Science

Science

Pseudo Science of Scientific Methods

0

Today morning, I watched this video shared by facebook friend and it reminded me old note on the same topic.

Never in true science, fluke responses and generalizations are accepted as principles.

Entire modern medicine field runs on fluke responses called ‘Clinical Trials’ and we call them ‘Science’ 😀.

Each one of us is unique by birth. Each one of us unique by the environment we live in. Our bodily state of health and sickness are personalized and cannot be generalized.

Modern pharma does clinical trials in controlled environment and then generalize the treatment. Utterly unscientific way of healing body. But since there is Economics and Greed is involved, they sell pseudo science big way. And since we are helpless by our ignorance, we buy the pseudo treatments. Modern clinicians may use scientific techniques but in the way that they treat their patients they are still quacks.The modern clinician and the medical researcher base their opinions and conclusions almost exclusively on subjective observations and wishful expectations which are likely to be based on inaccurate historical perspectives and experimental experiences with members of another species.

On the other hand, Ayurveda works on principles. Vata is Vata. Pitta is Pitta, Kapha is Kapha. Common sense, research governed by subjective conclusions backed by strong objective signs. Personalized treatment. Treatment is inspired by Mother nature.

Due to our involvement with pseudo sciences, we indirectly are tangled in the karma bonding with all animals and humans upon whom clinical trials happened so far.

I think it is high time we reject pseudo sciences and embrace benefits of true science.

10154928_358899244234990_4807062997491307066_n

Independence Day? Vested interests and Science Slaves

0

Are we really free? Independent?

maggi

This chapter of the book Precaution, Environmental Science, and Preventive Public Policy edited by Joel Tickner, very well explains ban on Maggi but no attention to equally and more dangerous killers and by that fooling mass.

===================

The main objective of a scientific exercise to determine the potential threats of harm from chemicals is to protect health and the environment.Yet this fundamental objective is often forgotten or ignored in the appraisal of risks inherent in the production, distribution, and use of potentially harmful chemical products. Dominant forces in the scientific community and regulatory agencies impose an evaluation system that relies heavily on numerical data and on the “smoking gun” type of evidence of harm that presumes the chemical to be innocuous until proven otherwise.

This supposedly “science-based” risk assessment methodology has proven to be more effective in protecting vested interests rather than protecting health and the environment. In fact, risk assessment is not the decisive factor in determining the regulatory status of a toxic chemical. The reality is that economic interests and political expediency are generally the dominant considerations influencing regulatory decisions pertaining to toxic chemicals, especially in southern countries where financial, technical, human, and other resources are sorely lacking and where sociopolitical circumstances are particularly conducive for powerful chemical companies to exert influence and manipulate public policy (Quijano 2000).

=======================

Independence Day? 😀 

 

Book reference:

 

Popular Posts

My Favorites

सामाजिक और राष्ट्रीय कर्तव्योंका विनियोग = यज्ञ

सामाजिक और राष्ट्रीय कर्तव्योंको भूल कर कोई व्यक्ति स्वस्थ एवं समृद्ध जीवन नहीं जी सकता, समाज प्रगति नहीं कर सकता और राष्ट्र अमर नहीं...