Posts by Kate Diaz

There aren't many medical professionals hanging out in this specific corner of the forum, so I doubt you'll find much useful insight here. You’d have much better luck seeking advice over in the 'Health & Wellness' section. Would you like me to move this thread over there for you?

Alright, let's actually take a look at that scientific evidence...

wanderingharbor51 said:My balcony is just a few yards above a transformer station, and my entire apartment faces right toward it...

Do I need to make that connection? 😱

Almost certainly—no!

To be clear, it isn't that low frequencies have absolutely zero effect. However, any such influence is so minuscule and negligible that it becomes impossible to measure or precisely define. In engineering terms, the negative impact of a transformer station is essentially "below the noise floor." Put simply, it’s impossible to distinguish whether any potential negative effect stems from low frequencies or from other external factors we can't control.

When comparing the influence of a single transformer station and its low frequencies against the anxiety caused by them, it is far more important to be mindful of chemical pollutants and hazardous compounds that we constantly introduce into our bodies, primarily through our diet. Instead of blaming low frequencies for their minor impact (if such an impact even exists), let's look at what we eat and the environments we live in. Living in a neighborhood near a trash incinerator, a cement plant, or an oil refinery is significantly more harmful than living next to some transformer.

On the other hand, people generally don't care about what they eat and drink or what they ingest. That choice almost certainly has a significant impact on the development of many diseases, including tumors. Through food, we consume massive amounts of chemical compounds, whether they are additives already built into the food (like various preservatives, dyes, sweeteners, or stabilizers) or things sitting on top of the food (for instance, who can guarantee how an apple bought at a farmer's market was sprayed?). And of course, I don't even need to mention smoking, alcohol, stress, or lack of sleep.

People are very prone to attributing their problems to someone else or blaming something else—cell phones, transformer stations, anything at all—because they don't want to face reality and take responsibility for their own behaviors. Please don't think I am contradicting you here; I am speaking in generalities, and this doesn't apply to you or any other specific individual.

But I highly doubt that transformers have any significant role in the development of disease. Besides, I still don't see a mechanism or a way for 50 Hz radiation to actually change anything within our biological systems.

In the mountainous regions of the US, specifically around the Dolomites, exchanging greetings isn't just a standard courtesy among hikers—it’s actually expected between trekkers and everyday locals too. Even out in the small rural towns, people are incredibly welcoming. Among the folks living in those countryside communities, it’s perfectly common for someone to invite a passing hiker in for a quick drink or a bite to eat.
On several occasions, we’ve had local farmers working in their fields or tending to their livestock actually call out to us during a break, inviting us to pull up a chair and join them.

labellina said:She escaped because she WANTED to. I believe she could have done it much sooner.
She feels guilty because he took his own life, and now she's terrified of being judged by the public...
We tend to see what we want to see rather than reality, simply because the truth is too uncomfortable or predictable. So, people inflate and reshape the narrative to fit their own perceptions.

That is exactly how I view the situation. There is no doubt she was abducted and held against her will. However, since we are talking about a child—who possesses much more psychological flexibility than an adult—she essentially grew up within that confinement and came to accept it as her baseline reality. Eventually, the captor likely didn't even need to rely on threats; she simply had no concept of any other way to live. Everything happening around her became her "normal," and she probably believed that’s just how life works. It wasn't necessarily a case of her living in total darkness, starving or naked every single day. It seems to me the kidnapper actually looked after her, which likely created a form of symbiosis—a shared existence where neither could truly function independently. While those first few months were undoubtedly traumatic, I highly doubt that level of intensity lasted for all ten years.

Besides, there are precedents for this kind of psychological shift. Does anyone remember that woman who was kidnapped by an extreme left-wing terrorist group (I think it was a German cell, something like the Red Army Faction)? She was taken captive, but after a few months, she actually joined the terrorists voluntarily and fought alongside them.

gentlecanyon92 said:Kate Diaz you’re breaking down my responses piece by piece... but please, just give me a straight answer: do you believe there are actually legitimate bioenergetic practitioners out there, or have you taken a skeptical stance toward everyone claiming that title? And you didn't address the $0.00 regarding the therapy... It feels like too many things are aligning too perfectly for this to be mere coincidence or a lie.

You can find part of my reasoning regarding my perspective in velvetpilot212's response. However, I would like to add a few thoughts.

Personal belief is a private matter, and I don't feel this forum is the appropriate venue to lay it all out. That is simply my view. When I offer an opinion on alternative medicine (or anything else, for that matter), I cannot tie it directly to one specific instance—in this case, your unique situation—because I don't know you personally, nor am I familiar with the specifics of your case. Without those details, any conclusion I draw would be pure speculation. What I can do, however, is speak from my general experience with alternative medicine and offer a broader reflection on the field as a whole, which is what I am attempting to do here.

My primary critique here is directed at alternative medicine as a broad concept. From my perspective, the field fails to provide empirical evidence of its own efficacy or demonstrate how it functions in a way that isn't purely psychological or psychosomatic, essentially operating on the level of the placebo effect.

As for why this particular practitioner isn't charging for their services, I wouldn't know; I have no connection to him or his circumstances. It is entirely possible that the individual truly believes they are performing a good deed and helping people (which I don't doubt for a second), and that they feel it would be morally wrong to profit from such assistance. On the other hand, it is also possible that there are different types of benefits involved—perhaps the lack of a fee is offset by other material advantages, local reputation, or something else entirely. Even the decision not to charge could serve a promotional purpose. I don't know which of these motivations is correct, though I am inclined to believe the first one is the truth.

velvetpilot212 said:It feels to me like you’re just refusing to believe that alternative medicine could offer any real help, even though it would be easy to do so. I can't tell if this is just for the sake of arguing, or if it stems from that old-fashioned fear of "witchcraft," but I don't see the point in stubbornly trying to debunk something using what you consider empty words.

No, not at all—quite the opposite. I approach every subject and every claim with an open mind, where all outcomes are considered equally possible. My goal is to approach matters critically and skeptically, questioning whether they truly hold water. In the process of determining the validity of a claim, I look for empirical evidence and substantiated arguments.

So, if someone asserts that a particular form of alternative medicine is genuinely effective and actually "works," my personal response is to seek out the evidence supporting that claim. At this stage, we aren't talking about faith; we are dealing with medicine and human health. Medicine is fundamentally a natural science, and there is simply no room for blind belief when dealing with something as serious as physical well-being.

Whether I personally believe in alternative medicine or not is irrelevant to its actual efficacy. You mention my "empty words" being used to refute what proponents claim, but I have to ask: how are they empty? I am merely demanding the proof required to be convinced of their effectiveness. Nothing more, nothing less. The fact that the available "evidence" often amounts to little more than anecdotal hearsay, selective anecdotes plucked from a vast sea of cases, and things that fail to meet scientific standards, isn't my burden to bear—it belongs to those presenting such evidence. If practitioners of alternative medicine find this method of verification distasteful, or if they wish their selective data were taken seriously despite being pure wishful thinking, that is their issue, not mine.

As the null hypothesis—which serves as the bedrock of modern scientific methodology—states: "The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim." It is not my responsibility to prove that the vast majority of alternative medicine doesn't work or is merely charlatanism. Rather, it is up to its advocates to demonstrate that it isn't just smoke and mirrors. That is how science operates. Since we are in the psychology subforum, I assume these scientific principles apply here as well. If they don't, perhaps we should move this discussion to the "mysteries and paranormal" section.

If our conversation is strictly limited to the mere *belief* in alternative medicine, then I apologize for bringing evidence and scientific rigor into the mix.

And finally, one of the core tenets of that aforementioned null hypothesis:
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

Sarah Cruz2 said:Can I please ask you to go annoy someone else? Ugh, gross. Now I feel like I've brought bad luck to my own thread.😁 It’s called Delija. 😁

🙂 🙂
No, no, no—you can't talk to hiddenviper9 like that.

Now you're going to face the music. Just wait through about half a page of people calling you useless, a moron, an idiot, and a jerk. And you'll probably drop dead by age 48 (mine predicted I'd make it to 52).

Chaos, Delija, chaos. 👋

velvetpilot212 said:Alternative medicine will try to "explain" WHY you have tachycardia, claiming that through these methods you'll become aware of emotional gaps, psychological struggles, or past traumas. The idea is that once those emotional issues are resolved, the tachycardia will simply vanish. That is the alternative medicine pitch.

But how does anyone actually know if the causes cited by alternative medicine are the true culprits? Where is the evidence? Or is the whole thing just built on faith and nothing more?

Unlike mere belief, conventional medicine is rooted in scientific results and the rigorous testing of both treatments and medications. The argument that modern medicine only treats symptoms rather than underlying causes is hollow; such a claim can only come from someone who either lacks an understanding of medical science and its methodology or simply refuses to grasp it. It is a superficial statement and, frankly, a cliché.

The goal of medicine is to uncover the root causes of illness. Sometimes it succeeds, and sometimes it doesn't. However, it has successfully identified the causes of AIDS, tuberculosis, rabies, and millions of other conditions. Do you truly believe that alternative medicine would be capable of curing rabies or AIDS just by identifying what you call the "true" causes?

Furthermore, in most instances, medicine knows exactly what triggers tachycardia. There are times when the cause cannot be cured, only managed by mitigating the symptoms. If tachycardia is caused by a structural heart defect, no one—not even alternative medicine—is going to cure it. But if tachycardia is driven by high cholesterol (to use a simple analogy), then medicine can address the cause by advising dietary changes. At that point, the patient chooses between a complete overhaul of their lifestyle or taking small yellow pills. Choosing the pills isn't a failure of medicine; it is a personal choice.

On the other hand, people gravitate toward alternatives because they offer something different. They provide quick fixes wrapped in spectacular slogans—like "we treat the cause, not the symptom"—even though there is absolutely no evidence to support such sweeping claims.

Rebecca Cox2 said:There isn't one. However, your line of reasoning perfectly illustrates how the human brain functions—specifically, how susceptible we all are at certain moments or during specific events to perceive a deeper meaning where none exists, linking current happenings to past experiences...

I would go even further and suggest that the human psyche is naturally inclined toward miracles and the supernatural. We have a profound tendency to hunt for miracles or inexplicable forces within relatively mundane circumstances. Usually, this happens by "forcing" an interpretation; out of a long string of random events, a person selectively picks only those that justify a supposed "miracle," even if those details have absolutely nothing to do with it.

Essentially, the sheer monotony of daily life and the repetitive nature of our behavior can take a heavy toll on the psyche. To cope, people instinctively seek ways to break that monotony. It is difficult for many to accept a truly predictable routine, so they search for magic in everything. Furthermore, miracles serve as a psychological substitute for our inherent limitations and mortality.

Human beings struggle with being finite, limited creatures; mentally, we crave a sense of omnipotence, much like a deity. This is why people believe in miracles—they want to believe in something "greater," something that transcends both their dull daily existence and their own physical vulnerabilities. Quite simply, we cannot reconcile ourselves to the fact that a monotonous routine might be all life offers, so we go looking for wonder.

In principle, miracles, alternative medicine, and religion aren't fundamentally different. The only real distinction is that religion provides an organized, institutionalized structure.

velvetpilot212 said:because medicine only addresses the surface level rather than tackling the actual root cause,

I’ve honestly never been able to wrap my head around this argument. No matter how much I try to follow the logic, I just can't get behind the idea from homeopaths and similar groups who claim that modern medicine only treats symptoms instead of causes. It makes me wonder—if that's the case, what exactly is medicine actually doing, if anyone can tell me?

Think about it this way: if you are hit by a tuberculosis infection, you treat it with antibiotics designed to kill the bacteria itself—which is the direct cause. You don't just suppress a fever or take some cough syrup and call it a day...

Sarah Cruz2 said:I visited the Croatika esotericist fair last weekend, and the whole thing was quite intriguing. Aside from stepping outside a few times to get some air—partly due to the heat and partly because of the pressure I felt building up—my stomach started acting up, and honestly, I could barely make it home. As soon as I walked through the door, I jumped straight into the tub, and something interesting happened. While catching up on all the latest gossip in Globe 😁 😁, I suddenly felt this warmth radiating from my solar plexus area (which I later realized is where the heart chakra is located). It felt like a flow, almost as if an energy was being released from within me, like some sort of cleansing process? Anyway, once I got out of the bath, the pain was completely gone.

Does anyone have any thoughts?

I certainly do. Why wouldn't you conclude that the various scents and smells at the fair caused those stomach issues? Then, when you got home and settled into the bath, the warm water acted as a relaxing, therapeutic agent for your stomach, which is why the pain subsided. After all, it’s common knowledge that warm water dilates capillaries and helps soothe cramped muscles with heat....

I mean, you can choose to believe in psychics and all sorts of mumbo jumbo, or you can believe that warmth in your abdomen has nothing to do with the supernatural...

hiddenviper9, is there a way for you to read my energy via email and pinpoint what my issue is? What is your take on hexes—do they actually exist and work? Also, what do you think about charging high prices for these services? Do you think if there's a fee involved, as gentlecanyon92 suggests, then it's acceptable? Does something that lasts just one weekend and costs $0.53 count as therapy or a total rip-off? (Over $200?)

Hold on a second, do you seriously believe that? Look, it’s one thing to believe in bioenergy practitioners and "higher" energies—that still makes sense to me. But believing that someone can read your energy through an email? Give me a break!!!

As for those dropping $200 on these scams, they can only blame themselves; they were conned...

And you’ve certainly found the right person to ask. hiddenviper9 is currently a bit preoccupied with an interview involving alternative types from planet Quadro in the Andromeda constellation...

God bless, hiddenviper9 👋

gentlecanyon92 said:If it’s just a coincidence, I’m going to keep leaning into it as long as it keeps working as a cure.😉

Exactly. Does it really matter if it's a coincidence or not? Is he actually providing healing or not? If believing this makes you feel better, then that's perfectly fine by me.

I don't know all the specific coincidences or circumstances that have to align, or where the line is drawn between what can be healed and what cannot, but I do know that in certain cases, it is possible...

It is fascinating how seemingly impossible things can happen with relative ease. How events that look impossible at first glance can manifest—events that are purely accidental and require a massive chain of other random occurrences to align. So, what does a person do when that happens? Because an event has such a low mathematical probability, we tend to assign it much more weight, labeling it a miracle or something supernatural. In reality, there isn't necessarily anything miraculous or paranormal about the mechanics of the event itself.

A few months ago, Scientific American published an article examining the frequency of "miracles" in human lives through the lens of statistics and probability. The study suggested that, on average, a person experiences a "miracle" once every two weeks to once a month. For the sake of the study, a "miracle" was defined as an event with a 1-in-a-million chance of occurring—roughly the same odds as hitting a major jackpot on a lottery ticket.

So, essentially, you experience a "miracle" comparable to winning the lottery about once a month.😁

gentlecanyon92 said:Modern medicine isn't some magic trick; it’s built on miracle tonics and chemicals that ultimately originate from nature itself. All of this was rooted in what we used to call alternative medicine back then. Nothing is truly new here—we simply have to make do with the tools we have available...

The fundamental difference is that those "miracle tonics and chemicals" undergo rigorous testing. Their efficacy is scrutinized, revealing that in a statistically significant majority of cases, these substances actually treat specific ailments. Furthermore, researchers have uncovered the mechanism of *how* those chemicals work. That is a crucial distinction, even if it isn't the most important one. Beyond just establishing the fact that a compound works, we must understand the process behind its function.

Bioenergeticists, on the other hand, don't subject themselves to that kind of scrutiny. Their "certification" is often nothing more than cherry-picking a handful of success stories out of a vast sea of failures. Such behavior is essentially misleading the public. It's akin to me claiming my car is incredibly reliable just because it managed one successful trip from Chicago to St. Louis. I'm conveniently leaving out the fact that it broke down a dozen times on the way to Nashville or Miami.

It's like buying a car or anything else in everyday life; you look at it and see a good vehicle, but how can you know if the dealer is trying to scam you or if the car is genuinely solid? You only find out once you check its specs, the components, and take it for a test drive. If it's good, it's good, and you buy it. But of course, a seller can still deceive you...

The reality is that you haven't actually tested (or even looked at) most cars, have you? Just because ten cars in a dealership run perfectly doesn't mean that specific model is reliable. You could only make a claim like that after inspecting hundreds of vehicles from the same manufacturer.

Look, none of that really matters in the end. If you believe someone might be taking advantage of you, well, that's your prerogative. If it makes you feel better, then fine.

But it still bothers me when proponents of alternative medicine act so self-righteous. There is a parallel in the Catholic Church. People believe that Lourdes-related water heals through faith in God. They regularly travel to Lourdes to drink that water. For some, they feel better; for others, they don't. In that context, it is entirely a matter of faith. No one thinks to scientifically verify if the water is actually miraculous, and the Church itself doesn't make such a clinical claim.

gentlecanyon92 said:Alright, here goes...

I had some major digestive issues during a trip—lots of cramping and I had to run to the restroom constantly.🙂 We couldn't figure out the cause, and doctors just chalked it up to motion sickness or something similar. It didn't let up even after two weeks, despite all my tests coming back perfectly normal. Eventually, a bioenergetic practitioner identified that it was actually food poisoning from two weeks prior. He pinpointed it himself without us giving him any clues; he didn't even know when my symptoms first started, yet he hit the nail on the head. He told me there were bacteria in my small intestine and said he would clear it out, advising me to call him again if the symptoms returned. Well, they haven't. Everything has been fine since that day.

I was healed just sitting on my couch watching TV. The cost? $0.00...

There are plenty of other examples too... exact timing, full recovery... I can write more if you'd like.

Well, that’s all well and good. If believing in something truly helps you, then there isn't really an issue there.

However, how can you be certain it was specifically HIM—the practitioner—who helped? Personally, that might not matter much to you; the bottom line is that you feel better. But you shouldn't claim with certainty that his specific methods were the cause or that you've proven his efficacy.

It is entirely possible that the illness simply ran its course and your immune system won the battle on its own. In that scenario, you're essentially attributing your recovery to the practitioner simply due to the timing of events.

On the other hand, we shouldn't overlook the massive psychosomatic impact of the placebo effect. If you went into the session with a profound, unshakable belief that this person would help you, that psychological conviction can trigger a physiological improvement. This phenomenon is widely recognized in mainstream medicine and is even utilized in therapeutic settings.

Determining whether a method is truly effective or justified is a bit more complex than relying on anecdotes or highlighting successful cases while ignoring the failures. One has to weigh successes against the total number of attempts. Unfortunately for bioenergetic practitioners, when you apply a systematic approach to testing their success rates, it often becomes clear that their "miracles" are merely coincidences driven by the placebo effect.

What truly bothers me isn't that people seek help from alternative healers, but rather the boastful and aggressive behavior of some of them. Their self-promotion and claims of curing cancer or a million other ailments that conventional medicine supposedly can't touch is nothing more than a lie, an illusion, and a deception. It’s playing with human emotions—a scam, and at the very least, one of the most morally reprehensible forms of manipulation. It’s like trying to sell someone a lump of dirt by claiming it's gold, based solely on the fact that you happened to find one tiny speck of gold inside that dirt.

gentlecanyon92 said:bioenergeticists

And how exactly can we say they "visibly and successfully help," if not based on nothing more than local folklore, fairy tales, or their own self-serving testimonials and praise?

To be clear, I am not making a claim about whether the bioenergetic effect actually exists or not; I am simply wondering what specific evidence is being used to conclude that they provide visible and successful assistance.

Now, hiddenviper9, there's no doubt you're right. I honestly don't know where I get the nerve to question your ideas, considering you're three times my age and spent a solid 18 years grinding through university lectures...

I should be ashamed for even challenging an authority figure like yourself. Perhaps I'll finally be able to do that in about 70 years, once I'm as seasoned as you are after those 18 years of academic life...

Anyway, go ahead and enjoy your chats with the Andromeda Galaxy. I'll catch up with you in 70 years when I've earned the right to a real debate with you... 👋 👋

By the way, I fail to see how all those scientists relate to you. Unlike you, they haven't been holding conversations with the inhabitants of the planet Qvadro in Andromeda, nor have they been attempting to heal people using the magical power of supercrystals...

For instance, Harry Houdini, also known as Ehrich Weiss
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houdini

Or take someone like James Randi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi

By the way, hiddenviper9—I honestly have no idea who takes you seriously. You’ve basically set a new gold standard for nonsense on this forum with that legendary claim about transcendental life existing on the planet Quard in the Andromeda Galaxy.😁

slyowl9 said:However, I believe you are mistaken on a few points, especially when you consider recent historical research. Joan of Arc is certainly not a myth. In fact, there is such an extensive collection of historical records preserved about her that there isn't even a shadow of a doubt regarding her existence or her impact on history.

It seems I may have misspoken, or perhaps my previous point was simply misunderstood by some of you. There is absolutely no question that Joan of Arc is a genuine historical figure—a woman of flesh and blood who holds a monumental place in the history of France. What I was attempting to emphasize in my last post is that her primary historical significance lies in her role as a myth and a legend, rather than just her existence as a physical person. She functioned as a massive catalyst for the French military; more importantly, she acted as a unifying force that brought together disparate social classes, rallying them all toward a single, shared objective.

The King certainly played his part in the grand scheme of things, just as the various generals did. However, we have to acknowledge the reality: she provided the spark and the sheer willpower that galvanized their troops. She wasn't acting as a military strategist, which actually makes her accomplishments on the battlefield all the more remarkable. If this were purely a matter of tactical maneuvering, why did the French continue to suffer losses year after year, leaving France on the brink of total collapse under English rule?

To truly understand this conflict, one must look closely at the social landscape of the era and the state of France at that time. It is important to remember that the concept of modern nations, centralized states, or even patriotism didn't exist yet; those ideas only emerged much later with the French Revolution and Napoleon. Back then, armies fought primarily for coin, land, or their King. At that point in history, France was essentially in a state of total chaos, lacking any unifying force that could rally everyone toward a single, cohesive objective. The feudal cavalry, which consisted mostly of landed gentry, was driven exclusively by the desire to expand their own influence and estates at the expense of the Crown. The King himself was incredibly weak—effectively more of a placeholder or a mere heir than a true sovereign. As for the infantry, they were either mercenaries who cared nothing for the cause, or peasants simply trying to keep their heads on their shoulders. To make matters worse, the country was reeling from a string of military defeats and widespread devastation, yet the King seemed far more concerned with asserting dominance over the nobility than with protecting his people or his land. Quite simply, the various social classes were unable to unite under the monarchy for a common cause. They required something "transcendental"—something beyond the reach of earthly politics and social strife. They needed a divine spark, a belief in a supernatural power and the sanctity of their struggle. That is exactly what Joan of Arc provided: the conviction that they were being guided by a "divine hand" and "divine providence."

During the Middle Ages, when the Church held immense sway over society, faith served as the ultimate driving force. It acted as a powerful unifying element, bringing together people from every walk of life to fight for a singular cause under the banner of divine power, much like the legendary crusade led by Joan of Arc.

History has shown us this pattern before. During their era of expansion, the Moors used Islam as a unifying force to create a cohesive empire. On the other hand, look at the Scots—strategically outmatched and facing a much larger, technologically superior English force composed of seasoned professionals. Despite those odds, they managed to secure decisive victories at Stirling Bridge and Bannockburn.

She appeared at the exact moment when Orleans was on the brink of collapse, and everything that followed feels less like a stroke of tactical genius from the French King or his generals and more like an actual miracle. Personally, I believe she truly was what she claimed to be—not just in the context of the movies, but in real life.

Personally, I believe motivation is one of the most potent weapons on any battlefield. I am certainly not alone in this view; thinkers ranging from Sun Tzu to George Patton have echoed similar sentiments, despite being separated by thousands of years of history.

Now, whether she truly possessed divine powers or heavenly foresight is something I won't dwell on, as that falls into the realm of faith rather than historical fact.

The trial that eventually cleared her name didn't take place a century later; it happened roughly twenty years after her death. At that time, there were still people alive who had known her personally, and even today, we have transcripts of their testimonies 🙂 including those from her own family members and fellow soldiers.

You make a fair point. She was condemned in 1431, but the retrial concluded in 1456. She was beatified in 1909 and canonized as a saint in 1920.

It’s quite simple: the English essentially weaponized the church courts to conduct a political trial. It wasn't the first time, nor would it be the last. 😁

The formal appeal was initiated in November of 1455. Pope Callixtus III authorized this appeal (known today as the "Rehabilitation Trial") at the request of the Inquisitor and three surviving members of Joan of Arc's family. Unlike the original trial, the appellate process included clergy from throughout Europe, and faithfully observed lawful court procedure. After taking the testimony of 115 witnesses and the opinions of theologians, the Inquisitor drew up his final summary of the case, the "Recollectio F Johannis Brehalli", in June of 1456, describing Joan of Arc as a martyr and her judges as heretics for having deliberately convicted an innocent woman in the pursuit of a secular vendetta.

gentlecanyon92 said:It really all depends on which specific branch of alternative medicine we're discussing.
Of course, there are charlatans out there, but you also have to acknowledge the people who clearly and effectively make a positive difference.

For instance?