Obviously, these are just some youtube videos, but they provide a starting point to investigate further. I do /did not want to give the impression that I somehow condone REPLACING conventional therapies with ONLY natural 'Alternatives' but I do think that there is much to be learned about immunology, pathology, nutrition and traditional forms of healing that are still valid and increasingly validated today, (India, China and Japan come to mind). My own personal experience has taught me a lot. I recently cured myself of a skin infection without antibiotics. This was a personal choice and really don't recommend anyone to listen to anyone other than health care practitioners. But that said, there is an awful lot of important information that is not emphasized in a conventional medical education. Nutrition is often tangentially addressed or a minimal amount of time is given to that topic exclusively. ( I had 14 medical students at my house recently and they confirmed this to me) Many diseases are addressed through diet and nutrition and our modern food system is producing food of lower nutritional density than decades earlier and this has been recorded along side the changes in social health trends. We have lots of calories and not much in the ways of minerals and trace elements.
When we lack Vitamin C we call it scurvy. lack of protein: kwashiorkor. Is it silly to think the 'cure' for these diseases might be vitamin C and all the essential amino acids the bodies needs to synthesize proteins?
Most synthesized drugs are just isolated compounds from nature: curcuminoids, salicin, astaxanthin.... or turmeric , willow bark and algae? If you google the hype you get the hype, if you isolate the point of value, you can then search the terms in peer reviewed medial journals from your own country and others and even translate them. How the same studies can be done in one country and be disputed by another, with the only difference being the source of funding... gives reason to pause and examine how human limitations can impact otherwise sound science. I was just thinking how the link between diabetes and soft drinks can get disputed in the USA but unanimously confirmed in Europe. What's the difference? Is there any reason to apply the scientific method back to science itself as a concerned citizen? lemme know your thoughts. I much enjoyed this one! lots of sources too!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: