Chiropractic Healthiness

Question:

> All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support your > beliefs.

Well sometimes it is difficult being a scientist. And I resent your assumption, which, by the way, is completely incorrect. *My* mind is not at all closed to anything.   I’ve had accupuncture to aid in the healing of a shoulder injury. The chiropractor down the hall from my office helped heal my lower back problem caused by an injury and upper cervical area problem which is an anatomical anomoly. (Not to mention the physical therapy.) I’ve used biofeedback in my practice to "cure" someone of amblyopia—a supposed un-fixable vision disorder. I’ve referred friends for hypnotherapy to quit smoking. Successfully. I’ve personally successfully used herbs and vitamins for a variety of ailments. And most recently, after cryosurgery and high-priced high-tech immunostimulants to treat my daughter’s viral warts failed, I taught her to use visualization/guided imagry.  And THAT not only worked, but quickly, without pain and without cost. So please don’t tell me that I’m closed to therapies that don’t support my beliefs. Something that works and works repeatably has my support. Even if there is no clear scientific explanation for how it works—-although most often there is. On the other hand, if a therapy or diagnostic protocol clearly does not work and/or clearly not only has no basic in science but science has proved it false, I can’t support it.  It’s bogus, a scam. And that’s where iridology is. Enough said.  My allergies are acting up and I need to take some quercetin and bromelain, a little extra vitamin C and some aromatherapy. I trust I’ll be well by the morning when I have to go to work and treat people with vision problems and eye disease, using all sorts of fancy diagnostic drugs and prescription medications. Or, perhaps some meditation, biofeedback and facial-cranial and neck massage. –Larry — Larry Bickford, OD Doctor of Optometry, Family Practice Eye Health and Vision Care The EyeCare Connection http://www.EyeCareContacts.com Please note: Addresses are munged using the .invalid protocol to reduce spam. Help fight spam! Report spam to SpamCop  http://www.spamcop.net

Response:

> > All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support > your > beliefs. > Heck, with cell salts one doesn’t even need iridology. Who needs > a diagnosis when salts (not table salts mind you) cures everything > regardless. I wonder who really has the closed mind- you or > the "doctors" you rail against?

Well, they’ve never fixed up anything much that I’ve had wrong with me. Housedust allergies, asthma, knotted back and neck muscles, headlice — the medical profession hasn’t got a clue i.e., they are clueless.  The cell salts treat these conditions successfully and more. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> frank

Response:

> Well, they’ve never fixed up anything much that I’ve had wrong with me. > Housedust allergies, asthma, knotted back and neck muscles, headlice — the > medical profession hasn’t got a clue i.e., they are clueless.  The cell > salts treat these conditions successfully and more.

Many of our conditions and medical problems resolve themselves spontaneously, in which case anything that we’ve done recently is given credit for the cure: "We are pattern-seeking…" And then we become missionaries selling the miracle: "…and story telling animals." The trick is to never stop learning, to never close one’s mind. In your case, there is a different viewpoint you might wish to explore. It will be difficult for you to accept, but I strongly believe that there is no relationship between the cell salts and the improvements you’ve experienced. Nevertheless, that you experienced relief is a good thing. That you must buy expensive salt water is a bad thing. In an unfortunate circumstance involving a true medical emergency, I hope you’ll consult a member of the conventional medical profession. In any case, I wish you the very best. Henry To email me, remove the OBVIOUS. I apologize for the inconvenience, but some viruses "harvest" email addresses from usenet, and if you’re infected, even from your INBOX.

Response:

>So please don’t tell me that I’m closed to therapies that don’t support >my beliefs. Something that works and works repeatably has my support. >Even if there is no clear scientific explanation for how it >works—-although most often there is.

Happy with that. >On the other hand, if a therapy or diagnostic protocol clearly does not >work and/or clearly not only has no basic in science but science has >proved it false, I can’t support it.  It’s bogus, a scam.

Here I have a problem.   I’ve looked at the studies and the reviews of studies and I have not found this proof.   The studies I found worked from photos of the eye.   In practice, the iridologists focus through the levels of the eye.   Some now use digital video to capture the changes as they go through the levels.   There are photos of these changes on this iridology site. http://cnri.edu/Clinical/index.htm and also articles explaining what was wrong with the medline studies. Now I accept that iridology is not proven, but I cannot accept that studies on iridolgy with photos can be used to disprove the practise of iridology with live microscopy. Best wishes — John Bain UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html Surround Sound for Television

Response:

>All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support your >beliefs.

How about us non-doctors?  I’m not any sort of medical professional, and I don’t believe a lot of these stories. Does not believing you (or Steven Fochi, or whomever) automatically make me "closed minded?"   — David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone      These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct.        "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants                   were standing on my shoulders."

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support your > beliefs. > Well sometimes it is difficult being a scientist. And I resent your > assumption, which, by the way, is completely incorrect. > *My* mind is not at all closed to anything. > I’ve had accupuncture to aid in the healing of a shoulder injury. > The chiropractor down the hall from my office helped heal my lower back > problem caused by an injury and upper cervical area problem which is an > anatomical anomoly. (Not to mention the physical therapy.)

Well you’d be one of the GOOD ones — heaps of them are in ruts.  I shouldn’t have been so sweeping in my generalisation and I apologise. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’ve used biofeedback in my practice to "cure" someone of amblyopia—a > supposed un-fixable vision disorder. > I’ve referred friends for hypnotherapy to quit smoking. Successfully. > I’ve personally successfully used herbs and vitamins for a variety of > ailments. > And most recently, after cryosurgery and high-priced high-tech > immunostimulants to treat my daughter’s viral warts failed, I taught her > to use visualization/guided imagry.  And THAT not only worked, but > quickly, without pain and without cost. > So please don’t tell me that I’m closed to therapies that don’t support > my beliefs. Something that works and works repeatably has my support. > Even if there is no clear scientific explanation for how it > works—-although most often there is. > On the other hand, if a therapy or diagnostic protocol clearly does not > work and/or clearly not only has no basic in science but science has > proved it false, I can’t support it.  It’s bogus, a scam. > And that’s where iridology is. > Enough said.  My allergies are acting up and I need to take some > quercetin and bromelain, a little extra vitamin C and some aromatherapy. > I trust I’ll be well by the morning when I have to go to work and treat > people with vision problems and eye disease, using all sorts of fancy > diagnostic drugs and prescription medications. Or, perhaps some > meditation, biofeedback and facial-cranial and neck massage. > –Larry > — > Larry Bickford, OD > Doctor of Optometry, Family Practice Eye Health and Vision Care > The EyeCare Connection > http://www.EyeCareContacts.com > Please note: Addresses are munged using the .invalid protocol to reduce spam. > Help fight spam! Report spam to SpamCop  http://www.spamcop.net

Response:

I recently consulted with an iridologist. She was able to see things through the photos she took of my eyes that were confirmed by my GP. My doctor did not discount any of the findings but encouraged me to pursue the iridologists recommendations.Iridology is an incredible insight into the onset of irregularities within the body. You will see it in the eye first when you can actually treat it through non invasive means such as diet, vitamins, minerals, herbs and exercise. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said were a > reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were crimped > or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about iridology > as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really expect > doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would you? > Hi all, > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able to > predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for years > and > verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but maybe > soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have been > using it for. > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process of > proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists have > been > claiming. > It’s a good thing for iridology and hopefully science continues to verify > other complimentary therapies. > Love and Light > Steven

Response:

> Henry, What are you trying to say that I am a victim of placebo.

More a beneficiary than victim. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Henry To email me, remove the OBVIOUS. I apologize for the inconvenience, but some viruses "harvest" email addresses from usenet, and if you’re infected, even from your INBOX.

Response:

We will see how useless the medical profession is when you have your first heart attack or stroke.  It is just a matter of time. rich – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Henry, What are you trying to say that I am a victim of placebo.  How you > medical lot love to toss that word around. > Do you think its placebo that calcium stops osteoporosis? > Of course not.  But I’ll tell you something.   Calcium supplements provide 3 > of the 12 cell salts, magnesium supplies another 1.  Therefore the medical > profession is prescribing 4 out of the 12 cell salts. > You will very soon notice that people won’t be able to consume much more > calcium without their system’s becoming out of balance. > But you lot can’t understand the obvious even when its staring you right in > the face.  That’s how good you are. > Hard as it might be for you to understand, you are wrong. >> Well, they’ve never fixed up anything much that I’ve had wrong with me. >> Housedust allergies, asthma, knotted back and neck muscles, headlice — > the >> medical profession hasn’t got a clue i.e., they are clueless.  The cell >> salts treat these conditions successfully and more. > Many of our conditions and medical problems resolve themselves > spontaneously, in > which case anything that we’ve done recently is given credit for the cure: > "We > are pattern-seeking…" And then we become missionaries selling the > miracle: > "…and story telling animals." > The trick is to never stop learning, to never close one’s mind. > In your case, there is a different viewpoint you might wish to explore. > It will be difficult for you to accept, but I strongly believe that there > is no > relationship between the cell salts and the improvements you’ve > experienced. > Nevertheless, that you experienced relief is a good thing. That you must > buy > expensive salt water is a bad thing. In an unfortunate circumstance > involving a > true medical emergency, I hope you’ll consult a member of the conventional > medical profession. In any case, I wish you the very best. > Henry > To email me, remove the OBVIOUS. > I apologize for the inconvenience, but some > viruses "harvest" email addresses from usenet, > and if you’re infected, even from your INBOX.

Response:

Having been into cell salts now for 24+ years, I can see what things they can treat. Nutritionists say we get enough sodium in our diets because we consume table salt.  This is wrong in my opinion. There are 3 sodium cell salts — * sodium phosphate which is an acid neutraliser and gets rid of gout and rheumatic conditions * sodium sulphate which removes poison charged fluids from the cells and gets rid of gout and other rheumatic ailments as well * sodium chloride which in its homeopathic form only, gets rid of watery eyes, allergic rhinitis, housedust allergies, itchy sore throat, wheezing and sneezing Does table salt do any of these things? Not to my knowledge and not from my experience.  Therefore table salt is NOT an acceptable form of dietary sodium. Think about it.  If you really want to find out for sure for yourself, take tablets and you will see what I am saying is correct.  Science is up the shit on table salt and sodium.  Now do you know why I don’t take them seriously and will continue with my views until they do some tests on what I am talking about.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support your >beliefs. > How about us non-doctors?  I’m not any sort of medical professional, > and I don’t believe a lot of these stories. > Does not believing you (or Steven Fochi, or whomever) automatically > make me "closed minded?" >   — David Wright :: wright at ibnets.com :: Not a Spokesman for Anyone >      These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct. >        "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants >                   were standing on my shoulders."

Response:

Henry, What are you trying to say that I am a victim of placebo.  How you medical lot love to toss that word around. Do you think its placebo that calcium stops osteoporosis? Of course not.  But I’ll tell you something.   Calcium supplements provide 3 of the 12 cell salts, magnesium supplies another 1.  Therefore the medical profession is prescribing 4 out of the 12 cell salts. You will very soon notice that people won’t be able to consume much more calcium without their system’s becoming out of balance. But you lot can’t understand the obvious even when its staring you right in the face.  That’s how good you are. Hard as it might be for you to understand, you are wrong.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Well, they’ve never fixed up anything much that I’ve had wrong with me. > Housedust allergies, asthma, knotted back and neck muscles, headlice — the > medical profession hasn’t got a clue i.e., they are clueless.  The cell > salts treat these conditions successfully and more. > Many of our conditions and medical problems resolve themselves spontaneously, in > which case anything that we’ve done recently is given credit for the cure: "We > are pattern-seeking…" And then we become missionaries selling the miracle: > "…and story telling animals." > The trick is to never stop learning, to never close one’s mind. > In your case, there is a different viewpoint you might wish to explore. > It will be difficult for you to accept, but I strongly believe that there is no > relationship between the cell salts and the improvements you’ve experienced. > Nevertheless, that you experienced relief is a good thing. That you must buy > expensive salt water is a bad thing. In an unfortunate circumstance involving a > true medical emergency, I hope you’ll consult a member of the conventional > medical profession. In any case, I wish you the very best. > Henry > To email me, remove the OBVIOUS. > I apologize for the inconvenience, but some > viruses "harvest" email addresses from usenet, > and if you’re infected, even from your INBOX.

Response:

I disagree whit the whole argument and the beliefs that iridology is false. I accept that he as well as you have a right to choose, you and him also have a responsibility to allow others to choose without interference. My belief in iridology is based on some reading I have done and an minor experience a few years ago that showed me that there was some truth in it. I wasn’t feeling too well and seeing a naturopath who used iridology as a diagnostic tool gave me a herbal tonic which had me feeling better in a short time. It wasn’t a serious concern but it had me feeling lethargic and uninterested. It wasn’t something that could offer proof, but was sufficient to warrant further investigation. I believe that there is some truth in the subject and think that after more research I would be in a better position to offer a better argument. It’s a subject that I have touched on yet haven’t studied so my arguments are more emotional than scientific. Still there is logic in the idea and see how it can be useful, also considering how the eyes reflect much that goes on in the body it’s likely that they can be used to diagnose abnormalities within the body. Steven

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Iridologists claim they can diagnose all sorts of systemic disease and > > dysfuction by looking at patterns in the iris "tissue".  Hogwash.  The > > iris does not "map" anything in the body. > > It is not high-tech medical science or hocus pocus iridology that allows > > us to help people with signs and symptoms of dis-ease.  It’s called > > observation of known causes and effectors of human physiologic systems. > > Not some guy’s drawings of iris patterns a half a century ago. > Thanks for that and while I disagree I respect your rights to your > opinions. > Please tell us what it is you disagree with and why. > erf

Response:

Hi all, Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able to predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for years and verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but maybe soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have been using it for. I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process of proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists have been claiming. It’s a good thing for iridology and hopefully science continues to verify other complimentary therapies. Love and Light Steven

Response:

> Hi all, > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able to > predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for years and > verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but maybe > soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have been > using it for. > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process of > proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists have been > claiming.

Did the "scientists" use an iridology chart to predict strokes?  I really doubt it.  If they didn’t, then this isn’t a validation of iridology at all. Iridology makes specific claims which have never been backed by reliable studies. erf

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi all, > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able to > predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for years and > verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but maybe > soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have been > using it for. > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process of > proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists have been > claiming. > It’s a good thing for iridology and hopefully science continues to verify > other complimentary therapies. > Love and Light > Steven

Steve, eye providers can ascertain systemic problems such as hypertension & diabetes by retinal evaluation (looking in the BACK of the eye w/an opthalmoscope). By identifying Hollenhorst plaques in the retinal vessels I can dx possible carotid stenosis (verified by Doppler)  and TIA’s/possible stroke victims. But the key is RETINAL evaluation, not the IRIS where iridologists claim to diagnose future problems. So sorry, I doubt that the story was legitimizing iridology. frank

Response:

It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said were a reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were crimped or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about iridology as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really expect doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would you?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi all, > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able to > predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for years and > verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but maybe > soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have been > using it for. > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process of > proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists have been > claiming. > It’s a good thing for iridology and hopefully science continues to verify > other complimentary therapies. > Love and Light > Steven

Response:

> It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said were a > reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were crimped > or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about iridology > as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really expect > doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would you?

Before you make some snide comments you should review some basic anatomy please and re-read my post. Vasculature BEHIND the iris are the retinal arterioles and venules. As stated, it is well known (and that’s why the eye care provider does opthalmoscopy) that a/v crossings with nicking, humping, silver wire reflex, etc. etc. are indicative of hypertension and other disorders. It is difficult to see iris vasculature, even with a slit lamp, unless the iris color is light, such as blue or light green. But again, in all liklihood, the story was most likely about the retina. Even if the iris vasculature was meant, it has zilch to do with iridology. The difference has something to do with sound science versus pseudoscience(don’t mean to be picky- go figure). So please refrain from making sweeping generalizations. frank

Response:

Thanks Carole, As I said I didn’t catch all of the story and what I did catch indicated to me that it was along the lines of iridology. It may also be possible that the story was embellished as the media tend to do. Maybe a different channel reported it differently, maybe not. I stand corrected and thank you for enlightening me. Steven

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said were a > reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were crimped > or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about iridology > as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really expect > doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would you? > Hi all, > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able to > predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for years > and > verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but maybe > soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have been > using it for. > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process of > proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists have > been > claiming. > It’s a good thing for iridology and hopefully science continues to verify > other complimentary therapies. > Love and Light > Steven

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > As I said I didn’t catch all of the story and what I did catch indicated > to  me that it was along the lines of iridology. It may also be possible that > the story was embellished as the media tend to do. Maybe a different > channel  reported it differently, maybe not. > I stand corrected and thank you for enlightening me. > Steven > It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said > were a  reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were > crimped  or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about > iridology as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really > expect doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would > you? > > Hi all, > > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able > > to  predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for > > years and   verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but >>maybe  soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have > > been  using it for. > > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process > > of  proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists > > have  been  claiming.

OK. One more time for those who have not read my similar posts before: Iridology is not science.  It does not work, never has, and has been proven countless times to be nothing more than a show. But—and this IS the truth—WE CAN look at physical structures like arteries and veins in the eye and WE CAN see signs of systemic disease and impending health crisis. WE CAN observe cholesterol and calcium plaques in arteries and veins in people soon to have a heart attack or stroke and WE CAN see leaking retinal blood vessels or new vessel growth on the iris in diabetic patients. WE CAN see cholesterol deposits in the cornea indicating high blood levels of fats. This IS NOT NEW information.  It is routine.  I see it my practice all too frequently.  Someone comes in for an eyeglass prescription and ends up in the ER wired up to heart monitors and being pumped with clot-busters. Iridologists claim they can diagnose all sorts of systemic disease and dysfuction by looking at patterns in the iris "tissue".  Hogwash.  The iris does not "map" anything in the body.   It is not high-tech medical science or hocus pocus iridology that allows us to help people with signs and symptoms of dis-ease.  It’s called observation of known causes and effectors of human physiologic systems.   Not some guy’s drawings of iris patterns a half a century ago. –Larry — Larry Bickford, OD Doctor of Optometry, Family Practice Eye Health and Vision Care The EyeCare Connection http://www.EyeCareContacts.com Please note: Addresses are munged using the .invalid protocol to reduce spam. Help fight spam! Report spam to SpamCop  http://www.spamcop.net

Response:

> > Iridologists claim they can diagnose all sorts of systemic disease and > dysfuction by looking at patterns in the iris "tissue".  Hogwash.  The > iris does not "map" anything in the body. > It is not high-tech medical science or hocus pocus iridology that allows > us to help people with signs and symptoms of dis-ease.  It’s called > observation of known causes and effectors of human physiologic systems. > Not some guy’s drawings of iris patterns a half a century ago. > Thanks for that and while I disagree I respect your rights to your

opinions. Please tell us what it is you disagree with and why. erf

Response:

>Please tell us what it is you disagree with and why.

you sure you want to start the iridology debate again, HD. Have you found any valid studies yet, HD? Best wishes — John Bain UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html Surround Sound for Television

Response:

All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support your beliefs.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> As I said I didn’t catch all of the story and what I did catch indicated > to  me that it was along the lines of iridology. It may also be possible that > the story was embellished as the media tend to do. Maybe a different > channel  reported it differently, maybe not. > I stand corrected and thank you for enlightening me. > Steven > > It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said > > were a  reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were > crimped  or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about > > iridology as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really > > expect doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would > > you? > > > Hi all, > > > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able > > > to  predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > > > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for > > > years and   verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but > >>maybe  soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have > > > been  using it for. > > > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > > > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process > > > of  proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists > > > have  been  claiming. > OK. One more time for those who have not read my similar posts before: > Iridology is not science.  It does not work, never has, and has been > proven countless times to be nothing more than a show. > But—and this IS the truth—WE CAN look at physical structures like > arteries and veins in the eye and WE CAN see signs of systemic disease > and impending health crisis. WE CAN observe cholesterol and calcium > plaques in arteries and veins in people soon to have a heart attack or > stroke and WE CAN see leaking retinal blood vessels or new vessel growth > on the iris in diabetic patients. WE CAN see cholesterol deposits in the > cornea indicating high blood levels of fats. > This IS NOT NEW information.  It is routine.  I see it my practice all > too frequently.  Someone comes in for an eyeglass prescription and ends > up in the ER wired up to heart monitors and being pumped with > clot-busters. > Iridologists claim they can diagnose all sorts of systemic disease and > dysfuction by looking at patterns in the iris "tissue".  Hogwash.  The > iris does not "map" anything in the body. > It is not high-tech medical science or hocus pocus iridology that allows > us to help people with signs and symptoms of dis-ease.  It’s called > observation of known causes and effectors of human physiologic systems. > Not some guy’s drawings of iris patterns a half a century ago. > –Larry > — > Larry Bickford, OD > Doctor of Optometry, Family Practice Eye Health and Vision Care > The EyeCare Connection > http://www.EyeCareContacts.com > Please note: Addresses are munged using the .invalid protocol to reduce spam. > Help fight spam! Report spam to SpamCop  http://www.spamcop.net

Response:

> All you doctors have closed minds to anything that doesn’t support your > beliefs.

Heck, with cell salts one doesn’t even need iridology. Who needs a diagnosis when salts (not table salts mind you) cures everything regardless. I wonder who really has the closed mind- you or the "doctors" you rail against? frank

Response:

>It will be difficult for you to accept, but I strongly believe that there is no >relationship between the cell salts and the improvements you’ve experienced. >Nevertheless, that you experienced relief is a good thing. That you must buy >expensive salt water is a bad thing.

Just a small point, Henry.   The tissue salts come as little white tablets.   Most people swallow them straight off, they do not dissolve them in water. Best wishes — John Bain UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html Surround Sound for Television

Response:

Thanks for that and while I disagree I respect your rights to your opinions. Steven

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> As I said I didn’t catch all of the story and what I did catch indicated > to  me that it was along the lines of iridology. It may also be possible that > the story was embellished as the media tend to do. Maybe a different > channel  reported it differently, maybe not. > I stand corrected and thank you for enlightening me. > Steven > > It was about looking at the veins behind the iris which it was said > > were a  reliable indicator of the state of the veins.  Any veings that were > crimped  or narrowed showed potential problems.  The article wasn’t about > > iridology as we have known it but was something similar.  You wouldn’t really > > expect doctors to acknowledge that any alternative remedy was any good would > > you? > > > Hi all, > > > Tonight on the news a story was talking about scientists being able > > > to  predict a stroke by looking into a person’s eyes. > > > It seems science is now recognising what many have been doing for > > > years and   verifying it all. ok they just discovered it works with strokes, but > >>maybe  soon they will confirm it works with all problems iridologists have > > > been  using it for. > > > I didn’t see it but heard it as I was eating dinner at the time while the > > > telly was on in the background. The scientists are now in the process > > > of  proving it all and hopefully soon it will verify what iridologists > > > have  been  claiming. > OK. One more time for those who have not read my similar posts before: > Iridology is not science.  It does not work, never has, and has been > proven countless times to be nothing more than a show. > But—and this IS the truth—WE CAN look at physical structures like > arteries and veins in the eye and WE CAN see signs of systemic disease > and impending health crisis. WE CAN observe cholesterol and calcium > plaques in arteries and veins in people soon to have a heart attack or > stroke and WE CAN see leaking retinal blood vessels or new vessel growth > on the iris in diabetic patients. WE CAN see cholesterol deposits in the > cornea indicating high blood levels of fats. > This IS NOT NEW information.  It is routine.  I see it my practice all > too frequently.  Someone comes in for an eyeglass prescription and ends > up in the ER wired up to heart monitors and being pumped with > clot-busters. > Iridologists claim they can diagnose all sorts of systemic disease and > dysfuction by looking at patterns in the iris "tissue".  Hogwash.  The > iris does not "map" anything in the body. > It is not high-tech medical science or hocus pocus iridology that allows > us to help people with signs and symptoms of dis-ease.  It’s called > observation of known causes and effectors of human physiologic systems. > Not some guy’s drawings of iris patterns a half a century ago. > –Larry > — > Larry Bickford, OD > Doctor of Optometry, Family Practice Eye Health and Vision Care > The EyeCare Connection > http://www.EyeCareContacts.com > Please note: Addresses are munged using the .invalid protocol to reduce spam. > Help fight spam! Report spam to SpamCop  http://www.spamcop.net

Response: