View Single Post
  #19  
Old October 19th 10, 11:35 PM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids,misc.kids.health,sci.med
carole
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 251
Default Allopathy Inc personality traits


"dr_jeff" wrote in message ...
On 10/18/10 2:06 PM, carole wrote:
"Bob Officer".@. wrote in message ...
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 03:27:58 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
wrote:


"Bob Officer".@. wrote in message ...
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:14:35 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
wrote:


"Bob Officer".@. wrote in message ...
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:55:43 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
wrote:




What you're describing john sounds like the patriarchal culture, where the macho men reign by secrecy, authoritarian
regimes,
hierarchical systems and brute force.

However, that doesn't sound like science at all. All the science that counts is published in publicly available journals,
often
available at libraries or over the internet for free. The abstracts (summaries) of the articles are almost always
available
for
free.

Ah yes, but Jeff, only certain health research is considered worthy of funding.

Yes, research which shows promise.

No, research which doesn't threaten big pharma.


Who decides what is and what isn't worthy of funding?

Well I guess you would actually look at avenues which haven't been
explored. After all how many times do you spend money to find the
evidence doesn't support Iridology or some other already explored
avenue shown to be a failure?

That was a rhetorical question bob.

It didn't look like one, Carole. I actually thought it was a
sarcastic question but a good one. I gave a good answer.

Since we know the structure of the iris is fixed in a person to the
extent it can be used for identification using iris scans, It pretty
much places the practice of iridology into the area of
pseudoscience...well not even really pseudo science, but pure
bull****.

We don't know that the iris is fixed bob.

yes we do.
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/TechReports/UCAM-CL-TR-635.html
http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_det...csnumber=38750
http://www.irisbase.com/ - non-functional
http://google.com/patents?id=KRkpAAAAEBAJ
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/jgd1000/irisrecog.pdf
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jgd1000/patrec.pdf
http://www.cbsr.ia.ac.cn/users/zfhe/publications.html
http://iris.nist.gov/ICE/ICE_2005_Re...0March2006.pdf


According to a book that I have called The Science and Practice of Iridology by Bernard Jensen, where he consistently talks about
iris changes caused by both disease and healing.


Evidence please. A self-serving book doesn't count.


The very first example where legend has it that in 1837, Von Peczely captured an owl and inso doing broke its leg, which showed up
in the iris of the owl as a black line which gradually disappeared as the leg healed.


When the health is deteriorating the irises get murkier with more overlay of signs of
toxins, the lesions get darker, there may be more nerve rings, probably more clumping of fibres. However, under a healing
regime
the
lesions are said to get lighter in color and eventually can disappear.

and the Research and evidence to back this claim is where, so I can
examine these data set? That's right they claim is all based on
here-say, and what is now a considered a falsified assumption.
The body of evidence and data is sufficient that the assumption upon
which iridology is based is false.


Yes bob, we all know about conventional statistics and how reliable they can be.
It is a well known fact that many people as they get older develop murkier irises with discolouration and acid overlays, not to
mention the scurf rings and arcus senilis (the arc of senility) - you know that while arc that goes between 11 and 1 oclock on
the
iris.


So? Prove that this makes iridology accurate.


Prove that allopathic medicine is accurate.


How many times does one spend time, money and effort to explore
avenues which have proved fruitless, Carole? How many times does it
have to be pointed out to you that, Claims based only on post hoc
fallacies (like your cell salt cures) fall apart under the most
simple examination and questioning.

This isn't the fault of the therapies bob, but of the researchers.

No if an avenue is shown to false, or the claims falsified, as in
iridology how many times do you revisit blind canyons of beliefs
which are contradicted by evidence?


I wouldn't believe it was false by anything told to me by an allopath for starters, and wouldn't believe everything told to me by
a
failed iridologist either because the healing effects depend on the methodology used to achieve it. If the method is no good, no
healing = no iris change.


The iris doesn't change because of disease. If I am incorrect, provide good evidence that I am wrong.


According to iridology the iris changes due to toxemia, and the amount of disease is directly proportional to the amount of toxemia.

--
Carole
www.conspiracee.com
"The common objection 'I don't believe in conspiracies' need not be taken seriously, since every meeting behind closed doors is a
conspiracy. All diplomacy, foreign policy, business decisions and political strategies are done in this way. Conspiracies happen
every day." -Peter Myers