Bioresonance Therapy (BRT)

Philosophy Forums Science, Technology, and Math
21

So because you claim to know one or two physicists (and I seriously doubt that you know any serious academicians), you make a statement to include all physists? Good thinking, good logic!
There are many who do not claim to be ‘bewildered’ (such as you are). You excuse your own ignorance by the false claim that ‘a couple of those who should know’ (by implication) admit bewilderment, thereby excusing yourself from the energy expenditure of having to learn and to think for yourself. Yawn… How boring…
Cant be all that bewildering when over 1/4 US economy is based on it.

Only if you use it to excuse your ignorance.

I didn’t expect any more than such as this from one as ignorant on the subject. I think that it is quite pathetic when someone has to go to such lengths, as you do, to justify their laziness and deliberate ignorance.
I’ll let you prattle on, after all; “The empty barrel makes the most noise.” So you must have plenty to say.
I wouldn’t reply to me anymore if I were you; you don’t/won’t understand, and I’m uninterested in your ignorant offerings.
Though i might just call a spade a spade when you present BS on the site. There might be someone actually reading your ignorant remarks (not on all topics, of course, but certainly on quantum science with too much ego to admit it) and needs another Perspective to be able to seperate the ‘wheat from the chaff’. But you needn’t reply to me. I usually don’t waste my time with the ‘willfully ignorant’, anyway.

Good day.

End transmission.
End topic subscription.

22

For the record doctors, biologists and biophysicists who study human biology/disease are in more of a place to comment on medical treatment than a quantom physicist.

In fact theres a very good chance your average general practioncer knows more about medical treatment.

Medicine isn’t based on fuzzily understood concepts like “bioelectrical feedback resonance loops” but SOLUTIONS to things like iron accumulation in the blood, or bacteria accumulation.

23

TTG,

And old myth and not true. Give amp to a kid with “ADD” and they become more well behaved and their grades improve. Give amp to a kid without “ADD” and they become more well behaved and their grades improve. That is the real joke. Amphetamines are very different from caffeine, the other well known stimulant. People expect it to be like caffeine and when it isn’t, huzzah, medical miracle. Silly stuff.

Nameless,

Keep telling yourself that. I’ve never said quantum doesn’t work, TVs operate on quantum principles. I said we don’t understand quantum. Those are two very different statements. Any physicist can get quantum to work; indeed, it works too effectively.

You also need to work on your rhetoric. First you try and cast doubt as to whether or not I know anyone in academia, then you try to belittle what associations I may have. While either on their own is a fair rhetorical strategy, combining them doesn’t cover your bases, it makes you look weak in an argument. Worth considering for future reference.

24

Y’know you don’t need “ties in academia” to research/reference other people. I don’t want to sound arrogant but my moderate education on biology (evolutionary, molecular (cell biology, molecular genetics, ethology, neurosciences (cognitive and evolutionary) probably surpasses an average quantom physicist. I’ve dedicated the last 7-8 years of my life to biological science, I own a small library on scientific literature.

A quantom physicist would have studied physics OPPOSED to that stuff on average.

I could tell you all sorts of things about biology most physicists wouldn’t know (excluding biophysicists). Of course there is always people who mass educate themselves on science (physics and biology) but its rare, and when it happens its often times a biophysicist or just some random individual whose massively interested in both.

Either way, I’m more of educated on biology than a random physicist quantom or otherwise. THEY ARE NOT authority figures on biology.

25

Quantom mechanics is not a realistic platform to understand disease OR treatment. I’m sorry, its not. Understanding disease requires understanding biological interactions and a long shared evolutionary history.

Theres no need to break into the quantom level when molecular sciences explain disease and biology quite well.

Xuniam, what do you mean, “not a real disease” don’t kids with attention disorders have signs of such in the brain revealed through fmri which isn’t found in control groups?Some findings being very consistant like basal ganglia and prefrontal cortex abnormalities, and many other issues.

Anyway ADD as a condition isn’t fake theres a lot of neurological, cognitive and biological evidence that what we label as “ADD” largely envolves abnormalities in the brain.

I dunno if treatment works.

26
  • psychiatric times
  1. ADD is a real condition caused by brain abnormalities or it creates them.
  2. Traditional medications MAY WORK
    3.Most humans diagnosed with it probably don’t have it and kids are massively thrown on meds they don’t need.
27

well, i hate to tell you, but i have first hand experience with amphetamines, as well as know close friends (2) with ADD. they take TWO 30mg XR pills (60mg) and they feel “normal”, they dont get hyper or energetic, they do not feel happy, ‘high’ or euphoric, they dont feel like running around or constantly moving, THEY CAN SIT STILL. on the contrary, i (without ADD) have taken only 10mg of Adderall and i get very energetic, i cant sit still, i feel euphoric, i get HIGH from it on relatively little dosage. so. i have also read this online numerous places, had a nurse at my previous job confirm this difference, and heard this same story from others in person.

i do not know where you get your information, but ive notived that its quite off. ADD is not a made up condition. sure, Adderall is a poor way to treat it, not because it doesnt control symptoms, but because the side effects are so severe and dangerous, especially in children. but there IS a difference in how it is metabolized (used) in the body. if you have ADD you do not get high on Adderall, even doses up to 6x as much.

please stop posting your opinions on here as if they were facts, the religion forum is right around the corner if youd rather indulge your faith-based irrationalism. your information about BRT is grossly false, you and cyrene do not understand the concepts of cellular/DNA EM communication, despite that its well documented in the scientific community, you deny that placebo is caused by mind-body interaction (the same principle that homeopathy uses and explains), you do not understand the simple mechanism that allows water to retain information after a solution dissolved is filtered to nearly becoming absent, and you dont understand how this water-dissulution allows the peptide-channels in cellular communication to process the chemical information when it would otherwise not get procesesed as effectively due to the chemicals being too forceful to activate the subtle network of communication inside the body. and now, you display complete ignorace as to a proven medical condition and a proven treatment, claiming that its all made up; i know you and cyrene think you can just ignore mountains of medical evidence and that your layman’s opinion is better than people with real experience, but ill tell you what i told him: keep these misguided prejudices to yourself, because they are nothing more than ignorant narcissism.

28

well, since biology is molecular and atomic, and since these are easily reduced to SUBATOMIC/quantum in nature, i guess that means youre wrong.

we need to look at EVERY part of the picture, because molecular biology on the chemical level will not explain cellular and DNA intercommunication via EM wavefield ocillation-- you cant understand the underlying networks of communication that occurs on the quantum level of wavefield energies on the macro-chemical level of biology… and if youd read any of the scientific links i posted you, you would likely know that.

29

They are, but no coherent understanding of disease comes from going to the quantom level.

Theres no great evidence that anything within biology communicates this way, cellular and DNA ‘intercommunication via EM wavefield ocillation’ theres no evidence that even happens, let alone as a cause for disease. Communication happens through a lot of different factors, but as of yet theres no evidence that plays a role.

Yep, and if you spent one minute of your life studying disease or biology, or human disease or biology, or those things from the molecular biology of the cell, or from molecular genetics, or even from an evolutionary perspective, you’d realize that offering QM as a method to understand human disease is idiotic and offers nothing.

How does quantom mechanics increase our understanding of a cause or potential treatment for Huntington’s disease?

How does quantom mechanics increase our understanding of diabetes and how to treat diabetics?

How does quantom mechanics increase our understanding of heart disease or heart disease patients?

Oh wait, it doesn’t offer ANY INSIGHT into ANY BIOLOGICAL PROCESS at this point.

30

If I get a bacterial infection or cancer, theres not going to be a quantum solution or explanation, there’ll be a molecular one. Always. In-fact a molecular explanation based on the principles of natural selection for cancer.

Tell me what QM does to highlight cancer that evolutionary concepts don’t fully explain? Tell me a QM treatment more effective than many molecular treatments in trials.

wow, you can’t! molecular is a broad term, but still.

31

What Xunian said is a common mis-belief and its based on the fact that diagnosticians didn’t have great evidence for the condition even existing, until modern tools of analysis like fmri had become wielded by skilled and educated researchers, on top of that the condition is massively over-diagnosed without the true evidence it’d need, and until very recently and even still, the evidence isn’t great the common treatments are better than the problem.

On the other hand, this entire thread is so full of whimsical, religious, magical suggestions about the nature of human disease and biology, that it leaves me almost speechless and drooling like an idiot that you’re willing to say these things about QM and then critisize Xunian’s statements on ADD.

get real.

32

“this entire thread is so full of whimsical, religious, magical suggestions about the nature of human disease and biology”, i certainly agree.

i wonder when you will stop your blind worship of evolutionary biology… i mean ive read on here before that it is your religion, but geez, when is it going to stop? you need to realise that quantum physics is the new revolution in science, and it has been for over 60 years… it has been validated and is behind all the modern technology that we use today, and is poised to turn inside out our former understandings of things like disease. BRT is just one small piece. biology is not wrong, its just not the whole picture.

deny the science behind quantum physics all you like. the fact that anyone can google the term and get tons of information, or go pick up a text book and read about the tremendous discoveries and experiments that confirm the quantum nature of reality every day, i guess doesnt do anything to open your eyes. they must be shut pretty hard.

i wish we would.

33

I don’t blindly worship evolutionary biology.

From a random uneducated poster who didn’t understand the application of evolutionary biology, to what I was talking about. That doesn’t make it an accurate criticism.

I’m not saying that quantum concepts don’t help explain modern technology, quantum concepts is hardly used to produce every-day technology, though. Biology isn’t the whole picture, its the whole picture of biology, and disease, though.

quantum mechanics may help us understand the universe, it offers no worthwhile explanations of disease.

Evolutionary biology almost always does, on just about any disease.

34

huge amounts of disease and population susceptibility is explained by evolutionary concepts.

  • Randolf Nesse

The proximate explanation envolves molecular malfunction or whatever the case may be, the secondary part is explaining why.

Yeah, evolutionary biology endlessly highlights disease more than QM ever could in any coherent way. Get real.

35

i wonder why you arbitrarily assume that there is something different about disease, which lends itself to being exempt from the laws of physics… :-k #-o

is disease not caused by bacteria and viruses, which are molecular in nature? are not molecules atomic? does not disease represent a breakdown of natural functions, those functions themselves being various instantiations of communication, i.e. input/output, which is the very process of life itself? and how can you ignore all the science which shows that quantum energy stores information, and transmits that information across the spectrum of its energies… all matter (mass) is nothing but the collapse of this information into local probabilities, generating relatively stable energy relations, which we designate as “particles”… hello, is anyone there?? have you even heard of quantum entanglement?
=P~ =P~ =P~

for someone so self-confident, you display unbelievable ignorance.

36
  • Human molecular genetics, 3rd edition
37

Anyway a billion years of evolution has given us impressive anti-tumor defence mechanism. One is cell suicide. Now for a long time it was thought cancer older and still used cancer treatments killed cancer cells, they didn’t, they damage cells to the point that they’d naturally commit cell suicide. Except sometimes the genes for cell suicide are so mutated, they won’t kill themselves. So tumors (some) those envolving cells which won’t kill themselves need different treatment options.

QM wave analysis can’t help us here.

38

mutations to Oncogenes and tumors supressor genes for example.

39

Psychoanalysis may though. :shifty:

40

hm. lets see here.

oops. i guess BIT can explain disease after all. i guess cellular communication is real, and is well understood. i guess BIT DOES offer insight into biological processes…

i guess youre wrong. again.