Least and most religious nations

[Thorne]

It really helps when one doesnt go to only a single and clearly biased source for their information.

I didn't think it was necessary to do months of research and provide footnotes. I used that particular source because he has already done the research, and has links to his sources.

In Nursing school they said pretty much what this acredited government site had to say about it, I highly reccomend you do more than just read the intro I posted bellow:

So you don't like my using real scientists as sources, yet you can use an organization which promotes alternative medicines? Well here's another for you.

And while I didn't go really in depth into the site you linked to, I did look at their section on clinical trials. I saw plenty of descriptions of what clinical trials are, and lots of claims of ongoing clinical trials, yet not one link to a true, reproducible, scientific study which supports their claims. To my knowledge, the practitioners of acupuncture, in particular, can't even prove the basic claim of their craft, which is something along the lines of realigning energy flows in the human body. They can't define these energy flows, can't measure them, can't study them, yet they insist they are there. Show me the proof! And no, I don't care about how many people use alternative medicines. That's irrelevant to whether or not it actually works.

It isnt even remotely considered snake oil.

Except by reputable scientists and doctors.

Many believers of these "magical" practices believe that scientists and medical professionals haven't looked into these things. They have. There have been plenty of real studies, with valid testing procedures, which have shown them to be no better than placebos.

[thir]

It really helps when one doesnt go to only a single and clearly biased source for their information.

True for all of us. With many things the official Western world of science sneers at various treaments, but in many cases, after a while, when properly investigated, they find out why it works. I think there is the believe that noone else knows anything - for one thing.

Chiropractic is one example.

Further on acupuncture:

Acupuncture does work as it stimulates a natural pain killer, scientists find

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...ists-find.html

Health: As a painkiller, they're pretty sharp: Acupuncture needles can dramatically reduce the use of anaesthetics in operations.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...s-1494541.html

And as for scientific evidence of humans being hardwired...just open any medical textbook...I would quote straight from all the ones on my bookshelf but that would simply be too much typing.

I guess it depends on what exactly is meant by 'hard-wired'. Lately it seems to be used by anyone to prove their point, and so the meaning of it (if any) is completely watered down.

Can you define what you mean by it for me?

[Thorne]

True for all of us. With many things the official Western world of science sneers at various treaments, but in many cases, after a while, when properly investigated, they find out why it works.

And then it is incorporated into scientific medicine! That's what I've been saying. The problems arise when, after thorough study, the scientists not only cannot figure out HOW something works, but can't even prove that it DOES work, at least any better than a placebo.

Acupuncture does work as it stimulates a natural pain killer, scientists find

Which is quite true. But it doesn't work in the way that it's proponents claim it works. And it doesn't necessarily do many of the other things it's claimed to do. A punch in the eye can trigger endorphins, too. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to use it for pain relief.

I guess it depends on what exactly is meant by 'hard-wired'. Lately it seems to be used by anyone to prove their point, and so the meaning of it (if any) is completely watered down.
Can you define what you mean by it for me?

As I understand it, something hard-wired into our brains is something which has developed through evolution, passed down through generations in our DNA. One thing to remember, though, is that this does NOT necessarily mean it's beneficial to survival. There are many bad mutations which are passed down, probably just as many as good mutations. All it means is that either the mutation was not necessarily inimical to survival, or that it was possibly necessary for survival at one time, under certain conditions.

[denuseri]

What I mean by hardwired...is exactly what any doctor who passed boards any nurse who remebers her prereq courses, and any scientist worth his or her salt: can tell you...its the most basic axion of not only anatomy and phisiology but all the physical sciences as well. From subatomic particles to the largest of blackholes.

Structure = function.

This applies from the smallest of mesurable objects to the largest.

Rearange somethings atomic structure and you have changed it's function.

Its how we design drugs and engineer space stations or computers etc etc.

Without knowing that axion, one is only blindly plodding along like a blind person in a roller derby.

When the human brain...or that of any of the animals with a brain..does something, anything, or is even at rest and just thinking or dreaming, massive ammounts of chemical chains called hormones are being released by different glands in the body in direct responce to the transfer of even more electrical chemical impulses that are a a result of various transfers of physical structures within one's celluar metabolism...such as the sodium/potasium gated channels that pass one electron loaded particle on from one nerve cell to the next until the charge is distributed thus popogating a command from the higher regions of one's brain to oh say..scratch that thing thats making your nose itch. All these little messengers have physical stuctures...as do the cells they travel through...every square in of one's body is made up of some kind of physical structure working in accordance with its counterparts becuase of it.

That includes the brain itself.

Much of what we think is completely free will is a reaction to electro-chemicals in your body structurally interacting with other structures in your brain as well, even "memories" have such coresponding structural patterns.

Its the structural hardware of the brain that determines the functions of the brain.

Not everyone can become a grand master in chess can they?

Nor can just anyone become an olympic athelete can they?

The reason isnt always becuase all the people who try and fail just up and decided to quit, it is allmost allways becuase those people have something inside them that the others didn't that let them press on despite whatever dificulties.

Science just happen to be proving that nature plays a larger role than the nurture crowd would like it too is all and its disturbing for some.

I am not saying the software (one's personal experiences or deductive reasoning or "free will" has nothing to do with it...I am only saying that it is becuase of it (it being the hardware or the structural arrangments and interactions between them) that we even have the illusion of it.

[Thorne]

Structure = function.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Certainly, structure IMPLIES function, but does not necessarily mean it's limited to that function. The human foot is obviously designed to walk, but can also be used to kick a football. We can learn to use different things for different purposes. And some parts of our body, such as the appendix, have outlived their original purpose, but can still function in a different manner. This applies to the brain as well. How else to explain stroke victims reprogramming themselves to utilize undamaged parts of their brains in order to at least partially regain abilities which were lost in the damaged portions.

This applies from the smallest of mesurable objects to the largest.

Then how do you explain the carbon atom? It can be arranged into the hardest known material, diamond, yet is integral to organic molecules, which are generally far from hard. Even graphite, which is as pure a form of carbon as diamond, has a far different function.

Much of what we think is completely free will is a reaction to electro-chemicals in your body structurally interacting with other structures in your brain as well, even "memories" have such coresponding structural patterns.

And yet, different people, with arguably the same, or very similar, structures, will respond in markedly different ways.

Its the structural hardware of the brain that determines the functions of the brain.

Again, this is a generalization, since parts of the brain can be retrained to perform functions for which they were not meant to perform.

Not everyone can become a grand master in chess can they?

Again, this argues against structure being a strict controller of function. If that were true then we COULD all become grand masters.

Science just happen to be proving that nature plays a larger role than the nurture crowd would like it too is all and its disturbing for some.

This is true. We are learning more and more about WHY we do things, and a lot of it is because we are predisposed to do them due to our genetic makeup. But predisposed does not necessarily mean required. Part of being human is the ability to recognize these traits and, hopefully, gain some kind of control over them. This is what makes one person risk his life to save someone while another person runs away.

[denuseri]

No its an argument that not everone's structure is exactly the same...thats how evolution works...smh..I am not making this up...go talk to any doctor of medicine or any real scientist of any caliber and they will tell you the same thing.

The foot is designed to preform a large number of functions Thorne, not just the one you mentioned, yes it can kick things and run and walk etc...it cant flap and make you fly though...to do that it would have to have a different overall structure!

As for generalizations about the brain...if the function your trying to preform doesnt have a structure behind it...you simpley wont be able to do it...the brain is designed to do what it does just the way it does it, it hasnt majically changed since we have began delving into it, nor does it show any evidence of having done so in mankinds recent past.

So are carbon atoms...which when pressure is apllied to for a long enough duration and tempurature just so happen to become really dense and become diamond...the atomic structure however is still there yet becuase its arranged differently diamond has different aplications compared to its less dense forms just like any other structure does when its altered..it too takes on different characteristics.

You may find it helpful to try and keep some sence of logic or study up on the subject in more detail if your going to argue from a scientific standpoint with non-lay people.

[Thorne]

No its an argument that not everone's structure is exactly the same...thats how evolution works...smh..I am not making this up...go talk to any doctor of medicine or any real scientist of any caliber and they will tell you the same thing.

I don't think you're making it up, denuseri. I'm just saying that strictly equating function with structure is too simplistic.

The foot is designed to preform a large number of functions Thorne, not just the one you mentioned, yes it can kick things and run and walk etc...it cant flap and make you fly though...to do that it would have to have a different overall structure!

And I'm saying that the brain is also designed to perform many functions.

So are carbon atoms...which when pressure is apllied to for a long enough duration and tempurature just so happen to become really dense and become diamond...the atomic structure however is still there yet becuase its arranged differently diamond has different aplications compared to its less dense forms just like any other structure does when its altered..it too takes on different characteristics.

Yes, the arrangement of the carbon atoms changes, forming a more dense crystalline structure when compressed to form diamonds, not so dense when forming coal. But the atoms themselves do not change! What I'm saying is that the activity of the brain is similar, in that the basic structure remains the same, but the overall interaction between structures, the electro-chemical signals which the brain uses, can vary greatly, and thereby give varying results. Function being influenced by structure, but not absolutely defined by it.

[denuseri]

Yes the brain is also...like most organs of the body made do a wide variety of things...duh. That doesnt change the fact that the structures of the brain are what they are and that they determine what functions if any one is capable of.

And its the doctors and scientists, both east and west and everywhere inbetween who are saying that structure does indeed equal function, plain and simple: the complicated part is figuring out every nuiance and function of every structure or structual variation and how it exactly works in relationship to its various functions....a task which is a long duanting one but they make more and more proccess in every day.

Open any modern day science school book book if you dont believe me.

In the case of acupuncture and most eastrn medicines, the question was approached in the exact opposite manner from the west...european doctors studied such things from observations of structures first...its what early gross anatomy is all about...where as in the east they looked at function first and experiemneted (much of the time through trial and error just like in the west) and found that when A is done to the body, it alleviated or corrected whatever B was in as minimally an envasive manner as possible. Thankfully the medical communities of both east and west have begun to embrace each others ways of thinking instead of clinging to pig headed euro-centrism and come to formally recognize and study in more detial the other way of thinking in equal measure. A fact that is easily recognized if one were to open any modern day medical textbook.

As for carbon...when the arangments between the atoms changed...so did the stucture...stucture is completely dependent upon such arrangments to begin with...its basic science 101...its why the lump of coal's function is so very different from the diamonds. Yes the little atoms themselves are still all carbon,,, but like little bricks in a house, how they are arranged determines the difference between there being a plain wall, a window or door or a thick castle wall etc etc.

[Thorne]

As for carbon...when the arangments between the atoms changed...so did the stucture...stucture is completely dependent upon such arrangments to begin with...its basic science 101...its why the lump of coal's function is so very different from the diamonds. Yes the little atoms themselves are still all carbon,,, but like little bricks in a house, how they are arranged determines the difference between there being a plain wall, a window or door or a thick castle wall etc etc.

So the structure of the bricks does not force the function of the building. Bricks can serve many different functions while maintaining their structure. And the structure of a building does not force its function, either. The same structure can serve many different functions.

I agree that scientists are studying the brain, learning how structure and function are interrelated. I just haven't seen anything that defines specific functions based upon specific structures. There are many generalities, and a hell of a lot left to learn.

found that when A is done to the body, it alleviated or corrected whatever B

And yet when scientists test these claims they find that, while A will sometimes alleviate B, sometimes it will do nothing, and sometimes it will affect C. They also find that sometimes when D is done to the body, B will seem to be alleviated, despite the fact that the acupuncturists claim something completely different. The placebo effect is well documented, and nothing I've seen regarding acupuncture, or many other alternative medicines and procedures, shows any greater effects than the placebo. Sure, poking a needle into the body is going to induce the body to produce endorphins, which alleviate pain. No big surprise there. But there is, as yet, no credible, verifiable evidence to show that acupuncture does any more than that. And it certainly does not perform as claimed by its proponents.

[denuseri]

Several billion people in the east and more than a just a few from the west myself included would beg to differ.

Such methods have been used successfully for thousands of years and have been recognized by their governemnts and our own along with most of the wests medical peer group to the point of being added to our textbooks as valid alternatives to seek as being just as valid as conventinoal medicine from the west...go figure.

[Thorne]

The numbers of people who believe in it, or the length of time that they have, are irrelevant to whether or not they actually do anything real. Billions have believed in astrology for even longer times, yet it's still garbage. As for textbooks, after watching what Texas has been doing for the last couple of years, I'm beginning to doubt them myself. I challenge you to show me one real, scientific study, published in a real, scientific journal, which shows that these alternatives are as valid as conventional medicine. Everything I've seen has shown just the opposite.