... What is the formula for that?


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

You can't manufacture it in a lab, maaan! You have to feeeeel it!


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

I don't believe you!


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

When you play guitar, where do the notes come from? Is it simply the firing of neurons causing your muscles to contract leading to vibrations of a string? No... it comes from somewhere _beyond_. Can you prove that your music is more significant than monkeys randomly plucking strings?


----------



## SirMyghin (Dec 8, 2011)

Actually it is the whole patterns of excitation and harmonic monvement of the string that make the note, quite literally. Where we place value has nothing to do with where the note comes from.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

That is a very good example of a harmonic oscillation, when you pluck the string, it vibrates and oscillates, making a difference in air pressure around it, causing a wave. If the string is longer, the slower it oscillates, you get a lower frequency (slower waves) and a lower note. The same, but reversed with a short string.

And anatomically:

The note actually comes from a specific frequency of sound that interacts with your eardrum, it is then transfered through nerves to your brain, that interpretes the vibration as a note.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> When you play guitar, where do the notes come from? Is it simply the firing of neurons causing your muscles to contract leading to vibrations of a string? No... it comes from somewhere _beyond_. Can you prove that your music is more significant than monkeys randomly plucking strings?



Wait, are you making the case that music comes from _beyond_, or that music is random, or that, in order to prove you wrong, someone has to prove their music is significant?

However, if you're genuinely interested in music, and why humans perceive it the way they do, you might enjoy reading _Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy: How Music Captures Our Imagination _by Robert Jourdain. It's a good book with good science and research behind it.

Oh, wait! I get it! You're saying that, because you can't imagine music (and our enjoyment of it) arising from our brains, it must be something from _beyond_! Of course!

Nope. Read the book. 

That's what's amazing about research. One never knows what science might look into, or just uncover through pure serendipity. 

----

Related to your attempted point, there are those who feel that words have power apart from as a means of communication. There's a fascinating science-based book, though, which talks about the brain's ability to learn language, _The Language Instinct_ by Stephen Pinker. 

----

Don't feel bad about reaching for the "from _beyond_" thing. I hear this kind of thing all the time, even when my coworkers were talking about a chocolate cake being "Heavenly!" and "Divine!" *laugh*

However, don't expect others to have the same religious/mystical view that music comes from _beyond_....

And, if you need something to feel bad about, why not feel bad about reaching for a bad example to justify pseudoscience?


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 8, 2011)

Jakke said:


> Hmmm, spice of life you say... What is the formula for that?



It cannot be synthesized, it can only be mined on Arrakis.


----------



## Jakke (Dec 8, 2011)

eaeolian said:


> It cannot be synthesized, it can only be mined on Arrakis.



Hmmm, I think we are onto something here...


----------



## Overtone (Dec 8, 2011)

Explorer I think you took my post a little too seriously. It was a tongue in cheek comment alluding to the eternal debate between science and spirituality, and the notion of the soul.

Spice of life.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 8, 2011)

It was hard to tell if you were espousing that the way you espoused th... Ah!

I get it.

You're making the point that if a source is unreliable in one way, it's difficult to distinguish when it can be relied upon, and therefore should be abandoned when better sources are available. 

I couldn't have made a better case myself. Well done!


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Fiction said:


> This is getting ridiculous.. You're just throwing conspiracy after conspiracy.
> 
> 
> 
> You were just arguing that and now you turn to blame education, whilst still holding your stance on doctors not wanting to cure everyone. I'm on a phone so I really can't be bothered to type up an argument, but you need to hold your stance or accept that you're wrong. You can't just keep bringing in some wacky new theory of yours that is still hard to believe.



BTW - you butchered my quote - actually changed the words and meaning. Go back and see the original. Again I NEVER STATED THAT DRS DON'T WANT TO CURE PEOPLE. Geeez! I am holding my stance and I am not accepting that I'm wrong on this one. Get off the phone! 

All these "conspiracies" are all part of the same ball of wax. That's why I'm bringing them up. That's all.


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Dec 8, 2011)

Overtone said:


> Explorer I think you took my post a little too seriously. It was a tongue in cheek comment alluding to the eternal debate between science and spirituality, and the notion of the soul.
> 
> Spice of life.



Can it really be considered a debate? Spirituality has no proof and science has all the proof. A debate implies that both sides can back up their arguments intelligently, something that spirituality and holistics cannot. 

That's how it is, unless you can give me legitimate proof.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Explorer said:


> Bullshit. Here's why.
> But you don't get it, and probably never will. It's sad, really.



Who's not "getting it" is a matter of debate. Sorry you're feeling sad too.  

Please watch these videos and let me know what you think. Just some info about cancer cure suppression. I'll post more info later on. Gotta get some dinner. BRB.


 fast forward in 1.5 minutes to avoid opening credits.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Regarding chem trails - 

- The chemtrail program is also known as "Project Cloverleaf", and it is very compartmentalized. Even the pilots themselves have no real idea of why they are actually spraying.

- Chemtrails are a sub-program of the US Navy's Radio Frequency Mission Planner (RFMP) program called the Variable Terrain Radio Parabolic Equation (VTRPE) - a system for creating 3D battlefield imaging that the US military has been using in Iraq and Afghanistan

- Some of the chemtrail contents are biological in nature such as BCTP - an anti-anthrax inoculation that was tested on US populations

- Clifford Carnicom has identified many of the very harmful biologicals coming out of chemtrails.

 preview

 full length

 Even History Channel covered the topic. 


 weatherman talks about it on the evening news in California


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 8, 2011)

Also to my dear Explorer - 

You insist on putting words in my mouth so please refrain. You said it yourself - your responses are quite long, but you're twisting my words. I give you credit for your enthusiasm. It's all good. 

You ask why wouldn't one DR or one person in the military step up and say something about the "conspiracies?" (see the last chem trail vid for example in previous post) There have been whistle blowers and people continually stand up and speak out. Do you think they're gonna interview them on the news which is run by the very same people they'd be rallying against? 

It's no joke. People get murdered for speaking out. I'll get you a list of some ASAP. Dinner is ready. Stay tuned.


----------



## Fiction (Dec 8, 2011)

I read your post wrong, i'm sorry for that.. 

If you had said;



> So anyway, I do believe DR's want to cure everyone.


Instead of;



> So anyway, no I don't believe DR's don't want to cure everyone.


That + Lack Of Sleep = Confused Fiction


----------



## Overtone (Dec 9, 2011)

dragonblade629 said:


> Can it really be considered a debate? Spirituality has no proof and science has all the proof. A debate implies that both sides can back up their arguments intelligently, something that spirituality and holistics cannot.
> 
> That's how it is, unless you can give me legitimate proof.



Fun is just NOT in your vocabulary is it?


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 9, 2011)

OK Explorer you're in the brackets and quotes below and my responses are not. Trying to address each of your comments here. No shaky ground here, only lack of research by others who are simply uninformed and unwilling to accept an outside point because of a lifetime of indoctrination with a particular world view. It happens. I didn't find a lot of this info until the internet made researching and sharing information so much easier. 

--------------
"The reason you don't think there's been any intelligent comments to ponder is that you appear impervious to them."
----------

Ok, I'm sorry there are some wonderfully intelligent comments on here. I retract that. I should have used a different word. How about this?
I'm looking for more informed comments. A lot of these seem uninformed and very slanted due to that ol' particular world view. People have largely been groomed to think a certain way. Who designed the education system to be the way it is? There's little room for free thought and creativity. It's shovel the shit in, get tested on it and become a good little worker bee. It takes a good 12 years to break a kid down. 

I've been into this stuff for a while and checked into it. I'm convinced on a lot of things (not all) but I doubt a lot of people have looked that deeply into these matters and rather just blow them off as ridiculous because a lot of it is some pretty out there info. It disturbs that carefully crafted world view. 

-----------------
"For example, you stated that there was a conspiracy to suppress a cancer cure. I broke down all the things which would have to be true for your conspiracy to succeed." 
----------

You didn't really break things down that well. You did say a lot but there are flaws to your comments. Let's break them down. See below;

-------
"You came back with something which basically ignored the shaky ground upon which your conspiracy rests, and how only one doctor, anywhere in the world, could end it... while still talking about profit."
------------

There are a lot of comments on this thread and I don't have all day to reply to every comment. I'll do my best to address each one as I feel I can provide links to back this stuff up. Proof is different for a lot of people, I understand that, but like I said after spending so much time around this kind of information you are more qualified to make a judgement and decide for yourself. 

-------------------
"Here's a few more ideas, which hopefully will make sense.

Have you ever met a doctor who wanted to help his or her patients?

I have

I have a friend who is a pediatric oncologist. We do kung fu together, and don't talk about her job often, but sometimes we do talk about things when she's had a hard day, and when she's been particularly affected by the death of a young patient. 

Now, you're basically saying that she doesn't really want to cure these kids because she wants to profit from their suffering. I call bullshit on that.

I also have friends who go to the worst fucking places as workers for Doctors without Borders. They risk death to help, and it's not about the money... although your conspiracy theory would require such a thing, to prevent there being a doctor willing to do something purely because they're a doctor. 

*All it would take is one doctor to break your proposed conspiracy, one doctor in the entire world. 

Just one.* " 
----------------------------- 

I actually said nothing about your friend Dr. not wanting to cure kids and profit from their suffering. You said that yourself and that's your story. That situation does nothing to change the fact that information control in the schools where the doctors learn limits them and along with certain laws which also limits them in treating patients. I never questioned the intentions of the doctors. I've said that before. They have the best intentions but are limited in what they can do as doctors and often times are indoctrinated to prescribe pills a lot. Not everyone is aware of other treatments. Watch some of those videos

And about your ONE MAGICAL DOCTOR TO SAVE THE WORLD THEORY - 
there have been in fact more than one doctor who has had tried to make a difference and bring about cures and info. Watch the videos I posted. Check into it. Really. Again, people are in jail and are dead because of this stuff. Info is suppressed. I will provide more links if you don't want to look it up on your own. It's easy to find. 

-------------------------------
"And, according to your premise, the conspiracy manages to suppress any single doctor who tries, no matter what country.

-------------------------------

I'm sure there are dr.'s who are not affected, but in the US there are laws and institutions in place to keep that good ol' status quo. Everyone play nice and don't rock the boat if you want to keep your reputation and career. 

----------------------
Dude, can you really not smell what you're shoveling?"
------------------------------

Yes! It's the sweet smell of freedom and liberation! I'm shoveling honest to goodness helpful and insightful information. It's OK that some people don't appreciate it and disagree with it. It's a free country right? Sorta? Not so much anymore? Yeah, things are messed up. 

----------------------------
"Incidentally, are you seriously claiming there's no information on disease prevention available? Or are you saying that the simple basic rules for living healthier require more literature to outweigh the highly technical writings on, say, how to kill a tumor without killing the person with the tumor?"
-------------------------------

There is info available, but there's an awful lot that isn't. A lot now is because of the internet of course, but people like you just think of it as quackery anyway. There's also health products and proven cures that are banned in the US (Americans travel for treatments to Mexico and Canada and Europe). Literature and things that get published all depends on whether it's in the interests in keeping with the status quo. Change never comes easy. It's been that way all through history. The powers that be don't like to be challenged. 

--------------------
"I suspect that when/if you finally get to university study, you'd do well taking a few basic science courses, in order to gain at least a basic clue as to the scientific method."
-------------------------------

FYI I graduated cum laude from University in 1999 and have a continued love for education and learning that gets better with every year of my life. I do have respect for science but as I stated earlier it is not immune to the affects of private interests, corporations, greed, corruption, etc.....

----------------------------
"*Short version: How do you think the vast cancer cure suppression conspiracy manages to control every doctor in every country? Money wouldn't work in the case of my friend, so come up with an alternate mechanism. Let's hear your intelligent thoughts on this, as opposed to, It just does!"
-----------------------------

I hope by now there's enough info that I'm not saying "it just does." I've had nothing but intelligent thoughts all along. Intelligent thoughts though they may be disagreed with are not as others may deem "off" or whatever. 

Every country? Ever hear of multinational corporations? And no not all countries have the same restrictions on what you can do to treat a patient and no i'm not talking about things that are barbaric or whatever, but things that really work. Things that have been proven. Oh, there's that ugly word. The system won't prove what it's trying to suppress. Pull your nose back from the page a bit and look more at the big picture. Again check out the videos if you have not already.*


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 9, 2011)

------------------------
"The science out there is that pesticides in food cause many bad effects. Organic foods, just from the different methods of pesticide usage, have much lower levels of pesticides than GMO crops which have been altered to withstand higher levels. 
-------------------

Did you know that GMO crops create their own pesticides? Did you know they're injected with all kinds of strange DNA which ultimately affects your own? Don't even get me started on what they use for fertilizer and what kind of toxic soil it's grown in. I once had a dr. who told me not to bother with eating organic and I'm sure she had the best intentions in the world, but after doing my research I felt the information was overwhelmingly supportive for organic foods. Food processing in this country. It along with the farming practices are all part of the degradation of health in our country. Anyway, that's a whole other ball of wax. Let's save that for another thread. 

----------------------------
"Bullshit. There's no suppression of information. There *is* a prohibition on making unproven and/or false medical claims, which prevents someone from selling, say, antifreeze as an anticancer drug."
---------------------

Sorry, again you're wrong here. Massive amounts of information suppressed. The media in the US is the governments PR dept. Journalists today are a disgrace, lobbing soft ball questions at politicians. It's a joke. Watch those vids for suppression of info on multiple levels. Get real.
All the best health info stuff I had to learn on my own and by asking doctors and professionals questions, going so far as to record entire conversations. I've gone to hear professionals speak. I've been into health info for the last decade. I live in an area where there are all kinds of alternative health treatment facilities, organic food stores, and community groups based around holistic ways of life. I interact with people. It's different when you talk to real people and get their stories. 

You don't need to trust me on this, you need to stop trusting the evening news and the coveted "expert opinions." Yeah, everyone's got something good to say, but anytime the words "official" or "official story" comes up I question it's validity. It's been wrong and misleading in the past. Disinformation and ridicule campaigns are effective tools in making sure everyone is in the dark on certain things. 

--------------------
How have I been home all week with my freaking marshmallow hand and have missed this? This is the most epic recent pseudoscience thread, and I basically missed out until now!
----------------------

I agree this has been epic but what you deem psuedoscience is real and effective and just because it's not a part of the mainstream system is it any less effective. Science is always correcting itself and changing and politics gets in the way of progress again and again. History proves this again and again. 

----------------
Why didn't anyone tell me? *laugh*
---------------------

Sometimes you have to look a little harder. A little closer and a little more carefully into things before you try to write them off as "bullshit."


----------



## Explorer (Dec 9, 2011)

The legitimate point has been raised that all it takes is one group, one university, one doctor to become the one(s) who can cure cancer. 

You keep arguing for conspiracies which control everything, and encompass everyone. 

BTW, I like that my proposing one doctor, corporation or university to break ranks is MAGICAL in your viewpoint, while your worldwide, all-powerful conspiracy is not. *laugh*

Again, you have no clue as to how medicine, university funding, and other real-world phenomena work. 

Oh, wait! It's time!







*laugh*

Again, it's impossible to teach insight.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 9, 2011)

Explorer said:


> The legitimate point has been raised that all it takes is one group, one university, one doctor to become the one(s) who can cure cancer.
> 
> You keep arguing for conspiracies which control everything, and encompass everyone.
> 
> ...




You're not saying anything worthwhile here. I addressed your points that you're restating here. My response has been covered already. Read it, watch the vids. Get some more funny graphics to fill up your posts here to make up for your lack of have anything worthwhile to combat what i've presented to you. Again your misinformed comments at this point are getting old. Don't tell me what I do and don't know about real world phenomena. You're in no position to know such things. Don't talk to me about insight or anymore of your bullshit. You're full of conjecture in your long winded and boring tirades where you try to twist around what I've said. In addition to your misinformed opinions, you're full of ridicule, sarcasm, condescension and generally negativity. On top of it all, now you're trolling me on other threads. As I stated elsewhere, I'm through with responding to your comments.


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 9, 2011)

That's because he already said many things that are worthwhile and you ignored him. 

In the same fashion as a kid holding his hands over his ears and going, "LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU."

Also:
Almost every claim you make of people not wanting to change their carefully crafted world view reeks of hypocrisy. 

Automatically mistrusting authority is good. Automatically trusting random unproven "medicine," is bad. Just throw a lot of that mistrust at the New Age/Alternate/Holistic/Homeopathic "medicine" and you'll likely see how all of it is bullshit as well.


Edit:


> Did you know that GMO crops create their own pesticides? Did you know they're injected with all kinds of strange DNA which ultimately affects your own? Don't even get me started on what they use for fertilizer and what kind of toxic soil it's grown in. I once had a dr. who told me not to bother with eating organic and I'm sure she had the best intentions in the world, but after doing my research I felt the information was overwhelmingly supportive for organic foods. Food processing in this country. It along with the farming practices are all part of the degradation of health in our country. Anyway, that's a whole other ball of wax. Let's save that for another thread.



Did you know that humans have been genetically modifying foods for millenniums. I would be interested in where you found this..."information," on Genetically modified foods.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 9, 2011)

AxeHappy said:


> That's because he already said many things that are worthwhile and you ignored him.
> 
> 
> Automatically mistrusting authority is good. Automatically trusting random unproven "medicine," is bad. Just throw a lot of that mistrust at the New Age/Alternate/Holistic/Homeopathic "medicine" and you'll likely see how all of it is bullshit as well.
> ...




It's called the internet. Look up Monsanto to start for GMO info. 

I did respond to his comments (see above)

I'm not trusting unproven medicine. Everything I do has been proven and I know what's right for me and what works and what doesn't. Thank you.


----------



## tuneinrecords (Dec 9, 2011)

AxeHappy said:


> Did you know that humans have been genetically modifying foods for millenniums. I would be interested in where you found this..."information," on Genetically modified foods.




Not like they've been doing in the last 100 years. This "information" about the horrors of GMO food is nothing new my friend. 

Food Inc. is a very popular film about our food industry. (two small sections) look up others on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htQkVRF68qg ---------- WATCH THIS ONE HERE ABOUT MONSANTO AND GMO.


----------



## chronocide (Dec 9, 2011)

I've not bothered to drop into this thread because tnueinrecords' statements are being so comprehensively refuted at every turn.

But something that I've not seen (or at least not noticed) remarked upon directly (though it's been alluded to).

Education does not work in remotely the same fashion everywhere in the world as it does in America. Nor does the medical profession. Many of tuneinrecords' claims regarding funding particularly simply aren't applicable in many nations. Nor does the "who developed the education system?" approach. But they're still all in on the conspiracy. 

And on the media being the government's PR dept? In virtually the entire Western world, that nonsense. The media runs the government far more than the other way around.


----------



## AxeHappy (Dec 9, 2011)

tuneinrecords said:


> It's called the internet. Look up Monsanto to start for GMO info.
> 
> I did respond to his comments (see above)
> 
> I'm not trusting unproven medicine. Everything I do has been proven and I know what's right for me and what works and what doesn't. Thank you.




1. Yeah, I can find anything saying anything on the internet. It's a cess pool of a million lies. I will, maybe, watch the "documentaries" later though.

2. No you didn't really. You basically said, "Nope! You're wrong because I say so." That's not a response. It's also worth pointing out that you're the one making a claim therefore the onus of proof lies on you and you are the one who needs to actually provide some sources (actually things we can go look up, website, books, something, not, "It's called the Internet,") to back up your claims. We just have to say, "No, you haven't proven your argument."

3. No it hasn't. Proven involves studies and repeatable measurable quantities and statistics and blah blah blah. Ancedotal evidence is, always has been and always will be meaningless. Working for you is not proof. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do it if it works for you but don't act like you are.


Right now you seem like the people in this:





Not saying you actually are, but it's the way you're coming off.

And on Genetically Modified food:



and more importantly:





But I guess Penn and Teller are in on the conspiracy too...


----------



## Jakke (Dec 9, 2011)

Ok, now you are just getting riddiculous tuneinrecords, GMO-crops have no way in hell they can affect the DNA of a consumer, there is just no way. GMO-crops has the potential to feed the planet, are you proposing we let people starve just because you do not know what GMO is or how it works?

Greenpeace once worked their propaganda on a couple of starving african countries, claiming that the crops they received was dangerous because they were GMO. What happened? People *starved* to *death*, just because idiots were screaming the loudest and terrified an already suffering populace..

Are you suggesting that should be the protocol in the future?


*EDIT* As I pointed out before, and as Chronocide have also done, your neat little world conspiracy would only work in the US. But that's hardly a world conspiracy, is it?




tuneinrecords said:


> Did you know that GMO crops create their own pesticides? Did you know they're injected with all kinds of strange DNA which ultimately affects your own? Don't even get me started on what they use for fertilizer and what kind of toxic soil it's grown in. I once had a dr. who told me not to bother with eating organic and I'm sure she had the best intentions in the world, but after doing my research I felt the information was overwhelmingly supportive for organic foods. Food processing in this country. It along with the farming practices are all part of the degradation of health in our country.



I would really like to see some citations for this...


----------



## eaeolian (Dec 9, 2011)

OK, I think this has run it's course.


----------

