- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Medicine Isn't A Science. Practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:37 pm to basionok
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:37 pm to basionok
How the Flexner Report hijacked natural medicine
quote:
Five Things to Know About the Flexner Report
1. Abraham Flexner was not a doctor, but a school teacher and educational theorist from Louisville, Kentucky. In 1910 he published the Medical Education in the United States and Canada, known as the Flexner Report, which elevated the importance of German educational methods in the teaching of medicine.
2. There is a connection between the robber barons and medicine. John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and others saw this as a progression of peddling pharmaceuticals, which began as byproducts of oil refinement.
3. There were no real effective governmental agencies in place monitoring the state of affairs within the medical community, so what Flexner did at the behest of the robber barons, he did so in favor of profits rather than the long-term care of patients. He effectively created a culture that enabled the monetization of medicine.
4. Drugs are created to treat symptoms and only rarely treat the actual cause. Plus, drugs create their own symptoms, sometimes requiring additional drugs to offset their ill effects. We live in a quick-fix culture where we crave immediate gratification.
5. For the most part, medicine has become tone deaf to the oath it claims to uphold — the Hippocratic oath. We believe Flexner paved the way for this overthrow of whole-body health by making scientific research and training alone the only desirable and credible approach to human wellness.
0
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:40 pm to Gaggle
quote:
Because they're not humans.
Does the study at least PROVE to you that m. tuberculosis is capable of leaving a humans mouth and traveling through the air? Surely the recipient would not matter for at least that claim to be true.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:41 pm to YipSkiddlyDooo
Of course not. How would guinea pigs prove anything about humans?
How do you know it was the coughs and they weren't eating each other's shite?
How do you know it was the coughs and they weren't eating each other's shite?
This post was edited on 7/26/22 at 9:43 pm
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:43 pm to YipSkiddlyDooo
quote:Give him a few hours to process this and to realize how stupid he is for thinking that airborne pathogens only exist around lesser mammals. And then another few hours for him to try to come up with a rebuttal. And then 2-3 minutes to type "tldr no proof."
Does the study at least PROVE to you that m. tuberculosis is capable of leaving a humans mouth and traveling through the air? Surely the recipient would not matter for at least that claim to be true.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:43 pm to Gaggle
quote:
Because they're not humans.
And how does that disprove the hypothesis?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:44 pm to WaWaWeeWa
quote:it fails to prove it. The continued failure to prove it is the issue
And how does that disprove the hypothesis?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:44 pm to Gaggle
quote:
How do you know they weren't eating each other's shite?
How did the bacteria get in one groups shite and not the other groups shite when both groups had no active TB infection prior to being isolated?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:44 pm to Gaggle
quote:
How do you know it was the coughs and they weren't eating each other's shite?
Because the control group had zero infections
The only difference was the air was sterilized
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:45 pm to Gaggle
quote:
How do you know it was the coughs and they weren't eating each other's shite?
You'd be surprised how much shite you ingest on the daily. Do you wash your hands every time you touch a door handle? Handle money? Touch a shopping cart?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:45 pm to Gaggle
quote:So you're willing to accept that TB - a disease of the lungs - is more likely to be passed by the fecal-oral route than by inhalation of spores/bacteria?
How do you know it was the coughs and they weren't eating each other's shite?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:46 pm to Gaggle
quote:
How would guinea pigs prove anything about humans?
What meaningful features of mammalian physiology are different vis a vis humans and guinea pigs?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:46 pm to WaWaWeeWa
That doesn't prove it. They could be infected by spraying but then spread by other means like shite eating.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:49 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:well for one humans have never been shown in any experiment whatsoever to spread airborne or saliva contagion. And I suppose guinea pigs have if we'll accept it. So that looks like a difference in physiological function.
What meaningful features of mammalian physiology are different vis a vis humans and guinea pigs?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:52 pm to Gaggle
quote:
well for one humans have never been shown in any experiment whatsoever to spread airborne or saliva contagion. And I suppose guinea pigs have if we'll accept it. So that looks like a difference in physiological function.
You have to be more specific than that. Give me the molecular details. That isn't sufficient enough answer if you said this nonsense on rounds.
Actually get into the nitty-gritty. Load up a book on mammalian physiology and actually make a case for once instead of retreating. Stop being a pussy. Carlos Santana believes in you.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:53 pm to crazy4lsu
Tldr no proof
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:54 pm to Gaggle
Damn your pussy been sore ever since I brought up the chiropractor thing.
Apparently animal models are good enough for teratogenic testing but not for use as disease models.
Apparently animal models are good enough for teratogenic testing but not for use as disease models.
This post was edited on 7/26/22 at 9:55 pm
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:56 pm to crazy4lsu
You don't even have active animal models. You have the one supposed study taught in elementary school.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:59 pm to Gaggle
quote:What did they teach you at Kiro Kollege? How to slide your hand into their wallet when cracking a back>
You don't even have active animal models. You have the one supposed study taught in elementary school.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 10:00 pm to VolcanicTiger
Weird. You would think you'd show me the active animal models. I mean obviously that'd be a great way to approach it.
This post was edited on 7/26/22 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 7/26/22 at 10:03 pm to Gaggle
quote:
You don't even have active animal models.
What?
quote:
You have the one supposed study taught in elementary school.
For such a renaissance man, you have alarmingly poor sentence construction.
You know, if you weren't a pussy, you could argue this from multiple angles. You lack the creativity and the curious sort of mind to approach this without getting caught in the rhetorical circles where your real ignorance comes through. Like you reference the immune system without irony, without realizing several features of it are in response to pathogenic and pyrogenic material. As so many doctors are fond of saying, 'you don't know what you don't know' and it is plainly obvious when you try to integrate anything at all.
Page 17 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News