greentara wrote: It shows how deregulated the market has become.
Thrasymachus wrote: You don't see many doctors out there at the front line presenting medical objections against pollution from the new factory opening near a residential area, opposing new highways which will cause lung problems from all the increased particulate matter in the air, opposing the increasing work hours most people are undertaking which always takes a bodily and psychic toll, opposing nuclear plants, or doing anything in general to promote health in a preventative matter.
mandala wrote:[What I'd like to see is doctors who recognise they can only offer a 'damage control' service - and are taught about traditional medicines/alternative therapies enough to offer a choice of referrals for preventative and holistic health care(instead of laughing in your face when you ask if there are alternatives to meds or surgery). It's a pretty big ask, but more likely (imo) than doctors taking diet, mental health, lifestyle and preventive health seriously themselves.
Thrasymachus wrote:...They also proscribed me oral anti-biotics called Keflex. If they prescribed topical I would have used it, but I am not dumb enough to destroy all my beneficial gut flora and bacteria just because a doctor recommends to or because it might make the wound heal faster.
These are the ingredients of two variants of the tetanus vaccine:Center for Disease Control wrote:CDC.gov: Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary Excipients Included in U.S. Vaccines, by Vaccine[PDF]
DT: aluminum potassium sulfate, peptone, bovine extract, formaldehyde, thimerosal (trace), modified Mueller and Miller medium
DTaP(Daptacel) : aluminum phosphate, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, 2-Phenoxyethanol, Stainer-Scholte medium, modified Mueller’s growth medium, modified
Mueller-Miller casamino acid medium (without beef heart infusion)
(There are more variants listed in the PDF which I didn't paste, but one gets the point.)
Needless to say that is toxic stuff and I am not putting it directly in my blood. I will leave that to others who baste in ignorance.
Nemo wrote:Your views on vaccination are entertaining. You should join the Flat Earth Society.
Himalayausa.com wrote:A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted on 40 subjects. Prior to the study, chemical parameters such as fasting blood sugar, cholesterol, weight and glycosylated HG (Alc) were measured. The group was divided into the Bitter Melon group and the placebo. The Bitter Melon group reported positive indications that Bitter Melon supports Alc and other parameters with no adverse side effects.*
Himalayausa wrote:One of the first to single herb supplements to proudly carry the Certified USDA Organic Seal
Easy to swallow caplets
Magnesium stearate free
No artificial ingredients
greentara wrote:Thrasymachus wrote:This does a good job as any single source of showing the ineffectiveness of anti-depressants:Bruce E. Levine wrote:Alternet: Are Antidepressants a Scam? 5 Myths About How to Treat Depression
Myth 1: Antidepressants Are More Effective than Placebos
Many depressed people report that antidepressants have been effective for them, but do antidepressants work any better than a sugar pill? Researcher Irving Kirsch (professor of psychology at the University of Hull in the United Kingdom as well as professor emeritus at the University of Connecticut and author of The Emperor’s New Drugs) has been trying to answer that question for a significant part of his career.
In 2002, Kirsch and his team at the University of Connecticut examined 47 depression treatment studies that had been sponsored by drug companies on the antidepressants Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor, Celexa, and Serzone. Many of these studies had not been published, but all had been submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), so Kirsch used the Freedom of Information Act to gain access to all the data. He discovered that in the majority of the trials, antidepressants failed to outperform sugar pill placebos.
“All antidepressants,” Kirsch reported in 2010, “including the well-known SSRIs [selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors], had no clinically significant benefit over a placebo.” While in aggregate, antidepressants slightly edge out placebos, the difference is so unremarkable that Kirsch and others describe it as “clinically negligible.”
Why are so many doctors unaware of the lack of superiority of antidepressants as compared to placebos? The answer became clear in 2008 when researcher and physician Erick Turner (currently at the Department of Psychiatry and Center for Ethics in Health Care, Oregon Health and Science University) discovered that antidepressant studies with favorable outcomes were far more likely to be published than those with unfavorable outcomes. Analyzing published and unpublished antidepressant studies registered with the FDA between 1987-2004, Turner found that 37 of 38 studies having positive results were published; however, Turner reported, “Studies viewed by the FDA as having negative or questionable results were, with 3 exceptions, either not published (22 studies) or published in a way that, in our opinion, [falsely] conveyed a positive outcome (11 studies).”
Most pharmaceutical drugs are the same. Infact they should be compared and tested against natural and cheaper alternatives like exposure to the sun long enough to synthesize Vitamin D, exercise, supplementation with vitamins and minerals, meditation, etc.
Probably the best thing for him to do is to contact the Hearing Voices Network in my estimation, the mental health field only pathologizes people. I know first hand from experience and from lots of reading and listening to critiques of their profession which in any society based on equality and freedom would be criminalized. Ghost01, in my experience and from lots of reading and listening to relevant podcasts, interviews and documentaries you did the best thing by minimizing contact with mental health crooks.
That makes very interesting reading and rings alarm bells. The pharma industry is far too manipulative and powerful!....
Lhug-Pa wrote:IF there is a major outbreak, then yeah maybe getting vaccinated could be Bodhisattva activity (perhaps H.H. the Dalai Lama was administering vaccines in that Youtube video because there was a major outbreak, and he knew that the vaccines he was administering were not full of the garbage listed in this pic...).
Lhug-Pa wrote:Well then maybe this is one of those very rare circumstances where vaccines might actually be useful, that is if administered without the mercury and other garbage often found in vaccines.
And I doubt H.H. the Dalai Lama would tell people that they should go and "get their flu-shot" at Walmart, or even that the average person should get any kind of regular vaccination.
Also, what allopathic prescription is he supposedly taking?
Anyway, the Dalai Lama often speaks to people of little understanding (i.e. the average person), and so perhaps his launching of vaccinations and taking allopathic medicine, etc. is only publicity; in other words a skillful means to show the average person that he's integrated with ordinary society and not a religious elitist etc. (not saying that he is a religious elitist, just saying that many people might view him as such). I don't think that many people know what H.H. the Dalai Lama's views are aside from what he says and writes about Dharma. When it comes to social issues, he has to appear to blend in with the mainstream. In other words, I think that when he writes about his views regarding Vajrayana and Dzogchen, he is telling us his actual precise views regarding Dharma. When it comes to social issues however, he has to use a lot of Skillful Means.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests