In the spirit of looking for useful lessons from an enemy on the verge of defeat, their attitude towards 'indigenous ways of knowing' contains the seed of a useful stance. Tradition is absolutely not science, but the attitude of science towards tradition has been historically too uncharitable. Science has generally assumed everything outside of itself to be false until shown true; since it can often take science some amount of time to develop the tools necessary for quantitative investigation, the result is that much useful knowledge accumulated by the species over many tens of thousands of years is ignored or derided. This then leads to charlatans and well-intentioned reformers casting aside tested customs - as regards say child rearing, family formation and structure, and so on - in favor of modern 'scientific' models that often proved deeply flawed in practice.
My point is not that everything from tradition needs be accepted without question. However, it may be socially beneficial if the attitude of science towards tradition evolves into the more charitable 'true, until proven false'. That way we can use science to refine and improve the knowledge base, without casting away much of the knowledge base at the start.
Even if psilocybin outperforms Pharma drugs, it will likely remain on the fringe until Pharma can find a way to monetize it. Oral allergy immunotherapy has been used for decades in the UK, Europe, and Australia. It's not associated with anaphylaxis like allergy shots but is still considered "unproven" in the United States and, thus, not covered by health insurance.
I spent some time studying with Peruvian shamans and I use some of their modalities with clients, but I talk about it in terms of тАЬthe realm of narrative, analogy, and metaphor.тАЭ My professional work definitely involves areas that fall outside of medical science in terms of BaconтАЩs method (for now), and yet, work where other things fail.
It brings me to two questions: what are the limitations of science, and what are the *current* limitations *within* science. What donтАЩt we know how to test for because we lack the tools or even the framework for such tests? Surely the reason western medicine is no longer improving life quality-over-span now that weтАЩve hit the apex of sanitation and food availability isnтАЩt because we arenтАЩt sciencing hard enough for materialistic mechanisms and materialistic interventions?
The limitations are thus: if you canтАЩt profit ($) from a thing, it does not deserve study. It is therefore not useful or valid (scientifically). There being many many things that would be curative and helpful therefore are purged from scientific inquiry. Also these things are scorned and given ad hominem treatment. The other thing is that people donтАЩt want an honest answer but an easy one. Exercise and eat good food? Too hard. Gimme a pill goddammit.
Some things donтАЩt fit into the contemporary framework of AB testing given what we know how to test with and for, though. We *have* the Heisenberg Principle. We know about quantum interference. And thereтАЩs only almost *everything* we *donтАЩt* know about electro-magnetics. IтАЩve seen healing happen, real, measurable, healing, in people where science says it shouldnтАЩt be possible. But when we try to subject it to AB testing, it falls apart.
Bone marrow transplant after relapse bought me time. But homeopathy saved my life and is the reason IтАЩm healthier than IтАЩve ever been 8 years later. How do you test for that?
we also have the problem of тАЬscienceтАЭ saying they know things that they actually donтАЩt..climate change, impact of genetically modified mosquitos, RNA therapies, etc. we should have testing on the orders of multiple generations, not fiscal quarters.
Well you can't really but don't tell too many (of the wrong sorts of) people or they will want to make it illegal. Not even kidding unfortunately. Beautiful to hear however. I think I will sneak on over to your substack to see if you have anything interesting on there...
The FDA is definitely trying to regulate it out of existence. The CDC is openly hostile and the entire shadow information infrastructure of the weaponized web smears it at every opportunity.
Given what we've just seen, I wear that as a badge of honor.
Sarah, I agree with you 100%, and have written about this myself. The one group of people that were not surprised when the CDC suppressed effective medicines during COVID were homeopaths.
Agreed. People constantly ask me what I do to be in the shape IтАЩm in. When I tell them they either sigh or roll their eyes. I donтАЩt have many takers.
John D Rockefeller destroyed naturopathic medicine and allopathic medicine and education, and we lost many of the natural treatments and cures that our ancestors used. Did you ever wonder how people survived before antibiotics and "vaccines"?
I can testify from personal experience that certain formulations of turmeric curcumin are very effective against the inflammation and pain caused by frozen shoulder. My orthopedic doctor recommended a prescription NSAID with a page long list of risks (heart attack or stroke or both with every single dose). I recovered rapidly (the PT and to ortho were shocked). At our last meeting in June, I brought in my bottle and told the doctor that I'd never taken the prescription NSAID. I'd taken an OTC turmeric curcumin (omax Hydrocurc). She said, "I can't prescribe that". I acknowledged her point and said I wanted her to know why I got better so quickly when clearly she had not expected me to do so. She expressed concern that they were not FDA regulated, and I held my tongue (the FDA is a corrupt and captured organization, how many FDA approved experimental jabs have you taken?).
Modern allopathic medicine is broken, perhaps irretrievably. Doctors for a least the past two generations have been taught to diagnose a test result and throw a prescription drug still on patent at it. They don't know how to practice clinical medicine. Those of us who are looking for safer naturopathic alternatives are left on our own.
In the spirit of looking for useful lessons from an enemy on the verge of defeat, their attitude towards 'indigenous ways of knowing' contains the seed of a useful stance. Tradition is absolutely not science, but the attitude of science towards tradition has been historically too uncharitable. Science has generally assumed everything outside of itself to be false until shown true; since it can often take science some amount of time to develop the tools necessary for quantitative investigation, the result is that much useful knowledge accumulated by the species over many tens of thousands of years is ignored or derided. This then leads to charlatans and well-intentioned reformers casting aside tested customs - as regards say child rearing, family formation and structure, and so on - in favor of modern 'scientific' models that often proved deeply flawed in practice.
My point is not that everything from tradition needs be accepted without question. However, it may be socially beneficial if the attitude of science towards tradition evolves into the more charitable 'true, until proven false'. That way we can use science to refine and improve the knowledge base, without casting away much of the knowledge base at the start.
this is definitely true.
science that instinctively disavows societal practice without having tested it is not science. it's prejudice.
i am thoroughly enjoying watching psilocybin massively outperform pharma drugs for depression as actual clinical trials are performed.
Even if psilocybin outperforms Pharma drugs, it will likely remain on the fringe until Pharma can find a way to monetize it. Oral allergy immunotherapy has been used for decades in the UK, Europe, and Australia. It's not associated with anaphylaxis like allergy shots but is still considered "unproven" in the United States and, thus, not covered by health insurance.
Right? Same. Also PTSD. Methylene blue has shown the same potential.
I spent some time studying with Peruvian shamans and I use some of their modalities with clients, but I talk about it in terms of тАЬthe realm of narrative, analogy, and metaphor.тАЭ My professional work definitely involves areas that fall outside of medical science in terms of BaconтАЩs method (for now), and yet, work where other things fail.
It brings me to two questions: what are the limitations of science, and what are the *current* limitations *within* science. What donтАЩt we know how to test for because we lack the tools or even the framework for such tests? Surely the reason western medicine is no longer improving life quality-over-span now that weтАЩve hit the apex of sanitation and food availability isnтАЩt because we arenтАЩt sciencing hard enough for materialistic mechanisms and materialistic interventions?
The limitations are thus: if you canтАЩt profit ($) from a thing, it does not deserve study. It is therefore not useful or valid (scientifically). There being many many things that would be curative and helpful therefore are purged from scientific inquiry. Also these things are scorned and given ad hominem treatment. The other thing is that people donтАЩt want an honest answer but an easy one. Exercise and eat good food? Too hard. Gimme a pill goddammit.
Some things donтАЩt fit into the contemporary framework of AB testing given what we know how to test with and for, though. We *have* the Heisenberg Principle. We know about quantum interference. And thereтАЩs only almost *everything* we *donтАЩt* know about electro-magnetics. IтАЩve seen healing happen, real, measurable, healing, in people where science says it shouldnтАЩt be possible. But when we try to subject it to AB testing, it falls apart.
Bone marrow transplant after relapse bought me time. But homeopathy saved my life and is the reason IтАЩm healthier than IтАЩve ever been 8 years later. How do you test for that?
we also have the problem of тАЬscienceтАЭ saying they know things that they actually donтАЩt..climate change, impact of genetically modified mosquitos, RNA therapies, etc. we should have testing on the orders of multiple generations, not fiscal quarters.
Well you can't really but don't tell too many (of the wrong sorts of) people or they will want to make it illegal. Not even kidding unfortunately. Beautiful to hear however. I think I will sneak on over to your substack to see if you have anything interesting on there...
The FDA is definitely trying to regulate it out of existence. The CDC is openly hostile and the entire shadow information infrastructure of the weaponized web smears it at every opportunity.
Given what we've just seen, I wear that as a badge of honor.
Start here: https://thebigatlarge.substack.com/p/no-medicine
Sarah, I agree with you 100%, and have written about this myself. The one group of people that were not surprised when the CDC suppressed effective medicines during COVID were homeopaths.
https://dystopianliving.substack.com/p/bad-medicine
Agreed. People constantly ask me what I do to be in the shape IтАЩm in. When I tell them they either sigh or roll their eyes. I donтАЩt have many takers.
I'd love to hear about it....
John D Rockefeller destroyed naturopathic medicine and allopathic medicine and education, and we lost many of the natural treatments and cures that our ancestors used. Did you ever wonder how people survived before antibiotics and "vaccines"?
I can testify from personal experience that certain formulations of turmeric curcumin are very effective against the inflammation and pain caused by frozen shoulder. My orthopedic doctor recommended a prescription NSAID with a page long list of risks (heart attack or stroke or both with every single dose). I recovered rapidly (the PT and to ortho were shocked). At our last meeting in June, I brought in my bottle and told the doctor that I'd never taken the prescription NSAID. I'd taken an OTC turmeric curcumin (omax Hydrocurc). She said, "I can't prescribe that". I acknowledged her point and said I wanted her to know why I got better so quickly when clearly she had not expected me to do so. She expressed concern that they were not FDA regulated, and I held my tongue (the FDA is a corrupt and captured organization, how many FDA approved experimental jabs have you taken?).
Modern allopathic medicine is broken, perhaps irretrievably. Doctors for a least the past two generations have been taught to diagnose a test result and throw a prescription drug still on patent at it. They don't know how to practice clinical medicine. Those of us who are looking for safer naturopathic alternatives are left on our own.