[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
How is the word toxic mean I am wrong? If something is not naturally found in the body and once introduced produces side effects it is toxic. Its not supposed to be inside you. The human body has the ability to heal almost every problem we throw drugs at given the proper sources of food light air and water. If we are made of these 4 things and the intake of these things have caused a degeneration then its only logical that rebalancing can reverse these conditions and it have been proven this happens. People have cured there incurable type II diabetes that the pharmaceutical company wants you buying insulin for the rest of your life for. Why the hell would they want you to know you can cure yourself but simply eating the right foods. You really have to think about the money in this industry. In the fortune 500, 10 pharmaceutical companies make more then all the other 490 companies combined
@relentless I already stated if you have something that surgery like broken bones or a emergency situation of a none fatty degenerative tumor like your brothers are better suited to modern medicine. When we are caught in a emergency situation and modern medicine triumphs but doctors in their drug prescribing roles are a detriment, not a asset to out health. We would be much better of with proper foods light air and water as long term problems that come the intake of these are the cause of many health problems we throw drugs at. cancer, type II diabetes, arteriosclerosis, cirrhosis, obesity, smoking etc These are the major killer of the american population. Stop dropping this down to a argument about taking care of benign tumors with surgery
Also, most people overestimate how healthy their diet is[/quote]
Your thoughts on biological processes are literally from the dark ages
You don’t need a debate my man. You need an education
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.
As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.
The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.
It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university
Your thoughts on biological processes are literally from the dark ages
You don’t need a debate my man. You need an education[/quote]
We have a good understanding of physiology and biochemistry but yet we fail to use it in order to make our society one where healthy is the majority, not a small minority. It really is sad that we don’t study health. We literally only study disease and how to cure the symptoms. If your going to make assumptions about me I would say from your posts you vastly overestimate your own knowledge of healthy practices.
You also forget that the rates of fatty degenerative diseases such as cancer and heart disease were non existent in 1900 compared to today’s extreme values. They are the 2 of the 3 biggest killers in america. You guys are impossible to persuade though. Try a book like “Fats that Heal, Fats that Kill” by Udo Erasmus. Its only 300 pages and is a pretty non bias source of information on this topic. He is also a Medical Doctor who has first had knowledge of what medicine can’t do for people. Something we cannot claim to have knowledge of
[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.
As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.
The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.
It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]
Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)
“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?
And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?
And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?
Indeed, our friend here is more or less referring to the following:
Nevermind the fact that this theory is THOUSANDS of years old. Homeboy says it’s all you need, so it must be right! But in all seriousness, this only proves my previous point, because there’s probably someone out there dumb enough who has felt slighted by doctors in the past for whatever reason who will read this guy’s posts and say, “hey, yeah! he must be right!” He’ll then Google “vaccines and autism” or what have you, and then become another member of the herd of retards beating the drums against that evil, evil allopathic medicine that’s managed to increase average life span by over 100% in the past 100 years. (Tip of the cap to the guy who looked that up for me already)
My favorite part about this and others’ posts is that you conveniently ignore some miracles of modern medicine such as open heart surgery, casting it off into some arbitrary category that you deem emergent (nevermind the fact that most valve replacements and angioplasties, as well as cancer resections, are done on an elective basis, not emergently). Another gap in knowledge you have is regarding cancer treatments. Is 3-5 years of additional life a success?? It depends on the disease and who you ask. For something like pancreatic cancer, where 6 months after diagnosis the patient often is dead, palliative care is the norm. We give patients pain medication and try to keep them as comfortable as possible. We know there isn’t anything we can do, although we always provide the option for the patient to receive operative or adjuvant care (rarely works). There are cancers, however, that can be cured entirely by surgery (squamous cell lung cancer, melanoma, thyroid cancer, testicular cancer, etc.) if they are caught before metastasizing. There are other times when it’s less cut-and-dry, sure, and it comes down to the person making the decision. It’s possible that someone’s mom (yours, mine, whoever) can beat cancer with chemo, radiation, and surgery. She will be miserable from side-effects of the above for a couple of years, but will live 20, 30, or 40 years longer. It’s also possible that she will die, either in the immediate period or from a recurrence. It’s not your place to say whether the side effects that she as a patient undergoes are worth it or not. Everyone weighs the risks/benefits, and makes their own choice. The evil physician merely ensures the patient has all the information. That’s it.
This is one of the most patently absurd things I have ever read, and that’s saying a lot. This entire thing has no basis in reality whatsoever. This “fatty degeneration” of tumors doesn’t even make any sense from a pathologic standpoint. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what you get when someone with a big mouth and a small brain reads the agendas of conspiracy theorists on the internet entirely too much. There is NOTHING about this that remotely resembles fact.
I’ve said it multiple times already but I’ll say it again: I see patients in the office who weigh 300 lbs, have angina, hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, etc. That didn’t happen in a day. And guess what? For YEARS these people have been counseled to eat healthier, work out, stop smoking…and they never do. It’s much easier for someone to take a statin daily along with their Big Mac than to eat baked salmon with spinach and a little white rice, work out, and stop smoking. Unfortunately, that’s the world that we live in.
[quote]Taking a statin comes down to this. Would you like a chance a a bunch of weird side effect from a toxic substance (all drugs are toxic since they aren’t supposed to be in the body and create ‘side effects’ or disease in there own right) for a supposed ‘benefit’ of lower blood cholesterol which isn’t even proven to lower the risk of heart attack.
We as a society have overdrawn on our public health much like our government has overdrawn on our national debt. But lets keep doing what we are doing and take a cynical view that people can’t change even when they start to see the effect of over drawing on their health loans through bad lifestyle choices. Lets drug them, lie about its effectiveness and make a huge profit while doing nothing to improve public health in the long run. Fatty degenerative diseases will never be cured by modern medicine. Only by food which is ultimately the best medicine as we are made of food, light, air and water. Intake of bad food, polluted light, air, and water, along with the introduction of toxic substances to cure symptoms of our ailments has led to all this cancer and heart disease never seen before 1900 [/quote]
I have idiopathic hypertension. That means I have high blood pressure (~160/100, unmedicated) for a reason that no doctor can figure out. I eat clean, I work out 5 days per week, I don’t smoke, I drink plenty of water, blah blah blah. I do everything that I tell my patients to do, yet I have high blood pressure. I take lisinopril every single day. I have side effects from it - I’ve had sinus issues from about two weeks since I began it. But you know what? Hypertension is a disease that kills you slowly. It will blind you, it will cause your kidneys to fail, it will give you heart attacks, it will give you blood clots, it will give you strokes…I can go on and on. Though I feel well on a daily basis, I know that the consequences of not taking medication FAR outweigh the sinus issues that I deal with every single day.
I’m the exception, not the rule. I choose to take the medication because I am educated and know the risks of not doing so. I AM healthy, and yet I STILL have pressure issues. How on earth do you think some sedentary piece of shit who drinks 12 beers a day and grubs on potato chips is going to get healthy? Please tell me. I just reloaded the page and saw your most recent post, and the very notion that you, me, or anyone else can change people’s behavior outright is laughable. EVERYONE knows smoking will kill you, yet millions do it everyday. EVERYONE knows eating an unhealthy diet will eventually kill you, yet fast food is a multi-billion dollar industry. These drugs give us the opportunity to combat some of the bad behaviors of people, and give them the opportunity to have more quality years of life ahead of them. No, better to put our head in the sand and not prescribe medications and preach from the mountain tops that all anyone truly needs is clean water, air, and whatever other bullshit you’re selling.
Sorry dude, not buying it. You peddle your bullshit all you want, but when it comes down to it, you don’t see sick people everyday, and you know very, very little about the way the human body actually works. It’s a pity that there are so many folks who fall into this same dangerous line of thinking.
Your thoughts on biological processes are literally from the dark ages
You don’t need a debate my man. You need an education[/quote]
We have a good understanding of physiology and biochemistry but yet we fail to use it in order to make our society one where healthy is the majority, not a small minority. It really is sad that we don’t study health. We literally only study disease and how to cure the symptoms. If your going to make assumptions about me I would say from your posts you vastly overestimate your own knowledge of healthy practices.
[/quote]
No, you don’t have a good understanding of physiology and biochemistry. A lot of people do, but you don’t. So don’t say “we”. And we literally only study disease? Really? Did you sit through all the classes I did getting a bio degree? I didn’t study health in them? Only disease?
Edit: stop calling cancer a fatty degenerative disease. seriously
I’m done here guys, as I said your impossible to convince even slightly. There is always an exception to the rule with drugs but we rampantly prescribe them for things that they aren’t curing. I have a 4 year degree in nutritional science from U of M so yes I took several chemistry and biochemistry courses as well. Fuck it, lets be cynic, put our heads in the sand and give up on the world because behaviors are impossible to change. Seriously consider reading that book if your a medical doctor mezcal. You’ll enjoy the read and its worth your while. It explains things far better then I can over an internet forum
The problem is that we have a plethora of studies and years of clinical practice behind what we’re saying. You have the burden of proof here, because it’s you with the fringe beliefs that you hold so dear. It’s not us who are impossible to convince. In fact, if you could provide me with a few references to the so-called cures for cancer by dissolving fat that you’ve mentioned, I’d love to see them.
[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
I’m done here guys, as I said your impossible to convince even slightly. There is always an exception to the rule with drugs but we rampantly prescribe them for things that they aren’t curing. I have a 4 year degree in nutritional science from U of M so yes I took several chemistry and biochemistry courses as well. Fuck it, lets be cynic, put our heads in the sand and give up on the world because behaviors are impossible to change. Seriously consider reading that book if your a medical doctor mezcal. You’ll enjoy the read and its worth your while. It explains things far better then I can over an internet forum[/quote]
Like mezcal said, burden of proof is on you. And if that is what they tought you at U of M (I’m assuming Maryland here) then i’ll scratch their molecular medicine phd program off my list. They were in my top 3 too. Bummer
[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
Our natural immune systems actually fair much better then you give them credit for. A great example would be about 2/3 of everyone in Europe living through the black death despite most being in crowded cities full of fleas and rats that spread the disease. Not to mention most cases become pneumonic plague where coughs and sneezes can pass on the illness. This is widely considered the worst pandemic to hit “modern” humans. You could also argue for the influenza outbreak after world war 1 which a even greater majority of people did not get sick from.[/quote]A third of Europe decimated? No big deal… 3% of the world’s population dead due to Spanish Flu? But the majority didn’t die!..
So what if they are in it to make money? Why the hell do you work? Vaccines work.
[quote]relentless2120 wrote:
Also please address the increased lifespan that bam brought up. How is that possible with all these toxins being pumped into us?[/quote]
this graph shows the percentage of survival (y) plotted against age (x)
by far the biggest leap forward in survival has been in steps a, b and c
a: better housing and sanitation
b: accesible healthcare, hygiene and VACCINATIONS
c: antibiotics, improvements in healthcare, food and health advises
d: recent biomedical advances
[quote]mezcal wrote:
EVERYONE knows eating an unhealthy diet will eventually kill you, yet fast food is a multi-billion dollar industry. These drugs give us the opportunity to combat some of the bad behaviors of people, and give them the opportunity to have more quality years of life ahead of them.
[/quote]
I’ve got some critiques of this.
yes, drugs give us more QOL, they can be used preventively to extend the years-lived-without-disability, all these good things.
But I seriously doubt this approach leads to a healthy individual, it’s more like a diseased individual with us trying to manage the symptoms instead of attacking the root causes.
I’m mainly talking about things like cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, metabolic syndrome,…
I think that lifestyle changes are much more effective then ANY drugs available today for the aforementioned diseases.
Even cancer! One study showed a 40% decrease in all cancers if you take out lifestyle risk factors. I can’t give you a link because I can’t find it so fast.
I’m a 4th year medical student from Holland who should be studying for his goddamned statistics retake instead of browsing T-Nation
anyway, that’s kind of my opinion about the whole thing, I hope i didn’t go too far from the central discussion
“The consent forms are a one-time process, meaning parents will not have to submit consent more than once regardless how many vaccines their child receives. “This leaves the door open for the injection or administration of any drug treatment to the child which the school’s health staff deems appropriate, without any informed consent by the parents on the treatment’s effects, contraindications or consequences,” said Mihalovic.”
“The consent forms are a one-time process, meaning parents will not have to submit consent more than once regardless how many vaccines their child receives. “This leaves the door open for the injection or administration of any drug treatment to the child which the school’s health staff deems appropriate, without any informed consent by the parents on the treatment’s effects, contraindications or consequences,” said Mihalovic.”[/quote]
“Unbeknownst to most doctors, the polio-vaccine history involves a massive public health service makeover during an era when a live, deadly strain of poliovirus infected the Salk polio vaccines, and paralyzed hundreds of children and their contacts. These were the vaccines that were supposedly responsible for the decline in polio from 1955 to 1961! But there is a more sinister reason for the ?decline? in polio during those years; in 1955, a very creative re-definition of poliovirus infections was invented, to ?cover? the fact that many cases of ?polio? paralysis had no poliovirus in their systems at all. While this protected the reputation of the Salk vaccine, it muddied the waters of history in a big way.”
[quote]Freaky Styley wrote:
I
Pro tip: alternative medicine is bullshit. If it worked, it’d be called medicine. [/quote]
This is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have read on these forums. And thats including all the horseshit posted by Nominal Prospect, Elitaballa, et al.
[quote]mezcal wrote:
First, Dr. Blaylock is a known quack. All of his anti-establishment posts revolve around one thing: his attempts at getting you to purchase his “Brain Repair Formula”, that he claims can reverse Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and other debilitating conditions for which we have no cure. This isn’t a coincidence - he’s preying on the uneducated and collective delusions of people on the internet desperately searching for relief. All of his claims sound wonderful, but I’d challenge you to find any published data in a reputable journal to verify it. You can’t, because it’s all garbage. For more information on that blowhard and a systematic evisceration of his many wild claims, you can go here:
Please explain to me how Western medicine is bad for long-term health maintenance. As I explained previously, we are unable to force anyone to make lifestyle changes, so drugs are our last option. How is taking a statin, something that overtime is going to significantly lower cardiovascular risk, impacting someone in a negative way? Again: obviously exercise and a good diet would be better (or both plus a statin!), but given the choice between doing nothing and taking a pill, I think the decision is easy. Don’t take my word for it, look at any of the innumerable intensive studies published on it. If it didn’t have a palpable clinical benefit, we wouldn’t use it.
The pseudoscience and entirely baseless claims made by a lot of these people are dangerous, especially in the age of the internet where their ill-informed pandering can be easily expressed to the vulnerable masses.
EDIT: In before “durrhurrr pharma companies sponsored all of those studies!!”, that is not factual, and furthermore, we practice evidence-based medicine, and if in practice patients aren’t doing any better with the drug, we don’t use it. Improvement in the clinical setting is something that doctors see personally, and has nothing to do with pharmaceutical corporations.[/quote]
Although you like to come off as super educated and retort to posts like a true smug, sanctimonious prick, in reality you are laughably unknowledgeable in this arena and just as you dismissed the other guy for having his facts mixed about the Vioxx case, here is your dismissal for this ignorant statement “ow is taking a statin, something that overtime is going to significantly lower cardiovascular risk, impacting someone in a negative way? Again: obviously exercise and a good diet would be better (or both plus a statin!),”
This is only the beginning, statins and the cholsterol-heart disease link are one of the biggest hoaxes of our time. I mean they deplete CoQ10 for christ’s sake, so no that wouldn’t be a good long term strategy.
And just for more clarification of the harmless statins:
** Liver damage, muscle pain, weakness, fatigue and even heart failure are the result of extended use.
**statins also lead to a condition known as TGA (transient global amnesia). The brain needs cholesterol. It’s present in the myelin sheaths that act as insulators for the neurons that help speed up nerve conduction. Cholesterol is so important for the brain that it is manufactured by the glial cells in the supportive tissues in the brain. Statins reduce this cholesterol level which leads to forgetfulness, disorientation, violent behavior and even suicide. The symptoms are often misdiagnosed as the early stages of Alzheimer’s.
“Dr. Amy Egan, the FDAâ??s deputy director for safety of metabolic and endocrinological products, said â??these cognitive changes can be quite dramaticâ?? and â??sustained,â?? but that they do disappear when statin therapy is stopped. She cautioned that the agency isnâ??t able to identify a specific drug or age group of people who might be prone to such cases of memory loss and confusion, but that patients should notify their doctors if such symptoms occur.”
this is pointless. Apparently many posters here put their utmost faith in research which agrees with their views while maintaining complete skepticism of that which does not. And, when someone who actually works in the field and has tangible, real experience posts about that experience he gets called a sanctimonious prick.
If you really think that statins are merely part of some grand scheme whose goal is only to make money and harm those who use them then so be it. However, these over-the-top skeptics are the same people who DO take their car to a mechanic or legal troubles to a lawyer; apparently the evil elite educational system only extends into medicine. Or maybe it’s because one may easily learn half the truth with a little web-browsing and draw one’s conclusions from that alone
Why is this thread in Supplements and Nutrition Forum? It should be in the Batshit Crazy Conspiracy Forum. Or try the cesspool of Politics and World Issues.
It always blows my mind when people post anti-science diatribes on a website dedicated to scientific approaches to bodybuilding.
