FA+
Shop
4536
Views
Views
87
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Digital) / Comics
Species Housecat
Size 750 x 1110
File Size 641.8 kB
Report this content
More from kandlin
galadrealCategory Artwork (Digital) / Comics
Species Housecat
Size 750 x 1110px
File Size 641.8 kB
There are several factors to that
A) Medics who do examination\practice do not have scientificcally structured education. They do not research, to do no not analize. They follow "best practices" to protect their skin. Opposite is forbidden and may lead to sues.
B) most of modern medicine based on statistic. Which is based on often inaccurate symptome identification, that is spread over years, while technologies and social ecology was changing.
C) Their approach is generalization: "everyone's body is is working same" In fact tha are just as many unique cases as many people around
This policy is supported by legislation of most civilized countries. And thing that occured to me: this leads tto "unification" of human beings, a process opposite to evolution - because those who have more things in common, closer to statistic average, do have advantage
A) Medics who do examination\practice do not have scientificcally structured education. They do not research, to do no not analize. They follow "best practices" to protect their skin. Opposite is forbidden and may lead to sues.
B) most of modern medicine based on statistic. Which is based on often inaccurate symptome identification, that is spread over years, while technologies and social ecology was changing.
C) Their approach is generalization: "everyone's body is is working same" In fact tha are just as many unique cases as many people around
This policy is supported by legislation of most civilized countries. And thing that occured to me: this leads tto "unification" of human beings, a process opposite to evolution - because those who have more things in common, closer to statistic average, do have advantage
You're assumption is correct and incorrect at the same time. Over the last 100 years of modern medicine, humans have slowly been weaning themselves away from natural selection. However, while we see less natural selection, we haven't changed the other half of the equation on new developments. Instead of unifying to a common goal, nature's course is chaotic. It basically throws things against the wall and sees what sticks through natural selection. This means humans are seeing more and more differences in their medical condition: diseases that were rare are starting to show up with more regularity. More people are suffering from conditions they would not normally see such as gluten allergies because one or more parents survive the condition while young and pass it on to their kids. A trait that's inherited over several generations typically strengthens, thus we see more people with higher allergic reactions to glutens. Apply this to the literally thousands of medical problems suffered by humans and you can see where this will lead.
I know that. I was talking about something else. That's scientific approach. But as I said, and I know from personal contact with multiple medics , that arent researchers, developers or hardware designers, but are just simple functionaries of system. Most common answer of them, if something happens that differs from statistics "This cannot be", or, in worse case "You did something wrong" or "I don't know". If something doesn't fit in statistics, for them it doesn't exist, while for researcher it's "new data"
They made grave mistake, thrice applying chemotherapy to my aunt when some analysys was showing abnrmal blood contnet. She never had cancer, and che died from liver failure, killed by chemo. Earlier probes were always showing that she have weird blood, but with old age, doctor just started to put that and old age together and writing: "100% probability of cancer, should start therapy". Deeper study was revealing absence of cancer, two years later it repeats,because they don't log those errors
They made grave mistake, thrice applying chemotherapy to my aunt when some analysys was showing abnrmal blood contnet. She never had cancer, and che died from liver failure, killed by chemo. Earlier probes were always showing that she have weird blood, but with old age, doctor just started to put that and old age together and writing: "100% probability of cancer, should start therapy". Deeper study was revealing absence of cancer, two years later it repeats,because they don't log those errors
Another thing about "modern" medicine, was that it had long story of declaring things that worked being "quack medicine". In not talking about obvious quack stuff (e.g. snake oil), but of things that either were found on practice or were used for hundreds years as natural medicine. That includes:
1. Methylene blue, iodine, malachite green used as anticeptics. In case of latter two medics wthat used them been laughed at, fired, died in poverty , while their colleagues found out that material works
2. Oligodynamic effect of metals. Not only silver, but iron, especially chrome-containing steel, got that effect - killing germs. That believ was "disproven" , in beginning of century,. Iron utencils were proven to be hazardous (by offereng experiment that solution of iron salt causes indigestion and pains). Result? Mass production of aluminium utencls. Aluminium is "inert", yada-yada. Yes it is inert, it's oxide blocks olygodynamic effect. Also, itdoes more hard, when oxide is consumed with food :P Oligodynamic effect was "re-discovered" somewhere in sixties, but in case of former USSR, it was believed to be "quack" until 90s.
3. Herbal medicine. Well, there are lots of wrongs and rights there, but in general, proponents of scientific medicine look with scorn at mention of it. But hundrreds of modern meds are based purely on fiding the compounds that were "active" in those herbs. No logic or design could give you idea that a poison would allows bones to knit faster and reduces pain: nettle's poison is now used as part of several meds, fresh nettle was always a herb used for treating broken bones.
1. Methylene blue, iodine, malachite green used as anticeptics. In case of latter two medics wthat used them been laughed at, fired, died in poverty , while their colleagues found out that material works
2. Oligodynamic effect of metals. Not only silver, but iron, especially chrome-containing steel, got that effect - killing germs. That believ was "disproven" , in beginning of century,. Iron utencils were proven to be hazardous (by offereng experiment that solution of iron salt causes indigestion and pains). Result? Mass production of aluminium utencls. Aluminium is "inert", yada-yada. Yes it is inert, it's oxide blocks olygodynamic effect. Also, itdoes more hard, when oxide is consumed with food :P Oligodynamic effect was "re-discovered" somewhere in sixties, but in case of former USSR, it was believed to be "quack" until 90s.
3. Herbal medicine. Well, there are lots of wrongs and rights there, but in general, proponents of scientific medicine look with scorn at mention of it. But hundrreds of modern meds are based purely on fiding the compounds that were "active" in those herbs. No logic or design could give you idea that a poison would allows bones to knit faster and reduces pain: nettle's poison is now used as part of several meds, fresh nettle was always a herb used for treating broken bones.
Funny story; around the age of 8, Gail had her parents take her to the doctor for a stomach ache and was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection. After a weekend of being unable to hold down water without getting sick, she went to a better doctor, where they diagnosed her with a ruptured appendix. During the operation, they had to remove small parts of her stomach and intestine due to gangrene and she had to spend about a month with an open wound to drain. She was informed by her parents that while they took out the parts of her stomach and intestines, they also took out a few other parts that would make it more difficult, if even possible, to have children. Something an 8 year old doesn't really care about.
A few years back, we did a personal chick with the hospital records and found that the information her parents had supplied her was incorrect.
A few years back, we did a personal chick with the hospital records and found that the information her parents had supplied her was incorrect.
Comments