Oil Pulling...

Status
Not open for further replies.
limit yourself to quackery, when the majority of the medical prescriptions are for symptoms, and not diseases or cures...and then they don't work on everyone (so much for science).

OK, quackery.

does silver kill bacteria ?

Not to do with Mercola, Dr Oz, etc...just facts...

BTW, what sort of logical fallacy is

Originally Posted By: Bandito440

Are you getting this info from the Mercola/Oz/Food Babe camp?


clearly, it's not arguing with facts and logic, it's intended to disparage a poster's point of view and position.
 
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
I discourage quackery like oil pulling, homeopathy, detox, essential oils, etc. because I don't like to see people taken advantage of by charlatans and snake oil salesmen.


How many clinical studies have proven a link between a shortage of certain chemicals in the bloodstream that would warrant their "supplimentation" to restore them to treat things such as depression.

If it's a "chemical imbalance", then science would state that the balance can be measured, and restored...is that the case ?

http://www.thepharmaletter.com/article/merck-disappointment-as-highly-touted-antidepressant-stalls

Why would the side effects of correcting a chemical imbalance actually be negative...if it's an imbalance, then correcting it can only be positive.
 
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
I discourage quackery like oil pulling, homeopathy, detox, essential oils, etc. because I don't like to see people taken advantage of by charlatans and snake oil salesmen.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16095639

Quote:
The goal of this study was to investigate the impact of the essential oils of orange and lavender on anxiety, mood, alertness and calmness in dental patients. Two hundred patients between the ages of 18 and 77 years (half women, half men) were assigned to one of four independent groups. While waiting for dental procedures patients were either stimulated with ambient odor of orange or ambient odor of lavender. These conditions were compared to a music condition and a control condition (no odor, no music). Anxiety, mood, alertness and calmness were assessed while patients waited for dental treatment. Statistical analyses revealed that compared to control condition both ambient odors of orange and lavender reduced anxiety and improved mood in patients waiting for dental treatment. These findings support the previous opinion that odors are capable of altering emotional states and may indicate that the use of odors is helpful in reducing anxiety in dental patients.


guess that the placebo in this case was no odour, and the essential oils outdid that eh ?
 
Wow, after three days of pulling I no longer bleed during brushing, teeth look & feel super clean, still sensitive to cold on the top right, I eat a cold egg righ out of the fridge every morning so I'll continue to monitor..be nice if that went away.

still trying to get use to a mouthful of solid oil first thing out of bed, much better once it warms up and liquifys.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: hatt
That was totally awful. I only lasted a couple minutes.


Just try it with saliva (your own preferably), or water.

As I said, the idea is to rinse and flush, and (IMO) the only difference is oil has a higher viscosity, dragging more junk with it.
I may have dipped out a little too much. I'm going to try it again tonight with half as much. As with anything the second time is usually a little better.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
limit yourself to quackery, when the majority of the medical prescriptions are for symptoms, and not diseases or cures...and then they don't work on everyone (so much for science).

Back up your claim with a credible citation showing at least 51% of prescriptions are for symptoms and not intended to treat the underlying disease. To help you limit your search, blog posts and conspiracy websites are not credible sources. Meta analysis would be best.

Elemental silver does have antibacterial properties. Is that what you were asking about, or is there a specific compound you'd like to discuss? Here are a few other items that kill bacteria: gunfire, boiling water, ionizing radiation, and the vacuum of space.

My inquiry that you quoted was about the biggest internet quacks, who all sell alternative nonsense on their websites. It wasn't answered, so no point was made.
 
Originally Posted By: Bandito440

Back up your claim with a credible citation showing at least 51% of prescriptions are for symptoms and not intended to treat the underlying disease. To help you limit your search, blog posts and conspiracy websites are not credible sources. Meta analysis would be best.


Given you are talking quacks... and I wasn't quick enough to quote the first version of your post.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673601062547/abstract

Quote:
67 advertisements appeared a total of 211 times during our study. Of these, 133 (63%) were for drugs toameliorate symptoms, 54 (26%) to treat disease, and 23 (11%) to prevent illness. In the 67 unique advertisements, promotional techniques used included emotional appeals (45, 67%) and encouragement of consumers to consider medical causes for their experiences (26, 39%). Moreadvertisements described the benefit of medication with vague, qualitative terms (58, 87%), than with data (9, 13%). However, half the advertisements used data to describe side-effects, typically with lists of side-effects that generally occurred infrequently. None mentioned cost.


quackery ?

From big pharma ?
 
That's an article about advertising and marketing, and does not state why medical prescriptions are written, which is what you'd need to back up your claim.
 
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
Back up your claim with a credible citation showing at least 51% of prescriptions are for symptoms and not intended to treat the underlying disease. To help you limit your search, blog posts and conspiracy websites are not credible sources. Meta analysis would be best.


OK, from a logician's POV.

"Curing" a disease should mean that once the disease was "cured" the patient would no longer have need of the drug, wouldn't it ?

If you are required to stay on:
* it;
* stronger doses of it; or
* or switch to another, different it.

then you aren't being cured, you are being treated...at a symptomatic level.
 
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
To help you limit your search, blog posts and conspiracy websites are not credible sources. Meta analysis would be best.


Again, your technique is to introduce rubbish to belittle...

Originally Posted By: Bandito440
Back up your claim with a credible citation showing at least 51% of prescriptions are for symptoms and not intended to treat the underlying disease.


Do you have a source for every prescription ?...link to where they are collated ?

Not sure how a meta analysis can therefore be done, so again...sounds all "woo-woo" asking for a meta analysis on every prescription made (is that a logical fallacy in asking ?), but...

"Regular" heart disease stuff.

Prescribed drugs to lower blood pressure.
Prescribed drugs to lower cholesterol.
Application of Stents
Application of pacemakers

What are they doing, curing the problem, or treating but some of the symptoms ?

If you need to be on them to stay alive, are you cured of the underlying dysfunction ?

If they carry side effects, then wouldn't that logically indicate that pharma is favouring one symptom of a problem over the creation of another symptom (which they also have another pill and another dollar for) ?

i.e. they are treating symptoms, in the faith that resolving multiple symptoms through multiple interventions results in a cure...albeit a cure that requires more of that for the rest of your life...not a cure.

Your turn now.

Pick type 2 diabetes, alzheimers, parkinsons, IBS, mental illness, and tell me the percentage of prescriptions for each of those ailments that cures the disease versus treating the symptoms.
 
No, it's not my turn. You made the claim, and the onus is on you. It's not my responsibility to provide data to back up your claim.

Shifting the burden of proof is your logical fallacy.

Make a specific claim, provide data to back it up. Meta analysis is a conglomeration of data, usually from studies that were peer-reviewed and deemed to be credible. Although that would be best, I'd be glad to examine any credible source that you can locate, like I did with the marketing article.

Steve makes an excellent point though. Opioid painkiller abuse is a huge problem, and has led to a further rise in heroin addiction in this country.
 
And please note that a huge portion of those abusing opioids were prescribed to them. Once your pain receptors have been changed by this drug it is terribly difficult to quit using it. My son has a friend who has done 3 stints in two different rehab facilities and each time he goes back to his old habit!

And on a personal note you will find absolutely no double blind testing or other real research was ever done regarding cardiac bypass. It is simply accepted as ok...
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
And please note that a huge portion of those abusing opioids were prescribed to them. Once your pain receptors have been changed by this drug it is terribly difficult to quit using it. My son has a friend who has done 3 stints in two different rehab facilities and each time he goes back to his old habit!

You're absolutely right. The timeline that I observed was an overprescribing of opioids which led to the dependencies. There was a thriving market in pills for a while that dried up due to formula changes and increased scrutiny of prescribers. Those opiate addicts have now gone to heroin, which is cheaper and more readily available than the pills. It may be different in other areas; those are just my observations.

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
And on a personal note you will find absolutely no double blind testing or other real research was ever done regarding cardiac bypass. It is simply accepted as ok..

Blinded studies are considered unethical there. The same applies to cancer treatments; administering placebo chemotherapy or bypass surgery is verboten.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

53' Stude
Squash: how do you cook or make it?
Replies
11
Views
566
99Saturn
fantastic
My Plant Based Vegan Food
Replies
10
Views
618
fantastic
John Galt
Spiced Coke
Replies
19
Views
1K
mr_boring
M
  • Locked
Eggs For Lunch
2 3
Replies
48
Views
2K
Astro14
F
Anyone tasting a decline in craft beer?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
1K
wlk
Back
Top