The ABC Homeopathy Forum
Attn: Zepoz
It seems that you have done a lot of scientific studies -In your scientific studies, have you encountered any scientific paper linking kidney failure to exposure to toxic molds like stachybotrys, penicillium, and aspergillus. Have you heard of any MD who is an expert on this subject.
I appreciate your scientific comment on this matter. Thank you.
cks689 on 2007-01-24
This is just a forum. Assume posts are not from medical professionals.
Can I suggest you sharpen up your research skills and go after the information yourself. I am not a library!
Here's a start:
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=stachybotrys+penicil...
Here's a start:
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=stachybotrys+penicil...
ZepOz last decade
alangail1 last decade
john34 last decade
I have been researching about this for a long time Just want to know your opinion because you sounded like you are a scientist. Thank you for your suggestion.
cks689 last decade
Well, I would love to stay and discuss things with you all further, but the forum administrator has banned me.
John, you are quite correct: some things ARE difficult to prove. So that is why we scientists take a LOT of care over how we go about getting acceptable proof, and what we allow as acceptable proof. It really does need to be VERY convincing to hold water, i.e. convince this jury. It is a matter of pride that we scientists are always prepared to accept that we may be wrong...but only if the evidence is strong enough. Just like having jail sentences annulled, it needs something REALLY convincing to bring that about.
DKS689, I am not in the field of medical research currently, and particularly not in the field of mycology. So my opinions would necessarily be based on looking up the research of others who are. My opinions would be relatively lightweight at the very best. However you can obtain huge amounts of useful information and more on the internet yourself, starting with the basic references I gave you. And there are, indeed, libraries full of further reference books on mycology in most major cities. Please do go find them and read them if that is your interest. It's a very remarkable field - good luck!
John, you are quite correct: some things ARE difficult to prove. So that is why we scientists take a LOT of care over how we go about getting acceptable proof, and what we allow as acceptable proof. It really does need to be VERY convincing to hold water, i.e. convince this jury. It is a matter of pride that we scientists are always prepared to accept that we may be wrong...but only if the evidence is strong enough. Just like having jail sentences annulled, it needs something REALLY convincing to bring that about.
DKS689, I am not in the field of medical research currently, and particularly not in the field of mycology. So my opinions would necessarily be based on looking up the research of others who are. My opinions would be relatively lightweight at the very best. However you can obtain huge amounts of useful information and more on the internet yourself, starting with the basic references I gave you. And there are, indeed, libraries full of further reference books on mycology in most major cities. Please do go find them and read them if that is your interest. It's a very remarkable field - good luck!
Zep__Oz last decade
zep-
so go prove it, other than you, no else seems to care that scientists have yet to 'prove' how homeopathy works. perhaps they are not clever enough to figure it out? who knows, I don't care... I did my own 'unscientific' test... it works. which is much more than I can say for the scientifically approved drugs that did nothing but suppress my illness for 33 years..
good luck on your crusade zep, though you must probably know by now, its a loosing battle. people are waking up to alternatives like homeopathy, and they like what they see. regardless of how many like you howl and nash your teeth... its almost silly.
John
so go prove it, other than you, no else seems to care that scientists have yet to 'prove' how homeopathy works. perhaps they are not clever enough to figure it out? who knows, I don't care... I did my own 'unscientific' test... it works. which is much more than I can say for the scientifically approved drugs that did nothing but suppress my illness for 33 years..
good luck on your crusade zep, though you must probably know by now, its a loosing battle. people are waking up to alternatives like homeopathy, and they like what they see. regardless of how many like you howl and nash your teeth... its almost silly.
John
john34 last decade
Hi Zepoz
Here is something you would like:
El principio homeopático
Estudio sensacional de la Universidad de Leipzig
En realidad, la catedrática de farmacología Karen Nieber quería demostrar que la homeopatía no tenía efectos. Puesto que en una potencia D23 elaborada mediante dilución homeopática ya no hay matemáticamente ninguna molécula de la sustancia base, desde el punto de vista farmacológico no hay nada que pueda actuar.
¿Por qué especialmente Atropina y Belladonna?
En la búsqueda de un método de ensayo en el que pudiera excluirse cualquier tipo de efecto placebo se le ocurrió la siguiente idea genial: introdujo el intestino de una rata en una concentración de nutrientes y lo fijó mediante hilos orgánicos a un sensor de forma que pudiera medir la contracción del intestino debido a los calambres. Seguidamente, introdujo en la concentración de nutrientes un irritante que ocasionara calambres fuertes al intestino de rata. El intestino se contraía y la balanza mostraba más tensión.
Cuando añadió belladona D 90 a la concentración de nutrientes el intestino volvió a relajarse y la balanza mostraba menos tensión. De esta forma demostró que la homeopatía también puede actuar sin las sustancias materiales y, de esta forma, ganó el premio Hans-Heinrich-Reckeweg, dotado con 10.000 , en el año 2003. Las cadenas de televisión ARD y ORF han informado de ello detalladamente.
Sergio
Here is something you would like:
El principio homeopático
Estudio sensacional de la Universidad de Leipzig
En realidad, la catedrática de farmacología Karen Nieber quería demostrar que la homeopatía no tenía efectos. Puesto que en una potencia D23 elaborada mediante dilución homeopática ya no hay matemáticamente ninguna molécula de la sustancia base, desde el punto de vista farmacológico no hay nada que pueda actuar.
¿Por qué especialmente Atropina y Belladonna?
En la búsqueda de un método de ensayo en el que pudiera excluirse cualquier tipo de efecto placebo se le ocurrió la siguiente idea genial: introdujo el intestino de una rata en una concentración de nutrientes y lo fijó mediante hilos orgánicos a un sensor de forma que pudiera medir la contracción del intestino debido a los calambres. Seguidamente, introdujo en la concentración de nutrientes un irritante que ocasionara calambres fuertes al intestino de rata. El intestino se contraía y la balanza mostraba más tensión.
Cuando añadió belladona D 90 a la concentración de nutrientes el intestino volvió a relajarse y la balanza mostraba menos tensión. De esta forma demostró que la homeopatía también puede actuar sin las sustancias materiales y, de esta forma, ganó el premio Hans-Heinrich-Reckeweg, dotado con 10.000 , en el año 2003. Las cadenas de televisión ARD y ORF han informado de ello detalladamente.
Sergio
sergiorvil last decade
To post a reply, you must first LOG ON or Register
Important
Information given in this forum is given by way of exchange of views only, and those views are not necessarily those of ABC Homeopathy. It is not to be treated as a medical diagnosis or prescription, and should not be used as a substitute for a consultation with a qualified homeopath or physician. It is possible that advice given here may be dangerous, and you should make your own checks that it is safe. If symptoms persist, seek professional medical attention. Bear in mind that even minor symptoms can be a sign of a more serious underlying condition, and a timely diagnosis by your doctor could save your life.