tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post7792931461754076690..comments2023-10-21T14:31:58.215+02:00Comments on 01 and the universe: NaturallyOwen Swarthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03023166526319714519noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-10462182930636901682012-05-12T20:02:32.670+02:002012-05-12T20:02:32.670+02:00Standard doses exist so that the doctor knows exac...Standard doses exist so that the doctor knows exactly how much you're getting and doesn't under- or over-dose you, but keeps it within the safe margin. That margin may be broad in some cases, but it's still much easier to hit when the dose is, say, 10 units rather than "somewhere between 0.01 and 15 units." The value of precision, even in partially uncertain conditions, should be obvious.Chris Shamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07066111751307656927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-23401260464842176312012-05-11T16:05:47.808+02:002012-05-11T16:05:47.808+02:00I'm all for research - finding materials on wh...I'm all for research - finding materials on which to base a working hypotheses. And once I have seen results (my senses being comparable to any scientist), by all means then I can act with certainty. The rest of the time most of us live and act based on assumptions (like: the wheels on my car have not become unscrewed overnight even though I have not checked them, so I will attempt to drive to work regardless), because, as you say, we can't be checking every fact all the time, and people who do end up in mental institutions. And, thankfully, it it only really necessary to have a working hypothesis dealing with the phenomena that actually impact my life, not every one in the universe.<br /><br />I do think, though, that it is important to sort out what you know for sure, and what your assumptions are. And then, also to realise that all facts are relative, as are all systems of measurement used in science; there are no absolute premises anywhere.<br /><br />The saner working hypothesis is the one that yields consistent results within acceptable parameters (as in, perhaps a sign of sanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting similar results). I'll do that when I want to verify a hypothesis. Otherwise, it's all hypotheses and fair game for question.carohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02759665084101088782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-3311702213539818062012-05-11T15:24:50.490+02:002012-05-11T15:24:50.490+02:00My gripe is with advertisers that are putting this...My gripe is with advertisers that are putting this "natural" label on foods whether natural is better or not. They are exploiting our good natures to make buck. I feel used, lied to and just in most cases angry. This article pretty much has nothing to do with experts and everything to do with what’s on your shelves in the shops. All of which have been through a marketing campaign at some point. Where the product that you pick isn’t the one that’s best for you, but the one with the better marketing campaign. I can’t even trust my own feelings anymore because advertisers know how to manipulate them so well. <br /><br />Can’t remember where, but I read that Coca-cola spends more on advertising than it does on the product. That means they spend more money trying to sell me something that is in no way healthy for me than they do on actually making the drink. I’m sure if that much money and effort was put into something like cancer research then we would be so much closer to a cure. But hey why cure something when you make more money off treating it.NoRythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09577775083022807484noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-17864925770247779762012-05-11T12:20:26.260+02:002012-05-11T12:20:26.260+02:00Stefan, your wishes for me are most ungenerous, an...Stefan, your wishes for me are most ungenerous, and your tactics derisive. You are not being helpful. In addition you are making a whole bunch of assumptions about me and what you think I'm "into". Please try again.carohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02759665084101088782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-20127698498798650412012-05-11T12:08:11.219+02:002012-05-11T12:08:11.219+02:00Indeed. No one person can have complete knowledge,...Indeed. No one person can have complete knowledge, or even a decent working knowledge of all the fields of science. For that reason we have no choice but to defer to people who know more than we do.<br /><br />It's not a trivial problem - finding reputable and trustworthy sources of information to base our decisions on - but it's not insurmountable either. <br /><br />With a modicum of scientific literacy, and some Internet savvy, we can identify good places to start from to build an empirically-based picture of the world, to allocate respective weight to different sources of information and to eliminate sources that are of little or no value.<br /><br />We needn't, and couldn't, test every hypothesis ourselves. The human life-span isn't long enough, nor are extenuating circumstances controllable enough to do it. At some point we have to set aside our fallible, subjective perspectives and start looking to processes bigger than ourselves to draw reliable conclusions about the world. In that regard science is the only game in town.Owen Swarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03023166526319714519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-9122395309846287772012-05-11T12:07:14.321+02:002012-05-11T12:07:14.321+02:00caro...
By that reasoning, please go and infect y...caro...<br /><br />By that reasoning, please go and infect yourself with anthrax and HIV. I mean all the so-called "experts" say it's wrong, you may even have seen it kill animals and other people, but reality is a lie and you can't truly KNOW that they died of either of those unless you try it out yourself. And who knows, maybe with that particular combination you might become immortal if your physiognomy allows it. And don't forget that you can't know which medicines work unless you try them out yourself. I suggest a concurrent course of St. James' Wort, radiotherapy and a dose of Valium. However, you may want to play around with sulphur and acid. I hear experts say that those are also NOT the way to treat any of those diseases.Stefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01572359645249957008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-71478645298452162432012-05-11T12:03:38.619+02:002012-05-11T12:03:38.619+02:00In some, but in clever people, the shininess of an...In some, but in clever people, the shininess of an idea can have them behaving quite foolishly.carohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02759665084101088782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-85808831817381655792012-05-11T11:52:43.405+02:002012-05-11T11:52:43.405+02:00"And the only true test is what one sees with..."And the only true test is what one sees with one's own eyes, experiences with one's own senses"<br /><br />Senses and feelings are by far the easiest to fool. Personal experience is another way to say "anecdotal evidence" and there are methods for removing them when evaluating something.Ho Hohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00177815588184912351noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-41395157777577432942012-05-11T11:37:06.213+02:002012-05-11T11:37:06.213+02:00OK, got a bit of time. The details here are not th...OK, got a bit of time. The details here are not the important thing, it is the blind spot in the premises. If empiricism is the way to find the real facts, then take it to its extreme - beyond the scientific method. That means that all claims, all processes, all institutions are questionable. And the only true test is what one sees with one's own eyes, experiences with one's own senses. Otherwise we are always outsourcing to others ("experts" - one born every minute) our understanding of verity and reality. And otherwise we will always be arguing about whose snake-oil doctor is the best. And until proven otherwise, to me they are ALL snake-oil doctors. Until I hypothesise, test and receive a result for myself, I cannot hold any data as verity. No PHD, PTY (Ltd) or legalese will convince me of a verity. Reality and verity are to me an entirely subjective judgement based on my own rigorous interrogation.<br /><br />Having done marketing work for technology, pharma, alternative therapies and many others, I know what goes into designing a marketing campaign. None is a greater liar than another. Nothing that is written down is in itself trust-worthy (yes, including this). Beyond self-verified fact, the choice of whose expertise to trust becomes an arbitrary choice based on personal preference, perhaps a trick of personality or indigestion-driven mood.carohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02759665084101088782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-89671835069201150512012-05-11T11:04:43.592+02:002012-05-11T11:04:43.592+02:00Still rolling my eyes. It's not about that, it...Still rolling my eyes. It's not about that, it's about what do you have access to when you need something. There are so many holes in your argument - no time now to fight properly.<br /><br />Michael Jackson had vitligo (which is also natural).<br /><br />What's the benefit of having standard doses of anything when human bodies don't conform to standards (other than to cover your ass legally within laboratory - prescribed safety measures)? All dosage guidelines are suggestions anyway, because of variations in patient's biochemistry and physiognomy. <br /><br />You are unwittingly stumbling through the bad-lands of a belief.carohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02759665084101088782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-72533764771822002522012-05-11T10:52:28.154+02:002012-05-11T10:52:28.154+02:00Oh yes! I forgot to mention the whole "chemic...Oh yes! I forgot to mention the whole "chemicals" thing. Indeed!Owen Swarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03023166526319714519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9319785.post-34405443878849876502012-05-11T10:45:02.428+02:002012-05-11T10:45:02.428+02:00nature good, chemicals bad .... EVERYTHING IS CHEM...nature good, chemicals bad .... EVERYTHING IS CHEMICALS!corrie206https://www.blogger.com/profile/01622157761692246333noreply@blogger.com