Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Read the average life expectancy number----37. That was where we were at after using traditional natural medicine for thousands of years.
Who cares about the AVERAGE? The MEAN is what is important. Sure back then they didn't have incubators and a lot of babies died in childbirth that stay alive today. If they lived past age 5, chances are they lived into their 70s, 80s 90s or 100s and died healthy and disease free in their sleep!
Compare that to today where more babies lives are spared -- which raises the average -- but in middle age half of Americans are diagnosed with a chronic or degenerative disease and today people are so debilitated by their sixties or 70s there is a nursing home crisis. People waste away living a horrible quality of life in their sunset years today. It is a sad testimate to modern medicine.
Of course the statisticians know Americans are too dumb to know the difference between average and mean. They just take the mainstream media's word for everything and don't even suspect they might be lying and just trying to brainwash people into believing the idiotic mantra that "we are living longer healthier lives" today. What a croc that line is.
Who cares about the AVERAGE? The MEAN is what is important. Sure back then they didn't have incubators and a lot of babies died in childbirth that stay alive today. If they lived past age 5, chances are they lived into their 70s, 80s 90s or 100s and died healthy and disease free in their sleep!
Who cares about the AVERAGE? The MEAN is what is important. Sure back then they didn't have incubators and a lot of babies died in childbirth that stay alive today. If they lived past age 5, chances are they lived into their 70s, 80s 90s or 100s and died healthy and disease free in their sleep!
Compare that to today where more babies lives are spared -- which raises the average -- but in middle age half of Americans are diagnosed with a chronic or degenerative disease and today people are so debilitated by their sixties or 70s there is a nursing home crisis. People waste away living a horrible quality of life in their sunset years today. It is a sad testimate to modern medicine.
Of course the statisticians know Americans are too dumb to know the difference between average and mean. They just take the mainstream media's word for everything and don't even suspect they might be lying and just trying to brainwash people into believing the idiotic mantra that "we are living longer healthier lives" today. What a croc that line is.
What an incredibly intellectualized condemnation of modern medicine you have there.
''Fewer babies die thanks to modern medicine = modern medicine sucks." Brilliant.
You should consider becoming a Christian scientist. Or a quaker.
Last edited by RaymondChandlerLives; 06-21-2015 at 07:48 PM..
Ummm, "average' and 'mean' generally refer to the exact same thing. (See: Mean, median and mode.)
Spent a bunch of years and made a pretty good living identifying and falsifying fraudulent 'published' science. (Hint to OP: Easiest way is to question the assumptions at the outset of the research - you can usually find it in the prelude to the 'materials and methods' section of the literature.)
Hilarious that the Lancet published the article; they were the ones who tried to throw the GW Bush re-election by publishing the entirely false study about the number of deaths in the Iraq war just before the '04 election. (They have since admitted it was false and retracted it.)
Look, any research can be criticized. Even Quack Watch - and a number of my subjects (frauds I uncovered) are published there - is subject to debate. That's why every article contains the throw-away line at the end, "Additional research is needed, but our research suggests..." We all have different ideas about how big the sample size should be and how to properly analyze findings. So anyone can criticize. But how many can prove falsification? That's what I did, and believe me, it is hard to do. Did they do that in the Lancet article? Nope.
So I would be careful about depending upon one letter or article in Lancet to condemn the entire medical/scientific community.
BTW, if you REALLY want to find fraud in research, explore the scientific grant process. It is absolutely alive with fraud and political manipulation...
I hope the bashers of Natural Medicine know the Medical Establishment itself has recently admitted in the esteemed UK medical journal "The Lancet" that "lots" of the so called "Science" that is published that the medical establishment has hung its hat on for so many years turns out to be W R O N G. http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journa...%2960696-1.pdf
The cat is OUT OF THE BAG now. Your argument that your precious "evidence based medicine" or "scientifically proven double blind studies" are the only way or the "superlative" method to prove something is effective no longer holds water --- because your own Scientists who did the studies say up to half of it is wrong.
Yes, of course, what a great excuse to not believe ANY scientific evidence EVER because "some" is wrong!
As with everything, the source and motivation for study should be scrutinized.
Read the average life expectancy number----37. That was where we were at after using traditional natural medicine for thousands of years.
This statistic has much to do with death in childbirth and infant mortality.
I'm a fan of homeopathic and "alternative" treatments but antibiotics and vaccines have changed the world. There is a time for homeopathy and a time for allopathy.
The beauty of science is that it will admit shortcomings and mistakes, and will move to improve/correct them. OTOH, the opposition claims "perfection" without any basis.
I believe what Emily is pointing out here is that even some main streamers are beginning to confirm what we skeptics have known all along. It's not a 'smoking gun", but simply confirmation.
Furthermore, we have seen in recent times, a significant number of revelations about deliberate manipulations and fabrications of data and studies from insider sources as well as independent scientific sources. Some of these revelations have been bombshells, yet completely ignored by the mass media and mainstream medical establishment who seem unmoved by new information, and particularly hostile to any new, inconvenient data.
For example, it was recently revealed how scientific studies have now shown that chemotherapy actually causes an acceleration of cancer growth, rather than serve as a cure. You'd think (if one was so inclined to really think) that such information would blow the lid off this fraud posing as effective and safe medicine, yet it seems to fall on deaf ears. See no evil ... speak no evil ... hear no evil ... that's the response.
Another revelation coming from insiders revealed how the FDA covered up data showing a causal link between vaccines and autism .... of course, the whistle blowers are attacked as quacks and the show marches on, along with an increased push for elimination of vaccination wavers. This is the exact opposite of the rational response, which should have been public demand for a full blown investigation into the manipulations being revealed.
The reality is, there are hundreds of billions of dollars riding on continuing and expanding pharmaceutical based medicine whether or not it is effective or safe. Efficacy and safety are just consumer/patient concerns to be addressed as a continued selling point only, and not a scientific or medical concern. That serves no significant role in the course if modern medicine .... if a particular "treatment" masks a symptom, but causes further health issues, well, all the better, since another treatment can be offered for that. A win-win for the medical establishment ... for the patient, not so much.
No industry has become as corrupt as the medical industry, with their unprecedented mandates and product liability protections written into law by their bribe taking lackies in congress. No other industry enjoys such laws requiring public participation/purchase of their product, while also granting them immunity from the well established rules governing product liability that applies to every other business or product.
The fraud is so blatant ... it's impossible not to see.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
