essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

[Guest guest]

Hi Fiamma and all:

 

--Fiamma-

Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind comes to

mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese medicine) from

something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting tremor, while essential

tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

---

 

Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to say, but

I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

 

We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements like

" essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat who said

it).

 

The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one) recently

acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time magazine:

 

" Why your DNA isn't your destiny

How you can change your genes "

 

Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict, you

don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all apparently

too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to influence or change

them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside of our sphere of

influence can alter our genetic structure.

Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which just

absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to have

integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just that? If

they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified in the most

magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and they...got away with

it....as we know they do. Some very interesting discussions on the behaviour of

the profession of the hard sciences with friends and colleagues who are in

psychology and the social sciences.

 

By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is named

(with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is another

way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty sure we don't

need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

 

So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone is

fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a scam.

 

Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

 

In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the way,

we are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

 

(p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one of

his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person to the

extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take responsibility for

themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my question, then, becomes:

Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

 

(p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese medicine.)

 

Thanks,

Hugo

 

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Odd but western science has long known that genes have the capacity for change,

malignancy created by toxic chemicals being one good example of this.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

subincor

Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:22:52 +0000

Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Fiamma and all:

 

--Fiamma-

Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind comes to

mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese medicine) from

something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting tremor, while essential

tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

---

 

Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to say, but

I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

 

We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements like

" essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat who said

it).

 

The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one) recently

acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time magazine:

 

" Why your DNA isn't your destiny

How you can change your genes "

 

Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict, you

don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all apparently

too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to influence or change

them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside of our sphere of

influence can alter our genetic structure.

Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which just

absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to have

integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just that? If

they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified in the most

magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and they...got away with

it....as we know they do. Some very interesting discussions on the behaviour of

the profession of the hard sciences with friends and colleagues who are in

psychology and the social sciences.

 

By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is named

(with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is another

way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty sure we don't

need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

 

So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone is

fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a scam.

 

Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

 

In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the way, we

are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

 

(p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one of

his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person to the

extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take responsibility for

themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my question, then, becomes:

Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

 

(p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese medicine.)

 

Thanks,

Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

[Guest guest]

That's not " change " Mike, that's damage.

 

In any case, the issue is about how much, and which, data is ignored in favour

of the power structure.

 

Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

Chinese Traditional Medicine

Mon, 1 February, 2010 15:43:31

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

Odd but western science has long known that genes have the capacity for change,

malignancy created by toxic chemicals being one good example of this.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

subincor

Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:22:52 +0000

Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Fiamma and all:

 

--Fiamma-

Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind comes to

mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese medicine) from

something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting tremor, while essential

tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

---

 

Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to say, but

I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

 

We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements like

" essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat who said

it).

 

The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one) recently

acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time magazine:

 

" Why your DNA isn't your destiny

How you can change your genes "

 

Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict, you

don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all apparently

too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to influence or change

them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside of our sphere of

influence can alter our genetic structure.

Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which just

absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to have

integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just that? If

they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified in the most

magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and they...got away with

it....as we know they do. Some very interesting discussions on the behaviour of

the profession of the hard sciences with friends and colleagues who are in

psychology and the social sciences.

 

By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is named

(with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is another

way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty sure we don't

need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

 

So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone is

fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a scam.

 

Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

 

In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the way, we

are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

 

(p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one of

his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person to the

extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take responsibility for

themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my question, then, becomes:

Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

 

(p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese medicine.)

 

Thanks,

Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi everybody,Tremor is an appearance of moving parts of the body such as of

limbs, head, or body.

 

Depend on how fast and how strong this movement exhibits, we

may judge on it.

 

If it happens only with the head ( this is yang qi moving,

at the top part of the body is yang , more 

yang than Qi ); fast ( yin is not controlling Yang ); weak ( yang is

weak, but still moving because yin is also weak, or yin and yang not harmonize

each other ); strong ( yang is strong, uncontrollable , tonify Yin here, not

sedate Yang ). In this case, Yang Qi must be tonified if Yang is weak, and it

must be regulated. To regulate Yang Qi, yin must be reinforced to control Yang.

Yin will attract Yang and sink ( suck ) it in. Please do not suppress Yang Qi,

it is necessary for life. Only regulate it and control it.

 

Only Yang or Qi can change things, lifestyle and forms. If

the true Yang is strong and fine, no disease exists. Everything will be

transformed

and harmonized.

 

If only the extremities are moving, it must be Qi , in the

body ( the middle part is Qi and blood ). Again , this will be focused on Qi

and blood.  Same meaning in Yang Qi

above, but this is for Qi and blood. More Qi will reach the extremities if more

blood flow through them. If blood is reaching there enough, but there is still

trembling limbs because Qi is uncontrollable “ rebel “, not co-operate with

blood. Correct it by tonifying blood and Yin. 

In this case, probably not enough blood , or blood not travel fast

enough together with Qi to the limbs. Nothing can hold up Yang Qi to be

still…….

Is this a form of medication damaged “ idiopathy “ ? Drugs or chemicals

 may damage blood “ dry it up , or thin it too

much “. It also can deplete all calcium, magnesium, manganese, zinc, copper

and

iron , those are so essential to nerve-health and nerve maintenance.

 

If the body is moving “ trembling “ , it is more to blood

depletion, not enough yin , body fluid, blood to control the whole body.  This

is rare, but I have seen this case.

 

To treat this tremor, I suggest not ever to sedate or

suppress any Yin nor Yang. This is always a case of deficiency……………..

This is

not an external cause “ not of a sudden cause, not of a sudden of a fever or

chills, or from pathogens “ ……. It could be from head injury, then tremor.

But

later, it can become a chronic and deficiency case, not from excess.

 

From the above,

 

I wish you may come up with a treatment plan with herbs….

Formula for Acupuncture is more difficult. But it can be done to regulate Qi

and Yang.

 

 

 

Good luck  !!!!!!!!!!

 

Nam Nguyen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hugo,

 

 

 

Change precedes tumor expression. Nornally, we have many changes that occur to

the DNA and most are nullified prior to any serious health consequence

happening. My point is that the western authorities have long known that genes

are not rigid like they claim. It has become a sort of political rhetoric from

which they struggle to explain a disjointed world view.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

subincor

Tue, 2 Feb 2010 01:26:30 +0000

Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

 

 

 

That's not " change " Mike, that's damage.

 

In any case, the issue is about how much, and which, data is ignored in favour

of the power structure.

 

Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

________________________________

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

Chinese Traditional Medicine

Mon, 1 February, 2010 15:43:31

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

Odd but western science has long known that genes have the capacity for change,

malignancy created by toxic chemicals being one good example of this.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

Chinese Medicine

subincor

Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:22:52 +0000

Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

Hi Fiamma and all:

 

--Fiamma-

Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind comes to

mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese medicine) from

something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting tremor, while essential

tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

---

 

Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to say, but

I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

 

We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements like

" essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat who said

it).

 

The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one) recently

acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time magazine:

 

" Why your DNA isn't your destiny

How you can change your genes "

 

Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict, you

don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all apparently

too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to influence or change

them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside of our sphere of

influence can alter our genetic structure.

Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which just

absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to have

integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just that? If

they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified in the most

magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and they...got away with

it....as we know they do. Some very interesting discussions on the behaviour of

the profession of the hard sciences with friends and colleagues who are in

psychology and the social sciences.

 

By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is named

(with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is another

way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty sure we don't

need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

 

So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone is

fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a scam.

 

Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

 

In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the way, we

are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

 

(p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one of

his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person to the

extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take responsibility for

themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my question, then, becomes:

Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

 

(p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese medicine.)

 

Thanks,

Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

[Guest guest]

Mike, we're speaking at different levels. What is obvious is that " change "

" precedes " everything. We are in agreement. What is important is to ask why we

accept poor integrity from the biomedical profession, in this case, in

relationship to the political rhetoric (as you say) which is used to apply

political force.

 

Hugo

 

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

Chinese Traditional Medicine

Tue, 2 February, 2010 10:37:53

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

Hugo,

 

 

 

Change precedes tumor expression. Nornally, we have many changes that occur to

the DNA and most are nullified prior to any serious health consequence

happening. My point is that the western authorities have long known that genes

are not rigid like they claim. It has become a sort of political rhetoric from

which they struggle to explain a disjointed world view.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yes, like so many women scientists whose work is quietly suppressed, Barbara

McClintok was one of the first to show the DNA was not static and was responsive

to the intrusion of other genes, like those of bacteria.....those to viruses. 8%

of our genome is now contaminated with viral gene sequences and how would this

have happened if not via vaccination? Barbara's work was more important that

Watson and Crick that showed the dimensions of the double helix. McClintok

showed that and more.

Dr. Eddy showed the viruses were responsible for cancer and then that polio

vaccines were making cancer in the animals.....but no one listened and instead

the plague was unleashed on man. Xenotropic viruses are the largest cause of

cancer in man and animals, these are recombined or reasserted animals viruses

whose protein sequences have reblended in the hosts they did not

belong........jabbed in with the vaccine. We know vaccines cause autoimmune

disease, immune mediated diseases and now even understand genetic disease as

they are capable of genetic mutation and tissue histocompatability biomarkers.

With vaccines, comes blood deficiency and liver yin deficiency and eventually

spleen qi deficiency. So many times the root is blood deficiency so what came

first? We now know that genetic disease often follows one generations autoimmune

disease. When does the trigger occur in the next generation? Following

vaccinations.

 

McClintok's work showed this was possible the influence of the genetic code back

in the 1930's I believe yet she wasn't recognized for her work until many

decades later. Our understanding of the consequences of man's hubris with

vaccine use is just now surfacing.....yet all the damage has been taking place

over the past 200 years.

 

Sincerely, Patricia Jordan DVM,CVA,CTCVM & Herbology

 

 

 

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

> naturaldoc1

> Tue, 2 Feb 2010 15:37:53 +0000

> RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

>

>

> Hugo,

>

>

>

> Change precedes tumor expression. Nornally, we have many changes that occur to

the DNA and most are nullified prior to any serious health consequence

happening. My point is that the western authorities have long known that genes

are not rigid like they claim. It has become a sort of political rhetoric from

which they struggle to explain a disjointed world view.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

>

>

>

Chinese Medicine

> subincor

> Tue, 2 Feb 2010 01:26:30 +0000

> Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

>

>

>

>

>

> That's not " change " Mike, that's damage.

>

> In any case, the issue is about how much, and which, data is ignored in favour

of the power structure.

>

> Hugo

>

> ________________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.middlemedicine.org

>

> ________________________________

> mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

> Mon, 1 February, 2010 15:43:31

> RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

>

> Odd but western science has long known that genes have the capacity for

change, malignancy created by toxic chemicals being one good example of this.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

> Chinese Medicine

> subincor

> Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:22:52 +0000

> Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

>

> Hi Fiamma and all:

>

> --Fiamma-

> Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind comes

to mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese medicine) from

something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting tremor, while essential

tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

> ---

>

> Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to say,

but I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

> Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

>

> We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements

like " essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat who

said it).

>

> The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one) recently

acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time magazine:

>

> " Why your DNA isn't your destiny

> How you can change your genes "

>

> Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict, you

don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all apparently

too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to influence or change

them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside of our sphere of

influence can alter our genetic structure.

> Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

> Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which just

absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to have

integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just that? If

they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified in the most

magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and they...got away with

it....as we know they do. Some very interesting discussions on the behaviour of

the profession of the hard sciences with friends and colleagues who are in

psychology and the social sciences.

>

> By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is named

(with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is another

way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty sure we don't

need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

>

> So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone is

fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a scam.

>

> Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

>

> In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the way,

we are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

>

> (p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one of

his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person to the

extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take responsibility for

themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my question, then, becomes:

Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

>

> (p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese medicine.)

>

> Thanks,

> Hugo

>

> ________________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.middlemedicine.org

>

>

[Guest guest]

Interesting post. Too bad you had to include the feminist whining.

 

Bart Paulding, LAc

 

 

Chinese Medicine

Chinese Medicine On Behalf Of Patricia

Jordan

Tuesday, February 02, 2010 10:18 AM

traditional chinese med

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

 

 

Yes, like so many women scientists whose work is quietly suppressed, Barbara

McClintok was one of the first to show the DNA was not static and was

responsive to the intrusion of other genes, like those of bacteria.....those

to viruses. 8% of our genome is now contaminated with viral gene sequences

and how would this have happened if not via vaccination? Barbara's work was

more important that Watson and Crick that showed the dimensions of the

double helix. McClintok showed that and more.

Dr. Eddy showed the viruses were responsible for cancer and then that polio

vaccines were making cancer in the animals.....but no one listened and

instead the plague was unleashed on man. Xenotropic viruses are the largest

cause of cancer in man and animals, these are recombined or reasserted

animals viruses whose protein sequences have reblended in the hosts they

did not belong........jabbed in with the vaccine. We know vaccines cause

autoimmune disease, immune mediated diseases and now even understand genetic

disease as they are capable of genetic mutation and tissue

histocompatability biomarkers. With vaccines, comes blood deficiency and

liver yin deficiency and eventually spleen qi deficiency. So many times the

root is blood deficiency so what came first? We now know that genetic

disease often follows one generations autoimmune disease. When does the

trigger occur in the next generation? Following vaccinations.

 

McClintok's work showed this was possible the influence of the genetic code

back in the 1930's I believe yet she wasn't recognized for her work until

many decades later. Our understanding of the consequences of man's hubris

with vaccine use is just now surfacing.....yet all the damage has been

taking place over the past 200 years.

 

Sincerely, Patricia Jordan DVM,CVA,CTCVM & Herbology

 

 

 

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

> naturaldoc1

> Tue, 2 Feb 2010 15:37:53 +0000

> RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

>

> Hugo,

>

>

>

> Change precedes tumor expression. Nornally, we have many changes that

occur to the DNA and most are nullified prior to any serious health

consequence happening. My point is that the western authorities have long

known that genes are not rigid like they claim. It has become a sort of

political rhetoric from which they struggle to explain a disjointed world

view.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

>

>

>

Chinese Medicine

> subincor

> Tue, 2 Feb 2010 01:26:30 +0000

> Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

>

>

>

>

> That's not " change " Mike, that's damage.

>

> In any case, the issue is about how much, and which, data is ignored in

favour of the power structure.

>

> Hugo

>

> ________________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.middlemedicine.org

>

> ________________________________

> mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

> Mon, 1 February, 2010 15:43:31

> RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

> Odd but western science has long known that genes have the capacity for

change, malignancy created by toxic chemicals being one good example of

this.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

> Chinese Medicine

> subincor

> Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:22:52 +0000

> Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

> Hi Fiamma and all:

>

> --Fiamma-

> Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind

comes to mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese

medicine) from something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting

tremor, while essential tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

> ---

>

> Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to

say, but I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

> Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

>

> We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements

like " essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat

who said it).

>

> The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one)

recently acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time

magazine:

>

> " Why your DNA isn't your destiny

> How you can change your genes "

>

> Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict,

you don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all

apparently too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to

influence or change them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside

of our sphere of influence can alter our genetic structure.

> Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

> Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which

just absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to

have integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just

that? If they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified

in the most magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and

they...got away with it....as we know they do. Some very interesting

discussions on the behaviour of the profession of the hard sciences with

friends and colleagues who are in psychology and the social sciences.

>

> By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is

named (with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is

another way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty

sure we don't need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

>

> So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone

is fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a

scam.

>

> Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

>

> In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the

way, we are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

>

> (p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one

of his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person

to the extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take

responsibility for themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my

question, then, becomes: Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

>

> (p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese

medicine.)

>

> Thanks,

> Hugo

>

> ________________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.middlemedicine.org

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hugo,

 

 

 

Conditioning comes to mind along with a lack of educational curiosity. They are

no different from the many other areas where some people are getting away with

huge crimes. It comes down to who is selling or benefitting from this? Follow

the money and/or control. Sorry for this but we are getting a bit off topic

now. Time to return to essential tremors.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

subincor

Tue, 2 Feb 2010 16:13:54 +0000

Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

 

 

 

Mike, we're speaking at different levels. What is obvious is that " change "

" precedes " everything. We are in agreement. What is important is to ask why we

accept poor integrity from the biomedical profession, in this case, in

relationship to the political rhetoric (as you say) which is used to apply

political force.

 

Hugo

 

________________________________

Hugo Ramiro

http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

http://www.middlemedicine.org

 

________________________________

mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

Chinese Traditional Medicine

Tue, 2 February, 2010 10:37:53

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

Hugo,

 

Change precedes tumor expression. Nornally, we have many changes that occur to

the DNA and most are nullified prior to any serious health consequence

happening. My point is that the western authorities have long known that genes

are not rigid like they claim. It has become a sort of political rhetoric from

which they struggle to explain a disjointed world view.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

 

 

[Guest guest]

I would not call this feminist whining, I am not a feminist. I just found over

and over and over and over and over and over again ad nauseum, the facts;

 

many woman researchers made significant contributions that have been suppressed,

oppressed, depressed but none the less, PRESSED down by the ruling males that

have been calling all of these mishots.

 

Sincerely, Patricia Jordan DVM,CVA,CTCVM & Herbology

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Medicine

gbp3

Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:09:43 -0800

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential tremor

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting post. Too bad you had to include the feminist whining.

 

Bart Paulding, LAc

 

 

Chinese Medicine

Chinese Medicine On Behalf Of Patricia

Jordan

Tuesday, February 02, 2010 10:18 AM

traditional chinese med

RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

 

Yes, like so many women scientists whose work is quietly suppressed, Barbara

McClintok was one of the first to show the DNA was not static and was

responsive to the intrusion of other genes, like those of bacteria.....those

to viruses. 8% of our genome is now contaminated with viral gene sequences

and how would this have happened if not via vaccination? Barbara's work was

more important that Watson and Crick that showed the dimensions of the

double helix. McClintok showed that and more.

Dr. Eddy showed the viruses were responsible for cancer and then that polio

vaccines were making cancer in the animals.....but no one listened and

instead the plague was unleashed on man. Xenotropic viruses are the largest

cause of cancer in man and animals, these are recombined or reasserted

animals viruses whose protein sequences have reblended in the hosts they

did not belong........jabbed in with the vaccine. We know vaccines cause

autoimmune disease, immune mediated diseases and now even understand genetic

disease as they are capable of genetic mutation and tissue

histocompatability biomarkers. With vaccines, comes blood deficiency and

liver yin deficiency and eventually spleen qi deficiency. So many times the

root is blood deficiency so what came first? We now know that genetic

disease often follows one generations autoimmune disease. When does the

trigger occur in the next generation? Following vaccinations.

 

McClintok's work showed this was possible the influence of the genetic code

back in the 1930's I believe yet she wasn't recognized for her work until

many decades later. Our understanding of the consequences of man's hubris

with vaccine use is just now surfacing.....yet all the damage has been

taking place over the past 200 years.

 

Sincerely, Patricia Jordan DVM,CVA,CTCVM & Herbology

 

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

> naturaldoc1

> Tue, 2 Feb 2010 15:37:53 +0000

> RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

>

> Hugo,

>

>

>

> Change precedes tumor expression. Nornally, we have many changes that

occur to the DNA and most are nullified prior to any serious health

consequence happening. My point is that the western authorities have long

known that genes are not rigid like they claim. It has become a sort of

political rhetoric from which they struggle to explain a disjointed world

view.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

>

>

>

Chinese Medicine

> subincor

> Tue, 2 Feb 2010 01:26:30 +0000

> Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

>

>

>

>

> That's not " change " Mike, that's damage.

>

> In any case, the issue is about how much, and which, data is ignored in

favour of the power structure.

>

> Hugo

>

> ________________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.middlemedicine.org

>

> ________________________________

> mike Bowser <naturaldoc1

> Chinese Traditional Medicine

> Mon, 1 February, 2010 15:43:31

> RE: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

> Odd but western science has long known that genes have the capacity for

change, malignancy created by toxic chemicals being one good example of

this.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

>

> Chinese Medicine

> subincor

> Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:22:52 +0000

> Re: essential tremor, or, the epistemology of essential

tremor

>

> Hi Fiamma and all:

>

> --Fiamma-

> Does anyone have thoughts on treating essential tremor? Of course wind

comes to mind, but I wonder how it might differ (in terms of chinese

medicine) from something like Parkinson's, which manifests as resting

tremor, while essential tremor (which is genetic) occurs with use.

> ---

>

> Hi Fiamma - you and probably everybody already know what I am going to

say, but I will say it anyway since I have nothing else to do.

> Parkinson's, resting tremor, essential tremor, genetics, are all western

*terminologies* (not realities) which carry with them a whole set of

*assumptions* (not realities) about the condition of the person in question.

>

> We are in for big problems if we accept, without consideration, statements

like " essential tremors are genetic " (even if it was a person in a white coat

who said it).

>

> The " science " of epigenetics (a strategic retreat if ever I saw one)

recently acquired critical mass and exploded onto the front cover of Time

magazine:

>

> " Why your DNA isn't your destiny

> How you can change your genes "

>

> Science is ostensibly based upon prediction. I.e. if you can't predict,

you don't have science. Genetic science made a prediction, one we are all

apparently too familiar with: genes control us, and we have no way to

influence or change them. Only mutations and other minor changes way outside

of our sphere of influence can alter our genetic structure.

> Now we have a typical about face, and, as usual, the back-pedalling occurs

without any admission of the failure of science to engage in its primary

activity: to make accurate predictions.

> Genetics now simply has a new subdiscipline called " epigenetics " which

just absorbs the previously taboo data, exculpating science from having to

have integrity. Did you ever notice that bullies in grade school did just

that? If they made an error, suddenly it wasn't an error, it was justified

in the most magical way, the whole concept of " error " was quashed, and

they...got away with it....as we know they do. Some very interesting

discussions on the behaviour of the profession of the hard sciences with

friends and colleagues who are in psychology and the social sciences.

>

> By the way the magical justification used in the sciences in question is

named (with great and excessive pride) " internal self-regulation " . Which is

another way of saying " the truth will always come out " . Which I am pretty

sure we don't need science for, but rather people with sufficient integrity.

>

> So now, in any case, the absolute opposite is true of genes, and everyone

is fine with it - and amazed at the genius of modern science to boot. What a

scam.

>

> Science is always right, and we are at war with Oceania.

>

> In my opinion, we would do well to pay less attention to science. By the

way, we are at war with Australasia, and always have been.

>

> (p.s. - M. Scott Peck gave an immensely pragmatic definition of sin in one

of his books back in the 70s: a sin is the act of confusing another person

to the extent that their ability to grow, know themselves and take

responsibility for themselves is significantly hindered or stopped. So, my

question, then, becomes: Does science empower us, or cowe us?)

>

> (p.p.s. - what is my point? Don't do western medicine, do Chinese

medicine.)

>

> Thanks,

> Hugo

>

> ________________________________

> Hugo Ramiro

> http://middlemedicine.wordpress.com

> http://www.middlemedicine.org

>

>