http://www.brucelipton.com/article/the-wisdom-of-your-cells
http://www.brucelipton.com/article/the-wisdom-of-your-cellspart-2-how-your-beliefs-control-your-biology http://www.brucelipton.com/article/the-wisdom-of-your-cells-part-3 Here is a three part article that explains the cellular biology involved in belief written by a cellular biologist after years of research. Ian and Chris probably won't read it, because this is something this group has hashed out many times and they remain firm in their beliefs of how it all works, whether they see them as beliefs or not. In regard to Ian's inflammatory language, he has always used it and no call to action to date has convinced him to stop. The moderators here can be intimidating and aggressive, as Justin pointed out in the copyright go round, and I do NOT appreciate it or find it acceptable. But I do appreciate the fact that they provide us here the space for dialogue that is rare, and try to keep that as my big picture, letting their rude behavior roll off. I know that it reflects on them, not me. I see more for them. But I think it is helpful to point it out when it occurs, so thank you very much. It is nice not to be the only one doing that. Chris and Ian come rightly to their perspective, and are not alone in not being able to make the leap from rational to trans-rational. Once you have made the leap, it is difficult to understand why others cannot. And difficult to explain in rational terms, what are trans- rational ideas or processes, because while they include what is rational, they also go beyond it. That doesn't mean the conversation isn't good or enlightening. The edge can be an edgy place... On Aug 5, 11:10 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > Useless, outrageous, and ludicrous are not words typically seen in ME > from my experience. Like I said, must be the moon. > > The comment in your first post in this thread, something like "you > can't get away with this anymore", seems to indicate resentment to her > words on a personal level, and therefore it is hard to equate them to > dialogue used in a "reasonable debate". I may be wrong, but my > impression is that Molly was being attacked and that is what I am > responding to. > > The footnote in my previous post is not mine, but was part of the > report, which is why it was included in the quotation marks. Although > you are right that this statistic does not carry a lot of weight > because it is not compared to the total number of people who die per > year, I would hazard a guess that the number of deaths attributed to > medical hiccups exceeds the ones that are attributed to people dying > because prayer sessions didn't work. It would be interesting to know > this. > > Even so, this is not the subject of Molly's post and, from my > perspective, some are having a hard time understanding the simple > message that she is attempting to deliver, that there is power in > positive thinking. I think her words that you "have to believe in it > to make it happen" or whatever, threw the nay sayers off the scent. > > On Aug 5, 10:40 am, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Deripsni, > > > Regarding your statistics -- they're useless. > > > Displaying a series with no reference to population is pointless. Making a > > correlation, in this case, with without a measure of frequency, is > > impossible. To then make an extrapolation from that series is pure fallacy. > > What would be interesting is to compare the annual death-rate across a > > number of areas (infection, cardiac, respiratory, autoimmune) by decade to > > see if the frequencies are getting better or wose. Maybe some Wolfram|Alpha > > analysis can help you? :) > > > Aside from all this, did you read what you copy/pasted? > > > "... highlighting these medical malpractice LAWSUIT statistics" > > > Emphasis added. > > > If your footnote is correct, then the only thing we do know is that the > > number of lawsuits is increasing. That says more about American legal > > culture than the effectiveness of medical treatment, doesn't it? > > > Ian > > > 2009/8/5 deripsni <[email protected]> > > > > Although I am not suggesting traditional medicine should not be used, > > > it is not always safe (Michael Jackson ring a bell?). The following is > > > an overveiw of deaths caused per year by malpractice in the USA alone. > > > In fact, doesn't this bring up the issue of whether one wants to put > > > their "faith" in the medical profession as it is suggested some are > > > doing with "quackery and juju"? > > > > "The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) produced an > > > article highlighting these medical malpractice lawsuit statistics, > > > with regard to patient deaths: > > > > >106,000 patients die each year from the negative effects of medication > > > > >80,000 patients die each year due to complications from infections > > > incurred in hospitals > > > > >20,000 deaths per year occur from other hospital errors > > > > >12,000 people die every year as a result of unnecessary surgery > > > > >7,000 medical malpractice deaths per year are attributed to medication > > > errors in hospitals > > > > This totals up to 225,000 deaths each year, due to medical negligence > > > of some nature. And that number is ever growing."- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
