This neurosurgeon met a friend in a dream. The next day the friend told him he had the exact same dream, confirming the experience they shared. Is there more to the dream world than we realise?
He also tells the story of a fellow surgeon who had a patient express their concern about an upcoming surgery. Despite this 'bad feeling', the surgery went ahead. A complication during the procedure resulted in the death of the patient. This unfortunate event raises a few important questions.
Do we listen to ourselves enough? Is our gut feeling a sixth-sense, a mechanism that can help us navigate this matrix? Are there untapped powers inside each and every one of us that we are yet to realise?
Hear Dr Goobie's take on things.
Follow Humanley
He also tells the story of a fellow surgeon who had a patient express their concern about an upcoming surgery. Despite this 'bad feeling', the surgery went ahead. A complication during the procedure resulted in the death of the patient. This unfortunate event raises a few important questions.
Do we listen to ourselves enough? Is our gut feeling a sixth-sense, a mechanism that can help us navigate this matrix? Are there untapped powers inside each and every one of us that we are yet to realise?
Hear Dr Goobie's take on things.
Follow Humanley
YouTube
Strange Experiences Of Consciousness That I Have No Scientific Explanation Or Proof For But Thats OK
Here I discuss strange personal experiences of consciousness that I have no scientific explanation or proof for, but that's OK.
#podcast #consciousness #psi #remoteviewing #synchronicity #dreams #goobieanddoobie
00:00 Science Is Limited In Studying Consciousnessโฆ
#podcast #consciousness #psi #remoteviewing #synchronicity #dreams #goobieanddoobie
00:00 Science Is Limited In Studying Consciousnessโฆ
๐21โค18๐ฅ7๐3๐ฏ1
AI cancer vaccines have been receiving a lot of attention recently. But why is humanity pinning all its hopes on a treatment when we know that prevention is better than cure?
Now, people might argue that vaccines are preventive, so this intervention is dealing with the cause. However, as stated in a 2024 Nature Journal article, cancer vaccines are not preventive. They work on destroying the cancer cells after the tumour has developed.
According to Harvard University "The cancer miracle isn't a cure, it's prevention". The 2019 article explicitly states "We cannot treat our way out of the rising cancer caseload. The only solution is a full-scale defense, so that nobody suffers the disease in the first place".
If we heed Harvard's sound advice, then identifying and treating the cause should be of the utmost importance. This raises the question, what's causing cancer? The answer is, many things. Therefore our attention should be focused on dealing with the most impactful causes first.
Enter PM2.5 (fine air particles less than 2.5 microns). Yesterday as reported in the Economic Times, the air pollution levels in Bangkok exceeded 120 mcg/m3, more than 8 times the limit (15 mcg/m3) stipulated by the WHO. The air quality was so bad that visibility was at an all time low and almost 200 schools across the city were closed. The article correctly points out that PM2.5 particles are small enough to enter the blood stream and cause cancer.
A 2016 study followed almost 70,000 residents in Hong Kong for more than a decade. The researchers found that for every 10 mcg/m3 increase above the tolerable PM2.5 limit, the risk of dying from any cancer rose by 22%. For cancers of the upper digestive tract the mortality risk was 42% higher, and 35% higher for other digestive organs. For breast cancer, the mortality risk increased by over 80%. Obviously, clean air matters.
Surely a coordinated effort towards making our air healthy to breathe would be at the top of the list of priorities for governments the world over? Instead, we get a reactive approach which promises to quell the burgeoning cancer crisis with the prick of a needle.
Go figure.
Follow Humanley
Now, people might argue that vaccines are preventive, so this intervention is dealing with the cause. However, as stated in a 2024 Nature Journal article, cancer vaccines are not preventive. They work on destroying the cancer cells after the tumour has developed.
According to Harvard University "The cancer miracle isn't a cure, it's prevention". The 2019 article explicitly states "We cannot treat our way out of the rising cancer caseload. The only solution is a full-scale defense, so that nobody suffers the disease in the first place".
If we heed Harvard's sound advice, then identifying and treating the cause should be of the utmost importance. This raises the question, what's causing cancer? The answer is, many things. Therefore our attention should be focused on dealing with the most impactful causes first.
Enter PM2.5 (fine air particles less than 2.5 microns). Yesterday as reported in the Economic Times, the air pollution levels in Bangkok exceeded 120 mcg/m3, more than 8 times the limit (15 mcg/m3) stipulated by the WHO. The air quality was so bad that visibility was at an all time low and almost 200 schools across the city were closed. The article correctly points out that PM2.5 particles are small enough to enter the blood stream and cause cancer.
A 2016 study followed almost 70,000 residents in Hong Kong for more than a decade. The researchers found that for every 10 mcg/m3 increase above the tolerable PM2.5 limit, the risk of dying from any cancer rose by 22%. For cancers of the upper digestive tract the mortality risk was 42% higher, and 35% higher for other digestive organs. For breast cancer, the mortality risk increased by over 80%. Obviously, clean air matters.
Surely a coordinated effort towards making our air healthy to breathe would be at the top of the list of priorities for governments the world over? Instead, we get a reactive approach which promises to quell the burgeoning cancer crisis with the prick of a needle.
Go figure.
Follow Humanley
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
The Cancer Miracle Isn't a Cure. It's Prevention. | Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
We cannot treat our way out of the rising trend in cancer cases. The only solution is a full-scale defense, so that nobody suffers the disease in the first place.
โค39๐ฏ32๐9๐ฅ9๐ค4
A fresh perspective on inflammation - Part 1
Yesterday I burned my arm with hot water. As you can see, it is red, swollen, and blistering. These symptoms are part of the inflammatory response.
The inflammation didn't cause the tissue damage, the hot water did. The injury preceded the inflammation, the inflammation didn't precede the injury. The tissue damage occurred first and the inflammatory response followed.
Inflammation is not the enemy.
Why?
Because inflammation is the healing response. It should be celebrated, not denigrated. If there is no tissue damage, there is nothing to heal. If there is nothing to heal, there is no inflammation.
Follow Humanley
Yesterday I burned my arm with hot water. As you can see, it is red, swollen, and blistering. These symptoms are part of the inflammatory response.
The inflammation didn't cause the tissue damage, the hot water did. The injury preceded the inflammation, the inflammation didn't precede the injury. The tissue damage occurred first and the inflammatory response followed.
Inflammation is not the enemy.
Why?
Because inflammation is the healing response. It should be celebrated, not denigrated. If there is no tissue damage, there is nothing to heal. If there is nothing to heal, there is no inflammation.
Follow Humanley
๐77๐ฏ31โค29๐ฅ7
A fresh perspective on inflammation - Part 2
The same is true of 'chronic inflammation'. When the tissue is being chronically injured, the body is in a chronic state of healing. If I kept burning my arm day after day, it would become 'chronically inflamed'.
Does this mean my arm has a disease? No.
Does it mean the inflammation caused the burn? No.
Does it make sense to suppress the healing response with anti-inflammatories? No.
The answer is to stop pouring boiling water on the injury. In other words, identify and remove the cause so that the body can repair itself.
So, before you go blaming inflammation, ask yourself, what's causing damage to your tissue? Maybe it's the pesticides and heavy metals in the food? The pollution in the air? The contaminants in the water?
It's time to rethink our relationship with inflammation.
Follow Humanley
The same is true of 'chronic inflammation'. When the tissue is being chronically injured, the body is in a chronic state of healing. If I kept burning my arm day after day, it would become 'chronically inflamed'.
Does this mean my arm has a disease? No.
Does it mean the inflammation caused the burn? No.
Does it make sense to suppress the healing response with anti-inflammatories? No.
The answer is to stop pouring boiling water on the injury. In other words, identify and remove the cause so that the body can repair itself.
So, before you go blaming inflammation, ask yourself, what's causing damage to your tissue? Maybe it's the pesticides and heavy metals in the food? The pollution in the air? The contaminants in the water?
It's time to rethink our relationship with inflammation.
Follow Humanley
Telegram
Humanley
Helping people heal themselves. Good health is a journey not a destination. Humanley challenges the status quo of all things health and wellness.
Can You Catch A Cold?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1763504409
Podcast, blogs & more
https://www.humanley.com/
Can You Catch A Cold?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1763504409
Podcast, blogs & more
https://www.humanley.com/
๐76๐ฏ39โค33๐ฅ14๐4๐ค2
Join me this Sunday the 16th of February at 12 PM Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST) for a live community call.
If you have a question, I'll answer it.
If you've got something to say, I'll hear it.
This session will be held live on Zoom. To join, simply click the link below.
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83803214651
This session will be recorded and uploaded to Telegram.
Looking forward to seeing you there.
Dan
Pacific Standard Time (PST) - Sat 15th of Feb at 6 PM
Eastern Standard Time (EST) - Sat 15th of Feb at 9 PM
Australian Eastern Daylight Time (AEDT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 1 PM
Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 2 AM
Indochina Time (ICT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 9 AM
New Zealand Daylight Time (NZDT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 3 PM
If you have a question, I'll answer it.
If you've got something to say, I'll hear it.
This session will be held live on Zoom. To join, simply click the link below.
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83803214651
This session will be recorded and uploaded to Telegram.
Looking forward to seeing you there.
Dan
Pacific Standard Time (PST) - Sat 15th of Feb at 6 PM
Eastern Standard Time (EST) - Sat 15th of Feb at 9 PM
Australian Eastern Daylight Time (AEDT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 1 PM
Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 2 AM
Indochina Time (ICT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 9 AM
New Zealand Daylight Time (NZDT) - Sun 16th of Feb at 3 PM
Zoom Video
Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting
Zoom is the leader in modern enterprise video communications, with an easy, reliable cloud platform for video and audio conferencing, chat, and webinars across mobile, desktop, and room systems. Zoom Rooms is the original software-based conference room solutionโฆ
๐14โค13๐3๐คฉ2
Click the zoom link below to join the live Q & A commencing in just under 1 hour (12 PM AEST).
See you there.
Dan
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83803214651
See you there.
Dan
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83803214651
๐15โค1
Could genes be nothing more than an elaborate fairy tale?
We are told that our genes hold the secret to life. The field of genetics asserts that DNA is the master molecule of the cell because it is made up of genetic material. This genetic material contains genes which are claimed to instruct the cell to make proteins. These proteins then drive various biological functions like our metabolism and the building of tissue.
It is said that there are a specific number of genes that are fixed in their form and function, with each gene coding for the synthesis of one protein. However, in her book โThe Century of the Geneโ, Evelyn Fox Keller, professor of physics at MIT, highlights that the evidence does not support these assertions at all.
Keller rightly points out that genes cannot possibly make one protein because there are only several thousand genes, and more than a hundred thousand proteins. Therefore, the only way for genes to make all of these different proteins is to constantly re-arrange themselves to code for a specific amino acid sequence. This means two things, both of which are death blows to the theory of genetics. First, our genes are not fixed in their form and function. Second, our DNA is not the master molecule and it must be getting its instructions from somewhere outside of the nucleus. So who, or what, is telling our DNA (if there even is such a thing) what to do?
To put this conundrum into context Keller says, "A musical analogy might be helpful here: the problem is not only that the music inscribed in the score does not exist until it is played (i.e. the genetic sequences in our DNA), but that the players rewrite the score (the mRNA transcript) in their very execution of it".
Keller is not the first to question the story we are told about genes.
In a 1937, Richard Goldschmidt, a professor of genetics at the University of California, published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. After a series of experiments in his quest to better understand the gene, he concluded that "there are no genes, no gene mutations and no wild type allelomorphs".
In 1998, William Gelbart, a professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of California, wrote that "the gene is a concept past its time" and that "genes are not physical objects but are merely concepts that have acquired a great deal of historic baggage over the past decades".
These uncomfortable truths might mean that we are no closer towards understanding the secrets of life than we were 120 years ago when William Baetson first coined the word 'genetics'.
Follow Humanley
We are told that our genes hold the secret to life. The field of genetics asserts that DNA is the master molecule of the cell because it is made up of genetic material. This genetic material contains genes which are claimed to instruct the cell to make proteins. These proteins then drive various biological functions like our metabolism and the building of tissue.
It is said that there are a specific number of genes that are fixed in their form and function, with each gene coding for the synthesis of one protein. However, in her book โThe Century of the Geneโ, Evelyn Fox Keller, professor of physics at MIT, highlights that the evidence does not support these assertions at all.
Keller rightly points out that genes cannot possibly make one protein because there are only several thousand genes, and more than a hundred thousand proteins. Therefore, the only way for genes to make all of these different proteins is to constantly re-arrange themselves to code for a specific amino acid sequence. This means two things, both of which are death blows to the theory of genetics. First, our genes are not fixed in their form and function. Second, our DNA is not the master molecule and it must be getting its instructions from somewhere outside of the nucleus. So who, or what, is telling our DNA (if there even is such a thing) what to do?
To put this conundrum into context Keller says, "A musical analogy might be helpful here: the problem is not only that the music inscribed in the score does not exist until it is played (i.e. the genetic sequences in our DNA), but that the players rewrite the score (the mRNA transcript) in their very execution of it".
Keller is not the first to question the story we are told about genes.
In a 1937, Richard Goldschmidt, a professor of genetics at the University of California, published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. After a series of experiments in his quest to better understand the gene, he concluded that "there are no genes, no gene mutations and no wild type allelomorphs".
In 1998, William Gelbart, a professor of chemistry and biochemistry at the University of California, wrote that "the gene is a concept past its time" and that "genes are not physical objects but are merely concepts that have acquired a great deal of historic baggage over the past decades".
These uncomfortable truths might mean that we are no closer towards understanding the secrets of life than we were 120 years ago when William Baetson first coined the word 'genetics'.
Follow Humanley
Telegram
Humanley
Helping people heal themselves. Good health is a journey not a destination. Humanley challenges the status quo of all things health and wellness.
Can You Catch A Cold?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1763504409
Podcast, blogs & more
https://www.humanley.com/
Can You Catch A Cold?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1763504409
Podcast, blogs & more
https://www.humanley.com/
๐70๐ฅ50โค32๐16๐ค7๐ฏ2๐1
Has DNA ever been isolated?
In 1869, Swisse physician and chemist, Friedrich Miescher, supposedly isolated DNA from human pus taken from a patients bandage. But what did Miescher actually isolate, if anything at all?
In a scientific experiment, every step along the way must be controlled for. This ensures the methods being employed are not creating spurious results (i.e. producing the effect you are looking for). In the absence of adequate controls it is imperative that presuppositions are not made, because it renders the results null and void. Yet, this is precisely what occurred in Miescher's case.
The table below outlines the steps employed by Miescher in the isolation of DNA. His first mistake was presupposing DNA was present in the pus to begin with, and if it was there, that it was the same as what is found inside a living human being. Without a gold standard or reference point, how did he know what he was looking for? He didn't know what DNA was, or whether it was even present, so how could he have possibly known when he had obtained a pure sample of it?
The second problem is the obvious lack of adequate controls. The first thing Miescher did with the pus was to mix it with a 1.5% sodium sulfate solution. How did he know that this step, or the dozen or so that followed, did not alter the DNA from its original form, or create a reaction which formed a new substance that was never in the pus in the first place?
Meisher could not have known such things because they cannot be controlled for. He simply mixed a bunch of stuff together in a beaker, subjected it to various processes, and obtained a substance which he claimed was a pure sample of DNA. He then inferred that what was in the beaker was the same substance that is present inside of us. Miesher's results are not based in science, rather, they are the consequence of flawed reasoning and faith.
Source
Follow Humanley
In 1869, Swisse physician and chemist, Friedrich Miescher, supposedly isolated DNA from human pus taken from a patients bandage. But what did Miescher actually isolate, if anything at all?
In a scientific experiment, every step along the way must be controlled for. This ensures the methods being employed are not creating spurious results (i.e. producing the effect you are looking for). In the absence of adequate controls it is imperative that presuppositions are not made, because it renders the results null and void. Yet, this is precisely what occurred in Miescher's case.
The table below outlines the steps employed by Miescher in the isolation of DNA. His first mistake was presupposing DNA was present in the pus to begin with, and if it was there, that it was the same as what is found inside a living human being. Without a gold standard or reference point, how did he know what he was looking for? He didn't know what DNA was, or whether it was even present, so how could he have possibly known when he had obtained a pure sample of it?
The second problem is the obvious lack of adequate controls. The first thing Miescher did with the pus was to mix it with a 1.5% sodium sulfate solution. How did he know that this step, or the dozen or so that followed, did not alter the DNA from its original form, or create a reaction which formed a new substance that was never in the pus in the first place?
Meisher could not have known such things because they cannot be controlled for. He simply mixed a bunch of stuff together in a beaker, subjected it to various processes, and obtained a substance which he claimed was a pure sample of DNA. He then inferred that what was in the beaker was the same substance that is present inside of us. Miesher's results are not based in science, rather, they are the consequence of flawed reasoning and faith.
Source
Follow Humanley
De Gruyter Brill
Historic nucleic acids isolated by Friedrich Miescher contain RNA besides DNA
One hundred fifty years ago, Friedrich Miescher discovered DNA when he isolated โNucleinโโas he named itโfrom nuclei of human pus cells. Miescher recognized his isolate as a new type of molecule equal in importance to proteins. He realised that it is an acidโฆ
๐ฅ40๐26โค13๐3๐3๐ค1
What is gut health?
Terms like a 'healthy microbiome' and 'dysbiosis' are thrown around all the time, yet does anyone ever stop and think about what these things actually are?
In 2018, leading experts from across the world convened in an attempt to define these 'enigmas'. They concluded that a healthy microbiome has not been defined and that there is no 'ideal' bacterial composition. They also stated that no one knows if 'dysbiosis' (i.e. a bacterial imbalance) is a cause or consequence of disease.
If no one knows what a 'healthy microbiome' or 'dysbiosis' is, then what's the point of doing all of these expensive microbiome tests?
If no one knows what a healthy or dysbiotic microbiome is, how do you know if you've got one?
If no one knows whether the microbiome is a cause or consequence of health and disease, then why is everyone so hell bent on trying to increase so-called good and decrease so-called bad bacteria?
Follow Humanley
Terms like a 'healthy microbiome' and 'dysbiosis' are thrown around all the time, yet does anyone ever stop and think about what these things actually are?
In 2018, leading experts from across the world convened in an attempt to define these 'enigmas'. They concluded that a healthy microbiome has not been defined and that there is no 'ideal' bacterial composition. They also stated that no one knows if 'dysbiosis' (i.e. a bacterial imbalance) is a cause or consequence of disease.
If no one knows what a 'healthy microbiome' or 'dysbiosis' is, then what's the point of doing all of these expensive microbiome tests?
If no one knows what a healthy or dysbiotic microbiome is, how do you know if you've got one?
If no one knows whether the microbiome is a cause or consequence of health and disease, then why is everyone so hell bent on trying to increase so-called good and decrease so-called bad bacteria?
Follow Humanley
๐56๐ฅ24๐ฏ23โค10
Important Update
Comments have been turned back on in this channel. Comments were disabled for quite some time as the chat was getting out of hand.
To ensure an enjoyable and enriching learning experience for everyone please follow the below guidelines when engaging with others in the forum.
Community Guidelines
This forum is a place for people to engage in an open, honest, and amicable discussion about health and wellness. Whilst we encourage rigorous intellectual debate, and the sharing of different perspectives and ideas, there are some standards of engagement that must be followed to ensure users of this forum have an enjoyable experience.
1. Treat fellow community members with kindness and respect. We are all here to learn and grow together.
2. Comments must be relevant to health and wellness. Off-topic comments may be removed by a moderator.
3. This forum is a place for general information only. Avoid asking for or providing specific health related advice.
4. We aim to foster a positive and friendly environment where people feel encouraged to share their thoughts, feelings, and opinions. However, please refrain from making comments that promote fear, panic, alarm, negativity, or angst.
5. This is a channel where people can come for knowledge, inspiration, motivation, and empowerment. There's no room for fear, negativity, and low vibrational states in this space.
6. Whilst we encourage healthy debate, and stand for freedom of speech, we ask that you refrain from making logically fallacious, antagonistic, or inflammatory comments that may bring the forum into disrepute.
7. There is zero tolerance for engaging in aggressive, defamatory, violent, abusive, divisive, derogatory, or threatening behaviour.
Breaching these guidelines may result in permanent removal from the forum by a moderator.
Thank you for your co-operation and looking forward to connecting with you in the chat.
Dan
Comments have been turned back on in this channel. Comments were disabled for quite some time as the chat was getting out of hand.
To ensure an enjoyable and enriching learning experience for everyone please follow the below guidelines when engaging with others in the forum.
Community Guidelines
This forum is a place for people to engage in an open, honest, and amicable discussion about health and wellness. Whilst we encourage rigorous intellectual debate, and the sharing of different perspectives and ideas, there are some standards of engagement that must be followed to ensure users of this forum have an enjoyable experience.
1. Treat fellow community members with kindness and respect. We are all here to learn and grow together.
2. Comments must be relevant to health and wellness. Off-topic comments may be removed by a moderator.
3. This forum is a place for general information only. Avoid asking for or providing specific health related advice.
4. We aim to foster a positive and friendly environment where people feel encouraged to share their thoughts, feelings, and opinions. However, please refrain from making comments that promote fear, panic, alarm, negativity, or angst.
5. This is a channel where people can come for knowledge, inspiration, motivation, and empowerment. There's no room for fear, negativity, and low vibrational states in this space.
6. Whilst we encourage healthy debate, and stand for freedom of speech, we ask that you refrain from making logically fallacious, antagonistic, or inflammatory comments that may bring the forum into disrepute.
7. There is zero tolerance for engaging in aggressive, defamatory, violent, abusive, divisive, derogatory, or threatening behaviour.
Breaching these guidelines may result in permanent removal from the forum by a moderator.
Thank you for your co-operation and looking forward to connecting with you in the chat.
Dan
๐80โค39๐ฏ18๐ฅ2๐2๐ค1
The Dysbiosis Delusion
Almost everyone is familiar with the term 'dysbiosis', but what actually is it? Is it even a thing?
A commonly accepted definition of dysbiosis is 'a change in the bacterial composition away from normal'. So, what does medicine consider a normal bacterial composition to be?
Well, according to the Journal of Gastroenterology "the definition of a healthy microbiome remains elusive".
A 2022 article published in Chemical Reviews stated "the exact definition of a healthy microbiome has yet to be defined".
The BMJ attempts to define a healthy microbiome by stating that "a high microbial diversity is generally considered a marker of gut health". Yet in the very next breath they admit "high diversity does not necessarily equate to better health".
If a normal microbiome has never been defined, then there is no baseline or reference standard.
That's a huge problem.
Why?
Because without knowing what a normal or healthy microbiome is, it's impossible to know what an abnormal one is.
This reeks of something eerily close to circular reasoning. In fact, this very issue was highlighted in a scathing review of the use of the term 'dysbiosis' in 2019. The paper aptly pointed out that most researchers use this this term "without even an ad hoc definition or specification", and that "this catch-all phrase is a circular definition with no scientific value".
According to the BMJ "there is a problematic issue with the term โdysbiosisโ, because it links microbial imbalances to various illnesses without precision or definition".
But wait, there's more.
Most people assume that dysbiosis is the cause of their ill health and that this link has been 'proven scientifically'. However, nothing could further from the truth. In 2018, an expert panel concluded that "it is unknown whether dysbiosis is a cause, consequence or both of health and disease". This fact has been reiterated in many papers published since then.
If no one knows what dysbiosis is, then how can anyone test for it?
If no one knows whether it's a cause or consequence of disease, how can anyone claim to treat it?
If no one knows what a healthy microbiome is, how can anyone recommend fancy pills or potions to restore it?
Talk about being bamboozled.
Follow Humanley
Almost everyone is familiar with the term 'dysbiosis', but what actually is it? Is it even a thing?
A commonly accepted definition of dysbiosis is 'a change in the bacterial composition away from normal'. So, what does medicine consider a normal bacterial composition to be?
Well, according to the Journal of Gastroenterology "the definition of a healthy microbiome remains elusive".
A 2022 article published in Chemical Reviews stated "the exact definition of a healthy microbiome has yet to be defined".
The BMJ attempts to define a healthy microbiome by stating that "a high microbial diversity is generally considered a marker of gut health". Yet in the very next breath they admit "high diversity does not necessarily equate to better health".
If a normal microbiome has never been defined, then there is no baseline or reference standard.
That's a huge problem.
Why?
Because without knowing what a normal or healthy microbiome is, it's impossible to know what an abnormal one is.
This reeks of something eerily close to circular reasoning. In fact, this very issue was highlighted in a scathing review of the use of the term 'dysbiosis' in 2019. The paper aptly pointed out that most researchers use this this term "without even an ad hoc definition or specification", and that "this catch-all phrase is a circular definition with no scientific value".
According to the BMJ "there is a problematic issue with the term โdysbiosisโ, because it links microbial imbalances to various illnesses without precision or definition".
But wait, there's more.
Most people assume that dysbiosis is the cause of their ill health and that this link has been 'proven scientifically'. However, nothing could further from the truth. In 2018, an expert panel concluded that "it is unknown whether dysbiosis is a cause, consequence or both of health and disease". This fact has been reiterated in many papers published since then.
If no one knows what dysbiosis is, then how can anyone test for it?
If no one knows whether it's a cause or consequence of disease, how can anyone claim to treat it?
If no one knows what a healthy microbiome is, how can anyone recommend fancy pills or potions to restore it?
Talk about being bamboozled.
Follow Humanley
Gastroenterology
The Healthy MicrobiomeโWhat Is the Definition of a Healthy Gut Microbiome?
Use of microbiome-based biomarkers in diagnosis, prognosis, risk profiling, and precision
therapy requires definition of a healthy microbiome in different populations. To determine
features of the intestinal microbiota associated with health, however, weโฆ
therapy requires definition of a healthy microbiome in different populations. To determine
features of the intestinal microbiota associated with health, however, weโฆ
๐50๐ฅ15๐ฏ13โค12๐2
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
โค34๐5๐ฅ3
If we accept that generational trauma causes disease, then we must also consider that;
1. Our health status is determined by the perceptions of random events that unfolded in the lives of those who came before us.
2. We are the victims of our forefathers very existence.
3. We pay the price for something that happened to someone else.
4. We were destined for disease long before our conception.
5. We are not responsible for our own health or well-being.
6. We have no control over our own health.
7. Diet and lifestyle are unimportant.
8. Beliefs and perceptions about health are inconsequential.
9. We must heal someone elseโs trauma to heal ourselves.
10. We are ultimately responsible for the health of future generations.
If trauma really is the cause of our modern health woes, then the societal, political, religious, medical, and meta-physical implications are immense. But, if it's not the problem, we must shift our focus so as to not lose sight of the true causes.
Follow Humanley
1. Our health status is determined by the perceptions of random events that unfolded in the lives of those who came before us.
2. We are the victims of our forefathers very existence.
3. We pay the price for something that happened to someone else.
4. We were destined for disease long before our conception.
5. We are not responsible for our own health or well-being.
6. We have no control over our own health.
7. Diet and lifestyle are unimportant.
8. Beliefs and perceptions about health are inconsequential.
9. We must heal someone elseโs trauma to heal ourselves.
10. We are ultimately responsible for the health of future generations.
If trauma really is the cause of our modern health woes, then the societal, political, religious, medical, and meta-physical implications are immense. But, if it's not the problem, we must shift our focus so as to not lose sight of the true causes.
Follow Humanley
๐ฅ38๐27โค17๐ค6๐คฏ2
Forwarded from CultivateElevate
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Vaccines in children? Just say no. ๐ซ
1986 Ronald Reagan passed the Vaccine protection act Protecting vaccine companies rather than the people.
Diabetes type 1 Induced by Vaccines โก๏ธ PDF Thankfully heavy metals can be detoxed and all of these induced illnesses can be reversed ๐
1986 Ronald Reagan passed the Vaccine protection act Protecting vaccine companies rather than the people.
Diabetes type 1 Induced by Vaccines โก๏ธ PDF Thankfully heavy metals can be detoxed and all of these induced illnesses can be reversed ๐
โค45๐30๐ฏ18๐ฅ9
Forwarded from Dr. Sam Bailey Official (Sam Bailey)
A Farewell to Virology by Dr Mark Bailey was first published in 2022. The 28,000-word treatise exposed not only the lack of evidence for SARS-CoV-2, but also the entire virus model itself. The timeless work was, and remains, one of the most important bulwarks against virology's pseudoscience and the tyranny it fuels.
It is now available in book form. Watch here ๐ https://tinyurl.com/bp69mere
It is now available in book form. Watch here ๐ https://tinyurl.com/bp69mere
โค54๐38๐ฅ8๐2๐1
I recently had a debate on the John Cooper show with Robert Jardine about German New Medicine.
Check it out here.
Follow Humanley
Check it out here.
Follow Humanley
YouTube
Is Trauma the Real Cause of ALL Disease? | Robert Jardine(GNM) Vs. Dan Roytas (GNM Sceptic)
German New Medicine Debate | Robert Jardine (GNM) Vs. Dan Roytas (GNM Sceptic)
In this brilliant episode, we welcome back regular guests Robert Jardine (GNM) and Dan Roytas (GNM Sceptic) for a juicy debate on the work of Dr. Hamer and his groundbreakingโฆ
In this brilliant episode, we welcome back regular guests Robert Jardine (GNM) and Dan Roytas (GNM Sceptic) for a juicy debate on the work of Dr. Hamer and his groundbreakingโฆ
โค23๐18๐5๐ฅ2
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
When it comes to health and wellbeing, our beliefs, perceptions, and assumptionsโthe lens through which we view the worldโmatter.
Our focus should be on the story we are telling ourselves, rather than on a 'conflict', a 'shock', an 'event', or an 'emotion'. Belief in these things causing illness only serves to disempower you.
If you believe that you are a victim of circumstance, then you will be. But life doesn't have to be this way. A shift in consciousness is all it takes to regain power and control over your own wellbeing.
Follow Humanley
Our focus should be on the story we are telling ourselves, rather than on a 'conflict', a 'shock', an 'event', or an 'emotion'. Belief in these things causing illness only serves to disempower you.
If you believe that you are a victim of circumstance, then you will be. But life doesn't have to be this way. A shift in consciousness is all it takes to regain power and control over your own wellbeing.
Follow Humanley
๐ฏ40โค28๐9๐6
Check out my latest podcast with Dr Andy Kaufman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np2DhNSHbRc
Follow Humanley
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np2DhNSHbRc
Follow Humanley
YouTube
Rethinking Germ Theory: How Terrain and Toxins Shape Your Health
What really makes us sick?
Modern medicine is built on the idea that invisible germs cause disease โ but is that the whole story?
In this episode of The True Health Report, Dr. Andrew Kaufman interviews naturopath and educator Daniel Roytas (Can You Catchโฆ
Modern medicine is built on the idea that invisible germs cause disease โ but is that the whole story?
In this episode of The True Health Report, Dr. Andrew Kaufman interviews naturopath and educator Daniel Roytas (Can You Catchโฆ
๐36โค30๐ฅ7๐6๐1๐ฏ1