Noni...Goji...what's next?

[karen]

Cutting through the Natural Health Marketing Jungle

 

A few years ago the big thing in the natural health marketplace was Noni juice. It claimed to help just about every ailment under the sun, and there were a multitude of glowing testimonials. There was Ester-C and Blue Green Algae.

 

Now it's soy shakes, goji berries, and krill oil - and a dozen more. But we forget that these products go in and out of style just like other types of products, and the overinflated claims and testimonials make us believe that each new panacea is the one to stock up on and tell all our friends about.

 

Well, there's something wrong with this picture. It's not that all those products have no value. Some have a lot of value as tools that work for specific purposes. But in any case, it's not hard to see beyond the marketing hype, that many of these products aren't exactly what they seem.

 

Let's look at a few particular issues to start cutting through the hype:

 

1. Specialness - is the product really as special as it sounds?

 

Most of the heavily marketed natural health supplements are essentially "knockoffs" of other products and are not truly unique. Many contain very ordinary ingredients that could be bought separately for a fraction of the cost. But with slick packaging and marketing, they become "new and improved" as if they deserve the special attention and price tag.

 

Many contain "proprietary ingredients" that make them sound special when they may not be. A critical thinker would want to question the manufacturer to find out what's so special.

 

2. Specialness - Hidden presuppositions in the marketing claims.

 

If the product is really one of a kind, and no other goji juice contains THIS many antioxidants, that may be true, but do we really WANT that many antioxidants? We don't really know that. Chances are that we don't really, or that the difference in the amount of antioxidants is not significant. Many people don't know that too much antioxidant activity can be quite harmful. But the "more is better" assumption is built into the marketing claim.

 

3. Testimonials - a dime a dozen.

 

Testimonials can be quite impressive. People seem to "cure" their arthritis with this Flexanol product. Or it's MSM. No doubt those people did get those results - probably most aren't lying. But what do testimonials really mean, in terms of how likely this particular product is to help YOU?

 

Well, it's a bit more complex than just finding the thing that helped your neighbor's arthritis or diabetes or high blood pressure or fatigue, and assuming that the product they swear by is going to help you.

 

The first thing to understand about symptoms is that you may have a similar symptom as your neighbor, but what caused yours is probably different, and so the treatment you need is going to be different. But the natural health market has to paint a picture with a very broad brush, so there's no room for individualizing. That's why the results are really very hit-or-miss, and those glowing testimonials don't mean very much in the end.

 

4. Marketing to symptoms.

 

The natural health market targets symptoms. Colon cleansing products are "good for" detoxification. Certain phytonutrients are "good for" brain power. Certain herbal formulas are "good for" flu symptoms. "This product for that symptom." What's wrong with this picture?

 

Well, a dozen cases of flu symptoms might each have different causes. A dozen cases of migraine might each have different causes. If your headache is caused by not drinking enough water, the one-size-fits-all product that claims to reduce migraines is probably not going to work for you.

 

But if you match the product with the symptom, you get this simplistic view of natural health self-help, which has a very low success rate overall, if you look past the overinflated claims and testimonials to see what actual percentage of people are getting the results.

 

5. Results based on removal of symptoms.

 

Now we have to look at what "success" really means. If my cough goes away because I took a "natural" cough suppressant, but a few months later I have bronchitis, was that really a success? It looks like we had a great success with the cough, right?

 

Now the cough suppressant product claims success. But, the two conditions may very well be linked. Even though the suppression of the cough may have *caused* the bronchitis, still the cough product is claiming success, when really it's a failure.

 

Many products will remove symptoms, just like allopathic drugs can remove symptoms. But if they drive the problem deeper so that later on down the road we develop a more serious condition, what does that say about the wisdom of removing the symptom in that way?

 

Everywhere in the natural health field you'll see this emphasis on removing symptoms as if that's what we're aiming for, and if we do that, then we're successful. This is a huge error in the understanding of the meaning of symptoms.

 

The symptom is just the messenger, not the disease. Sure, sometimes you do need to manage the symptoms in order to make yourself more comfortable, but there are ways to do that safely without suppression which drives the disturbance deeper.

 

The problem with natural health marketing, and even many natural health practitioners, is that they don't really know the difference between the symptom and the disease. They are working on the level of symptoms just like the allopath is, trying to kill the symptom for the short-term gain of making the patient feel better. That's what most people are looking for.

 

Well, that's what people can get, if they're willing to risk making themselves sicker in the longer run. They may be young and robust, and maybe they won't notice the damaging effects of some of these natural health protocols. But I think that many people would want to know that there is another side to this health marketing hype, and that they may be spending a lot of money on products that aren't really helping.

 

This is not to overstate the potential for harm, either. But the key is that the appropriate treatment for a particular conditon depends on the underlying cause of that condition and working on the causative level. If you're simply looking at the superficial level of symptoms, you may be palliating at best, and suppressing at worst.

 

Generally people don't really know what they are doing except that they're taking something "natural" to help a particular symptom or problem. They have no idea of the complex physiological functions that are being altered, and the possible imbalances that are being caused, even by taking a simple nutrient like calcium.

 

Generally these things are safe in relatively small doses, but we need to take a sobering look at the megadoses and "more is better" approach that's often thought is required to get the best results. The heroic "no pain, no gain" approach works well for ripping off a band-aid from your finger. But otherwise, we really want to know whether the gain is real and isn't causing new problems that we didn't bargain for.

_____________

 

So what's the best way to make your way through the jungle of health products?

 

First, find out what is really unique about the product you're interested in. Consider that what it does might be done just as well by many other more ordinary products. Most of the network marketed products (what used to be called multi-level marketing) fall in this category. Most are not-so-unique products that don't do much more than their simple counterparts in your local heath food store.

 

If there is a dizzying array of similar products, and you're not sure which you need, find out if they're all really essentially different. For example, there are dozens of different products based on beneficial phytochemicals in berries. Are they each so different from one another? The claims point to specific differences - one comes from a unique source, one is more pure than the rest, etc. The distinctions are dizzying, and probably not as important as it sounds.

 

Look at what your need is fundamentally. Maybe you're constipated, and you need to address that. But do you need a stimulating herbal formula? Maybe you just need to drink more water, or maybe you need more good quality fats in your diet.

 

If you're a chilly type with certain deficiencies, the stimulating herbs may actually have a weakening effect for you. So you'd want to investigate what is the best way for YOU to approach this constipation problem, and not just match your symptom to the product.

 

-Karen Robinson

Guide for Self-Healing

http://www.guideforselfhealing.com

Edited August 14, 2007 by karen

[Cameron]

Why do you have to disrespect my friend Yoda like this? Do you not know he is a MONKEY AND A GEMINI?!

 

I don't even really know what that means but my guess is it makes things like trying the newest supplements and practices his LIFESBLOOD.

 

Don't mind her dude! Trying new supplements and practices isn't a waste of time!

 

 

*secretly mostly agrees with Karen*

[karen]

Why do you have to disrespect my friend Yoda like this? Do you not know he is a MONKEY AND A GEMINI?!

 

My bad. I should have mentioned that the article doesn't apply to monkeys! Geminis, maybe half of it applies

 

And really, the idea is awareness, not to make judgments about what's right or wrong. Even wasting time and money isn't necessarily wrong.. and I've done plenty of both.

 

It's more a matter of what you're really after. If you want the short-term experience, like visiting a foreign country and immersing yourself in that culture.. well, actually it might be more fun to just do that . But if you want to do what's best for your health in a deeper way, it takes a bit more than just getting on the bandwagon of the latest/greatest. Just a matter of what you want.

 

-Karen

[thelerner]

Great mirror er I mean article.

 

Michael

[Yoda]

I got to the end of the article ready to shell out $19.95 plus shipping and handling on something but all there was was the sound of one hand clapping...

 

[karen]

Consciousness has free shipping

[dharmabum]

There is another product claimed to do wonders

it rids the kidneys of toxins

it balances the blood of certain imbalances

it can assist with mental clarity

it can assist irregular bowel movements

it gives skin and joints elasticity

it can consumed with any product without interaction

applied to the skin, it can even soothe burns

what is it?

water

[karen]

[Trunk]

Consciousness has free shipping

bada-biiinnggg!

[OpenSecret2012]

Cutting through the Natural Health Marketing Jungle

 

A few years ago the big thing in the natural health marketplace was Noni juice. It claimed to help just about every ailment under the sun, and there were a multitude of glowing testimonials. There was Ester-C and Blue Green Algae.

 

I have no memory of it. Perhaps before "my time". Anyhow, it doesn't matter what used to be the in thing.

It's all about common sense. One must do their own homework. Look up whatever the product is. Talk to people who use it. Then test it on yourself. Keep a journal for 1-6 months. Then see if there are any positive differences. If yes, then decide if one wants to keep using. If no, then no big deal if one no longer uses it.

 

Now it's soy shakes, goji berries, and krill oil - and a dozen more. But we forget that these products go in and out of style just like other types of products, and the overinflated claims and testimonials make us believe that each new panacea is the one to stock up on and tell all our friends about.

 

Now you are assuming. You do know what Benny Hill said when you ass-u-me. You give a blanket statement "each new panacea". Soy can be good or bad. Soy milk is better than the garbage fake cow milk sold in all stores. But too much reliance on soy is not good.

 

Pure goji-berries aka WOLF BERRIES, are litterally food of the gods. Scientists are shocked such a food exists. There's also emperor goji berries/wolf berries.

 

Now here's where one's common sense enters. Everything I said in my first response. I've purchased Wolf Berries in China Towns. They are different than the one sold in "yuppie" health food stores. I noticed when I read the ingrediant label, the one in the mainstream health food stores has additional ingrediants ADDED. Not good.

 

Well, there's something wrong with this picture. It's not that all those products have no value. Some have a lot of value as tools that work for specific purposes. But in any case, it's not hard to see beyond the marketing hype, that many of these products aren't exactly what they seem.

 

*Allows his barbarian blood to thaw out*

No, nothing is wrong with the picture. Something is wrong with people who do not use their common sense. Common sense is another way of saying common logic. Yes slick marketing is used to sell items. It's up to the consumer to engage in critical thinking aka common sense aka common logic. My example with the goji/wolf berries says it all.

 

One needs to take the time, make the effort, do the homework, on whatever the product is. Are the ingrediants natural, or man made then added? Is this product found naturally in nature? What's its shelf life? Where in the store is it stocked? (is it next to the pesticide products?). Shop around for prices, including the internet. Etc.. etc...

 

There is nothing wrong with a person, or company, wanting to make money off a health product. The question is... the homework one needs to do... is does the product hold up to its claims? Does it hold up to the homework you/one does on it?

 

 

Let's look at a few particular issues to start cutting through the hype:

 

1. Specialness - is the product really as special as it sounds?

 

Most of the heavily marketed natural health supplements are essentially "knockoffs" of other products and are not truly unique. Many contain very ordinary ingredients that could be bought separately for a fraction of the cost. But with slick packaging and marketing, they become "new and improved" as if they deserve the special attention and price tag.

 

Some folks don't have the time to shop for all the products seperatly. If they can afford the price, no problem if they buy it. It comes down to is the product real? Does it measure up to its claims?

 

Example... you posted goji berries as another of the many items that come into style, then go out of style. So what if this happens? Goji berries are indeed as special as they sound!

 

 

Many contain "proprietary ingredients" that make them sound special when they may not be. A critical thinker would want to question the manufacturer to find out what's so special.

 

This one sentance IMHO could've been your entire post. It's all that needs to be said. Then your thread can be seen as another reminder to everyone to keep their critical thinking hats on always.

 

 

2. Specialness - Hidden presuppositions in the marketing claims.

 

If the product is really one of a kind, and no other goji juice contains THIS many antioxidants, that may be true, but do we really WANT that many antioxidants? We don't really know that. Chances are that we don't really, or that the difference in the amount of antioxidants is not significant. Many people don't know that too much antioxidant activity can be quite harmful. But the "more is better" assumption is built into the marketing claim.

 

Now you are making a blanket statement. Sometimes more is better. Sometimes it is not. How to decide? Take everything on a case by case basis.

 

Do YOU know what oxidation is? Oxygen for humans is both a life giver, and the element that ages and kills us. It causes our cells to "rust" just like it does to everything else. Imagine putting 10 coats of weather protectant on a bar of metal. It will be very well protected. Imagine putting 100 coats of weather protectant on. Yes, it's more than enough. Yes it can be said to be tooooo much. But is it now doing more harm than good?

 

Just like in advance military training, when one is looking for a food source, one does gradual experiments on oneself (eat a nibble, wait 5 hours, eat another nibble, wait 5 hours, etc...) one goes through doing homework on anti-oxidants. Then finally experimenting on oneself in small, controlled doses. Eat a certain serving for 1 month, recording how one feels, and what happens.

 

I eat about a hand full of goji/wolf berries twice a week, and get great results. I've talked to others who eat a hand full each day. Eat 2-8 handfulls each day. They also get great results.

 

I've experimented with carrot juice. Drinking 1-7 gallons each week, after first eating a heavy meal so that the juice stays in the stomach longer. I've found that for me personally 1-2 gallons per week works fine - after experimenting with different amounts.

 

What may be "too much" anti-oxidants for you, may be fine for someone else. When it comes to each person's health and diet, one must do their own homework, and their own experiments.

 

 

3. Testimonials - a dime a dozen.

 

Testimonials can be quite impressive. People seem to "cure" their arthritis with this Flexanol product. Or it's MSM. No doubt those people did get those results - probably most aren't lying. But what do testimonials really mean, in terms of how likely this particular product is to help YOU?

 

This is just a repeat of what's covered above. It comes back to using one's own common sense, logic, and critical thinking. Testimonials are simply information. Most are skewed. It is up to the person to sift through them for the intresting ones. For example, the cure for cancer has long been found, and used since the 1930's. There are testimonials. One would then do homework... which includes following up on the testimonials, investigating the testimonials. If one just uses a blanketed view, one would miss the testimonials that may not be skewed, that may point to products that really do work.

 

http://www.starbase21ok.com/dirk_benedict.htm

 

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0070767/bio

 

4. Marketing to symptoms.

 

You mean the WESTERN market. Westerners are too lazy to do preventive medicine. If they would streach, exercise, eat right, stop over eating, meditate, concentrate on building good karma, concentrate on "not being an a--" to other people as much as possible, they would not get the "flu symptoms" in the first place.

 

Preventive medicine means acting first.

"I don't want to get a potbelly gut. Let me start doing crunches, and leg raises now, while I don't have one yet,"

 

Current Western medicine is about re-acting.

"Oh no! I now have a potbelly gut. Now I'll just get liposuction surgery, or surgery to shrink my stomach, blah, blah, blah..."

 

Fill in potbelly gut with "flu symptoms", cancer, lethargy, tiredness, weak bones, flabby muscles, impotence, being unable to last longer than 10 secs with a woman, etc.. etc... other problems.

 

5. Results based on removal of symptoms.

 

 

The symptom is just the messenger, not the disease. Sure, sometimes you do need to manage the symptoms in order to make yourself more comfortable, but there are ways to do that safely without suppression which drives the disturbance deeper.

 

The problem with natural health marketing, and even many natural health practitioners, is that they don't really know the difference between the symptom and the disease. They are working on the level of symptoms just like the allopath is, trying to kill the symptom for the short-term gain of making the patient feel better. That's what most people are looking for.

 

Again, you are talking about the present WESTERN view of medicine or "medicine". The Western view of results or "results".

 

With preventive medicine, the results are that there are no problems in the first place. You would not have a cough in the first place because of you activly taking charge of your diet, physical health, and mental health, from the getgo (age 5? heheheh ).

 

 

Well, that's what people can get, if they're willing to risk making themselves sicker in the longer run. They may be young and robust, and maybe they won't notice the damaging effects of some of these natural health protocols. But I think that many people would want to know that there is another side to this health marketing hype, and that they may be spending a lot of money on products that aren't really helping.

 

Oh there is another side alright. Just like the link in my sig shows. It's not just health products that may be wronging us. It has been found, and proven, that it's bad, horrible, DIET.

For example, anything with Aspartame, which also goes by the name Nutra-Sweet, is littarally P-O-I-S-I-O-N. Check out the book "Sweet Poison" at any major bookstore for the graphic details.

 

Also hydroginated corn oil, artifical color (insert number 1-100 here)... red #2, blue #4, yellow #8, etc... etc...

ALL milk sold in stores is fake poison garbage. Flash Pastrizing KILLs any positive nutrients. Then the man-made vitamins are added to it to "fortify" it. "100IU Vitamin D". Homoginization isn't as bad, but still not good. Food should stay as nature makes it. There's a reason nature makes it the way it's naturally made. Like honey, royal jelly, pure cow milk, colostrum, pure goji/wolf berries, everything Dirk Benedict found out when he discovered the facts about the cure for cancer, and more, etc... etc...

 

You have people eating s---t food, which makes them get sick. Then they take s--t medicine to treat the sickness. ALL this mess could have been avoided using preventive medicine. Stop eating the s--t food in the first place! LOL! How to find out what is s--t? One needs to activly do their own homework.

 

 

Generally people don't really know what they are doing except that they're taking something "natural" to help a particular symptom or problem. They have no idea of the complex physiological functions that are being altered, and the possible imbalances that are being caused, even by taking a simple nutrient like calcium.

 

Oh, they know. They just don't want to do their own homework. Example... taking calcium. Obviously it's man made. If they would simply go visit a farm, and ask the farmer for pure cow milk, then they will be taking the REAL natural calcium.

 

And again, one needs to experiment on oneself. In small doses, over a period of time (1-6 months). And yes, things will possibly get altered. It's part of finding out what works, and what does not work. Even Dirk Benedict had to eat the right foods for himself, and monitor what happened over time.

 

Generally these things are safe in relatively small doses, but we need to take a sobering look at the megadoses and "more is better" approach that's often thought is required to get the best results. The heroic "no pain, no gain" approach works well for ripping off a band-aid from your finger. But otherwise, we really want to know whether the gain is real and isn't causing new problems that we didn't bargain for.

 

Again, that's a blanket statement, about another blanket statement.

Sometimes pain is needed to gain. Sometimes some pain is needed. Sometimes no pain is needed.

It all comes down to a case by case basis.

Everyone is different. That's why it's back to doing one's own homework. Gradually experimenting on oneself, and recording the results over time.

I don't need mega-doses of goji/wolf berries to feel fine. Others can take mega-doses of goji/wolf berries and feel fine.

 

 

So what's the best way to make your way through the jungle of health products?

 

First, find out what is really unique about the product you're interested in. Consider that what it does might be done just as well by many other more ordinary products. Most of the network marketed products (what used to be called multi-level marketing) fall in this category. Most are not-so-unique products that don't do much more than their simple counterparts in your local heath food store.

 

If there is a dizzying array of similar products, and you're not sure which you need, find out if they're all really essentially different. For example, there are dozens of different products based on beneficial phytochemicals in berries. Are they each so different from one another? The claims point to specific differences - one comes from a unique source, one is more pure than the rest, etc. The distinctions are dizzying, and probably not as important as it sounds.

 

No, one must first decide if they really, really, want to get to the bottom of matters - or not. There is no part way, half way, when it comes to pursuing the best possible health. With this said, it won't matter if there's a "dizzying array of simlar products". One will take the time to look at every single one. Filter out all the ones that have man-made chemicals in them - using common sense aka critical thinking aka homework aka investigation. Like my example with the goji/wolf berries. The ones I found in my local China Town had only wolf berries as the ingredients. The same goji/wolf berries found in the local mainstream supermarket, and health stores, had additional ingredients added!

 

Look at what your need is fundamentally. Maybe you're constipated, and you need to address that. But do you need a stimulating herbal formula? Maybe you just need to drink more water, or maybe you need more good quality fats in your diet.

 

If you're a chilly type with certain deficiencies, the stimulating herbs may actually have a weakening effect for you. So you'd want to investigate what is the best way for YOU to approach this constipation problem, and not just match your symptom to the product.

 

-Karen Robinson

Guide for Self-Healing

http://www.guideforselfhealing.com

 

Now you are entering the realm of preventative medicine.

If she drank enough water in the first place, helped by always carrying a bottle with her everywhere, then she would never get the constapation problem in the first place.

 

It would be ok for the person to get the weakening effect from the herb. It's all part of experimenting with what works best for each person. Then they find out for sure it's not the right herb. Move on to the next possible solution. Rinse, repeat. Just like Dirk Benedict did until he finally found the RIGHT cure for cancer.

 

Very last item, no one, including me, should ever assume they know everything. One should always, be open to new ideas, new treatments, new finds.

Edited May 10, 2008 by OpenSecret2012

[karen]

Hi OpenSecret 2012,

 

I'm sorry I couldn't get the quote function to work on this particular post (anyone have any idea why?) - hopefully this is readable!

I have no memory of it. Perhaps before "my time". Anyhow, it doesn't matter what used to be the in thing.

It can help to have a historical perspective to see a current phenomenon in a larger context.

 

It's all about common sense. One must do their own homework[.b]. Look up whatever the product is. Talk to people who use it. Then test it on yourself. Keep a journal for 1-6 months. Then see if there are any positive differences. If yes, then decide if one wants to keep using. If no, then no big deal if one no longer uses it.

That's always the general idea. But if we use a trial and error approach, we have no way of judging the effects of a substance except by empirical "positive differences." For example, Vitamin C in large doses can make many symptoms go away. If that happens to you, do you know whether it has effected a cure, or whether it's just palliating the symptom, or whether it's suppressing the symptom for it to express later in another form? You only know that the symptom has gone away, for the time being, and if that's the only criteria you have, you don't have a reliable way of judging the effect of a treatment.

 

The natural medicine field is using large doses of substances in material form - largely nutrients and herbs, to make symptoms go away, without understanding the real principles involved. This is essentially allopathy, which means it's not based on principle but just some vague idea of what seems to work.

 

If you have a headache because you're dehydrated, but you take herbs to make your headache go away, that might be acceptable to many people, but it's unprincipled in a sense. It's shutting up one expression of the problem and leaving the source of the problem to express itself in other ways.

 

So the whole issue of what it means for a treatment to "work" is important to clarify, although rarely is that addressed.

 

Now you are assuming. You do know what

Benny Hill said when you ass-u-me. You give a blanket statement "each new panacea". Soy can be good or bad. Soy milk is better than the garbage fake cow milk sold in all stores. But too much reliance on soy is not good.

This I have to disagree on.. unfermented soy isn't fit to eat. See the Soy Alert from the Weston Price Foundation: http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/index.html. Sure, small amounts aren't usually a problem.

 

When something is marketed as a one-size-fits-all panacea, it should be looked at critically. If you look at the health food business over time, you see the phenomenon of marketing hype. It's not a blanket statement, but an observation of a pattern.

 

Pure goji-berries aka WOLF BERRIES, are litterally food of the gods. Scientists are shocked such a food exists. There's also emperor goji berries/wolf berries.

Yes, it's a "superfood" in that it's very nutritively dense.

 

Now here's where one's common sense enters. Everything I said in my first response. I've purchased Wolf Berries in China Towns. They are different than the one sold in "yuppie" health food stores. I noticed when I read the ingrediant label, the one in the mainstream health food stores has additional ingrediants ADDED. Not good.

It would depend on what's being added - something wonderful like hemp seeds would be a great combination!

 

No, nothing is wrong with the picture. Something is wrong with people who do not use their common sense. Common sense is another way of saying common logic. Yes slick marketing is used to sell items. It's up to the consumer to engage in critical thinking aka common sense aka common logic. My example with the goji/wolf berries says it all.

Yes, individual responsibility, for sure. It also helps for people to understand the marketing phenomenon.

 

One needs to take the time, make the effort, do the homework, on whatever the product is. Are the ingrediants natural, or man made then added? Is this product found naturally in nature? What's its shelf life? Where in the store is it stocked? (is it next to the pesticide products?). Shop around for prices, including the internet. Etc.. etc...

All good.

 

There is nothing wrong with a person, or company, wanting to make money off a health product. The question is... the homework one needs to do... is does the product hold up to its claims? Does it hold up to the homework you/one does on it?

No, nothing wrong with selling for profit . But claims on health products are generally misleading. This really goes into a much more extensive discussion of what these substances actually do, beyond the surface level of biochemistry and effects on symptoms. I use nutrients and herbs not according to any claims but according to known principles of natural law. But that's a whole 'nother discussion .

 

Some folks don't have the time to shop for all the products seperatly. If they can afford the price, no problem if they buy it. It comes down to is the product real? Does it measure up to its claims?

There are many products such as the green food forumulas, where the company has already done the research and come up with a synergistic formula, ideally advised by professional herbalists and such, so that we don't have to do all the homework. There are many good ones that don't claim to be the best, but are just different versions of a similar thing, because there's always room for variations. The thing is to realize that they're just variations on a theme.

 

Now you are making a blanket statement. Sometimes more is better. Sometimes it is not. How to decide? Take everything on a case by case basis.

To say that the "more is better assumption" is misguided, isn't a blanket statement. I'm saying, don't make the assumption. More is not always better, but marketing makes that assumption, "You need this product because it contains *more* of a particular nutrient." More antioxidants, usually. Does anyone wonder whether we all need that much more antioxidants? What happens if we get too much? Do we each have different requirements, at different times? Does anyone ask?

 

Do YOU know what oxidation is? Oxygen for humans is both a life giver, and the element that ages and kills us. It causes our cells to "rust" just like it does to everything else. Imagine putting 10 coats of weather protectant on a bar of metal. It will be very well protected. Imagine putting 100 coats of weather protectant on. Yes, it's more than enough. Yes it can be said to be tooooo much. But is it now doing more harm than good?

Oxidation has its complementary polarity in nature. If you do too much anti-oxidation, you can't produce enough energy. There are deeper reasons why a body is becoming too oxidized, not just from stress or poor diet. But the main issue I have with products that compete for "higher antioxidant" status, is that no one is asking whether the difference really matters.

 

If you're under a lot of emotional stress, does throwing in a few more antioxidants make a significant difference? Maybe for some, but in other cases it's pissing in the wind. We can't know the answer if all we're doing is latching onto a few biochemical substances like antioxidants and deciding to focus on those, out of context of the whole person.

 

Just like in advance military training, when one is looking for a food source, one does gradual experiments on oneself (eat a nibble, wait 5 hours, eat another nibble, wait 5 hours, etc...) one goes through doing homework on anti-oxidants. Then finally experimenting on oneself in small, controlled doses. Eat a certain serving for 1 month, recording how one feels, and what happens.

The problem is that many people have complicated health conditions, including people who consider themselves fairly healthy but have chronic emotional stress. It's very hard to evaluate the effects of a food or supplement based on empirical effects. When you understand the principle of what you're doing, then you know you're getting the effects, even if you don't notice them for a while. Many people have too many complicating factors to be able to sort things out themselves.

 

I eat about a hand full of goji/wolf berries twice a week, and get great results. I've talked to others who eat a hand full each day. Eat 2-8 handfulls each day. They also get great results.

Again, the concept of "results" is vague. Bluegreen algae gives people energy, but it's because it stimulates detoxification, and the adrenals are working harder. For some people, overstimulating the adrenals that way can be very damaging. But they have more energy. Is that a good thing? We have to understand what is really going on when the outer results seem to be good.

 

I've experimented with carrot juice. Drinking 1-7 gallons each week, after first eating a heavy meal so that the juice stays in the stomach longer. I've found that for me personally 1-2 gallons per week works fine - after experimenting with different amounts.

Works in what way? Drinking after a large meal insures poor digestion.

 

This is just a repeat of what's covered above. It comes back to using one's own common sense, logic, and critical thinking. Testimonials are simply information. Most are skewed. It is up to the person to sift through them for the intresting ones. For example, the cure for cancer has long been found, and used since the 1930's.

There are many methods that can push back the symptoms. But again, does it work in all cases? And is it a permanent cure or temporary palliation? If we don't know that, we don't have a science, just hit-or-miss. For some, hit-or-miss is better odds than nothing. But we can do even better.

 

You mean the WESTERN market. Westerners are too lazy to do preventive medicine. If they would streach, exercise, eat right, stop over eating, meditate, concentrate on building good karma, concentrate on "not being an a--" to other people as much as possible, they would not get the "flu symptoms" in the first place.

Another whole discussion. There 's a whole 'nother side to what causes disease. Diet, nutrition, exercise, sleep, meditation, healthy lifestyle, etc. (which is called "regimen") - this is all but one side of the polarity. The other side is the energetic impingements on the life force which will not go away no matter how much regimen one does.

 

Ancient people had very few of the latter, so all the preventive measures worked fine. Chinese medicine and Ayurveda, for example, were developed for that population, so they worked great for those people. There is a reason why preventive medicine and all the natural medicine approaches that simply balance things don't work well enough for many of the chronic, complex conditions that modern people have.

 

The regimen is important, but is only one side of things.

 

Also current naturopathic medicine says we can just take supplements and do exercise, even if the potbelly gut is based more deeply in a fear state or an inherited predisposition or an early emotional trauma. When you try to fix the outer manifestation of something without addressing the root cause, you have allopathic medicine, whether it's conventional medicine or "alternative" medicine.

 

I have a family member who is very fit, exercises correctly, and still has a pot belly. There are many possible root causes for each symptom - not everyone with the same symptom has the same causative factors.

 

Fill in potbelly gut with "flu symptoms", cancer, lethargy, tiredness, weak bones, flabby muscles, impotence, being unable to last longer than 10 secs with a woman, etc.. etc... other problems.

Yes, and a particular symptom no matter what it is, can arise from a multitude of different causes. Some regimenal, some not.

 

Again, you are talking about the present WESTERN view of medicine or "medicine". The Western view of results or "results".

 

With preventive medicine, the results are that there are no problems in the first place. You would not have a cough in the first place because of you activly taking charge of your diet, physical health, and mental health, from the getgo (age 5? heheheh )

.

Not as simple as that, as I began to describe above, but would take a much longer discussion to flesh out. Most people don't have perfect regimen starting from early childhood. And even if they did - there are millions of kids with autism and other severe health problems from a very early age, many from birth. These are not all regimenal issues. Proper regimen is an important foundation, and many people make great strides with it. But there's a reason why it often doesn't go the whole way.

 

The allopathic mindset of shutting up symptoms pervades not only conventional medicine but the field of natural medicine.

 

You have people eating s---t food, which makes them get sick. Then they take s--t medicine to treat the sickness. ALL this mess could have been avoided using preventive medicine. Stop eating the s--t food in the first place! LOL! How to find out what is s--t? One needs to activly do their own homework.

Sure the commercial food supply is depleted of life force and processed products contain many poisons. It's not hard to do the homework to understand what proper diet is. That's clear. That said, there's more to the issue of curing disease than proper regimen.

 

Again, that's a blanket statement, about another blanket statement.

Again, you're misrepresenting what I said . I said that "no pain no gain" *as an approach* doesn't work. To work with an approach based on principle is the rational way, not to use pain or discomfort as the criteria for whether something is powerful enough.

 

I don't need mega-doses of goji/wolf berries to feel fine. Others can take mega-doses of goji/wolf berries and feel fine.

Right. each person's nutritional needs are different, but most people have no way of understanidng their own individual needs. That's why I set up my professional services.

 

It would be ok for the person to get the weakening effect from the herb. It's all part of experimenting with what works best for each person. Then they find out for sure it's not the right herb.

Not always. The weakening effect is not always perceptible, until the person starts to notice symptoms, and then it can be a major health issue.

 

Very last item, no one, including me, should ever assume they know everything. One should always, be open to new ideas, new treatments, new finds.

Agreed. Yet we have to have something to stand on - known principles. Otherwise we have only empiricism and no way to judge what's happening on the levels beneath sense perception, where the root causes lie. If we don't have principles, we have no way of applying critical thinking. Being open to new treatments doesn't mean to dismiss everything we know, just as being "open minded" doesn't mean that you need to continually explore everything that you know to be false.

 

-Karen