Returns Scroll Stop Automatic mode

Health and prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental hazardsThe dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

How to stay healthy and prevent risks and consequences on your health and public health. occupational disease, industrial risks (asbestos, air pollution, electromagnetic waves ...), company risk (workplace stress, overuse of drugs ...) and individual (tobacco, alcohol ...).
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 787
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 29

The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Exnihiloest » 28/05/17, 16:10

"A boy of 7 years has just died after being treated only to homeopathy for an ear infection."
http://www.femmeactuelle.fr/sante/news- ... thie-39665

Nothing surprising, homeopathy has already been suspected of death in the United States:
http://www.ouest-france.fr/sante/medica ... sa-4558593

Indeed, homeopathic medicines are not subjected to the drastic controls required for the real drugs (those of allopathy). Even with these checks, accidents happen with the drugs, so when you do not even control, because the dosage of anything, even cyanide, is too low to present the least risk, you run to problem. For it would still have to be checked, this dosage!

And when we test homoeopathic medicines truly homeopathically dosed, we realize their ineffectiveness:
http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societ ... 65953.html
This is the placebo level.

In this same order of ideas, alternatives to what we know that works, though imperfect, beware of dietary alternatives:
"Their baby dies after being fed with vegetable milk".
http://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2017/05 ... rents.html

Vegetarianism is fashionable. It even has its extremists, the followers of veganism. This movement motivated by moral, religious or cultural reasons (misguided because counter-nature) would make us believe, too, a history of a semblance of rationality, that vegetarianism would be the solution to the deplorable food habits of our modernity and an ecological solution in Rendering livestock obsolete, as if man himself was not also the object of ecology.
Because man has always eaten meat since he left to colonize the world, which still leads us to more than 2 millions of years. Apart from the lack of diversity of a too meaty diet and the excesses associated with the large amounts consumed, meat has never been a problem. On the contrary, it is beneficial to man by increasing the necessary diversity of the inputs we need.

The two facts reported here confirm that the unqualified promoters of all these inconsistent alternatives are criminal limits. Unconsciousness is not an excuse.
0 x

Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6547
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 428

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Ahmed » 28/05/17, 17:42

Exnihiloest, I am very surprised that you make use of the following argument (underlined by me), in particular because of your unconditional support for transhumanism:
This movement motivated by moral, religious or cultural reasons (Deviated, for against nature *)


* This is vegetarianism.
0 x
"Do not believe above all that I tell you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5832
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: Burgundy
x 59

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Janic » 28/05/17, 19:11

"A boy of 7 years has just died after being treated only to homeopathy for an ear infection."
http://www.femmeactuelle.fr/sante/news- ... thie-39665

Nothing surprising, homeopathy has already been suspected of death in the United States:
http://www.ouest-france.fr/sante/medica ... sa-4558593

As usual, there is nothing worse than ignorant to look like a scientist
The first case: no information on whether the child was followed by a doctor or not. From then on, it is possible to say anything to make events happen at low cost. In the reverse case H is a medicine practiced by professionals graduated from the faculty of medicine and they have all the skills to prescribe according to the pathologies they are examining. However self-medication in H as in A presents risks of errors hence the need to consult competent professionals.
For those who have the opportunity, it is interesting to visit the hospital of the sick children of Paris to see that the A. Has not only successes, nor VGs, on the contrary.
Indeed, homeopathic medicines are not subjected to the drastic controls required for the real drugs (those of allopathy).

The subject has already been seen and reviewed until complete wear? Thus repetition: the French legislation has settled this issue since the H does not present No danger It is therefore not necessary to pass on to it all the protocols specific to A, the toxicity of which is recognized by the medical profession and which therefore requires many precautions
Even with these checks accidents happen with the going drugs,

Only with medicines A. not those of H according to French legislation. And for those who challenge it each to representatives in the legislative assemblies to change the law (even big pharma has been put in its place!)
Then when we do not even control under the pretext that the dosage of anything, even cyanide, would be too low to present any risk, we run to the problem. For it would still have to be checked, this dosage!

Oh ignorance, how much devotion do you make to weak minds? : roll:
Repetition: homeopathy is Officially recognized as non-toxic Hence its minimum dilution imposed and therefore No poisoning is possible. On the other hand, some products containing homeopathic products, Are not H Hence burrs as was the case in america (already seen once again)
And when we test homoeopathic medicines truly homeopathically dosed, we realize their ineffectiveness:
http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societ ... 65953.html
This is the placebo level.

Already seen too! Placebos have the same percentages of successes or failures WHATEVER THE THERAPY USED .
Most anti-H articles come from "scientists" on the orders of big pharma (and therefore incompetent in H) and many scandals have demonstrated the conflicts of interest that bind the two. This article in the express is characteristic.
In this same order of ideas, alternatives to what we know that works, though imperfect, beware of dietary alternatives:
"Their baby dies after being fed vegetable milk".
http://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2017/05 ... rents.html

The same goes to the sick children's hospital and there you will see many children who, although not nourished with vegetable milk, are in a sad state
Otherwise the so-called "vegetable" juices are not milk and do not replace them, nor cow's milk for a human.
Now these parents have fed their two previous children in this way without any problem. The reason is therefore to be sought elsewhere than in the product itself.
Yet, the couple who have already partially fed their two girls with vegetable milk, still does not realize how this could happen »
Vegetarianism is fashionable. It even has its extremists, the followers of veganism. This movement motivated by moral, religious or cultural reasons (misguided because counter-nature) would make us believe, too, a history of a semblance of rationality, that vegetarianism would be the solution to the deplorable food habits of our modernity and an ecological solution in Rendering livestock obsolete, as if man himself was not also the object of ecology.

Great anything, once again! Begin by first informing authorities in the matter already quoted that is the AADDC (10.000 American and Canadian dieticians)
Because man has always eaten meat since he left to colonize the world, which still leads us to more than 2 millions of years.

He smokes and becomes alcoholic and even officially or unofficially drug, violates children, makes wars, etc.
Is that a reference?
Aside from the lack of diversity of a diet too meaty and the excesses associated with large quantities ingested, meat has never been a problem. On the contrary, it is beneficial to man by increasing the necessary diversity of the inputs we need.
Speech "The kind one goes; Three hello the damage"Which has made the good days of the sector of the picole.At the same time some countries voted the tolerance 0 at the wheel. : Evil:
Begins, once again, to study in depth this subject before playing the parrot of an official speech that changes softly to the dismay of the branches of butchery
The two facts reported here confirm that the unqualified promoters of all these inconsistent alternatives are criminal limits. Unconsciousness is not an excuse.

When big pharma bribes are limited to two cases, it will be an incredible health revolution. Yes, the unconsciousness, and worse the voluntary lack of consciousness that you show, is not an excuse.
0 x
"We do science with facts, as is a house with stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Exnihiloest
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 787
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 29

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Exnihiloest » 28/05/17, 21:40

Ahmed wrote:Exnihiloest, I am very surprised that you make use of the following argument (underlined by me), in particular because of your unconditional support for transhumanism:
This movement motivated by moral, religious or cultural reasons (Deviated, for against nature *)


* This is vegetarianism.

Yes: man is an omnivore.
Would we have to force a cow to eat meat or a lion of the salad, and we would have the SPA and we would end up in court.
But as far as man is concerned, one thinks oneself allowed. That is the ideological position.
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6547
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 428

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Ahmed » 28/05/17, 21:43

I understood what you meant, but, and transhumanism?
0 x
"Do not believe above all that I tell you."

User avatar
Exnihiloest
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 787
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 29

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Exnihiloest » 28/05/17, 21:45

An excellent synthesis on this charlatanerie that is homeopathy:
http://archives-lepost.huffingtonpost.f ... oiron.html
1 x
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 787
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 29

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Exnihiloest » 28/05/17, 22:07

Ahmed wrote:I understood what you meant, but, and transhumanism?

It is only since 2,6 millions of years that man eats meat. His dietary change would have been triggered for a survival issue in new environments.
Vegetarianism pretends to make it return to its previous situation. In what, two or three generations ?! And why ? To save animals which anyway will not exist any more because they are raised only to eat them ?! To improve production efficiency and possibly reduce pollution by eliminating this intermediary between the plant and man, what is the animal ?! Because we must not eat other living beings while animals spend their time eating each other ?! A carrot is not a living being? ... All this makes no sense.

Transhumanism is a man-directed evolution, without waiting for the vagaries of environmental pressures and favorable mutations.
There we change the nature of the individual, we do not force the one who is endowed with a nature to act against his own nature.
It's nothing revolutionary. Piercing or tattoos is already transforming his body. Only the hi-tech technology evoked by transhumanism would make the difference, the change of nature becoming much more subtle than piercing or tattooing!
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6547
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 428

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Ahmed » 28/05/17, 22:56

A carrot is not a living being?! ...

Arrrgh! The cry of the crushed carrot alive by a pitiless jaw! : Lol: Let us be serious, compassion for living beings concerns sentient beings, even if the limit, like any limit, remains imprecise; Of course, you can always decide that the carrot is part of it ... : roll:
... the animals spend their time eating each other ?!

There are also many examples of co-operation, obviously, but also extra-specific; Moreover, to show more compassion than animals seems to me to be in the honor of our species: why should we align ourselves with the least saying in this matter? Especially and unlike animals, this choice is physiologically possible.
There we change the nature of the individual, we do not force the one who is endowed with a nature to act against his own nature.

It is a purely abstract vision which postulates a society which would be a simple collection of perfectly free individuals, without any power relations between them, and which would be distinguished only by the choice or not to be transformed. While it is well understood that the increase would immediately amplify the existing cleavages.
0 x
"Do not believe above all that I tell you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5832
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: Burgundy
x 59

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Janic » 29/05/17, 08:42

Yes: man is an omnivore.

And go for an extra counter-truth.
The comparative anatomy of which you use an example below, allows to classify the living beings according to precise biological mechanisms and which are unanimous in the scientists of the anatomo / biology.
Would a cow be forced to eat meat or a lion of salad,

This gives reason to what is formulated above. But how are these different animals classified, if not by their physiological mechanisms: organs of prehension, dentition, digestive and intestinal system, and this can not be the object of fanciful interpretations. Now you put forward a process cultural Anti-biological.
But as far as man is concerned, one thinks oneself allowed. That is the ideological position.

So you have an ideological posture by declassifying the human to support an inadequate cultural food mode.
Because we must not eat other living beings while animals spend their time eating each other ?! A carrot is not a living being? ... All this makes no sense.

You could not avoid this commonplace widely used to mock the sensitivity of some VG.
But there is no question of raising awareness. Predators of other animals or those of plants do not do in the sensory system, but obey biological mechanisms adapted to their nature.
The human transgresses these mechanisms for various cultural (and sometimes survival) reasons in particular circumstances. But the exception becomes a rule after a certain time, which does not change anything in the initial physiology.
It is only since 2,6 millions of years that man eats meat. His dietary change would have been triggered for a survival issue in new environments.

You invoke millions of years (stuffing of school skull), and it would be surprising that after such a long time human physiology has not changed a hair, which would be in complete contradiction with the theory Of evolution, and if its physiology has not changed, it is because it is manners, culture, and morals have never been a scientific reference.
Besides, you can not recommend yourself at all end of the sacrosanct science and despise it to support the speech of an industry that employs pseudo-scientists to support its path.
There we change the nature of the individual, we do not force the one who is endowed with a nature to act against his own nature.

This is called an inversion of reality: it is culture that wants to change the profound nature of a physiology that has been established (according to evolutionary discourse) over millions of years. It is acting against one's own nature. Compare our method of nutritious selection with that of other animals: can we grip and bite to the full in the buttocks of the hunted animal? NO, can we tear our flesh with our little quootes? NO ! No more than a few million years ago the theory. In the same way can we graze grass like herbivores? NO MORE ! Because we are not designed and equipped to be able to do so. There is therefore no question of forcing or forbidding anything, but it is a return to a better harmony with our deep nature in terms of food and not cultural. To return to the fundamentals of biology.

An excellent synthesis on this charlatanerie that is homeopathy:
http://archives-lepost.huffingtonpost.f ... oiron.html
How much has he been paid to bring out this rag of nonsense which underlines his total ignorance of the subject. And you call it an excellent synthesis! In fact, their ignorance is greater and their synthesis becomes excellent? Well we are not soon out of medieval pseudoscientific obscurantism!
0 x
"We do science with facts, as is a house with stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Exnihiloest
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 787
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 29

Re: The dangers of homeopathy and food alternatives

Unread Messageby Exnihiloest » 29/05/17, 19:30

Ahmed wrote:...
Arrrgh! The cry of the crushed carrot alive by a pitiless jaw! : Lol: Let us be serious, compassion for living beings concerns sentient beings, even if the limit, like any limit, remains imprecise; Of course, you can always decide that the carrot is part of it ... : roll:

I am serious, see below.

There are also many examples of co-operation, obviously, but also extra-specific; Moreover, to show more compassion than animals seems to me to be in the honor of our species: why should we align ourselves with the least saying in this matter? Especially and unlike animals, this choice is physiologically possible.

Compassion or sentimentality?
Empathy for animals depends on their degree of resemblance to us. So towards mammals, we sympathize. But not to the tunas that are dying on the deck of a boat. They can not be heard. But not sure that their suffering is less than that of a calf properly killed in a slaughterhouse.
I think vegetarianism has many reasons. That of refusing to eat animals out of compassion is incoherent. Between eating pigs, eating carrots, passing through the snail or frying, there are all the degrees from one to the other. Knowing moreover that the Animal / vegetable distinction Is uncertain, the threshold decided to eat / not to eat one or the other can only be the result of an arbitrary and necessarily iniquitous choice.

... It is a purely abstract vision which postulates a society which would be a simple collection of perfectly free individuals, without any power relations between them, and which would be distinguished only by the choice or not of Transform ... While it is clear that the increase would immediately amplify the existing cleavages.

Humanism does not postulate any of this. At the limit it is a religion; you have faith, you put yourself in it, it does not interest you, you stand aside. If the movement takes, then the world can be transformed, but it has also been transformed by Christianity and Islam. I know that this comparison is not flattering to humanism, so in my defense I add that it's still not the same problem: not to be supreme in sight, no dogma, no rite, just technical possibilities that you take or not or that you try.
0 x


 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and guests 2

Other pages that will certainly interest you: