Natural remedies "seldom effective"

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
Bee Pollen is probably the best natural remedy.
I have been taking it for thirty years, for allergies. Side affect? No more flu.
If you need an immune system boost, and you are not allergic to bee pollen, take it. You won't regret it.

I have NOT taken bee pollen for thirty years, for allergies. Side effect? No more flu.
There is no evidence that your taking bee pollen prevented you from getting the flu.
None.

reply to post by schuyler

That is funny that you say this. I run into this sort of thinking a lot.
In fact, the OP has that sort of thinking. It doesn't matter what people say, or how many people say it, as evidenced in this thread, if there is no "scientific" proof then he aint buying it. And, in fact, he will mock it and apparently scoff at the experience of others.
And that is okay. If you don't want to take bee pollen, by all means, don't. I am relaying my experience. And, I can assure you, I don't get the flu any longer. I haven't had it in decades.
In fact, I haven't been to the doctor for any reason other than a physical that my wife demanded...in two decades.
Don't listen to me though.

reply to post by pianopraze

Here is Scientific American:

it is true that fruits and vegetables grown decades ago were much richer in vitamins and minerals than the varieties most of us get today. The main culprit in this disturbing nutritional trend is soil depletion: Modern intensive agricultural methods have stripped increasing amounts of nutrients from the soil in which the food we eat grows. Sadly, each successive generation of fast-growing, pest-resistant carrot is truly less good for you than the one before.

A landmark study on the topic by Donald Davis and his team of researchers from the University of Texas (UT) at Austin’s Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry was published in December 2004 in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition. They studied U.S. Department of Agriculture nutritional data from both 1950 and 1999 for 43 different vegetables and fruits, finding “reliable declines” in the amount of protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin (vitamin B2) and vitamin C over the past half century. Davis and his colleagues chalk up this declining nutritional content to the preponderance of agricultural practices designed to improve traits (size, growth rate, pest resistance) other than nutrition.

So I have a question. I have often wondered how they determine the vitamin and mineral values of foods. Also, are the nutritional values we read today on labels ever updated? Meaning, do the foods today describe the same nutritional data which they were originally analyzed 30, 50 or a hundred years ago?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


In today's world, I don't trust my medical doctor because he doesn't know how to read an aura, and use the good stuff, not some pill with poison in it even if it's small.

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by schuyler

 

That is funny that you say this. I run into this sort of thinking a lot.
In fact, the OP has that sort of thinking. It doesn't matter what people say, or how many people say it, as evidenced in this thread, if there is no "scientific" proof then he aint buying it. And, in fact, he will mock it and apparently scoff at the experience of others.
And that is okay. If you don't want to take bee pollen, by all means, don't. I am relaying my experience. And, I can assure you, I don't get the flu any longer. I haven't had it in decades.
In fact, I haven't been to the doctor for any reason other than a physical that my wife demanded...in two decades.
Don't listen to me though.

The point is that you have not established a cause and effect relationship between taking bee pollen and not getting the flu. I have had EXACTLY the same experience you have had with regards to the flu and I have never taken bee pollen. I also haven't had it in decades.

Your attitude, your "testimonial," as it were, is scientifically useless, but has been the reason quack medicines have sold for thousands of years. If you were to try to sell bee pollen with this claim, you'd be shut down by the FDA in a heartbeat. You can't just make up stuff and claim there is a relationship, which is exactly what you have done here. It's like saying drinking Dr. Fudd's magic Tonic Water prevents the piles. That is fraud.

Prove it. And the thing is, you COULD if you wanted to. It's not like believeing in Fairy God Mothers. You could put together an experiment with 1,000 takers of bee pollen against a control group of 1,000 people who never took bee pollen, making sure both groups were made up of a sufficiently random sample, trace how many times they got the flu over thirty years, statistically analyze the results, and PROVE with a 99% confidence rate that taking bee pollen prevents you getting the flu. In fact, although it would take awhile, that's a fairly easy experiment, just measuring two variables in a longitudinal study.

You COULD do that, but you have not, so all you have is an anecdote that proves nothing at all. And that's the reason no one should listen to you.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

you need to change the title to:
Natural remedies "seldom effective"money-makers for Big Pharma , page 1

LL, you seem to have been hoisted by your own petard

There are a number of alternative healing therapies that work so well and cost so little (compared to conventional treatment), that Organized Medicine, the Food & Drug Administration, and their overlords in the Pharmaceutical Industry (The Big Three) would rather the public not know about them. The reason is obvious: Alternative, non-toxic therapies represent a potential loss of billions of dollars to allopathic (drug) medicine and drug companies.

The Big Three have collectively engaged in a medical conspiracy for the better part of 70 years to influence legislative bodies on both the state and federal level to create regulations that promote the use of drug medicine while simultaneously creating restrictive, controlling mechanisms (licencing, government approval, etc) designed to limit and stifle the availability of non-drug, alternative modalities. The conspiracy to limit and eliminate competition from non-drug therapies began with the Flexner Report of 1910.

Abraham Flexner was engaged by John D. Rockefeller to run around the country and 'evaluate' the effectiveness of therapies taught in medical schools and other institutions of the healing arts. Rockefeller wanted to dominate control over petrolem, petrochemicals, and pharmaceuticals (which are derived from 'coal tars' or crude oil). He arranged for his company, Standard Oil of New Jersey to obtain a controlling interest in a huge German drug cartel called I. G. Farben. He pulled in his stronger competitors like Andrew Carnegie and JP Morgan as partners, while making other, less powerful players, stockholders in Standard Oil. Those who would not come into the fold "were crushed" according to a Rockefeller biographer (W. Hoffman, David: Report on a Rockefeller [New York:Lyle Stuart, Inc., 1971]page 24.)

Forbidden Cures www.educate-yourself.org...



reply to post by Arbitrageur

umm no dude, quackwatch has been thoroughly debunked for years now
educate-yourself.org...

You need to do MUCH more research before jumping to conclusions about Hulda Clark (or any other alternative health researcher or natural medicine advocate) based on the rank lies you might read from Stephen Barrett.

For starters, "Doctor" Stephen Barrett was NEVER a practicing physician. He USED to be a PSYCHIATRIST, but that was BEFORE HE LOST HIS LICENSE TO PRACTICE PSYCHIATRY.

He used to have free rein on the internet for many years, slandering just about everyone and anyone who advocated nature-based medicine and others who were not interested in the pharmaceutical approach.

But then Tim Bolen stepped in somewhere in the late 1990s and began to challenge Barrett's garbage. That eventually led to lawsuits which Barrett.... lost,... big time.

Being a shill of the drug companies, however, does have its advantages. Those include hidden sources of funding and promotion to mount appeals and the like and flood the internet with scurrilous attacks on Bolen for having the audacity to out this rank ringer for the pharmaceuticals.

Who are these so-called "Quackbusters"?... www.quackpotwatch.org...
www.quackpotwatch.org...

Originally posted by cycondra
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Well this thread has been quite the laugh.

I'm sorry OP, you should have known you can't reason with the placebo effect coupled with a hatred for all things scientific.

Damn scientists and their giant organized conspiracy against the planet and everyone on it.

Oh and for anyone without basic reading comprehension, he never said that ALL natural remedies were bogus, just most of them. Take a moment and turn the "conspiracy" on its head, all these people pushing and selling natural remedies are in it to make a buck as well.

nobody is hating on REAL SCIENCE, only on Nazi-Science of which big Pharma is a major arm
here are some links concerning Big Pharma and it's links to nazi concentration camps

Chop Shop Hospitals:Cutting for Fun, Profits, and Giggles: Surgically Removing the Appendix, Tonsils, and Spleen
healthwyze.org...

(Reprinted from issue 3 of Naturally Good Magazine.)

According to the World Health Organization, the United States is ranked 38th in life expectancy, indicating that its standard medical practices are inferior to Cuba, South Korea, Costa Rica, Guadeloupe, Singapore, and 31 other nations. The U.S. system of medicine is only slightly superior to the Czech Republic and Slovenia, despite the U.S. spending approximately 16% of its total expenditures every year for health related expenses. Standard medicine in the U.S. is the world's most expensive, and yet it is among the least safe.

Creating Dependence For Repeat Customers

There are plenty of medical procedures which are both unnecessary and dangerous. With most of them, a complete recovery is eventually possible provided that the patient steps away from the medical establishment, and begins taking care of his own health.

www.salem-news.com...

"The Nuremberg code originated because of some of humanity’s darkest deeds. .... these principles — though now expanded several times in the Declarations of Helsinki (1964 and 1975, with further revisions in 1983 and 1989) and the Belmont Report (1979) — were created to protect people from inhumane treatment carried out in the name of scientific research. If these principles are fully adhered to, people should be protected from experiments without scientific merit and without full understanding and consent."

Rabbis are aware of Mengele's experiments on twins, perhaps of other hideous experiments done to Auschwitz prisoners, but seem unaware of or to have forgotten one specific type of medical experiment - the sterilization experiments done with untested, unknown vaccines, on Jewish women who could not say no.

"Auschwitz was the largest and one of the most infamous of the camps and the site of numerous ‘medical’ experiments. This historical study uses primary source documents obtained from archives in England and Germany to describe one type of experiment carried out at Auschwitz — the sterilization experiments...

"The purpose of these experiments was to perfect a technique in which non-Aryans could be prevented from reproducing while still being able to work as slave laborers."
***
"Records show the Merck pharmaceutical company received a major share of the Nazi "flight capital" at the close of World War II when its president, George W. Merck, was America's biological weapons industry director.

did somebody mention the amish?
the-amish-dont-get-autism-but-they-do-get-bio-terrorism
healthwyze.org/index.php/component/content/article/295-the-amish-dont-get-autism-but-they-do-get-bio-terrorism.html

People outside the alternative health community are often confused by the lack of autism in the Amish people. The Amish do not experience autism, or any of the other learning disabilities that plague our technological society. The Amish live in a society that consists of outdated technologies and ideals, by contemporary standards. Their diet consists of eating organic, fresh, locally-grown produce, and of course, they do not follow the established vaccination routines. To the dismay of the mainstream media and the medical establishment, this has resulted in a healthier people, that are void of all of our chronic diseases. Heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are virtually non-existent in Amish villages. Equally non-existent are modern, chemically-engineered medicines, enhanced (chemically-engineered) foods, G.M.O. foods, and of course, vaccines. How is it that those who are without the "miracles" of modern orthodox medicine are healthier? The truth about health, medicine, and how they both relate to the Amish is becoming an embarrassment to some rather powerful people.

All I know and can atest to is that for 25 years I suffered badly from Irritable Bowel Syndrome & for around 12 years from painful Fibromyalgia, until mid 2010. For the last 3 years of that period I was on strict gluten free diet.

Tried numerous 'pharma' solutions from Doctors without success, even tried some natural remedies with only short-term results, until I came across Japanese Plum Balls, Chlorella & Spirullina (didn't take them specifically for those conditions...more hoped that they might just improve my general health).

Within 2 weeks of taking the above, I noticed major reductions in the symptons I experienced for all those years, and within a month I was able to drop the gluten free diet, and being eating foods & drinks that I had given up on all those years ago!

Suffice to say that 18 months later, my health at 56 is so much better than it was from my early 30's to 55

The question everyone should ask though, is how many people have DIED from taking natural health products, compared to those that have died from consuming PHARMA subscribed products??? It's probably something like 1 death attributed to natural health consumption, to 50,000 deaths attributed to bad reactions to subscibed pills...

reply to post by schuyler

Well then Schulyer, no one should listen to anyone here that relays their own experience. In fact, since you haven't had the flu either, you could do one of two things. You can relay the reasons why you believe you haven't had the flu, and possibly help others, or you can keep your good fortune to yourself. Perhaps you could do some clinical trials since most people get the flu and you don't. Certainly you have your reasons for keeping whatever beliefs you may have to yourself, but you come and question mine?
Tsk. Tsk.
I do believe that you are trying to influence others here, Schuyler, and last I heard, that is quite okay.

Originally posted by zroth


What is the frequency of 'seldom' specific to the definition of 'effective'?

Here is some data that says chemo is 2% effective for example. That seems seldom.

This is what I try to tell people and I get a "you are a complete nutjob" look.

Originally posted by SpaceJockey1 It's probably something like 1 death attributed to natural health consumption, to 50,000 deaths attributed to bad reactions to subscibed pills...

Not to mention all the law suits generated by prescribed medicine. You can't turn on the TV without being barraged by endless ads for meds with a long list of side effects that are 10 times worse than what you have... and then countered with lawyers telling you to call them if you had any of those side effects so they can sue the companies

my son has trouble paying attention

so I researched it a little, and we have added lots of spinach, vitamin C, fish and whole grains into his diet, and he's doing much better

doesn't get more natural than that !

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Natural remedies "seldom effective"

www.stuff.co.nz

Colloidal silver, deer velvet, arnica and rescue remedy are a "waste of time and money" and sometimes harmful, doctors say.

After twelve years in the Pharmacuetical industry, I know the same could also be said of western medical remedies.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Natural remedies "seldom effective"

www.stuff.co.nz

Colloidal silver, deer velvet, arnica and rescue remedy are a "waste of time and money" and sometimes harmful, doctors say.

In the latest New Zealand Medical Journal Digest, doctors Shaun Holt and Sarah Jeffries and health psychologist Andrew Gilbey have slammed some of New Zealanders' favourite natural health products as ineffective.

Holt told The Press that of the "hundreds" of therapies and products, about 95 per cent were either not biologically plausible or not supported by research evidence.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.vifab.dk

How can they test efficacy of something without doing a clinical study.
Surely the act of doing a clinical study would bring the treatment out of quackery and into science?

Limbo

Herniated ulcer: Cornstarch & Milk. Cured my moms and cured mine. Wasn't over night but each time an attack came on I took it and it relieved it immediately. I have not had an attack in over 5 years now.
Castor oil: Our dog had a fatty tumor on his lip it got as big as a baseball. Using castor oil wraps for two weeks it shrunk to a golf ball size. Then I rubber banded the core attached to his lip and it fell off in two days and never came back.
Elderberry juice when flu like symptoms are coming on and it stops it dead in its tracks within a 1/2 a day.

IMO pharmacies make no money if we find ways to heal ourselves with out their costly drugs. Of course they are going to pay people off to say "they don't work".

Sigh castor oil is supposed to reduce wrinkles....so far.......its not working LOL

It depends on the remedy and what it is used for.

I've never come across a more effective treatment for nausea than fresh ginger.

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by schuyler

 

That is funny that you say this. I run into this sort of thinking a lot.
...
Don't listen to me though.

schuyler DID listen to you and wrote a thoughtful reply.

You replied but your reply doesn't really address the point he made. How do you explain the fact that others are taking no bee pollen at all and not getting the flu? You didn't address this so I get the impression it is you who isn't listening.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

Perhaps he eats flowers, I don't know. I never pretended to know why Schuyler doesn't get the flu, perhaps he can tell you. I stated why I don't. If you don't believe it, fine.
I thought my answer was just fine.

nothing natural works untill the un-natural is eliminated
your toplerance is so high from caffeine, nicotines, packages chemicals and foods for your skin and stomach not to say about the over the counter drugs = all crap = a healer cant heal some one who believes they are already healthy and anyone using something other than them self cant use the self - they are dead and walk the earth in poisoned state of un consciousness

Originally posted by cycondra
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Well this thread has been quite the laugh.

I'm sorry OP, you should have known you can't reason with the placebo effect coupled with a hatred for all things scientific.

Damn scientists and their giant organized conspiracy against the planet and everyone on it.

Oh and for anyone without basic reading comprehension, he never said that ALL natural remedies were bogus, just most of them. Take a moment and turn the "conspiracy" on its head, all these people pushing and selling natural remedies are in it to make a buck as well.

the beswt I read was that you claimed science is bad, nobody else.
I see most counter the arg discussing really bad science is really bad.
In that case only anecdotal evidence matters to an individual. I will give you an example, based on anecdotal evidence using good science to counter really bad science.
A few years ago I had MRSA really bad.
It was in my bloodstream and lymph system.
@ dr's and 3 emergency room visits into it I was on my way to a third dr. and turned the car around and decided to take control of my own destiny.
The docs and the emergency room treated an antibiotic resistant bug with....antibiotics. I guess by your standards they were being scientific.

I went to work searching and studying.
I ran into earthlink which had..dundundunduaaa, thousands of people speaking anecdotally about what worked for them.
The overwhelming opinion was that tumeric and it's isolated compound, curcumin, worked for them great.
I immediately chased tumeric down, found it in a big pkg at a mideatern mkt for 3 dollars.
At this point I was in complete mysery with over 50 boils all over my body. Within 2 hrs I felt some relief in pain and preesure on the wounds.
I was suffering from this for 1 1/2 years at this point.
2 weeks later everything was clearing up.
2 months later the last boil was gone.
Years later I am in better health than before it all started.
If you want real science look at what science is finding about tumeric.
Google, "tumeric, super spice" and be amazed.
For pennies a day I got better.
I had the same positive attitude while in mysery and during recovery.
Hardly a placebo effect or unscientific.
What happened was my immune sytem was empowered.
Science has known for over a decade that if the immune system is empowered that the body can heal itself of almost any illness.
Bad science is based on the magic bullet theory where every symptom has a magic bullet that will make it go away.
Nice business it is in the treating symptoms game.
The more symptoms to treat the more money to be made.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Categorisation of every doctor as in the pocket of "Big Pharma" is nonsense.

Granted there are some doctors who try their best in the interest of the patient. Doctors see death and dying on a regular basis to the point the patient is no different than an auto mechanic regards an automobile in for repairs, after awhile they become calloused like many people do in other professions to the point they wish retirement day would soon arrive. They also have almost daily visits from pharmaceutical salesmen offering incentives for promoting their products.