"Neurolink" therapy - has anyone used this?
Sue Bilstein
A friend yesterday recommended this to me, as something that might
help with my husband's health problems. He said that it had fixed his
wife's asthma and back pain, and had also cured his own post-viral
fatigue syndrome problems.
When I look at the website, it just screams "QUACK ALERT" to me:
http://www.neurolink.co.nz/about_us/about_us.asp?id=2
Has anybody on the group used Neurolink? Any comments?
Tarla
Osteopath...Quack quack quack.
--
Tarla
****
What did the Buddhist say to the hot dog vendor?
Make me one with everything.
A L P
A L P
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
<sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
Yes. I'd be very wary.
"Wellness programmes, pain management etc is rather new in NZ outside
of what little is available in the public hospital system so don't be
surprised to see more of these companies pop up.
What twigged me was a 28 hour training programme they offer for
physcians!
Not necessary for medical records. x-rays etc.
When people are desperate, they are willing to try anything.
Example: I was under a multi partnership team which included a
neurologist in California.
There was not one public or private in Christchurch.
After he had taken all my medical records to read, the next visit, it
was interesting talking to the doctor at the Burwood Pain Clinic about
the lack of procedures etc available in NZ v the treatments etc I had
undergone.
I can see why people in Chc would look to alternatives in the hope of
relief.
Is there a Pain Clinic attached to your local public hospital?
Have you tried accupuncture with or without using chinese herbal
medicines; Fieldenkrause [spg]?
Cath
Sue Bilstein
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:16:35 +1300, Sue Bilstein
><sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>>
>>When I look at the website, it just screams "QUACK ALERT" to me:
>>
>>http://www.neurolink.co.nz/about_us/about_us.asp?id=2
>>
>>Has anybody on the group used Neurolink? Any comments?
>
>Yes. I'd be very wary.
>
>"Wellness programmes, pain management etc is rather new in NZ outside
>of what little is available in the public hospital system so don't be
>surprised to see more of these companies pop up.
>
>What twigged me was a 28 hour training programme they offer for
>physcians!
>Not necessary for medical records. x-rays etc.
>
>When people are desperate, they are willing to try anything.
Well, we're desperate, but I couldn't see getting Skip to agree to try
something like this - his quack alert is even more sensitive than
mine.
>Example: I was under a multi partnership team which included a
>neurologist in California.
>There was not one public or private in Christchurch.
>After he had taken all my medical records to read, the next visit, it
>was interesting talking to the doctor at the Burwood Pain Clinic about
>the lack of procedures etc available in NZ v the treatments etc I had
>undergone.
>
>I can see why people in Chc would look to alternatives in the hope of
>relief.
>Is there a Pain Clinic attached to your local public hospital?
I don't know. Skip doesn't have fibromyalgia. Chronic fatigue
syndrome sounds something like what he experiences. It's like having
the flu plus hayfever 365 days a year.
>
>Have you tried accupuncture with or without using chinese herbal
>medicines; Fieldenkrause [spg]?
No. He is very sceptical of this sort of thing.
We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
out what causes these problems.
Ray Greene
wrote:
>A friend yesterday recommended this to me, as something that might
I've been using it for a couple of years now. I would recommend it very
highly indeed. I had back pain for many years and I had tried every type of
therapy I could find but nothing had any effect. The only other thing my
doctor could suggest was spinal fusion.
On my first Neurolink treatment I was told that one hip was twisted forward.
When the session was over my back was completely free of pain and stiffness
and it hadn't caused me any problems since. That was about 2 years ago.
It has also fixed stomach upsets, headaches and insomnia.
That may sound a bit over the top but it's true. I've also found it very good
for a general tuneup after long hard periods of work when I've been feeling
rundown.
It's nothing like osteopathy or any other therapy I've ever tried. People may
put it down as quackery but I would strongly suggest you give it a try. I've
found the results to be quite dramatic so you should soon see whether it's
working for you. Just remember to follow their advice on resting afterwards.
It's VERY important.
I have been treated by Lucy Giles and Dave Wheeler in Christchurch and they
are very good. Dave does a lot of work on animals, mostly horses. He is
getting work from race horse trainers here and in Australia because of the
good results.
People suggest that this sort of treatment is all in the mind etc, but I've
never found horses to be that gullible...
I'm certainly not imagining my lack of back pain, my ability to get a full
nights sleep or the absence of diarrhoea. Or if I am I must look a real mess
by now :-)
Ray Greene.
Ray Greene
wrote:
<snip>
>No. He is very sceptical of this sort of thing.
>
>We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
>out what causes these problems.
Don't believe that your doctor knows everything. If she has given up then
find another doctor. It can take a long time to find one who has the answer
to a particular ailment. The problem is that too many people assume that any
doctor knows as much as every other doctor, and that they all know
everything.
It is good to look at alternatives too. Many people are happy to spend
thousands on doctors with nothing to show for it but are shocked at the
thought of spending a few dollars on an alternative treatment in case it
doesn't work.
If your husband is too sceptical to try alternative treatment then he is
shutting himself off from a huge range of knowledge that may well be able to
help him. The cure may not be the first thing he tries but if the alternative
is giving up and spending the rest of his life suffering, then surely it's
better to keep looking?
Ray Greene.
Sue Bilstein
>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:16:35 +1300, Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com>
>wrote:
>
>>A friend yesterday recommended this to me, as something that might
>>help with my husband's health problems. He said that it had fixed his
>>wife's asthma and back pain, and had also cured his own post-viral
>>fatigue syndrome problems.
>>
>>When I look at the website, it just screams "QUACK ALERT" to me:
>>
>>http://www.neurolink.co.nz/about_us/about_us.asp?id=2
>>
>>Has anybody on the group used Neurolink? Any comments?
>
>I've been using it for a couple of years now. I would recommend it very
>highly indeed. I had back pain for many years and I had tried every type of
>therapy I could find but nothing had any effect. The only other thing my
>doctor could suggest was spinal fusion.
>
>
>I'm certainly not imagining my lack of back pain, my ability to get a full
>nights sleep or the absence of diarrhoea. Or if I am I must look a real mess
>by now :-)
Thanks for this, Ray. It may be worth a try, if I can get my husband
to give it a go. I was certainly impressed that it had helped my
friend with a similar problem.
Sue Bilstein
>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:02:08 +1300, Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
>>out what causes these problems.
>
>Don't believe that your doctor knows everything. If she has given up then
>find another doctor. It can take a long time to find one who has the answer
>to a particular ailment. The problem is that too many people assume that any
>doctor knows as much as every other doctor, and that they all know
>everything.
Not us - we know that most of the ones we've encountered (in Auckland
anyway) are pretty much useless, able to diagnose a broken leg if the
bone is sticking out.
Our current doctor is a real one for a change; she works away at a
problem and she has been quite helpful.
>
>It is good to look at alternatives too. Many people are happy to spend
>thousands on doctors with nothing to show for it but are shocked at the
>thought of spending a few dollars on an alternative treatment in case it
>doesn't work.
If you don't mind me asking, how much is an initial consultation for
the Neurolink thing? Do you have to do repeated treatments?
>
>If your husband is too sceptical to try alternative treatment then he is
>shutting himself off from a huge range of knowledge that may well be able to
>help him. The cure may not be the first thing he tries but if the alternative
>is giving up and spending the rest of his life suffering, then surely it's
>better to keep looking?
Maybe, but a) he's a sceptic and b) he's that exhausted all the time
that it's hard for him to decide on any course of action.
Ray Greene
wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:56:21 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:02:08 +1300, Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>No. He is very sceptical of this sort of thing.
>>>
>>>We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
>>>out what causes these problems.
>>
>>Don't believe that your doctor knows everything. If she has given up then
>>find another doctor. It can take a long time to find one who has the answer
>>to a particular ailment. The problem is that too many people assume that any
>>doctor knows as much as every other doctor, and that they all know
>>everything.
>
>Not us - we know that most of the ones we've encountered (in Auckland
>anyway) are pretty much useless, able to diagnose a broken leg if the
>bone is sticking out.
>
>Our current doctor is a real one for a change; she works away at a
>problem and she has been quite helpful.
That's great, they're hard to find. Still, if she's reached her limits then
it may be time to look for someone else. Like I said, nobody knows
everything.
>>It is good to look at alternatives too. Many people are happy to spend
>>thousands on doctors with nothing to show for it but are shocked at the
>>thought of spending a few dollars on an alternative treatment in case it
>>doesn't work.
>
>If you don't mind me asking, how much is an initial consultation for
>the Neurolink thing? Do you have to do repeated treatments?
Dave and Lucy charge $50 for a treatment that lasts from 1/2 hr to 1 hr,
depending on how many problems they find. Some things require repeat
treatments, others not. For a serious problem like your husband has I would
imagine it would take repeat treatments, but going on my own experience I
would expect him to notice some benefits after the first one or two sessions.
BTW, they may offer an explanation for a problem that is different from that
given by your doctor. Some people find that hard to accept and even get angry
(I'm not quite sure why). I just keep an open mind and tend to take the word
of whoever fixes my problem :-)
>>If your husband is too sceptical to try alternative treatment then he is
>>shutting himself off from a huge range of knowledge that may well be able to
>>help him. The cure may not be the first thing he tries but if the alternative
>>is giving up and spending the rest of his life suffering, then surely it's
>>better to keep looking?
>
>Maybe, but a) he's a sceptic and b) he's that exhausted all the time
>that it's hard for him to decide on any course of action.
Yeah, being that tired does make it hard to make decisions, but for me it's
not a hard choice. If I have a problem I'll happily try anything if there's a
chance it might help. If it doesn't then I've probably wasted less money than
I would on a good night on the town. There are quacks out there for sure, but
if you don't try you'll never find out which ones aren't, just like with
doctors.
My rule is just to avoid people who dress like hippies, and avoid anything
with the word "rainbow" in the name :-)
Ray Greene.
Tarla
I read recently that medical studies have shown that accupuncture
actually works better than conventional medicine for some forms of
pain. Medical doctors are coming around to it slowly but surely. I've
never tried it myself, but I'm not opposed to it in any way. My
friend, Bev, is in the first stage of Multiple Sclerosis, that is, she
has one sclera on her spine, and if she gets more, then she's in
trouble. She uses a combination of medical doctors and chinese herbs
and accupuncture. So far, she's been able to keep it at bay for about
8 years.
xlo
And do you think it would work if you had cancer?
The Neurolink website promotes the idea that it's effective for cancer.
They show photos of tumours shrinking. That is in the "research"
section of their website. It smacks of dangerous, dirty, and greedy
quackery to me.
Why not get a Medicalert bracelet - with a hotline number to Dr Allan
Phillips at Neurolink? If he can perform such miracles, then in the
case of an emergency wouldn't you be far better off with him than a doctor?
Ray Greene
>And do you think it would work if you had cancer?
I only know of one person with cancer who is having Neurolink treatment. He
is having it alongside conventional treatment. He says it is very good for
relieving pain and generally making him feel better, especially after
chemotherapy. That's all I know about that area of treatment.
>The Neurolink website promotes the idea that it's effective for cancer.
>They show photos of tumours shrinking. That is in the "research"
>section of their website. It smacks of dangerous, dirty, and greedy
>quackery to me.
Do you know that it's not true? Have you tried to find out? Are you just
jumping to a conclusion?
>Why not get a Medicalert bracelet - with a hotline number to Dr Allan
>Phillips at Neurolink? If he can perform such miracles, then in the
>case of an emergency wouldn't you be far better off with him than a doctor?
Why would I need a MedicAlert bracelet?
I don't know Dr Allan Phillips, nor do I know anyone who can do miracles. In
emergencies I'm quite happy to be treated by emergency medical staff.
I'm not against conventional medicine, I just realise its limitations and the
alternatives and I go with whatever works for me. That often makes people
angry, though I've never worked out why. Doctors I've spoken to generally
seem happy enough with my approach.
Regarding cancer treatment, let me tell you about a case. A few years ago my
father went to his GP about a persistent cough. The doctor treated him for
flu, which was a reasonable assumption at the time. Six months later he still
had the cough and the doctor was still giving him flu medicine.
Dad was a heavy smoker with a family and personal history of serious lung
disease, but all he got was antibiotics. When he finally happened to see a
locum, the guy shipped him off to hospital the same day for Xrays. Sure
enough it was lung cancer.
He had part of his lung removed and had radiation therapy etc and had a lot
of pain which the oncologist said was due to the ribs they had to break to
get to his lungs. He was on morphine and suffering badly. He also had
breathing difficulties and was told it was because part of his lung was gone
and the rest was not working so well because of old age etc.
When he went back for a checkup to see if the cancer had all been removed,
the oncologist said it was gone and he was OK and on the mend. A few weeks
later he got worse and died. His lungs were riddled with cancer.
If you like I can get you the names and phone numbers of his GP and
oncologist. You can put them on your MedicAlert bracelet.
--
Ray Greene
xlo
this relates to the conclusions that you have formed about the relative
merits of conventional and alternative therapies.
I do not dispute the criticism that you have of the GP.
However, the apparent failure of a "system" that is evidence based does
not result in a higher probability that an alternative "system" has merit.
That the alternative system is not evidence based, draws attention to
the primary difference between "conventional" and "alternative"
medicine. Once (or should I say "if") something like "Neurolink" had
evidence to show that it worked, then it would be conventional not
alternative.
Kerry
wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:49 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>
> >And do you think it would work if you had cancer?
>
> I only know of one person with cancer who is having Neurolink treatment. He
> is having it alongside conventional treatment. He says it is very good for
> relieving pain and generally making him feel better, especially after
> chemotherapy. That's all I know about that area of treatment.
>
> >The Neurolink website promotes the idea that it's effective for cancer.
> >They show photos of tumours shrinking. That is in the "research"
> >section of their website. It smacks of dangerous, dirty, and greedy
> >quackery to me.
>
> Do you know that it's not true? Have you tried to find out? Are you just
> jumping to a conclusion?
Aha the classic "prove a negative"
For any kind of hypothesis to have any validity at all it has to have a
hysiological physic al conceivable mechanism of action
Do post me the hypothetical physiological and physic al mechanism of
action for Neurolink to shrink tumours and positively affect cancers.
Then post me the randomised controlled trials that support this
Thanks
Nomad Damon
has anyone used this?, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:49 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>
>>And do you think it would work if you had cancer?
>
>I only know of one person with cancer who is having Neurolink treatment. He
>is having it alongside conventional treatment. He says it is very good for
>relieving pain and generally making him feel better, especially after
>chemotherapy. That's all I know about that area of treatment.
>
>>The Neurolink website promotes the idea that it's effective for cancer.
>>They show photos of tumours shrinking. That is in the "research"
>>section of their website. It smacks of dangerous, dirty, and greedy
>>quackery to me.
>
>Do you know that it's not true?
That they can cure cancer?
>Have you tried to find out?
Medical science would be beating a path to his door, statues
would be being erected in his honour, he would feted by every
prominent person in the world, symphonies would be composed in
his honour, children would be named after him, countries even,
need I go on?
>Are you just jumping to a conclusion?
A perfectly justified conclusion: that he is a quack who trades
on the last pathetic hopes of dying people to his monetary
benefit.
OF COURSE HE CAN'T CURE CANCER OR EVEN SHRINK TUMOURS!!!!
You need a reality course or at least a vigorous rogering with a
glass studded, razor wire wrapped clue bat.
Ray Greene
>I do not dispute the criticism that you have of the GP.
>
>However, the apparent failure of a "system" that is evidence based does
>not result in a higher probability that an alternative "system" has merit.
Did someone suggest that it did?
>That the alternative system is not evidence based, draws attention to
>the primary difference between "conventional" and "alternative"
>medicine. Once (or should I say "if") something like "Neurolink" had
>evidence to show that it worked, then it would be conventional not
>alternative.
Yes indeed. However I'm not particularly interested in how Neurolink is
labelled, only in whether it works for me.
I have no experience of Neurolink's effect on cancer. I have tried it for
lesser problems and it has worked very well, far better than conventional
medicine did. This is all the evidence I need to convince me that it has
definite merit. I haven't instructed anyone to use Neurolink, I just shared
my entirely positive experience of it.
--
Ray Greene.
grimly bubble
"Nomad Damon" <no...@damon.no.mad> wrote in message
news:06q9s0leapvtcudgt...@4ax.com...
Wow, that is cruel and unusual punishment especially coming from the pen of
a follower of Christ..!??>
Ray Greene
>In article <cq2gej$k59$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz>
>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:49 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>>
>> >And do you think it would work if you had cancer?
>>
>> I only know of one person with cancer who is having Neurolink treatment. He
>> is having it alongside conventional treatment. He says it is very good for
>> relieving pain and generally making him feel better, especially after
>> chemotherapy. That's all I know about that area of treatment.
>>
>> >The Neurolink website promotes the idea that it's effective for cancer.
>> >They show photos of tumours shrinking. That is in the "research"
>> >section of their website. It smacks of dangerous, dirty, and greedy
>> >quackery to me.
>>
>> Do you know that it's not true? Have you tried to find out? Are you just
>> jumping to a conclusion?
>
>Aha the classic "prove a negative"
Not at all, I never asked him to prove anything. I just asked whether he had
gone to the trouble of even asking them for evidence before he attacked them.
>For any kind of hypothesis to have any validity at all it has to have a
>hysiological physic al conceivable mechanism of action
>
>Do post me the hypothetical physiological and physic al mechanism of
>action for Neurolink to shrink tumours and positively affect cancers.
>
>Then post me the randomised controlled trials that support this
You seem to be confusing me for the guy who started Neurolink. I don't know
whether they have done trials or not, nor have I inferred they might have. I
was just irritated by xlo's assumption that since they claim to be able to
treat cancer they are therefore dangerous, dirty greedy quacks. In my
experience they are not.
--
Ray Greene.
xlo
Don't know if you have any friends in the medical supply business, but
if so, you might want to let them know that Dr Phillips is using the
"Neurolink" trade mark, as registered to Guidant Corporation of USA for
their FDA approved stent system. They might want to sue his arse, even
if Medsafe in NZ are too busy to address his fraudulent claims.
Ray Greene
>On , , Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:02:35 +1300, Re: "Neurolink" therapy -
>has anyone used this?, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 11:28:49 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>>
>>>And do you think it would work if you had cancer?
>>
>>I only know of one person with cancer who is having Neurolink treatment. He
>>is having it alongside conventional treatment. He says it is very good for
>>relieving pain and generally making him feel better, especially after
>>chemotherapy. That's all I know about that area of treatment.
>>
>>>The Neurolink website promotes the idea that it's effective for cancer.
>>>They show photos of tumours shrinking. That is in the "research"
>>>section of their website. It smacks of dangerous, dirty, and greedy
>>>quackery to me.
>>
>>Do you know that it's not true?
>
>That they can cure cancer?
Yes.
>>Have you tried to find out?
>
>Medical science would be beating a path to his door, statues
>would be being erected in his honour, he would feted by every
>prominent person in the world, symphonies would be composed in
>his honour, children would be named after him, countries even,
>need I go on?
Of course, just like they did for the guy who invented chemotherapy. What was
his name again, I think there was a symphony named after him...?
Is your evidence that it doesn't work solely that he isn't incredibly famous?
I saw a better mousetrap once. Strangely enough nobody had beaten a path to
the door of the guy who invented it.
>>Are you just jumping to a conclusion?
>
>A perfectly justified conclusion: that he is a quack who trades
>on the last pathetic hopes of dying people to his monetary
>benefit.
>OF COURSE HE CAN'T CURE CANCER OR EVEN SHRINK TUMOURS!!!!
>You need a reality course or at least a vigorous rogering with a
>glass studded, razor wire wrapped clue bat.
Ooh ooh, I choose the vigorous rogering!!!
It would have to be less painful than a 'reality' course from someone who
can't even comprehend simple English. I never claimed that Neurolink could
cure cancer, or that I believed it could. I made that quite clear. I was
simply questioning xlo's assumption that it couldn't.
--
Ray Greene
xlo
Anyone that claims to be able to effectively treat cancer, with no
evidence to support that claim, and is charging for the service, is a
dangerous, dirty, greedy quack.
Open your eyes Ray.
Ray Greene
wrote:
>"Nomad Damon" <no...@damon.no.mad> wrote in message
>news:06q9s0leapvtcudgt...@4ax.com...
>> OF COURSE HE CAN'T CURE CANCER OR EVEN SHRINK TUMOURS!!!!
>> You need a reality course or at least a vigorous rogering with a
>> glass studded, razor wire wrapped clue bat.
>
>Wow, that is cruel and unusual punishment especially coming from the pen of
>a follower of Christ..!??>
Well, cruel at least... :-)
--
Ray Greene
Ray Greene
>Anyone that claims to be able to effectively treat cancer, with no
>evidence to support that claim, and is charging for the service, is a
>dangerous, dirty, greedy quack.
>Open your eyes Ray.
They cured me, in one treatment, of a serious back problem that the medical
profession couldn't fix after 25 years of trying. That's a damned interesting
form of quackery.
--
Ray Greene.
Kerry
wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:41:21 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
That's interesting Ray, and I am very pleased for you
But muskuloskeletal therapies are an entirely different matter to cancer
therapies. It had an effect and you like them.
Because they "cured" your back after 25 years it does not necessarily
follow that they have the 'cure' for cancer. There is no known
mechanism for musckuloskeletal therapies to do this at all, even if you
like the people doing it
Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out
Ray Greene
Hehe, don't worry about that. My mind is open just wide enough to try things
for myself, and to not believe that just because something could possibly be
a fraud then it must be a fraud.
Yes I do like them, but I like my GP as well. I don't believe any of them can
do miracles, and for any particular problem I'll use whichever one gives me
the best results.
I never claimed that they can cure cancer, or even that I believe they can.
Interestingly though the technique they use is the same for any illness, and
it's nothing like chiropractic, osteopathy etc. I have no idea whether or not
it is effective against cancer.
I certainly wouldn't suggest that people use Neurolink, or anything else for
that matter, exclusively to treat cancer, but if I had cancer I would
definitely use it in conjunction with whatever other treatment I decided to
use. It can't do any harm and at the very least it is very effective for pain
and general stress.
--
Ray Greene.
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
<sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>
>A friend yesterday recommended this to me, as something that might
>help with my husband's health problems. He said that it had fixed his
>wife's asthma and back pain, and had also cured his own post-viral
>fatigue syndrome problems.
>
>When I look at the website, it just screams "QUACK ALERT" to me:
>
>http://www.neurolink.co.nz/about_us/about_us.asp?id=2
>
>Has anybody on the group used Neurolink? Any comments?
I've just had a quick look at
www.quackwatch.org and one is to be posted re neurolink under 'index
of questionable treatments'.
Also found this
Neurolink is the research of Dr Allan K Phillips, an Osteopathic
Physician, from New Zealand. He has been assisting in providing better
health to patients for 26 years. Neurolink, itself, represents well
over 10 years of research. Dr Phillips' research initially began in
the area of neurological disorganisation and learning difficulties.
More recently he has been consulting to the United Nations, which
includes assessing the application of the Neurolink protocol to
research and screening programs, such as cervical cancer and
hepatitis.
full text at: www.themessenger.info/Jan2002/LisBaird.html
Scary that above statements are being made without IMHO, concrete
evidence.
Cath
A L P
something else ....?
A L P
Tarla
Then, either your back pain was mental, or that's a miracle, because
this is bullshit of the first order.
--
Tarla
****
"Our country reeks of trees, our yaks are really large
and they smell of rotting beef carcasses.."
**The Anthem of the Royal Canadian Kilted Yak Herdsmen.
Tarla
wrote:
>In article <cq2tp2$k59$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz>
You're being far too kind, Kerry. The guy that developed this is an
osteopath...PLEASE.
Sue Bilstein
wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:50:02 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:41:21 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Anyone that claims to be able to effectively treat cancer, with no
>>>evidence to support that claim, and is charging for the service, is a
>>>dangerous, dirty, greedy quack.
>>>Open your eyes Ray.
>>
>>They cured me, in one treatment, of a serious back problem that the medical
>>profession couldn't fix after 25 years of trying. That's a damned interesting
>>form of quackery.
>
>
>Then, either your back pain was mental, or that's a miracle, because
>this is bullshit of the first order.
Lithium therapy for mania - "You mean it had a calming effect on your
hamsters? Puh-leeze ...."
Sue Bilstein
<sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:14:58 +1300, Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz>
>wrote:
>>
>>this is bullshit of the first order.
>
>Lithium therapy for mania - "You mean it had a calming effect on your
>hamsters? Puh-leeze ...."
I should expand on this, as it will only make sense to those who know
how it was discovered that lithium works as a mood stabiliser - see
quote below.
Some forty years after lithium therapy came into use, it is still not
known exactly how it works.
http://ps.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/53/9/1182
In 1949, Dr. John Cade, an Australian psychiatrist, thought that mania
might be caused by imbalances in protein metabolism. Cade knew that
such a process could be evaluated by studying uric acid and urea
(breakdown products of proteins) obtained from the urine of patients
with mania. Cade's experimental method was to inject these compounds
into guinea pigs, but he had a problem: "Since the compounds are not
soluble in water, they had to be conjugated to an element such as
lithium prior to injection." Incredibly, he found that "lithium
urate預nd later, lithium carbonate用roduced a calming effect in the
guinea pigs."
Nomad Damon
I'm just bloody tired of people making money from the misery of
others.
BTW, I never claimed to be perfect.
>
Ray Greene
Something else I guess. It involves light touching, poking and tapping, that
sort of thing. It's very gentle, too much so to be any form of manipulation
or massage. They did explain how it worked but I was relaxing too hard to
take it in :-)
You keep your clothes on and it's mostly done lying down.
Ray Greene.
Max Ambient
nz.general<veh7s0pok3h53mskp...@4ax.com>:
: >Have you tried accupuncture with or without using chinese herbal
: >medicines; Fieldenkrause [spg]?
:
: No. He is very sceptical of this sort of thing.
:
: We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
: out what causes these problems.
Acupuncture was the thing that finally started quelling a chronic pain
problem in an OOS damaged shoulder for me, with renewed and expert physio
followup making further improvement. It eluded several doctors and a shoulder
specialist, although the "capsulitis" was noted. Cortisone injection had
merely caused more agony. Previous physio had suggested accupuncture.
It was an interesting experience in itself, and that it worked, a bonus!
There's a very rigid mindset ... in some practioners of Western medicine.
Don't be afraid to try new things, at least when they are non-invasive ...
Of course, acupuncture *is* *slightly* invasive, but I hope you KWIM!
--
"I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out"
Ray Greene
>On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:50:02 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>They cured me, in one treatment, of a serious back problem that the medical
>>profession couldn't fix after 25 years of trying. That's a damned interesting
>>form of quackery.
>
>Then, either your back pain was mental, or that's a miracle, because
>this is bullshit of the first order.
Mental back pain? Hehe I love that :-) What's the medical term for that
condition? Hey, maybe I had mental diarrhoea as well!
Oh shit, I think I'm going to regret that last remark...
It could have been a miracle I suppose. You're not the first one in this
thread to suggest that, but I'm a bit sceptical of miracles myself. Anway, if
that was it then they're awfully consistent with their miracles.
Dave has good results with horses too. That could be a miracle too I guess.
Hey, maybe the horses are all mental as well!
Whatever it is, it sure isn't bullshit. And unlike everyone else in this
thread, I'm speaking from experience.
--
Ray Greene
xlo
So you completely deny the possibility that it is bullshit, and the
relief from the symptoms that you claim to have experienced were either
the placebo effect result of your belief in bullshit, or a coincidence
that the improvement of your symptoms seemed to be related to the
treatment that you had.
The placebo effect is a real phenomenon. The fact that no treatment can
sometimes be better than ineffective treatments is what the nonsense
called homeopathy is based on.
Glad you're feeling better - but I don't believe your explanation.
xlo
> Max Ambient says
>
>>Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> in
>>nz.general<veh7s0pok3h53mskp...@4ax.com>:
>>
>>: >Have you tried accupuncture with or without using chinese herbal
>>: >medicines; Fieldenkrause [spg]?
>>:
>>: No. He is very sceptical of this sort of thing.
>>:
>>: We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
>>: out what causes these problems.
>>
>>Acupuncture was the thing that finally started quelling a chronic pain
>>problem in an OOS damaged shoulder for me, with renewed and expert physio
>>followup making further improvement. It eluded several doctors and a shoulder
>>specialist, although the "capsulitis" was noted. Cortisone injection had
>>merely caused more agony. Previous physio had suggested accupuncture.
>
>
>
> Psychosymatic I'll bet....
>
I agree. I have seen video footage of an operation conducted in PR
China. A woman had a thyroid tumour removed with acupuncture as the
only anaesthetic. Once the final stitches were tied off, she got up and
walked out of the theatre. This was during Mao's time, so the truth may
be that the decadent luxury of lying down for half an hour may have been
worth the pain of having your throat carefully slit with sharp objects.
As incredible as this was to see, the point is that accupuncture was
only used as the anaesthetic - not to treat the tumour. They needed
conventional medical treatment to fix the real problem. Mind over
matter seems to have it's limits - mind over mind might be a better way
of explaining it.
Kerry
wrote:
What will happen to me in a Neurolink session?
A Neurolink practitioner looks at your body in a different way than most
practitioners.
We work on the premise that your brain (not your mind) infinitely knows
EXACTLY what YOUR body needs - to be completely well. A Neurolink
practitioner 'taps' in to that information.
We look at whether the brain understands and is controlling your body's
systems - that is your muscles, tendons, glands, organs etc. We view
your body as a highly integrated set of 'circuits'. When all the
'circuits' are intact, the brain has control over our bodies, ensuring
optimum wellness. That is - our food breaks down fully and is absorbed
properly, our structures are in correct alignment, inflammation and pain
are quickly suppressed, antigens are eliminated rapidly and healing is
quick.
However......circuits can break, due to excessive physical, emotional,
chemical or pathogenic stresses. Then the brain is no longer able to
control the problem. The body loses it's optimum state and that's when
the symptoms we feel, start to show.
The aim of a Neurolink session is to find out which circuits are no
longer intact and re-establish (reconnect if you like) the brains
control over them.
The first time you visit a Neurolink practitioner they will review your
medical history and current complaint/s. Neurolink is very gentle and
does not involve any adjusting, manipulating or stressing of your body.
That is why patients of all ages can benefit.
As a patient you will lie on a medical treatment bed face up or face
down, fully dressed.
The practitioner will hold different points on your body to activate
different 'circuits'. Some of these points will be obvious. Some may
not be so obvious to you. To determine if the various circuits are
intact or not, the practitioner will use a muscle test (ie holding an
arm strong) as an indicator. The muscle test could be thought of as the
practitioner's way of 'talking' to the brain. If the circuit is broken,
the muscle will lose strength, and the patient will be unable to resist
against the practitioner's pressure.
In most cases, to correct the problem, the practitioner will make
contact with points on the body. The patient may also be asked to hold
certain points him/herself. The practitioner will tap a certain place
on the cranium - which is the integration message centre to the brain.
The practitioner will check through various circuits correcting as
necessary for the individual, based on the information that is fed back
from the brain.
Remember....with a Neurolink treatment, it is tailor-made for you. The
practitioner can only correct circuits your brain says need correcting.
And.....your brain doesn't lie.
The time frame for a Neurolink treatment can vary, and depending on the
length of your visit, can be spread out over sequential visits. Either
way, your practitioner will only spend the time needed to take your body
through all the sequential steps of the Neurolink system. (Please
consult with him or her.)
How is Neurolink Different to other Healthcare modalities?
? Neurolink consults the infinite wisdom of the brain to determine
the patients individual needs. Other modalities act upon only
symptomatic evidence or are only consulting the body.
? Neurolink uses the brain as the most accurate diagnostic tool.
Other modalities rely on what the physician thinks is needed to correct
the patient.
? Neurolink corrects the underlying causes of the patient's
complaint. Other modalities treat the symptom only.
? Neurolink is a complete system. Other modalities are techniques.
Neurolink looks at how all body systems work with eadh other to achieve
optimum function. Other modalities look only at certain areas of body
function.
? Neurolink believes your brain is the best and most competent
medical specialist you will ever have, not the practitioner themselves.
? A Neurolink practitioner is only a facilitator between the brain
(not the mind) and the body. Other modalities actually do 'something'
to the patient. ie: surgery, manipulation, drugs/supplements, needles
(acupuncture), massage.
Heres an example:
A blood test may reflect evidence that a patient has Hepatitis B. While
limited treatment approaches are made to reduce/minimize the symptoms,
no correction or investigation is made to understand why the immune
system has failed to recognize and deploy a counter attack on these
antigens. Again...the symptom has been recognized, and masked by man's
knowledge and understanding.
The CAUSE, and ineffectiveness of the immune system has NEVER been
considered. This forms the premise and key difference of the Neurolink
system, where the vital link of communication to establish etiological
(causal) data can be sourced and acted upon by the brain.
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
<sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>
>A friend yesterday recommended this to me, as something that might
>help with my husband's health problems. He said that it had fixed his
>wife's asthma and back pain, and had also cured his own post-viral
>fatigue syndrome problems.
>
>When I look at the website, it just screams "QUACK ALERT" to me:
>
>http://www.neurolink.co.nz/about_us/about_us.asp?id=2
>
>Has anybody on the group used Neurolink? Any comments?
Sue,
Has your hubby tried:
H-Wave or Tens ?
Cath
Ray Greene
>So you completely deny the possibility that it is bullshit, and the
>relief from the symptoms that you claim to have experienced were either
>the placebo effect result of your belief in bullshit, or a coincidence
>that the improvement of your symptoms seemed to be related to the
>treatment that you had.
Woohoo, you really crack me up xlo :-) 25 years of back pain spontaneously
and permanently ceased PURELY BY COINCIDENCE during the half hour or so that
I was having my treatment.
Man, I just love the incredible explanations that sceptics use to try to
explain things. They're way crazier than anything they are trying to debunk.
If my belief in bullshit was so strong, why didn't any of the other
alternative treatments I have tried over the years, along with all the
conventional ones, have any effect? Maybe I just had a coincidental
spontaneous burst of faith without realising it.
Hey I know what it was! I am probably so mental and prone to believing in
bullshit that I only thought that I was thinking "Gee, I wonder if this will
work at all..." when in actual fact I was really thinking "YIPPEE, THIS IS
IT, THIS IS THE ONE, IT'S GONNA BE A MIRACLE CURE THIS TIME HALLELUJAH PRAISE
THE LORD!!!". But I just didn't realise it.
Yeah, that's the most likely explanation.
>The placebo effect is a real phenomenon. The fact that no treatment can
>sometimes be better than ineffective treatments is what the nonsense
>called homeopathy is based on.
You know, it's amazing just how quickly no treatment can have an effect. I
have seen screaming panicky little kids calm down in seconds when their
mother has eventually managed to get a drop of rescue remedy on their tongue.
I've even seen it work on cats.
Mind you, everyone knows that cats are pretty damned gullible.
>Glad you're feeling better -
Thanks mate.
>but I don't believe your explanation.
And I can't believe you're really serious.
I guess I'm just a natural sceptic :--)
--
Ray Greene
Max Ambient
nz.general<32nak0F...@individual.net>:
: Max Ambient says
: > Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> in
: > nz.general<veh7s0pok3h53mskp...@4ax.com>:
: >
: > : >Have you tried accupuncture with or without using chinese herbal
: > : >medicines; Fieldenkrause [spg]?
: > :
: > : No. He is very sceptical of this sort of thing.
: > :
: > : We have quite a good GP, but I believe she has given up trying to find
: > : out what causes these problems.
: >
: > Acupuncture was the thing that finally started quelling a chronic pain
: > problem in an OOS damaged shoulder for me, with renewed and expert physio
: > followup making further improvement. It eluded several doctors and a shoulder
: > specialist, although the "capsulitis" was noted. Cortisone injection had
: > merely caused more agony. Previous physio had suggested accupuncture.
:
:
: Psychosymatic I'll bet....
That's what all you boss types said to the workers, eh ...
Your primitive Marxist leftist education is showing ...
Ignorance remains ignorance.
Stay stuck, somnambulist ...
xlo
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:53:36 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>
>
>>So you completely deny the possibility that it is bullshit, and the
>>relief from the symptoms that you claim to have experienced were either
>>the placebo effect result of your belief in bullshit, or a coincidence
>>that the improvement of your symptoms seemed to be related to the
>>treatment that you had.
>
>
> Woohoo, you really crack me up xlo :-) 25 years of back pain spontaneously
> and permanently ceased PURELY BY COINCIDENCE during the half hour or so that
> I was having my treatment.
>
> Man, I just love the incredible explanations that sceptics use to try to
> explain things. They're way crazier than anything they are trying to debunk.
>
> If my belief in bullshit was so strong, why didn't any of the other
> alternative treatments I have tried over the years, along with all the
> conventional ones, have any effect? Maybe I just had a coincidental
> spontaneous burst of faith without realising it.
mightn't have worked. That is why Neurolink use so much
pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo in their marketing.
> Hey I know what it was! I am probably so mental and prone to believing in
> bullshit that I only thought that I was thinking "Gee, I wonder if this will
> work at all..." when in actual fact I was really thinking "YIPPEE, THIS IS
> IT, THIS IS THE ONE, IT'S GONNA BE A MIRACLE CURE THIS TIME HALLELUJAH PRAISE
> THE LORD!!!". But I just didn't realise it.
>
> Yeah, that's the most likely explanation.
>
responded to suggestion, or that you just got better by coincidence.
Both of these possibilities are more based on well accepted principles.
Neurolink is based on incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo and lies.
>
>>The placebo effect is a real phenomenon. The fact that no treatment can
>>sometimes be better than ineffective treatments is what the nonsense
>>called homeopathy is based on.
>
>
> You know, it's amazing just how quickly no treatment can have an effect. I
> have seen screaming panicky little kids calm down in seconds when their
> mother has eventually managed to get a drop of rescue remedy on their tongue.
> I've even seen it work on cats.
>
> Mind you, everyone knows that cats are pretty damned gullible.
>
to tell me that homeopathic treatments work on cats are you?
Sue Bilstein
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com wrote:
>
>Sue,
>Has your hubby tried:
>H-Wave or Tens ?
I never heard of those, Cath.
Ray Greene
>Ray Greene wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:53:36 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>So you completely deny the possibility that it is bullshit, and the
>>>relief from the symptoms that you claim to have experienced were either
>>>the placebo effect result of your belief in bullshit, or a coincidence
>>>that the improvement of your symptoms seemed to be related to the
>>>treatment that you had.
>>
>>
>> Woohoo, you really crack me up xlo :-) 25 years of back pain spontaneously
>> and permanently ceased PURELY BY COINCIDENCE during the half hour or so that
>> I was having my treatment.
>>
>> Man, I just love the incredible explanations that sceptics use to try to
>> explain things. They're way crazier than anything they are trying to debunk.
>>
>> If my belief in bullshit was so strong, why didn't any of the other
>> alternative treatments I have tried over the years, along with all the
>> conventional ones, have any effect? Maybe I just had a coincidental
>> spontaneous burst of faith without realising it.
>Maybe you did. If you "realised" that was what was happening, then it
>mightn't have worked.
My God xlo, I'm stunned. You're really serious aren't you?
>That is why Neurolink use so much pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo in their marketing.
Funnily enough I was referred by a friend who neglected to tell me the mumbo
jumbo. I hadn't even been to the Neurolink website. My sole pre-programming
was the opinion of a friend that they were "quite good".
>> Hey I know what it was! I am probably so mental and prone to believing in
>> bullshit that I only thought that I was thinking "Gee, I wonder if this will
>> work at all..." when in actual fact I was really thinking "YIPPEE, THIS IS
>> IT, THIS IS THE ONE, IT'S GONNA BE A MIRACLE CURE THIS TIME HALLELUJAH PRAISE
>> THE LORD!!!". But I just didn't realise it.
>>
>> Yeah, that's the most likely explanation.
>>
>No. I just think that the possibility is greater that you have
>responded to suggestion, or that you just got better by coincidence.
>Both of these possibilities are more based on well accepted principles.
>Neurolink is based on incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo and lies.
That's one hell of a coincidence, as I mentioned before. And seriously, if I
was that prone to suggestion I would have been cured many years ago.
Anyway, if I have to choose between spinal fusion and an over-active
imagination, I'll take imagination any day. It's got all of the benefits and
none of the drawbacks.
>>>The placebo effect is a real phenomenon. The fact that no treatment can
>>>sometimes be better than ineffective treatments is what the nonsense
>>>called homeopathy is based on.
>>
>>
>> You know, it's amazing just how quickly no treatment can have an effect. I
>> have seen screaming panicky little kids calm down in seconds when their
>> mother has eventually managed to get a drop of rescue remedy on their tongue.
>> I've even seen it work on cats.
>>
>> Mind you, everyone knows that cats are pretty damned gullible.
>>
>Cats and dogs are perceptive of human behaviour. FFS - you aren't going
>to tell me that homeopathic treatments work on cats are you?
No of course I'm not, that would be ridiculous (but if anyone else is reading
this, it really does, I've seen it happen. Just don't tell xlo).
Hey, I've just had a thought. We've seen in this thread how placebos and the
power of the mind can cure chronic back pain and cancer, and allow operations
without anaesthetic. I'm sure they can do all sorts of other really neat
things too.
So, why don't doctors and scientists stop messing around with dangerous drugs
and stuff and just work on making better placebos? Just imagine, you go to
the doctor with a list of complaints and he gives you a handful of sugar
pills and says "OK this one will cure your cancer, this one will stop those
strokes you keep having and that one will deal to the athletes foot". People
are so suggestible that this would actually work! And there would be no side
effects - unless the patient had read somewhere that there was some I guess.
Then they might die of imaginary complications. That could be awkward, you
would probably have to give them placebos for the non-existent side effects
too.
There would still be the same old problems though. Those goddamned quack
therapists would start making "healthy" and "natural" sugar pills from
organic brown sugar and releasing them on the public without proper field
trials and then innocent people would die from taking fake placebos. I think
the Government would have to pass a law to stop that happening.
I do believe I've just revolutionised modern medicine here people. Isn't that
cool?
Back on a serious note, if you were having chemotherapy but they gave you a
placebo instead, and you were a ridiculously suggestible type of person like
me, would your hair still fall out?
I bet xlo thinks it would :-)
--
Ray Greene
Max Ambient
nz.general<cq5vu8$50h$3...@lust.ihug.co.nz>:
: You know, it's amazing just how quickly no treatment can have an effect. I
: have seen screaming panicky little kids calm down in seconds when their
: mother has eventually managed to get a drop of rescue remedy on their tongue.
: I've even seen it work on cats.
Speaking of rescue remedy; I was once present at a situation where the adults
had finished clearing a room to a bare concrete floor for painting; all the
light fittings had been sprung out so that the wall could be cleanly painted.
A neighbour and her daughter, perhaps 10, came over to visit and chat.
The child was bored with the adult conversation;- she had perhaps never seen
light sockets sprung out from the wall before; she as quick as thought sprang
over to investigate and stuck her finger behind the socket; she got 230VAC !
On a concrete floor with bare feet! Bare finger!
We were all shocked! It had happened so fast ... really at thought-speed!
The mother of the household was a "herbalist" and had "Rescue Remedy" there.
I was amazed, knowing the expected results of a shock, and having experienced
some myself, to see the visible results within seconds/minutes for that kid!
She went from pale and visibly "shocked" to regaining colour and calmness in
seconds/minutes ... we were all entirely relieved, as you might imagine !!!
Don't knock it unless you actually have had some experience of it, I say!
Max Ambient
: The child was bored with the adult conversation;- she had perhaps never seen
: light sockets sprung out from the wall before; she as quick as thought sprang
: over to investigate and stuck her finger behind the socket; she got 230VAC !
:
: On a concrete floor with bare feet! Bare finger!
:
: We were all shocked! It had happened so fast ... really at thought-speed!
I meant light "switches", to be precise! But I tell you! She moved fast!
That could have been a fatality, and yet we had only taken a break ...
Not expecting interruptions or vistors. In fact the visitors were the break!
Otherwise, we would have carried on. That child learned about electricity!
I sincerely believe, on that experience, that "Rescue Remedy" has effect.
Make of it what you will ...
--
"It is wrong to ever split an infinitive"
Ray Greene
wrote:
It's amazing stuff all right.
I've made it part of my first aid kit, along with bandaids, duct tape, gauze,
painkillers and a large bottle of single malt antiseptic and cough mixture.
It makes for quite a compact (apart from the cough mixture) and versatile
first aid kit and one way or another takes care of pretty much any emergency.
Medical or otherwise...
I just need a bottle of extra-strength placebos now and I'll be ready for
anything :-)
Rat Greene.
Max Ambient
nz.general<32npcrF...@individual.net>:
: Ray Greene says
:
: >
: > Rat Greene.
: >
: Careful, Maxie will be campaigning against you on the grounds of
: self abuse.
" Nobody was asking you, you sycophantic slimebag. Why do you
think its a good idea to harass other users whose political
views you don't agree with, creep??? " - Redbaiter, lowest of the low.
I rest my case, temporarily ...
--
"I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public"
Tarla
wrote:
snip nonsense
>The CAUSE, and ineffectiveness of the immune system has NEVER been
>considered. This forms the premise and key difference of the Neurolink
>system, where the vital link of communication to establish etiological
>(causal) data can be sourced and acted upon by the brain.
Quack Quack Quack
Tarla
I'm sorry, but it IS bullshit. I've read the site and it's nothing but
airy fairy nonsense with no science whatsoever to back it up. He
claims that there are electrical circuits that are broken, but
provides no scientifice evidence to support this circuit theory,
which, btw, does not appear in any biology book that I've ever read,
and I've read plenty. Nor does he provide any evidence to show how
this "circuitry" is restored, other than a light touch? Fuck save your
money and have your partner touch you all over! Back pain...cured!
grimly bubble
"Max Ambient" <m...@ambient.invalid> wrote in message
news:avcds0lgrbjfvpido...@4ax.com...
> Redbaiter <Redba...@inbox.lv> slimes in
> nz.general<32npcrF...@individual.net>:
>
> : Ray Greene says
> :
> : >
> : > Rat Greene.
> : >
> : Careful, Maxie will be campaigning against you on the grounds of
> : self abuse.
>
> " Nobody was asking you, you sycophantic slimebag. Why do you
> think its a good idea to harass other users whose political
> views you don't agree with, creep??? " - Redbaiter, lowest of the low.
>
> I rest my case, temporarily ...
Consider resting it permanently, if you can't show any intelligence in your
own posting, be guided by those who can.
grimly bubble
"Tarla" <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote in message
news:4o2es0h0joaf446aa...@4ax.com...
Bloody good advice tarla.
Ray Greene
>Ray Greene says
>
>>
>> Rat Greene.
>>
>Careful, Maxie will be campaigning against you on the grounds of
>self abuse.
Ooh bugger...
--
Ray Greene
Ray Greene
I've tried that many times over the years Tarla. It just made my back hurt
worse in the end. But it's a good hurt...
I'm probably fortunate that I never went to the website before the treatment,
otherwise my incredible powers of suggestibility would have been seriously
compromised and I'd still be in pain. Instead here I am, gullible but cured.
Lucky old me :-)
--
Ray Greene
Tarla
I don't suppose that you could get your old buddy, Dave, to give a
demonstration of this publically or to a med school, could you?
xlo
Goodness gracious.
Don't bother checking heartbeat / breathing after a severe electric
shock - reach for a herbal remedy!!!
Oh yeah - read the instructions:
"If the person is unconscious or unable to drink the formula can be
rubbed directly onto soft tissues of the body, lips, temples, inner
wrists, etc."
Sounds like the stuff might even raise the dead.
Then the disclaimer:
"The material in this site is provided for personal, non-commercial,
educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute a
recommendation or endorsement with respect to any company or product."
So you can recommend something, then use a disclaimer to evade
responsibility for the fact that what you are selling, for the purpose
for which you are selling it, is about as useful as sniffing guinea pig
farts.
FFS - if some shonky clever dick tried selling cars or some other
consumer item (with the possible exception of computer software), that
so totally failed to meet any reasonable standard of proof that it did
what it was supposed to do, then they would tarred and feathered by the
media.
Have you considered the possibility that she would have regained colour
and calmness in a few minutes anyway?
Ray Greene
>I don't suppose that you could get your old buddy, Dave, to give a
>demonstration of this publically or to a med school, could you?
Dunno. What did you have in mind, a serious scientific study by open-minded
people (no usenetters allowed :-) or just a chance to tell him that it's all
bullshit in public?
He's busy treating people fulltime, I doubt that he would want to waste time
demonstrating to people who are just going to tell him it's purely
coincidence or mind over matter when he does successfully treat someone.
I certainly wouldn't ask him to do that.
--
Ray Greene
Nomad Damon
The racist would have us believe that chinese don't feel pain
like we do because they are a "dirt" race.
Nomad Damon
has anyone used this?, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:53:36 +1300, xlo <checkt...@dodgeit.com> wrote:
>
>>So you completely deny the possibility that it is bullshit, and the
>>relief from the symptoms that you claim to have experienced were either
>>the placebo effect result of your belief in bullshit, or a coincidence
>>that the improvement of your symptoms seemed to be related to the
>>treatment that you had.
>
>Woohoo, you really crack me up xlo :-) 25 years of back pain spontaneously
>and permanently ceased PURELY BY COINCIDENCE during the half hour or so that
>I was having my treatment.
>
>Man, I just love the incredible explanations that sceptics use to try to
>explain things. They're way crazier than anything they are trying to debunk.
>
>If my belief in bullshit was so strong, why didn't any of the other
>alternative treatments I have tried over the years, along with all the
>conventional ones, have any effect? Maybe I just had a coincidental
>spontaneous burst of faith without realising it.
>Hey I know what it was! I am probably so mental and prone to believing in
>bullshit that I only thought that I was thinking "Gee, I wonder if this will
>work at all..." when in actual fact I was really thinking "YIPPEE, THIS IS
>IT, THIS IS THE ONE, IT'S GONNA BE A MIRACLE CURE THIS TIME HALLELUJAH PRAISE
>THE LORD!!!". But I just didn't realise it.
>
>Yeah, that's the most likely explanation.
That you are simple minded and needed to believe it was going to
work because they took the money for the "consultation off you
BEFORE the procedure.
That is a powerful reason to believe it is going to work.
>
>>The placebo effect is a real phenomenon. The fact that no treatment can
>>sometimes be better than ineffective treatments is what the nonsense
>>called homeopathy is based on.
>
>You know, it's amazing just how quickly no treatment can have an effect. I
>have seen screaming panicky little kids calm down in seconds when their
>mother has eventually managed to get a drop of rescue remedy on their tongue.
>I've even seen it work on cats.
>
>Mind you, everyone knows that cats are pretty damned gullible.
That you are gullible is without argument. Rescue remedy is a
placebo, I have seen water work just as well.
Nomad Damon
has anyone used this?, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
Don't knock it, you can mix up great tasting cocktails with
whisky and cough mixtures.
Nomad Damon
has anyone used this?, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
He is more likely to refuse to demonstrate his remarkable
"powers" in front of sceptics. Funnily enough they only "work" on
believers.
>I certainly wouldn't ask him to do that.
I don't set out to embarass my friends in public either.
Max Ambient
nz.general<1103602612.81553@ftpsrv1>:
: > The child was bored with the adult conversation;- she had perhaps never seen
: > light sockets sprung out from the wall before; she as quick as thought sprang
: > over to investigate and stuck her finger behind the socket; she got 230VAC !
: >
: > On a concrete floor with bare feet! Bare finger!
: >
: > We were all shocked! It had happened so fast ... really at thought-speed!
: >
: > The mother of the household was a "herbalist" and had "Rescue Remedy" there.
: >
: > I was amazed, knowing the expected results of a shock, and having experienced
: > some myself, to see the visible results within seconds/minutes for that kid!
: >
: > She went from pale and visibly "shocked" to regaining colour and calmness in
: > seconds/minutes ... we were all entirely relieved, as you might imagine !!!
: >
: > Don't knock it unless you actually have had some experience of it, I say!
:
: Goodness gracious.
:
: Don't bother checking heartbeat / breathing after a severe electric
: shock - reach for a herbal remedy!!!
There was no problem with either. She was basically OK, but "shocked".
Thankfully too it was a dry floor. Of course if there had been a clear medical
emergency there would have been a different response!
: Have you considered the possibility that she would have regained colour
: and calmness in a few minutes anyway?
Certainly. Perhaps she may have, but that was the sequence of events.
What did impress me subjectively at the time was that there was such a change
so quickly. I had had no prior experience with the stuff, and am only relating
an anecdote. Perhaps it really helped. Perhaps it was only a placebo effect.
I am certainly not recommending it as a treatment for electric shock!
Yet despite the various "debunkings" (Randi et al, BBC doco) of homeopathy, I
am not yet fully convinced that there are not effects as yet not understood.
OTOH I don't use it or necessarily "believe" in it either.
It was a just a personal experience that impressed me at the time, that's all.
xlo
<snip>
>
> Yet despite the various "debunkings" (Randi et al, BBC doco) of homeopathy, I
> am not yet fully convinced that there are not effects as yet not understood.
>
proven effect that requires understanding.
The theory behind it is totally absurd, both from the method of treating
a symptom with an immeasurably small dose of something, and the notion
that the "something" should be chosen as a compound that would cause the
symptom, not cure it (homeopathic caffeine for insomnia etc).
Max Ambient
nz.general<32qculF...@individual.net>:
: Max Ambient says
: >
: > : Have you considered the possibility that she would have regained colour
: >
: > Certainly. Perhaps she may have, but that was the sequence of events.
: > What did impress me subjectively at the time was that there was such a change
: > so quickly. I had had no prior experience with the stuff, and am only relating
: > an anecdote. Perhaps it really helped. Perhaps it was only a placebo effect.
: Perhaps this whole pointless story is a waste of time and
: bandwidth...
It always amuses me when these petty cries of "bandwidth waste" come up,
especially from such an unprincipled user of it as the "red baiter" ...
Redbaiter'd be the type who cries "He's using up my oxygen!"
Perhaps indeed he has wasted his time ...
--
"What marks leftist especially is there ignorance, which is a
result of their lack of education, which in turn results in
their abysmal comprehension skills which then produces examples
of utter brainlessness" -- Redbaiter
Max Ambient
So it seems. I'm merely not taking a stance on it. There may yet turn out to
be something in it, or (perhaps more likely!) it will go the way of alchemy.
I'm not "into" it, I assure you!
Max Ambient
: >You know, it's amazing just how quickly no treatment can have an effect. I
: >have seen screaming panicky little kids calm down in seconds when their
: >mother has eventually managed to get a drop of rescue remedy on their tongue.
: >I've even seen it work on cats.
: >
: >Mind you, everyone knows that cats are pretty damned gullible.
:
: That you are gullible is without argument. Rescue remedy is a
: placebo, I have seen water work just as well.
Good stiff brandy, too, perhaps ;- ?
Max Ambient
nz.general<32qfq8F3...@individual.net>:
: Max Ambient says
: > Redbaiter <Redba...@inbox.lv> goes stalking again in
: > nz.general<32qculF...@individual.net>:
: > : Max Ambient says
: > : >
: > : > : Have you considered the possibility that she would have regained colour
: > : > : and calmness in a few minutes anyway?
: > : >
: > : > Certainly. Perhaps she may have, but that was the sequence of events.
: > : > What did impress me subjectively at the time was that there was such a change
: > : > so quickly. I had had no prior experience with the stuff, and am only relating
: > : > an anecdote. Perhaps it really helped. Perhaps it was only a placebo effect.
: > : >
: > : Perhaps this whole pointless story is a waste of time and
: > : bandwidth...
: >
: > It always amuses me
:
: Good, I must remember how you are amused by such things...
:
: > when these petty cries of "bandwidth waste" come up,
:
: They're not 'petty cries', they're well substantiated
: observations. Nobody is interested in the boring repetitive
: rantings of an obviously psychotic loon like you Maxie.
:
: > especially from such an unprincipled user of it as the "red baiter" ...
:
: You ain't seen nothing yet Maxie.
: >
: > Redbaiter'd be the type who cries "He's using up my oxygen!"
:
: Your using up everyone's oxygen Maxie. You should show some
: consideration for the planet and stop breathing.
: >
: > Perhaps indeed he has wasted his time ...
: >
: That's right Maxie, mostly when I'm responding to you Max.
: --
: Redbaiter
: In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
:
: "Leftists- The enemies of classic liberalism"
[Googled]
Max Ambient
nz.general<32qg0pF3...@individual.net>:
: Max Ambient says
:
: >
: > Good stiff brandy, too, perhaps ;- ?
: >
: What's the bet that's about the only stiffness you've
: experienced in a long while Maxie. Actually impotence is quite
: often the cause of psychotic problems like yours.
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
[msge snipped]
Out of curiosity, you would please list since you're earliest memory
of your back problem, all the investigations, treatments, meds etc you
underwent before trying Neuorlink?
Example: GP, specialist/type [ i.e. neurologist, ortho etc and if in
private practice or at a public hospital; pain clinic] etc;
X-rays, cat scans, MRI's, Thermogram, EMG, Nerve Conduction Studies
etc
Treatments - accupuncture, physical therapy, Sympathetic Blocks incl
Biers, TENS, H-Wave, SCS etc
Drugs - opoids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents; for constant
pain not caused by inflammation, agents acting on the central nervous
system by an atypical mechanism; 'off-label' drugs etc
I think it important to your case that readers be given your history
of tried & failed so we can judge for ourselves, the effectiveness
over every other method/treatment that failed for you prior to your
success with Neurolink.
Cath
Tarla
>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:44:09 +1300, Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>I don't suppose that you could get your old buddy, Dave, to give a
>>demonstration of this publically or to a med school, could you?
>
>Dunno. What did you have in mind, a serious scientific study by open-minded
>people (no usenetters allowed :-) or just a chance to tell him that it's all
>bullshit in public?
A serious scientific study. Double blind.
>
>He's busy treating people fulltime, I doubt that he would want to waste time
>demonstrating to people who are just going to tell him it's purely
>coincidence or mind over matter when he does successfully treat someone.
>I certainly wouldn't ask him to do that.
Yep...too busy making money quacking to bother to give this great
Knowlege to the world. How many more people could be helped if he just
took a day off to prove it works?
Sue Bilstein
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com wrote:
>
>Out of curiosity, you would please list since you're earliest memory
>of your back problem, all the investigations, treatments, meds etc you
>underwent before trying Neuorlink?
>
>Example: GP, specialist/type [ i.e. neurologist, ortho etc and if in
>private practice or at a public hospital; pain clinic] etc;
>
>X-rays, cat scans, MRI's, Thermogram, EMG, Nerve Conduction Studies
>etc
>
>Treatments - accupuncture, physical therapy, Sympathetic Blocks incl
>Biers, TENS, H-Wave, SCS etc
... you are joking, aren't you Cath?
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
Definitely NOT.
I for one, would like to know what he underwent prior to finding his
cure with Neurolink.
Ray did say and I quote:
" I had back pain for many years and I had tried every type of
therapy I could find but nothing had any effect. The only other thing
my doctor could suggest was spinal fusion."
One could take it he was just treated by his GP, hence my postings.
Cath
texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
<sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
Sue, FYI, I pasted and copied parts of msges along with links and
other info I found to a doctor friend in Los Angeles.
He's hoping to have a look at it over the weekend.
Cath
Ray Greene
wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:56:21 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>[msge snipped]
>
>Out of curiosity, you would please list since you're earliest memory
>of your back problem, all the investigations, treatments, meds etc you
>underwent before trying Neuorlink?
I've seen several GPs and physios, two specialists of some persuasion
(orthopaedic?) that do bone/joint stuff, an osteopath, 3 or more
chiropractors, an acupuncturist and an aura cleanser (hey, I was bored and
she was cute and did it for free :-).
When it got really bad I had 2 lost of Xrays, an MRI scan and/or a CAT scan
(I can't remember now if I had one or both). Interestingly the scan (one of
them) showed different results to the Xrays. If I recall correctly, the doc
said the Xray indicated a ruptured disc and the scan a small growth on a
vertebra.
This was when I was offered spinal fusion, but I saw a doco about that at
around the same time, and there was this doctor with a hammer and chisel
chiselling bits out of a woman's spine while chatting away to camera about
how careful you had to be working so close to the spinal cord. I decided not
to have one.
I did exercises that various of the above people prescribed, they helped a
little. I tried yoga which sometimes helped and sometimes made things worse.
Various painkillers like Cataflam. Some other pills at various times,
probably anti-inflammatories or something but I don't really remember now.
Sorry if some of that's a bit vague but it happened over a period of 25 years
or so.
In the beginning I found the best treatment to be painkillers and light
duties for a few days. The pain would go after a few days until the next
time.
Eventually it didn't get better and after a few weeks I was unable to walk
more than a few steps and had to give up work for quite some time.
That's when I got the scans and saw the specialists and the osteopath and a
few more GPs and physios. Nothing helped much and eventually I gave up and
went all sedentary. I started retraining at Polytech although sitting for any
period was agony, but after a few months it started to improve.
I eventually went back to work at a desk job but I had continuous problems,
often quite serious, with my back until the Neurolink treatment.
--
Ray Greene
Ray Greene
>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:10:39 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:44:09 +1300, Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote:
>>
>>>I don't suppose that you could get your old buddy, Dave, to give a
>>>demonstration of this publically or to a med school, could you?
>>
>>Dunno. What did you have in mind, a serious scientific study by open-minded
>>people (no usenetters allowed :-) or just a chance to tell him that it's all
>>bullshit in public?
>
>A serious scientific study. Double blind.
So how exactly would this work? I'm not familiar with medical testing. What
conditions would it be tested on, how many people, how long for, who is the
impartial person who oversees the test etc?
Who decides whether it has worked or not, and how do they decide? If it does
work, will it be attributed to coincidence or the power of suggestion? Who
will publish the results and where?
If you can give me all the details I can pass the offer on to him sometime in
the new year.
>>He's busy treating people fulltime, I doubt that he would want to waste time
>>demonstrating to people who are just going to tell him it's purely
>>coincidence or mind over matter when he does successfully treat someone.
>>I certainly wouldn't ask him to do that.
>
>Yep...too busy making money quacking to bother to give this great
>Knowlege to the world. How many more people could be helped if he just
>took a day off to prove it works?
This scientific double-blind medical test is only going to take a day? What
kind of test is that? I thought you were being serious Tarla. Jeez, I really
am gullible aren't I? :-)
Yes he is busy, helping people like me who have had no help from conventional
medicine or who simply appreciate the good results and the modest fees.
I've never heard him quack though...
If you're really serious about saving the world through Neurolink, I would
strongly suggest you contact the guy who invented it. I'm sure he knows more
about it than anyone else.
--
Ray Greene
Tarla
>On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:31:24 +1300, Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:10:39 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:44:09 +1300, Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I don't suppose that you could get your old buddy, Dave, to give a
>>>>demonstration of this publically or to a med school, could you?
>>>
>>>Dunno. What did you have in mind, a serious scientific study by open-minded
>>>people (no usenetters allowed :-) or just a chance to tell him that it's all
>>>bullshit in public?
>>
>>A serious scientific study. Double blind.
>
>So how exactly would this work? I'm not familiar with medical testing. What
>conditions would it be tested on, how many people, how long for, who is the
>impartial person who oversees the test etc?
Depends upon what the actual claims are.
>
>Who decides whether it has worked or not, and how do they decide? If it does
>work, will it be attributed to coincidence or the power of suggestion? Who
>will publish the results and where?
That's why you set up a double blind. So that no one knows until the
experiment is over whether or not they recieved the actual treatment
or a placebo. If successful, I imagine your mate, Dave, would be more
than happy to publish. If unsucessful, then the data would be
available to other researchers, I suppose.
>
>If you can give me all the details I can pass the offer on to him sometime in
>the new year.
>
>>>He's busy treating people fulltime, I doubt that he would want to waste time
>>>demonstrating to people who are just going to tell him it's purely
>>>coincidence or mind over matter when he does successfully treat someone.
>>>I certainly wouldn't ask him to do that.
>>
>>Yep...too busy making money quacking to bother to give this great
>>Knowlege to the world. How many more people could be helped if he just
>>took a day off to prove it works?
>
>This scientific double-blind medical test is only going to take a day? What
>kind of test is that? I thought you were being serious Tarla. Jeez, I really
>am gullible aren't I? :-)
Didn't it only take one treatment for your pain to disappear?
>
>Yes he is busy, helping people like me who have had no help from conventional
>medicine or who simply appreciate the good results and the modest fees.
>
>I've never heard him quack though...
>
>If you're really serious about saving the world through Neurolink, I would
>strongly suggest you contact the guy who invented it. I'm sure he knows more
>about it than anyone else.
Why would I contact someone I think is full of shit?
Tarla
>On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:20:27 -0600, texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:56:21 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>>[msge snipped]
>>
>>Out of curiosity, you would please list since you're earliest memory
>>of your back problem, all the investigations, treatments, meds etc you
>>underwent before trying Neuorlink?
>
>I've seen several GPs and physios, two specialists of some persuasion
>(orthopaedic?) that do bone/joint stuff, an osteopath, 3 or more
>chiropractors, an acupuncturist and an aura cleanser (hey, I was bored and
>she was cute and did it for free :-).
Not a single medical specialist among them. Ever see an orthopedist?
an internist? What the hell did you expect going to osteos and
chiropractors ffs?
Ray Greene
>Why would I contact someone I think is full of shit?
Why are you talking to me then?
Let me know when you're serious and can actually organise a real test.
--
Ray Greene.
Ray Greene
>Not a single medical specialist among them.
I assumed my GP would send me to see the appropriate people. I guess it's a
mistake to rely on doctors :-)
>Ever see an orthopedist? an internist?
I mentioned seeing orthopaedic (I think) specialists. They were surgeons. Is
an orthopedist something else?
I don't know what an internist is.
>What the hell did you expect going to osteos and
>chiropractors ffs?
I expected much the same results as I had got from doctors, but by that point
I was desperate. I obviously hadn't reached the gullible stage though, they
didn't help at all :-)
--
Ray Greene
Kerry
Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:56:50 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:20:27 -0600, texan....@texas.removethisbit.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:56:21 +1300, Ray Greene <ra...@es.co.nz> wrote:
> >>[msge snipped]
> >>
> >>Out of curiosity, you would please list since you're earliest memory
> >>of your back problem, all the investigations, treatments, meds etc you
> >>underwent before trying Neuorlink?
> >
> >I've seen several GPs and physios, two specialists of some persuasion
> >(orthopaedic?) that do bone/joint stuff, an osteopath, 3 or more
> >chiropractors, an acupuncturist and an aura cleanser (hey, I was bored and
> >she was cute and did it for free :-).
>
> Not a single medical specialist among them. Ever see an orthopedist?
> an internist? What the hell did you expect going to osteos and
> chiropractors ffs?
Gps and orthopaedic surgeons are medical specialists
Tarla
We were not talking about the "discoverer" of this technique. We were
discussing the guy who actually treated you. If the guy who came up
with this is in NZ, I'd love to have him prove his bull...claims.
The problem for me as a private citizen is that I cannot afford to set
up such an experiment on my own.
Tarla
>On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 21:34:43 +1300, Tarla <ta...@inspire.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>Not a single medical specialist among them.
>
>I assumed my GP would send me to see the appropriate people. I guess it's a
>mistake to rely on doctors :-)
You have to be a good consumer, even when it comes to doctors.
>
>>Ever see an orthopedist? an internist?
>
>I mentioned seeing orthopaedic (I think) specialists. They were surgeons. Is
>an orthopedist something else?
>I don't know what an internist is.
An internist is someone who specializes in the internal organs.
Sometimes what you think is causing the problem isn't actually what is
causing the problem.
>
>>What the hell did you expect going to osteos and
>>chiropractors ffs?
>
>I expected much the same results as I had got from doctors, but by that point
>I was desperate. I obviously hadn't reached the gullible stage though, they
>didn't help at all :-)
Of course they didn't. They are quacks. I would never set foot near
one of them.
Tarla
wrote:
I know that. He didn't seem sure.
Peter Metcalfe
ker...@iiihuugg.co.nz says...
> Gps and orthopaedic surgeons are medical specialists
Surely GPs are generalists rather than specialists?
--Peter Metcalfe
Kerry
Peter Metcalfe <metc...@quicksilver.net.nz> wrote:
Family medicine specialists. Specialist generalists if you like ;-)
Ray Greene
>We were not talking about the "discoverer" of this technique. We were
>discussing the guy who actually treated you.
Oh OK, I thought we were discussing the technique itself.
>If the guy who came up
>with this is in NZ, I'd love to have him prove his bull...claims.
He's a kiwi but I don't know where he lives. You could email him and ask.
>The problem for me as a private citizen is that I cannot afford to set
>up such an experiment on my own.
Well then why... oh never mind.
--
Ray Greene
drerwi...@gmail.com
> A friend yesterday recommended this to me, as something that might
> help with my husband's health problems. He said that it had fixed his
> wife's asthma and back pain, and had also cured his own post-viral
> fatigue syndrome problems.
>
> When I look at the website, it just screams "QUACK ALERT" to me:
>
> http://www.neurolink.co.nz/about_us/about_us.asp?id=2
>
> Has anybody on the group used Neurolink? Any comments?
It is an absolutely amazing system. My brother in law had a heart attack three years ago which ended in him getting stents in his major coronary arteries. He was told that he would be laid up for a month or two but would then get progressively better to a point where he'd feel almost normal after six to eight months.
Instead, he could hardly get out of bed two and a half YEARS later. He had extreme weakness, was drowsy all day long, was out of breath simply walking from one room to another and couldn't sleep at night.
After his first visit to the Neurolink practitioner, which took about an hour, he got out of bed the next morning and returned to his work as a well driller. This is very hard, heavy work, but within days he was working ten to twelve hours per day with ease. The return to normal of his energy, sleep and strength were nothing short of a miracle.
Erwin
heartsan...@hotmail.com
rac...@goodwood.school.nz
So I have been sick for the past two years with a virus/ autoimmune undiagnosed thing. I have seen every gp under the sun and been to specialist after specialist to find some answers. I have breathlessness, liver disfunction, migraines, dizziness, low immunity, weight loss etc. I tried some unconventional medicine; Homepath and naturopath. They made me sicker! My dad told me about neurolink and I have been seeing a practitioner for the last 8 weeks. I didn't tell her about all my problems so I could see if she was 'real' or not. I was astounded by how much she was able to pick up that I hadn't told her and that matched my blood tests from the dr. It causes a physical effect on your body that is undeniable. I still have a few body bits that need fixing still but feel heaps better, which is something that I haven't experienced in 2 years. I can understand sceptism but definitely worth a try if you have tried conventional medicine.
george152
> Hi.
> So I have been sick for the past two years with a virus/ autoimmune undiagnosed thing. I have seen every gp under the sun and been to specialist after specialist to find some answers. I have breathlessness, liver disfunction, migraines, dizziness, low immunity, weight loss etc. I tried some unconventional medicine; Homepath and naturopath. They made me sicker! My dad told me about neurolink and I have been seeing a practitioner for the last 8 weeks. I didn't tell her about all my problems so I could see if she was 'real' or not. I was astounded by how much she was able to pick up that I hadn't told her and that matched my blood tests from the dr. It causes a physical effect on your body that is undeniable. I still have a few body bits that need fixing still but feel heaps better, which is something that I haven't experienced in 2 years. I can understand sceptism but definitely worth a try if you have tried conventional medicine.
>
Because its the next thing in that chain of 'belief' and
pseudo/alternative health regimes