🚀 go-pugleaf

Deacon:

>> You are the one making the claim for the efficacy of magnetic therapies.

Firstly, let me once again reassure you I do not make any claim that this is
a "theraputic" method.

The word "therapy" would be ascribed only to a method of any kind used for
medical purposes, these products ARE NOT medical devices, hope I have made
that point very clear.

> Magnetic fields strong enough to be of use in therapies
> are hundreds of times more powerful than the fridge magnets in common use
> with quack treatments. This is well established.

If you are assuming I am refering to "fridge" type magnets, you do me a
grave injustice.  I am not so feeble in the head as to believe I could get
any results from taking such items from my fridge door and placing it on my
forehead etc.  On this point we agree.  By the by, "treatment" is a medical
term, you will notice I have not used that term either.

> You are obviously unaquainted with the scientific process, or care not for
> reading or research.

In fact, I was very skeptical at first until I had my own "experience".  So
just what is research?  Scientific study is a documented process from which
we draw conclusions based on the experience of the people doing the study
under controlled conditions.  Depending upon the "controlled conditions", we
can prove just about anything we wish as long as we get to set the
conditions!!  If we set out with the attitude that we are going to disprove
a theory once and for all no matter how scientifically right or wrong we may
be, 9 times out of 10 we will find proof to support our point of view and
visa versa.

I am not nor have I ever claimed to be a scientist with hordes of scientific
evidence to prove or disprove magnets and their properties or effectiveness.
Since I am not about to get into a discussion based on limited knowledge on
my part I would refer you to a book available at your nearest Chapters book
store entitled "Healing with Magnets", the author is Dr. Gary Null (Ph. D.),
published by Carroll & Graf and specifically pages 46 and the first three
paragraphs of page 47.  This is an in depth scientific, physiological
explanation by an expert (Jim Joseph) as to exactly what effect the magnetic
field has on the human body and why.

>
>  Testimonials are not evidence.

Hmmmmmm, I agree so, what is your point?  Testimonials are only people
sharing the experiences they have had.  Do you now say to these people they
are nuts??  Do you think for one minute I accept that these "magnets" work
because of what these people say??!!  No, I accept they work because of my
experience with these products and there may be other people for whom these
products will give relief from their discomfort as they have me.

Testimonials are not given as scientific evidence, that would be ludicrous!
However, peoples experiences cannot be judged right or wrong and you cannot
judge an items effectiveness based on heresay.  I suffer from allergies and
have tried "Claritin" which according to scientific studies SHOULD give me
relief, well it DOES NOT!!  G.I. Joe down the street is also an allergy
sufferer BUT "Claritin" works wonders for him and he swears by it.
According to our testimonies who's right??  Obviously according to my
testimonial, this product should be removed from every shelf across Canada
as it clearly does not work!   That would be shear stupidity.  My point is,
scientific studies or not, people experience what they experience and you
cannot say to someone who tells you what they experienced - "you did not!!"
To assume you can is just as ludicrous.
>
>  You have to prove otherwise.
>
Deacon, I have nothing to prove and neither do you.  The whole point I have
tried to make is everyone's physiology is different.  You and I can go on
and on, claim - counter-claim, for every scientific study you refer to
supporting your position I can produce another one to show otherwise.  We
can go around the mulberry bush until the day you and I are pushing up
dandelions.

Bottom line, we loan products to people BEFORE they invest in any product.
Why?  Because I have had some people come to me and say..."this isn't
working for me but thanks for letting me try".  I will give the very same
product to another person, go to pick it up after 10 days and they refuse to
give it back because it is so wonderful; hmmmm go figure.

John Fleming wrote...
> In fact, I believe the correct procedure with people to compensate for
> the placebo effect is to test the treatment with two groups--one given
> the actual treatment, and the other given a placebo.  A double blind
> adds to the effectiveness because the person dealing directly with the
> test subjects isn't aware of who's getting the placebo and who isn't.

I agree John, but try finding double blind studies done on many of our drugs
available only by prescription and you will find most prior to the 80's were
never tested by such a method and yet they are still prescribed even though
our physicains cannot tell us how they work.  According to those who base
their faith in double-blind studies many of our "acceptable" drugs had
better be removed from shelves and pharmacies across this country
immediately.

I also agree that what may work on an animal may or may not work on the
human physiology but the point in question was - do they work or is it
simply suggestion or hope?  My response was to point out that with animals
the placebo effect is eliminated and these products do work on animals.

Deacon...according to the saying you have listed at the end of your emails
you need evidence before you will believe in anything (Bertrand Russell).
If this truly reflects your thinking and faith is not part of you then I
pity the fact you have one less dimension in your life to enjoy and cherish.

Robert King
King & Associates International
kai@5pillars.com