[HealthyIndia] Why holistic healers are against modern medicine.

[Guest guest]

Hello All, I wish to address this mail to Shri Raman Khanna, in response to his mail to Shri Jagannnathji. Raman, I agree with you, in your opening statement, "People are both the problem and the solution" The question; here is who is the problem and who is the solution? You say, that patients in your cancer ward, is worth having a look

at? Why because, the patients are being or have been treated by the best brains, and yet the live to suffer and perish? You perceive they came to the hospital, because, they felt it was there that they could find some hope to live; but go back when you passed the final judgement on them, that they now have to die with it. Tell me, what does a mother, do when she sees, her child playing with fire? Let me put that for you as well: She first screams,(knee jerk reaction) Then yells at the child for playing so carelessly with the fire, then guess What? She curses herself, for not having taken care of her child And then thanks god, for saving her child, by keeping her alert on his activities. Tell me should the child be thankful to the mother or the god? Some may say, God, Some may say the mother, some may say, God, who came in the form of a mother, to save him. Some may say, he

should not thank anybody, because he was destined to die then, hence nothing untowards was to befall on him So what’s the relevance of this point - you may ask? The same principle comes in to play here as well. At the moment, it is claimed that practitioners of Modern Medicine - Allopaths are the Mothers, who are capable of saving the child. Nobody else apart from them can do that! This is coupled with a

strong financial lobby, which supports (Read "Funds") this school of thought How can you decry another science, without having applied your mind to it? Just the way you cant study chemistry without going to the lab, Cant study anatomy, without a dissection, cant understand pathology without having seen microbes, cannot understand the pathophysiology with out going to the wards, In the similar way, the method to study, understand, decipher, and interprets Spirituality, you need to study spirituality, without first questioning it? You may say, Why study without a questioning? Did you see the atomic structure of water, when you were first told about it in the class? Did you not accept it at face value, when your teacher explained it to you. The same applies to the science of spirituality Now, let’s get to the core facts: Tell me what is your contribution to the recovery of a patient to whom you prescribe an antipyretic like say

Acetaminophen. You would argue; I prescribed the drug, I used my judgment and chose this one amongst many others!! Thats my skill!! OK!!! But what’s the great deal about it? That’s what you were trained for? You were not one of those who discovered the molecule of Acetaminophen; you were not the one, who took the study on himself by consuming it physically, and risking his kidneys, to study its toxicity? Do you spell out the name of the gentlemen, who invented it, when you prescribe it to your patients? Or do you say, to your patients: Oh please do not thank me!! I was not the one, who discovered that drug; convey you’re thanks to the address of the scientist who created it? On the contrary, you reply, Oh that was a pleasure? As if the patient really wanted a tablet of the drug from you! Then what’s the great deal in talking of something that you have been trained to do? A student of spirituality, sees the world from his frame of mind, while you would see it from your materialistic frame of mind? What scientific right do you have to talk about Karma and relate them to Genes? Do you have any authorative study (Not a group study; but something across various gene pools - to comment that cancer could be due to Genes?)

Mere presence of a mutated gene in a patient may be an indicator of a disease, there is nothing as yet, to prove, that gene indeed causes cancer Infact the first line of etiology of Cancer, itself, says (and very logically) that etiology of cancer in unknown The genes in the body may or may not be a cause of Karma, there is nothing to prove or disprove it So how and why are you trying to decry it? Instead of decrying it, you could have actually asked Jagannathji to prove his point? But you chose to decry his thoughts, even without giving it a thought in the scientific manner? No theory is quack theory – unless proved otherwise The incapability of proving ones point – need not necessarily mean that the point is not worthy of being given its due attention. (Remember Darwin and

Mendel ; I wont delve in to it?) Has the study of modern science created the feeling in you that no other science is worth its merit? You talk of research, in homeopathy or other science, The research of every other science takes a back seat, because of the miniscule funds being released to it. When your studies come out to be inconclusive? Nobody questions the efficacy of your science, whereas, the failures of other science become a cause to their cessation in the first

place. It is expected that therapist of other pathies, come out with a panecea, if they have to prove their merit, whereas modern medicine has the privilege of staying inconclusive, and yet decry other pathies!!! Each practitioners right from Spirituality to the Most Advanced Science, see the world in his own way. None of them, need decry each other, without a proper justification Thanks for your time and patience Best Regards, Ravi

Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Answers

[Guest guest]

Yes, I too fully agree with Jagannathji as I am one

such patient who self-cured his own chronic backache

by finding out simple instinctive exercises that are

done by various species and adapting them to my

condition. Many others also have cured themselves in

the same way.

 

S. M. Acharya <smacharya (AT) (DOT) co.uk>

 

--- Jagannath Chatterjee <jagchat01 wrote:

 

> Re: Need for double bind trials.

>

> Dear Dr Susalra,

>

> While such studies will be beneficial to the

> practitioners, they are of little use to the patient

> who would like to treat his own acute condition.

> There is often an " intuition " factor here. The

> patient tends to gravitate towards the remedy. We

> see this when the patient unknowingly puts pressure

> on the right accupressure points when in pain.

[Guest guest]

Dear Jagannath, Ravi, Dr. Acharya, Dr. Rebello, Raman Khanna and others. Most interesting discussion on holistic healing. I am particularly happy because I am attempting to research this topic of the Self healing the Self. What is being discussed seems to be the question of agency. Who is doing the healing? Who is being healed? Please read the attachment. I would value any inputs from you all. Thanks and regards Prabha KrishnanRavi Ahuja <rgahujamp wrote: Hello All, I wish to address this mail to Shri Raman Khanna, in response to his mail to Shri Jagannnathji. Raman, I agree with you, in your opening statement, "People are both the problem and the solution" The question; here is who is the problem and who is the solution? You say, that patients in your cancer ward, is worth

having a look at? Why because, the patients are being or have been treated by the best brains, and yet the live to suffer and perish? You perceive they came to the hospital, because, they felt it was there that they could find some hope to live; but go back when you passed the final judgement on them, that they now have to die with it. Tell me, what does a mother, do when she sees, her child playing with fire? Let me put that for you as well: She

first screams,(knee jerk reaction) Then yells at the child for playing so carelessly with the fire, then guess What? She curses herself, for not having taken care of her child And then thanks god, for saving her child, by keeping her alert on his activities. Tell me should the child be thankful to the mother or the god? Some may say, God, Some may say the mother, some may say, God, who came in the form of a mother, to save him. Some may say, he should not thank anybody, because he was destined to die then, hence nothing

untowards was to befall on him So what’s the relevance of this point - you may ask? The same principle comes in to play here as well. At the moment, it is claimed that practitioners of Modern Medicine - Allopaths are the Mothers, who are capable of saving the child. Nobody else apart from them can do that! This is coupled with a strong financial lobby, which supports (Read "Funds") this school of thought How can you decry another science, without having applied your mind to it? Just the way you cant study chemistry without going to the lab, Cant study anatomy, without a dissection, cant understand pathology without having seen microbes, cannot understand the pathophysiology with out going to the wards, In the similar way, the method to study, understand, decipher, and interprets Spirituality, you need to study spirituality, without first questioning it? You may say, Why

study without a questioning? Did you see the atomic structure of water, when you were first told about it in the class? Did you not accept it at face value, when your teacher explained it to you. The same applies to the science of spirituality Now, let’s get to the core facts: Tell me what is your contribution to the recovery of a patient to whom you prescribe an antipyretic like say Acetaminophen. You would argue; I prescribed the drug, I

used my judgment and chose this one amongst many others!! Thats my skill!! OK!!! But what’s the great deal about it? That’s what you were trained for? You were not one of those who discovered the molecule of Acetaminophen; you were not the one, who took the study on himself by consuming it physically, and risking his kidneys, to study its toxicity? Do you spell out the name of the gentlemen, who invented it, when you prescribe it to your

patients? Or do you say, to your patients: Oh please do not thank me!! I was not the one, who discovered that drug; convey you’re thanks to the address of the scientist who created it? On the contrary, you reply, Oh that was a pleasure? As if the patient really wanted a tablet of the drug from you! Then what’s the great deal in talking of something that you have been trained to do? A student of spirituality, sees the world from his frame of mind,

while you would see it from your materialistic frame of mind? What scientific right do you have to talk about Karma and relate them to Genes? Do you have any authorative study (Not a group study; but something across various gene pools - to comment that cancer could be due to Genes?) Mere presence of a mutated gene in a patient may be an indicator of a disease, there is nothing as yet, to prove, that gene indeed causes cancer Infact the first line of etiology of Cancer, itself, says (and very logically) that etiology of cancer in unknown The genes in the body may or may not be a cause of Karma, there is nothing to prove or disprove it So how and why are you trying to decry it? Instead of decrying it, you could have actually asked Jagannathji to prove his point? But you chose to decry his thoughts, even without giving it a thought in the scientific

manner? No theory is quack theory – unless proved otherwise The incapability of proving ones point – need not necessarily mean that the point is not worthy of being given its due attention. (Remember Darwin and Mendel ; I wont delve in to it?) Has the study of modern science created the feeling in you that no other science is worth its merit? You talk of research, in

homeopathy or other science, The research of every other science takes a back seat, because of the miniscule funds being released to it. When your studies come out to be inconclusive? Nobody questions the efficacy of your science, whereas, the failures of other science become a cause to their cessation in the first place. It is expected that therapist of other pathies, come out with a panecea, if they have to prove their merit, whereas modern medicine has the privilege of staying inconclusive, and yet decry other pathies!!! Each practitioners right from Spirituality to the Most Advanced Science, see the world in his own way. None of them, need decry each other, without a proper justification Thanks for your time and patience Best Regards, Ravi Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Answers

Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Answers