15 May 2015

It seems that the two most controversial topics revealed by the Internet are Jesus Christ and homeopathy. What do they have in common? Perhaps a desire to do good without the technology, without the money and the greed. Perhaps it's the logic that others fail to see, because they live in a very limited, evil world of their own. Jesus healed people through love. Homeopathy heals people through information available in nature.

There is endless hate for homeopathy (as for Jesus) from those who are unable to grasp its principles and wisdom, from those who reject any proof that it can work. These are the people who only retain the failures of the method (as with the failures of the humans/the church - if one priest did something bad, then the whole faith is rendered null).

Homeopathy is a scientific method and has never done the harm traditional medicine is causing. It is growing worldwide and one of the reasons is because people have experienced the failures of traditional medicine and are at least willing to explore new therapies.

Besides I debunk the usual beliefs and pseudo-arguments of homeopathy haters, I want to ask this:

What do you prefer?

You're ill. Do you want to be prescribed a medication which you don't know how was made and with what, you don't know if the studies concerning are truthful and valid or just sponsored, or would you like to be analyzed wholly, based on all your symptoms and prescribed a customized remedy? Would you like the doctor to care about who you are, how you feel and what your lifestyle is, to understand your health problem? Or would you like them to just observe the symptoms and prescribe a generic medication to cover those up?


"Homeopathic specialists are scammers and they never healed anyone"

Traditional doctors are often scammers, too. If some of them do this for the money, this doesn't invalidate the method itself. Anyone is free to choose whichever therapy and be a complete scammer. There's equality between these doctors, yet you refuse that. Yes, of course you will find all kinds of healers to be scammers. This doesn't mean anything.

As for the healing evidence, the word of mouth is doing its job. Reality will never change - people try these remedies and, when they find healing, they spread the word. This is the only way homeopathy got to expand and prosper. Note that finding the right remedy is the big challenge. This is why some patients are not healed. This is the reality of homeopathy - it takes a lot of patience, honesty, hard work to understand a patient's problem and select the right remedy. That's why it fails at times. Why not see the failures of traditional medicine, too? they are countless. Why you excuse those, but not these? Besides, homeopathy never killed and cannot kill. The skeptics themselves say it's "only water and sugar". Therefore, how can a 'scam' so harmless kill someone?

"That person stayed ill/died after using homeopathic remedies"

What was their illness? Was it an emergency? Homeopathy never claims it can replace traditional medicine 100%. It is a helper. It leaves the urgent cases to the emergency services. Traditional medicine can heal with a heart attack, a broken bone or organ, but cannot understand ailments like anxiety, depression or any psychosomatic disease. Why not see all the people who got worse and who died because of traditional medicine? It happens every day in hospitals. All mindlessly treated through the same methods, regardless of the differences between patients. A headache can have a hundred reasons, it's ridiculous to believe that masking it with a painkiller will get you rid of all those reasons. This is only one example, mind you.

"It's only water and sugar!"

You'll mostly hear this ridiculously childish complain that homeopathic medicine has no active principle in it and therefore it cannot heal. This is a very primitive 'logic'. Homeopathy is based on information, not on substance quantity. I ask the skeptics:

Do you believe in mobile phones? in computers and tablets?

Of course, you'll say. "I use these objects every day, they work and they help me, what's the deal with it". Well, you believe in them although it doesn't make sense. You use your smartphone to get such a great deal of information. Where is all that stored? How can you have so much in so little? Physically, your phone is a very small object. You can't cram too much in it. Secondly, you can open the case and see what's inside. Metal and plastic. You can't find the apps, the information, the sounds, the visuals, nothing of that is inside. Just some tiny metal and plastic pieces. Then why don't you ask yourself how is that possible? You were taught to never question it. It's the way electronics and information work. If we were to step back (or just go back in time with some decades), we wold consider it like magic. Would you have imagined smartphones 2 decades ago? No, the idea would have seemed like pure magic! Crazy! Yet you're using a smarphone these days and have the world at your feet.

The same goes with homeopathy. Its remedies, though only sugar and water and alcohol physically, are loaded with information. Just like the Internet. Can you see the Internet in a purely physical form? Can you touch it? Can you use scales to weight it? A knife to cut a piece of it? No, it's entirely 'abstract', yet you can use it s you please. Yet you don't believe that a remedy can be like that, contain information in it and be beneficial through that.

"There are no studies to assess the benefits of homeopathic medicine"

Studies require a lot of money. Money go in industries where huge sums are being handled. It's not the case with homeopathy. It's a simple law of economics, you cannot invest in something that brings no real profit. Homeopathic medicine is very cheap. The time of the doctor is precious, hence why consultations are expensive (by the way, one consultation lasts about 1 h), but the remedies are not. It would never be logical for the money to go towards this method. And sadly, without studies many will dismiss homeopathy without getting educated or trying it. 


"Homeopathy is not compatible with Christianity, it's witchcraft."

Honestly, when I heard this claim, I started to think seriously about the possibility. I am not 100% convinced about the 'cleanliness' of the preparation method for homeopathic remedies, but I have some common sense observations to make.

God created plants and minerals. The Bible says God left herbs for our healing. By all means, it is impossible for humans to get to know ALL the plants in the world and identify the right ones for ALL the conditions in the world. Therefore, it requires some sort of revelation, of divine inspiration.

The Bible also tells how "like cures like" (by looking at the metal snake, the people were healed from venom snake bites; Jesus saved mankind by being born as human; Jesus vanquished death by dying).

It's impossible to say we should not use natural remedies because pagans have used them and because they were ones to rely on the "like cures like" principle. Pagans also ate plants and drank water, perhaps Christians should stop doing that because it's something 'pagan'.

A Christian myself, I do not agree with such over cautious attitude. Plants are from God and God says He wants us to use them to heal. Could this be a farce, because it's impossible to get to know all the plants and their effects in normal conditions? Just like with Hildegard von Bingen, it needs inspired people to discover a method of healing. It's not witchcraft if God wanted it so. It's not a farce from God. There's no devil calling and no incantation involved, but ordinary chemistry and physics.



In conclusion, no amount of saying "It doesn't work", "It's ridiculous", "It's a scam", "It's doing nothing" can ever suppress the logic and the evidence. Some people will always think for their own and investigate. Some will simply try the treatments and spread the work if they work. This is how homeopathy didn't die, but actually got more and more powerful and popular, without the support of corporation and without the streams of money that are being usually pumped into traditional medicine.

4 May 2015

Lately, many of the bigoted (and vastly intolerant to different views) homosexuality supporters have been enforcing their opinions by claiming how animals are often homosexual and therefore it's "normal and natural" for humans to be that way, too. This post is going to provide a clear explanation as to why it is 100% inaccurate and misleading to call animals homosexual.


Animals are PANSEXUAL.


Pansexuality is a sexual orientation that makes one attracted to everything -- yo the opposite sex, to the same sex, to other species and to inanimate objects as well. "Pan" means "everything".
Ever seen a dog humping on a human's leg? It is because it is pansexual. Ever seen a bird displaying courtship behaviour towards a human? That is pansexual, too.

In other words, the animals do not have that discernment. They just breed when they feel like it. They are ruled by their breeding instinct. Thus, it doesn't matter to them how they're trying to satisfy this drive. It is simply ridiculous and manipulative to use this as an arguments in today's debates.

Besides, what these people support is a downgrading of the human species. If we are to accept or adopt homosexual or pansexual behaviour ourselves, then it means that we return to the animal state. Are you ready to say goodbye to millions of years of evolution? Funny thing, it's the same supporters that claim they're oh so evolved and everyone else should have their views in the 3rd millennium.

What this animal homosexual propaganda is in fact saying is: "forget about the long way the human species has come; forget about discernment; forget about the purpose of the sexual instinct in all living beings. Just become a mindless animal and tell those who oppose you that this is the "normal" and "evolved" way!

No wonder so many are saying, "No, thanks!"

Instead of blindly believing what the Internet or a fanatic supporter tells you, better have a look at nature yourself. A good look. See things for what they are. Animals don't have enough discernment to make the difference. They're just driven by a blind breeding instinct. If you want to be like that too, fine, but let the others be humans and mind their own stuff. Don't push false education and pseudo-science down their throats!

No matter how much footage you see of "homosexual animal behaviour", you should know that this is only part of what's out there. They show you that because that's how they want you to see it but remember, animals are pansexual.

Also, if you are going to say that "it's normal and natural to be pansexual", then I hope you realise you're also supporting things like necrophilia, pedophilia and zoophilia! After all, where do we draw the line? What is "natural" and what isn't? (it's rhetorical, yes) Who are we to tell others how to behave sexually, right?