Descartes model of science cannot be applied to living beings.

[Guest guest]

Dear _______,

 

I am talking of health issues. The Descartes model of science does not apply

to human beings because man is not a mechanical model. This is a fundamental

flaw that is recognised and acknowledged but probably nothing can be done to set

it right in the short run because it involves very courageous decision making.

 

Another factor that I have already pointed out is that science is no longer

following scientific parameters. There is an overwhelming element of bias now

that business houses and scientific institutions have come together, ostensibly

for the " greater good " of humanity. In the health field we thus find drug

pharmacy and GM industry CEOs in boards of many such institutions. As these

establishments donate almost all the funds required for the institutions to run,

this has severely eroded their credibility. I have already mentioned the

findings of The Lancet as to how scientific reports are being doctored with gay

abandon.

 

Today scientists, emboldened by powerful backing of business houses, prefer to

hit below the belt when anybody questions their postulates. We are seeing this

all over the world as practitioners of holistic systems of health and their

medicine chests are being criminally persecuted, under archaic laws designed to

suit the interests of the dominant method, just because they are perceived to

be a threat to the drug barons. The scientific community is now the exact

duplicate of the Church of yesteryears where opposition was burnt at stakes.

Currently three very successful doctors are behind bars just because they had

dared to use " unconventional " (read holistic) methods to treat their patients.

Herbal supplements are being targetted through CODEX in America even as drug

majors are being provided immunity from law suits.

 

In India we are seeing how the issues of " heavy metals " , " lack of

standardisation " , " lack of research " etc are being taken up to malign ayurveda

even as the scientists very well know that they are non issues. The heavy

metals, though present in the medicines, have not affected the patients and also

no traces have been found in the body of patients after their use but the so

called " scientists " prefer to turn a blind eye to such findings from their own

laboratories. Even Nehru was aghast when Indian doctors informed him that

studies on laboratory animals had confirmed that heavy metals in ayurvedic

medicines do not stay in the body of suspects and are flushed out after use by

the other components of the medicines. This procedure is known as chelation and

parents of children in the USA affected by heavy metals in vaccines are now

turning to this procedure for curing their severely affected children.

 

The " standardisation " , though adopted in many ayurvedic formulations cannot

always be adopted as no two patients are the same. Ayurveda thus allows

permutations and combinations to deal with the various conditions they come upon

as well as the varying constitution of the patients. We know that allopathy is

now similiarly questioning the concept of " standard medication " as they find

that people of various races and different sexes are reacting variously to the

same medication. Ayurveda and homeopathy have their own holistic parameters and

cannot be judged by the mechanistic parameters of allopathy which seeks to apply

factory assembly line rules on human beings.

 

While highlighting lack of resarch in ayurveda no one draws attention to the

fact that government help is almost nil. Whatever is allocated in the budget is

also not released as reported in the recent CAG report which has flayed the

Health Ministry for not doing enough for the holistic health sector. The report

has revealed that of the 31 crores allotted last year only 17 crores has been

released and again a major portion of that fund could not be utilised for lack

of infrastructure. And all this when the Government gives thousands of crores to

allopathy as subsidies to keep the prices of basic drugs under control. While

the patients get sicker a recent report has revealed that the drug industry is

" in the pink of health " and growing at unprecedented rate. We are now consuming

23000 crores worth of medicines every year, the growth rate expected being 30%.

That is, the decline in health rate is 30% per year.

 

But despite all this our " scientists " continue to behave as if everything is

well and above board. Nobody dares question them because we live in the age of

" science " and thus it cannot be questioned, even if it is wrong.

 

I hope things are now abundantly clear for you. If you go through my earlier

posts you will notice that I have already dealt with these issues. You have

chosen to ignore them. It is not only in the health sector that the mechanistic

model is being challenged. In environment issues and agriculture activists are

clamouring for a shift to what they call " the vedic world view " which looks at

the earth as a living being. Mind you these activists are not Indians but unlike

certain " Indians " they have studied what ancient India had to say on such

issues. It is unfortunate that we have to learn of our own treasures from

foreigners.

 

I will conclude with the remarks of a scientist which I have posted earlier,

" I began to see how science can be used, often without conscious intent, to

intimidate and control, to obfuscate, to exploit and oppress. I began to see how

the dominant paradigm can generate a selective blindness in scientists, making

them ignore and deny scientific evidence, or fail to interprete them correctly " .

 

Regards,

Jagannath.

 

 

____ , ____ <____@g...> wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Chatterjee,

>

> I have trouble comprehending your questions. I do not know your background

> but if you are in anyway related to science, I would assume a lot of the

> questions would be self explanatory.

 

> Any product of science is NEVER complete. And that is because science is a

> dynamic progressive phenomenon. A product is rolled out as an application

> designed to cater certain parameters with specific objectives with a

> knowledge that is best available. Accuracy and target parameters determine

> its performance. Many concepts are not fully developed, yet are being

> applied in field- Laser, digital communications – to name a few. Very gross

> example- your toothbrush. It cleans your teeth, but it does not clean

> plaque. So, is it a failure? The obvious answer is no! It is not meant to.

> Your attacks on most (I am not saying all, but MOST) of issues are similar –

> they are conceptually flawed. You are attacking the weakness of a design

> that is known to be weakness and was never targeted as an objective.

> Medicines that have side effects have to be used as prescribed. GM products

> that are out in the market are tested, but not ALL GM concepts are eligible

> for practice. A GM procedure that can apply to Apples cannot apply to humans

> or animals. Hence the risk, objectives, parameters are not the same. Hence

> your question about why those crops are being produced despite GM not being

> perfect is simple- because it was able to meet the objectives it was

> designed for. Genes cannot be absorbed by digestion (we do not become

> chicken when we eat one) and hence crops pose no threat of altering the

> human species by its consumption (that forms the bulk of hallucinating

> fear). However, what can effect is an altered chemical interaction during

> digestion – or in other words – problems with constituents or chemical

> composition. Very rare GM food alters fundamental chemical constitution.

> Most alter the composition. If GM food cause problems, it is possible due to

> modified levels of toxicity and little to do with harming the human

> race….Bottom line – it can be fixed.GM in crops have a different fear- the

> impact on nature as a whole and its own ability to reciprocate.

 

> The concerns in the forums and debates you have mentioned are very different

> in nature than the one you pose. Your (implicit) concerns are ethical and

> divine and are more concerned with religion, beleif and the theory of

> evolution. It is do with beleif in god and the role of man. This form of

> resistance is very typical and uses science selectively to damn its

> progress. It is what is classically called the 'Church and the State'

> conflict.

 

> While being concerned about failures is prudent to prevent harm, criticizing

> the very concept is more emotional than concrete. Just like the toothbrush

> example, you need to know your tool and supplement it with additional tools

> to gain your objective- in the plaque's case- get Floss and mouthwashes (be

> it natural or medicated)! Of course, unless we find hidden capitalist

> motives behind the toothbrush manufacturer and determine that using fingers

> or twigs is the best alternative to toothbrush!

 

> Let us start with a more fundamental question: While your basis of mistrust

> for men practicing science may be have different valid roots, what is your

> basis of mistrust in science?

>

 

 

 

 

 

" Our ideal is not the spirituality that withdraws from life but the conquest

of life by the power of the spirit. " - Aurobindo.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photos

Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,

whatever.

 

 

[Guest guest]

> > Any product of science is NEVER complete. And that is because

science is a

> > dynamic progressive phenomenon. A product is rolled out as an

application

> > designed to cater certain parameters with specific objectives

with a

> > knowledge that is best available. Accuracy and target parameters

determine

> > its performance. Many concepts are not fully developed, yet are

being

> > applied in field- Laser, digital communications – to name a few.

Very gross

> > example- your toothbrush. It cleans your teeth, but it does not

clean

> > plaque. So, is it a failure? The obvious answer is no! It is not

meant to.

> > Your attacks on most (I am not saying all, but MOST) of issues

are similar –

> > they are conceptually flawed. You are attacking the weakness of a

design

> > that is known to be weakness and was never targeted as an

objective.

> > Medicines that have side effects have to be used as prescribed.

GM products

> > that are out in the market are tested, but not ALL GM concepts

are eligible

> > for practice. A GM procedure that can apply to Apples cannot

apply to humans

> > or animals. Hence the risk, objectives, parameters are not the

same. Hence

> > your question about why those crops are being produced despite GM

not being

> > perfect is simple- because it was able to meet the objectives it

was

> > designed for. Genes cannot be absorbed by digestion (we do not

become

> > chicken when we eat one) and hence crops pose no threat of

altering the

> > human species by its consumption (that forms the bulk of

hallucinating

> > fear).

 

Evrything created by GOd is COMPLETE. If we take it as offered, we

also assume completeness.

 

Science always solves only problem presented to it, or how to make

something more efficient, less costly etc. Author will cite a single

example here to defeat the theory that we dont become chicken by

eating chicken. You become what you eat. if you type these words in

google at least 500 websites will emerge and say what this authors

wish to state here.

 

In last 30 years, the epidemic of obesity has assumed alarming

proportion. And science says obesity leads to problems such as

precocious puberty, early menopause, diabetes, infertility etc. These

are all nervous system problems. Nervous system develops based on

milk fed to us during infant stage. If you couple this effect with

the milk products from New Jersey cow milk, or all animal products

used in food (fats, proteins) obtained from hormone adjusted animals

for better yields, we know why women have become as obese as jersey

cows, as infertile as jersey cows. Jersey cows require artificial

insemination for pregnancy. Women also (1 in 5, proportion may

increase in future) need IVF these days, as ovaries have become

sluggish. Nor men have adequate and motile sperms. Girls aged 2 are

attaining early puberty. Early puberty-early menopause and early

departure from material world. Is this not the effect of chemicals,

GM seeds. GM seeds have no fertility other than one crop only. They

need to be bought from seed manufactureres every year. The connection

between plant fertility, animal fertility and human fertility has

been brought out by this author on ayurveda list. The

connection between obesity and disturbed dhatu metabolism as

influenced by faulty (intentional lacking in fertility) diet is also

discussed. All these effects on current child-bearing population can

not be proven directly, unless one carries out a trial for 20-30

years and keeps the population feeding only GM diet. Such trials are

impossible to do. GM i9ndustry has given us seedless grapes, sedless

papaya, etc and eating those fruits, we too have become seedless. A

race marching towards extinguishing state.

 

Jersey cow milk is one example. By feeding horse mare urine,

(Premarin) women have become masculine. They compete with men in

every field. They have assumed horse qualities.

 

Lastly, we will take one more example. Use of GM seeds and chemical

fertilisers has eroded soil fertility to an extent that it is very

difficult to restore it. Attempts are going onlready U.S. pa, but we

cant restore the original fertility of the soil. Unless of course

soil is left untilled for years.

 

When we consume food that has flawed genetic structure, we too assume

that kind of properties. Lack of love for others, self interests in

each and everything and mad race for materialism are the qualities of

the food that we have developed in ourselves.

 

GM insdustries profits may swell, farmers may become slaves, and it

takes years to know the connection between GM and our progress. The

environment does not forgive. Toll has to be paid by future

generation. Already parents are worried with their children who are

depressed, irritating, lacking in mental faculties, and not able to

express any creative thoughts. Whether situation is linked to Toxins,

GM, fertilisers or chemicals, how does it matter? Are we not all

sufferers?

 

Dr Bhate