ayurveda woo?

[ungoliant]

this is in reference to the statements made by Barry Kendall in Ontario, Canada, in this week's commentary about ayurveda.

in the past i was very taken by woo. i have since developed a more critical mind. but i am a certified ayurvedic practitioner and yoga teacher.

i would like to clear up some misconceptions about ayurveda that Mr. Kendall perpetuates.

firstly, the ayurvedic suggestions given for how needs change with season and age and living circumstance are not woo. they are common-sense approaches, such as sleep a little more in winter, (which one does naturally), and eat lightly in the summer, and eat more if you change to a more active lifestyle. older women are encouraged to intake more calcium for their bones. people in hot climes are advised to eat cooler foods during the heat of the day. people in cold climes are advised to eat warmer foods. these are sound pieces of advice, many of which are supported by medical research.

second, ayurveda has herb recommendations that are also supported by medical research. ginger and fennel are for digestion. echinacea for colds. (just kidding! although ayurveda does recommend this, i know it is bunk) lavender for calming and sedation.

third, the individual approach to health care is one many people feel is more conducive to successful medical treatment than the "one-size-fits-all" approach. ayurveda recognizes that though people may have symptoms in common, their treatment needs not be so.

fourth, the daily routine is one of ayurveda's principles. who could not benefit from daily teeth and tongue cleansing, body washing, exercising, meditating? not everyone brushes their teeth everyday. btw, in some tests (not done by the maharishi) meditation has shown to increase the powers of concentration. so it isn't all bunk.

fifth, the ayurvedic principle of mindfullness is a very useful tool. it encourages the subject to learn to be more aware of their everyday choices instead of repeating things habitually. this can be of great help to smokers, over-eaters, etc.

so, while much of ayurveda is woo, there is no denying that it has alot of solid, worthwhile contributions to make to healthcare.

although there are many woo-woo practitioners of ayurveda who promise alot of BS, there is also a solid core of good advice and good health care there.

to dismiss so lightly is, to me, to ignore the truth.

[Miggins]

You`re a certified something, that`s for sure.

[ungoliant]

You`re a certified something, that`s for sure.

funny.

but show me where anything i said is woo. please. back up your sarcasm.

i like to have an open mind and get more educated.

[Starrman]

fourth, the daily routine is one of ayurveda's principles. who could not benefit from daily teeth and tongue cleansing, body washing, exercising, meditating? not everyone brushes their teeth everyday. btw, in some tests (not done by the maharishi) meditation has shown to increase the powers of concentration. so it isn't all bunk.



Educate me. How is is this different than good hygeine and healthly living? What about this paragraph makes it ayurvedic? The meditating?

Please reference the tests that increase the powers of concentration. How exactly is that measured? And isn't part of meditating being alone and in a quiet room free of distractions? Wouldn't that alone be enough to increase the powers of concentration?

[ungoliant]

Educate me. How is is this different than good hygeine and healthly living? What about this paragraph makes it ayurvedic? The meditating?

Please reference the tests that increase the powers of concentration. How exactly is that measured? And isn't part of meditating being alone and in a quiet room free of distractions? Wouldn't that alone be enough to increase the powers of concentration?

well, this is exactly good hygeine and healthy living. that is why i said it is not woo. that part of it at least.

also, i will look for the test on meditation facts. i just can't remember which paper i read it in. i read three or four a day.

ayurveda was the ancient world's (india) healthcare. the good, sound advice you get from a doctor was being given by doctors back then too, some of it. and their word for medicine was ayurveda.

yes, meditating is being alone and free of distraction. i don't understand your point here. clearing your mind and focusing it has been shown to be beneficial.

[ungoliant]

here is one link i found right away.

http://www.pbs.org/saf/1310/hotline/hlazar.htm

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8317

[ungoliant]

here is some more. being quick here.

Researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital have found that meditation changes gray matter in the brain. According to scientists, people who meditate regularly have increased thickness in a region called the insula, which is key to integrating thoughts and emotions. This helps explain biologically just how meditation relieves stress. They also found that people who have practiced meditation for years had increased thickening in areas of the brain affecting heart-rate and breathing.

As we age, the brain tends to thin in areas that sustain attention and regulate memory. Yet those same areas were thickened in the brains of meditators, proving that meditation also aids in memory and focus. Science has already shown that the brain can change by learning another language or by playing a musical instrument. Now we know, scientifically, that the brain is capable of many benificial changes through the internal exercise of meditation.

http://libertyspiritwork.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2005/12/20/1464421.html

[pindar1]

ungoliant, while all your statements are true to an extent (while most of these things would promote good physical and mental health and improve your quality of life slightly, they would not be enough to cure a serious disease by themselves), they fail to say anything about the veracity of ayurveda as a whole. You seem to have wisely abandoned the silly parts of the practice, but now it's time to realize that it has too small a ratio of good ideas to flawed ones (signal to noise) for it to be a reliable source of information.

Ayurveda, as I'm sure you know, is a millenia-old comprehensive system of medicine, operating on the very sensible and very false assumption that like causes like (thus spicy foods cause heat in the body). It encompasses hundreds or thousands of cures (many containing lead and mercury) based on this principle and evolved through thousands of years of unscientific (I know you'll object to this ungoliant--but it's not scientific if it's not double blinded) study.

Now unless you contend that at least a good part of these cures work, and that there are five elements and three doshas, you really cannot say that ayurveda is "true", or qualified to find working cures. As such, anything proposed by it would be suspect until confirmed by scientific testing.

I'll suspect that you will get a higher hit rate than if you just generated random medical claims, due to the trial-and-error evolution of the practice, but do you contend that over 50% of ayurvedic cures would work in a double blind test? 25%? 10%?

Would you to go to a doctor who said that it's only 25% likely that any of his treatments actually work (not that it will work, but that it even can work for anyone)?

If ayurveda is useful, then, it is as a reference for coming up with ideas for scientific inquiry (even this is debatable). Until science has proven the effect of an ayurvedic cure, it is just a guess. And the few times that science does find that a lucky guess was correct does not make ayurveda true, it just makes science that much stronger.

[drfrank]

but now it's time to realize that it has too small a ratio of good ideas to flawed ones (signal to noise) for it to be a reliable source of information.

Thanks :) I've been trying to think of a decent way to explain that, although a few concepts of some random alternative treatment may be valid e.g. acupuncture can aid muscle pain (which isn't woo since you actually just shove the needles into the muscle), you should still discard all the ridiculous dogma associated with it (qi energy, acupuncture points) and examine effects within a normal medical framework.

The signal to noise ratio example you use has provided me with just that :)

[luchog]

The problem with "traditional" systems of medicine like TCM, ayerveda, and the like, is that they're a combination of several different sources for their pratices: religious beliefs of some sort, empirical experience, and traditional practices which may or may not be based on empirical experience.

Because of the last two, you're going to have some aspects that are valid and which work effectively; and which will therefore lend credence to the system as a whole. Particularly since there are some practices (such as hygiene or proper nutrition) which are more or less universal to all healthcare/medical systems.

[ungoliant]

yes, i agree with many of these statements critical of ayurveda.

however, my point was that the criticism of ayurveda in the commentary came of a program which mentioned the changing needs of age and season and climate and these are valid scientific topics.

the writer in the commentary was putting down ayurveda in a snide manner when the program seemed to be about the few things ayurveda gets right!

i am all for skepticism and scientific inquiry. that is why i think it is important when we point out a skeptic who has gone too far and has attacked valid scientific principles because they are wrapped in woo, instead of attacking the woo and acknowledging the scientific principles.

[drfrank]

yes, i agree with many of these statements critical of ayurveda.

however, my point was that the criticism of ayurveda in the commentary came of a program which mentioned the changing needs of age and season and climate and these are valid scientific topics.

the writer in the commentary was putting down ayurveda in a snide manner when the program seemed to be about the few things ayurveda gets right!

i am all for skepticism and scientific inquiry. that is why i think it is important when we point out a skeptic who has gone too far and has attacked valid scientific principles because they are wrapped in woo, instead of attacking the woo and acknowledging the scientific principles.

I don't agree that you can describe genuinely beneficial things in an alternative therapy as "scientific principles".

Saying it's good to eat a balanced diet because it purifies your Blungleflurp Energy Field™ is still rubbish. Just because the conclusion is correct, it doesn't mean all the preceding reasoning and associated dogma has any value, and it certainly couldn't be called scientific.

I can understand why in the past it was good to contain useful information in religious/spiritual teachings, such as not to eat shellfish because they're a bugger to cook properly, because such teachings were the main source of knowledge that was passed down between generations. However, I think that now we have a good understanding of the body and why these things happen it is much more productive for medicine to be separated from spiritual dogma.

[ungoliant]

[QUOTE=drfrank;1402863]Just because the conclusion is correct, it doesn't mean all the preceding reasoning and associated dogma has any value, and it certainly couldn't be called scientific.[QUOTE]

i agree that the associated dogma isn't proven by the veracity of the conclusion. but if the conclusions are proven by science, then they are indeed scientific. maybe the process isn't a scientific one, but if the conclusions are identical, how does that change the value of the conclusions?

if you throw a rock in the dark, trying to hit a tree, and you do, is your hit invalid because you couldn't see?

[ungoliant]

also, a friend of mine who is reading this with me wants to know what scientific ayurvedic test have been done to disprove it and where can he read them?

he is an ayurvedic practitioner.

[Tony4245]

if you throw a rock in the dark, trying to hit a tree, and you do, is your hit invalid because you couldn't see?

That is SO not relevant. We are not throwing rocks here, and I for one don't do research in the dark.

Which conclusions are you referring to? Got any articles? YOU make the claims, sir - YOU provide the evidence. End of story (I'll happily read any articles you choose to share).
I have a reference from MEDLINE by an Indian author, stating that the tenets of Ayurveda are bunk. I can post the info to look it up, if you like.

Ayurveda did not invent hygiene and exercise, as you seem to imply.

If these traditional Eastern methods are so wonderful, why is it that life expectancy in Asia went waaaay the hell up when Western medicine got there?

I have an open mind too, but not so open my brain falls out.

[ungoliant]

if you throw a rock in the dark, trying to hit a tree, and you do, is your hit invalid because you couldn't see?

That is SO not relevant. We are not throwing rocks here, and I for one don't do research in the dark.

Which conclusions are you referring to? Got any articles? YOU make the claims, sir - YOU provide the evidence. End of story (I'll happily read any articles you choose to share).
I have a reference from MEDLINE by an Indian author, stating that the tenets of Ayurveda are bunk. I can post the info to look it up, if you like.

Ayurveda did not invent hygiene and exercise, as you seem to imply.

If these traditional Eastern methods are so wonderful, why is it that life expectancy in Asia went waaaay the hell up when Western medicine got there?

I have an open mind too, but not so open my brain falls out.

well, you're aggressive.

i for one am not a supporter of the ayurvedic theories, as i posted. don't know how you got that impression.

my friend, who does believe in them, asked for some links disproving it. i just passed it on.

i was defending the concepts of changes in lifestyle due to time of year, age, and circumstances.

my OP's point is that the info advertised in the program was sound advice and was slammed as woo, and this was somewhat unfair. sure, the ayurvedic principles are bunk. but don't put down the things within the ayurvedic framework just because they are ayurvedic even though they are sound advice.

[Tony4245]

Ungoliant:

It's part of my charm.

I do owe you an apology at least, though. I've been up to my neck in CAM proponent ******** of late, and I tend to be very much more short-tempered than usual when I perceive it. I beg your pardon.

Since you are posting on your friend's behalf, I will be happy to provide the information on the article I mentioned. Probably won't be until tomorrow, though.

[ungoliant]

Ungoliant:

It's part of my charm.

I do owe you an apology at least, though. I've been up to my neck in CAM proponent ******** of late, and I tend to be very much more short-tempered than usual when I perceive it. I beg your pardon.

Since you are posting on your friend's behalf, I will be happy to provide the information on the article I mentioned. Probably won't be until tomorrow, though.

no problem.

and thanks for the info in advance.

[a_unique_person]

well, you're aggressive.

i for one am not a supporter of the ayurvedic theories, as i posted. don't know how you got that impression.

my friend, who does believe in them, asked for some links disproving it. i just passed it on.

i was defending the concepts of changes in lifestyle due to time of year, age, and circumstances.

my OP's point is that the info advertised in the program was sound advice and was slammed as woo, and this was somewhat unfair. sure, the ayurvedic principles are bunk. but don't put down the things within the ayurvedic framework just because they are ayurvedic even though they are sound advice.

The ancient Indus civilisation appears to have invented some of the ayurvedic lore, (that is, it predates even the vedic lore). There are figurenese in what appear to be yoga poses, for example.

The civilisations were highly complex, larger than the ones in the other 'cradles' of civilisation.

The were large baths, drainage, order and ritual. All essential for a city to function. That the lessons learned to make these cities successful would be passed on is hardly surprising. These people appear to have valued what was necessary for a civilised life.

Over time, the customes become ritualised religious orthdoxy, but the rational basis for their creation is still there.

I have practices yoga myself in the past, and find it a wonderful recreation that does help 'mind and body'. Unfortunately, I always wondered off during the lectures on ..... , um, what were those lectures on again? Chakras? I have no idea. The exercises were truly marvellous, however.

[ungoliant]

The exercises were truly marvellous, however.

exactly the kind of thing i am talking about. if we pooh-pooh the poses because the underlying theory is woo, we would miss out on some truly beneficial aspects to yoga exercises.

which are a part of ayurvedic therapy, btw.

[Jekyll]

exactly the kind of thing i am talking about. if we pooh-pooh the poses because the underlying theory is woo, we would miss out on some truly beneficial aspects to yoga exercises.

which are a part of ayurvedic therapy, btw.
There are some similarities with the posture work in the tai chi I practice.

It is far better to try and understand why the postures do what they do, and through testing small modifications refine them for yourself, than to just accept them and the woo theory that supports them.

[a_unique_person]

They work fine as they are. A 'back workout' with a good yoga teacher I had was a real back workout. It is built on, literally, thousands of years of experience. If the yoga made me feel worse, I just wouldn't have gone.

As for the woo part, it's quite easy to just tune out.

[Jekyll]

They work fine as they are. A 'back workout' with a good yoga teacher I had was a real back workout. It is built on, literally, thousands of years of experience. If the yoga made me feel worse, I just wouldn't have gone.

I find that repeating the same workout, it's all to easy to slip into a grove and stop pushing yourself.

My attitude has always been b:eek:gger the ch:confused:. How can I keep taxing myself?

[ChristineR]

I've always taken Ayurveda, yoga, acupuncture, herbal medicine as simply early pre-technological medicine. The scientists who first came up with these theories (chi, chakras, yin, yang, doshas) were formulating theories based on their limited observations and their cultural knowledge.

What I don't understand is why people still want to rely on two thousand year old technology. The good stuff has made it into modern medicine, the rest is interesting and appealing, but hardly good medicine.

[Pennywise]

"eat lightly in the summer" strikes me as a pretty stupid suggestion. For most people it would be contradicted by "eat more if you change to a more active lifestyle" because most people are more physically active in the summer than they are in the winter.


"the individual approach to health care is one many people feel is more conducive to successful medical treatment than the "one-size-fits-all" approach."

Insinuating that traditional medicine is a "one-size-fits-all" approach is ignorant. There are many different treatments for the same illnesses because the same thing doesn't work for everyone. Penicillin, for example, will not help people who are allergic to penicillin. Some people require surgery for the same condition that can be treated with medication. Some people are too weak or ill to handle surgery and must be treated as best as they can with medications.

In many cases though, sure, it does seem that way. If you go to the doctor with a cold, he's not going to tell you that there is a different herbal remedy depending on the color of your eyes and the number of freckles on your nose. Acting like there's something wrong with this common-sense approach to medicine is ridiculous.

[ungoliant]

"eat lightly in the summer" strikes me as a pretty stupid suggestion. For most people it would be contradicted by "eat more if you change to a more active lifestyle" because most people are more physically active in the summer than they are in the winter.


"the individual approach to health care is one many people feel is more conducive to successful medical treatment than the "one-size-fits-all" approach."

Insinuating that traditional medicine is a "one-size-fits-all" approach is ignorant. There are many different treatments for the same illnesses because the same thing doesn't work for everyone. Penicillin, for example, will not help people who are allergic to penicillin. Some people require surgery for the same condition that can be treated with medication. Some people are too weak or ill to handle surgery and must be treated as best as they can with medications.

In many cases though, sure, it does seem that way. If you go to the doctor with a cold, he's not going to tell you that there is a different herbal remedy depending on the color of your eyes and the number of freckles on your nose. Acting like there's something wrong with this common-sense approach to medicine is ridiculous.

well, thanx for the input.

first, eating less in the summertime is indicated because of the heat. ask your general practitioner. it is sound advice. people eat less in the summer natural, unconsciously, and tha's why they lose weight. well, one of the main reasons.

second, modern western medicine is excellent, but it does have a tendency to prescribe medicines to all people who present with similar symptoms, and to treat people with the same therapies without regard to their individual needs. sometimes you must even make your PCP aware of your special needs because they have a tunnel vision mentality. this is why medicines are made but they effect people different, and not every pill works on every person, with varying side effects.

did you know that the basis for many different pills is an herbal one?

also, the need to treat each patient in an individual way is a topic of converstaion in the medical industry. i had a conversation about it just yesterday with my cardiologist. he said doctors need to be more aware of the different needs of different patients, and doctors talk about this.

out of curiosity, what connection do you have with the medical industry? you seem to have strong opinions, but they clash with what i know to be reality.

see, my father was an MD, my mother and my grandmother an RN, my sister an MD. i spent pretty much my whole life in hospitals and doctor's offices. my god-father, all my dad's friends, most of my mom's boyfriends since my dad died, all doctors, and i have worked in hospitals, in various jobs, for years. so, i know what i am talking about.

no offense, but you are a prime example of what i made this post about, a skeptic who is so overzealous that he sees right past the forest for the trees.

[PixyMisa]

I've always taken Ayurveda, yoga, acupuncture, herbal medicine as simply early pre-technological medicine. The scientists who first came up with these theories (chi, chakras, yin, yang, doshas) were formulating theories based on their limited observations and their cultural knowledge.
Right.

What most people don't realise is that until very recently, the field of medicine was almost entirely woo. We could build cathedrals and sailing ships and firearms and telescopes, but if you got sick, you might as well pray as see a doctor because the doctor couldn't do anything for you. (As opposed to surgeons, who could at least cut off gangrenous limbs and such, which gave you some chance of survival.) The germ theory of disease wasn't even established until the 19th century.

What I don't understand is why people still want to rely on two thousand year old technology. The good stuff has made it into modern medicine, the rest is interesting and appealing, but hardly good medicine.
Yep. Modern conventional medicine is simply a system of "try it and see what works". If it works, it's in. If it doesn't work, it's out.

[a_unique_person]

Which describes how man worked before science, as well. Science adds a formal framework to allow for our human inconsistencies. Much was learned, however, in pre-science times. There was just no way to formally demonstrate it, other than success. Eg, the indus civilisations did flourish, and a large part of that success would have been their discovery of hygeine.

[Tony4245]

Ungoliant:

Here is the information:
Published in The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, Vol 49, May 2001
Author: Bhatt, AD
Article title: Clinical research on ayurvedic therapeutics: myths, realities and challenges.

Hopefully it'll help you somewhat in your quest... ;)

I apologize for not getting it posted here until tonight, I found out on Thursday that I was going to have to re-do my epidemiology lecture for my class tomorrow morning; so I've been a bit busy.

And DO let me know what you think of the article.

[Tony4245]

Yep. Modern conventional medicine is simply a system of "try it and see what works". If it works, it's in. If it doesn't work, it's out.

Well, there's a bit more to it than that, randomized clinical trials are a very highly evolved form of trial-and-error learning.

The number 1 rule of Western medicine is still "First, do no harm".

Heck, we've licked smallpox and have polio on the ropes.

:)

[ungoliant]

Ungoliant:

Here is the information:
Published in The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, Vol 49, May 2001
Author: Bhatt, AD
Article title: Clinical research on ayurvedic therapeutics: myths, realities and challenges.

Hopefully it'll help you somewhat in your quest... ;)

I apologize for not getting it posted here until tonight, I found out on Thursday that I was going to have to re-do my epidemiology lecture for my class tomorrow morning; so I've been a bit busy.

And DO let me know what you think of the article.

thank you very much. i told my pal to sign up here, but i guess he hasn't. i will send it to him. i hope it debunks ayurveda or i will never hear the end of it.

also, is there a link to this info? is it online?

[Tony4245]

I've always taken Ayurveda, yoga, acupuncture, herbal medicine as simply early pre-technological medicine. The scientists who first came up with these theories (chi, chakras, yin, yang, doshas) were formulating theories based on their limited observations and their cultural knowledge.

Very true. They did the best they could with what they knew.

What I don't understand is why people still want to rely on two thousand year old technology. The good stuff has made it into modern medicine, the rest is interesting and appealing, but hardly good medicine.

Well... partly because it's two thousand years old, and our woo neighbors dig anything that's "ancient". Or pre-technological. Or can be found at Whole Foods(tm). Or involves some weird belief system, in the sense that it's not the one they grew up with. Or they don't believe in "science". Or because it makes them feel "empowered".

Pick one.
:eek:

[Tony4245]

thank you very much. i told my pal to sign up here, but i guess he hasn't. i will send it to him. i hope it debunks ayurveda or i will never hear the end of it.

also, is there a link to this info? is it online?

No link that I know of, unfortunately. I had to order it through UC's document service, I have NO idea where the original library was.

You could try MEDLINE or Google, though. Good luck!

[.13.]

As far as I know: Eating too much in winter has exactly the same effect as eating too much in summer. And eating hotter or cooler foods has no positive or negative effects on your health that are dependent on the climate.

[burrahobbit]

The fact that a woo therapy has SOME good ideas does not make it any less woo.

The good ideas can be teased out, researched, tested (DBPC!) and then becomes part of medicine. (There is only one)

The fact that some medicines have herbal roots does not make all herbal products great. Where the benefits are clear, medicine has the openness to study them and incorporate the active ingredient into therapy.

My major issue with Ayurveda is that there are no standards. Anything that was referred to in certain books is accepted. There is no standard dosage, no monitoring of the herbs for the active ingredients, NOTHING.

[ChristineR]

Well... partly because it's two thousand years old, and our woo neighbors dig anything that's "ancient". Or pre-technological. Or can be found at Whole Foods(tm). Or involves some weird belief system, in the sense that it's not the one they grew up with. Or they don't believe in "science". Or because it makes them feel "empowered".

Pick one.
:eek:

I swear, someday I'm going to start a wholistic healing practice based on the four humors. When people come in I'll tell them they have an excess of phlegm, and I'll prove it by pointing to their blue fingernails.

Then I'll bleed them!;)

Seriously, the fact that it was invented in India doesn't make it any more valid than the stuff they used to believe in Europe.

[Mojo]

I swear, someday I'm going to start a wholistic healing practice based on the four humors. That's one more humour than ayurveda usually uses...

[ChristineR]

That's one more humour than ayurveda usually uses...

And two more than TCM! I think we can't lose here. Let's throw in some stuff about the four corners of the earth, the four elements, the four apostles, and tarot cards. (All this has already been done for us, BTW, so it will be simple.)

[Mojo]

Don't forget the four simultaneous days within a single rotation of Earth (http://www.timecube.com/)!

[ChristineR]

Don't forget the four simultaneous days within a single rotation of Earth (http://www.timecube.com/)!

Ah, yes! That's a great deal of humor!

[ungoliant]

As far as I know: Eating too much in winter has exactly the same effect as eating too much in summer. And eating hotter or cooler foods has no positive or negative effects on your health that are dependent on the climate.

no offense, but you don't know much then.

in the summer, when you are active, if you have a full belly you might feel sick. think of running around playing frisbee full of tomato soup.

but in the winter, you sit around more. and you can take more time to digest.

there is no need for me to defend this anymore, as it is a proven fact that people naturally gravitate to this lifestyle.

you gain weight in the winter and lose it in the summer. natural ELEM diet.

[ungoliant]

No link that I know of, unfortunately. I had to order it through UC's document service, I have NO idea where the original library was.

You could try MEDLINE or Google, though. Good luck!

well, after exhaustive searching, two hours, i found a partial article written by the same author about the dangers of ayurvedic medications which many times contain harmful metals.

i found the journal your article was in, but that particular article is not available online.

bummer. i really wanted some scientific evidence to skewer the woo with.

[ungoliant]

The fact that a woo therapy has SOME good ideas does not make it any less woo.

uhhh, yes it does. by using logic if you prove some aspects to be true then those aspects are technically not woo anymore, making the overrall woo science less woo.

lack of standards is one of the SMALLER problems in ayurveda. you should take a course on some of this stuff. the things they are saying are out there. waaay out there. like pluto.

[Tony4245]

I swear, someday I'm going to start a wholistic healing practice based on the four humors.

What - like George Carlin, Robin Williams, Jim Carrey and Ellen DeGeneres?

:D

[Tony4245]

uhhh, yes it does. by using logic if you prove some aspects to be true then those aspects are technically not woo anymore, making the overrall woo science less woo.

Um - I respectfully disagree with this. If "they" think that it works because of some paranormal or other woo-type phenomenon, then no - it doesn't.

On the other hand, if there IS some legitimate science involved; then yes, you are correct.

lack of standards is one of the SMALLER problems in ayurveda. you should take a course on some of this stuff. the things they are saying are out there. waaay out there. like pluto.

I have; and I've been there.
;)

[Tony4245]

well, after exhaustive searching, two hours, i found a partial article written by the same author about the dangers of ayurvedic medications which many times contain harmful metals.

i found the journal your article was in, but that particular article is not available online.

bummer. i really wanted some scientific evidence to skewer the woo with.

Sorry to hear it. Maybe you can get a copy through a library???

I'd heard about some Chinese herbal preparations having toxic metals, but not the Ayurvedic ones. Interesting.

[ungoliant]

Um - I respectfully disagree with this. If "they" think that it works because of some paranormal or other woo-type phenomenon, then no - it doesn't.

explain the quantitative difference between two equal results arrived at through different means.

if i use science to figure out water puts out a fire, and you use guesswork, how does that effect the water's dousing of the fire?

i will check for that info at the library next time i am there. thanks again.

also, where did you 'learn' ayurveda? i wasted thousands at the, well, i don't want to give them publicity. let's just say in northern california.

[ungoliant]

I'd heard about some Chinese herbal preparations having toxic metals, but not the Ayurvedic ones. Interesting.

oh yeah, big time. mercury is a major ingredient in ayurvedic healing.

[.13.]

no offense, but you don't know much then.

in the summer, when you are active, if you have a full belly you might feel sick. think of running around playing frisbee full of tomato soup.

but in the winter, you sit around more. and you can take more time to digest.

there is no need for me to defend this anymore, as it is a proven fact that people naturally gravitate to this lifestyle.

you gain weight in the winter and lose it in the summer. natural ELEM diet.

What if I try to run around playing frisbee with a full stomach in winter? Would I be any less sick?

It has nothing to do with the time of year.

[a_unique_person]

Your body needs less energy in summer to maintain it's correct temperature.

As for mercury? Ughh.

[Tony4245]

explain the quantitative difference between two equal results arrived at through different means.

I suppose I could, but just how does that affect the qualitative difference in the reasoning? Can't have it both ways.

if i use science to figure out water puts out a fire, and you use guesswork, how does that effect the water's dousing of the fire?

Well, on a simple level, science IS guesswork. We make a guess (hypothesis) and see if our experiment will prove or disprove it.

My argument is that if I were to ascribe a spiritual or supernatural cause to the fact that water puts out a fire, I am taking the woo road.

i will check for that info at the library next time i am there. thanks again.

also, where did you 'learn' ayurveda? i wasted thousands at the, well, i don't want to give them publicity. let's just say in northern california.

You're welcome. Hope you can get a copy.

I can't actually say I've 'learned' ayurveda per se; I've been exposed to it, shall we say, at the University of California. And was not happy about it, either.

[Jyera]

...snipe... in the past i was very taken by woo. i have since developed a more critical mind. but i am a certified ayurvedic practitioner and yoga teacher. . Good for you. I would say not every critical thinking person are brave enough to jump right in to learn something new. To learn towards a certification demands some level of standard. And we only know how much it is worth after learning.

i would like to clear up some misconceptions about ayurveda that Mr. Kendall perpetuates. I think it is good for you, who is more in the know about ayurveda, to share your knowledge with the rest of us.
...snipe..
older women are encouraged to intake more calcium for their bones.
...snipe...
these are sound pieces of advice, many of which are supported by medical research.
I'm curious about how this get into Ayurveda ?
Is this originated from Ayurveda's original research?
Did ancient Ayurveda researcher knew about chemistry to be able to isolate calcium? And to associate calcium to bone? Please illustrate more.

[.13.]

Your body needs less energy in summer to maintain it's correct temperature.


I doubt the difference is significant. You need energy to cool your body in summer (Though I don't know how much.). And wearing warm clothes in winter reduces the energy needed for warming your body.

[Tony4245]

I doubt the difference is significant. You need energy to cool your body in summer (Though I don't know how much.). And wearing warm clothes in winter reduces the energy needed for warming your body.

It's essentially the amount of energy needed for surface capillaries to either dilate or contract.

If you get REALLY cold, you start shivering - muscle activity that generates heat. Which, granted, uses more energy than just plain sweating does.

:)

[ChristineR]

I doubt the difference is significant. You need energy to cool your body in summer (Though I don't know how much.). And wearing warm clothes in winter reduces the energy needed for warming your body.

It's not much if you're inside a heated building, but in fact the difference is HUGE. The majority of your calories ends up as heat. People living outdoors in very cold climates need to eat a lot.

http://www.utah.edu/unews/releases/02/feb/eat-up.html

[.13.]

If I recal correctly those numbers (3200 - 5000) mentioned in the article apply to athletes in any climate.

When you do excercises in cold climate do you actaully use energy to warm yourself? Doesn't the excercise generate too much heat and you have to cool your body?

I agree with a previous poster that when you start to shiver you use a lot more energy. But warm clothing prevents that. I'm still not convinced that overall your need for energy in winter increases significantly.

Edited to add:

The majority of your calories ends up as heat.

I found this:
http://www.bupa.co.uk/health_information/html/healthy_living/lifestyle/exercise/diet_exercise/calories.html
Maybe majority of calories end up as heat. But according to that website person with low level of activity uses 10% of the energy intake to actually regulate the temperature (Including digesting and metabolising food.).

[Harlequin]

What a great website!

Santa vital to Christmas -
No Santa - no Christmas.
Now that's just cruel.
However, one of my favourite sections is on Evil math.
6 side Cube is Evil math,
ignoring its top & bottom.
-1 x -1 = +1 is Evil math,
as +1 and -1 are antipodes
equating a zero existence.

Still, there was one thing I heartily agreed with:

Believers are Evil - for not
measuring. Result of belief is
dying stupid

[Tony4245]

I found this:
http://www.bupa.co.uk/health_information/html/healthy_living/lifestyle/exercise/diet_exercise/calories.html
Maybe majority of calories end up as heat. But according to that website person with low level of activity uses 10% of the energy intake to actually regulate the temperature (Including digesting and metabolising food.).

Yep. Referred to as the 'thermic effect' of food.

[ChristineR]

The thermic effect of food refers to the fact that calories are used to digest (and to possibly to internally warm) food, so the effective calorie count is less than the actual calorie count. It takes a teensy little bit more calories to digest cold food than hot.

http://www.caloriesperhour.com/faqs_thermic.html

The heat lost in the digestion process is small compared to the total heat created by the body, and has little to do with the temperature regulation of the body. If it did, you would drop to room temperature after a day or so of fasting. The 65% of calories that maintain the BMR generate far more heat.

[ungoliant]

My argument is that if I were to ascribe a spiritual or supernatural cause to the fact that water puts out a fire, I am taking the woo road.

yes, but it would still put out the fire. so, later on when that fictional religion is disproved, does water stop putting out fies? do you ask firemen to stop using hoses?

[ungoliant]

I'm curious about how this get into Ayurveda ?
Is this originated from Ayurveda's original research?
Did ancient Ayurveda researcher knew about chemistry to be able to isolate calcium? And to associate calcium to bone? Please illustrate more.

suprisingly, ancient ayurvedic physicians had a remarkably accurate picture of how the human body and human physiology worked. they understood from years of observation. thousands of years.

they understood chemistry as the interaction of 'life energies' called 'doshas' and 'elements'. these were a way of naming and observing natural forces in the absence of modern science and equipment.

you would be surprised at how much correct information humans can divine in that way. for instance, many of the ayurvedic herbal remedies have been found to work just as they say, and many more are currently being tested.

also, they espoused the importance of personal hygiene, exercise, massage, relaxation, proper posture, and many other practices recognized to be beneficial to health according to modern medical knowledge. remember, until modern times this was not the case in most of the world throughout most of history.

ayurveda was the most advanced attempt at medical science until modern times. as such it was filled with many practices and much knowledge in use today.

that being said, it was also full of woo. this was more due to the limited technology than to religious thought or dogma. the scientists in ancient india were very similar to modern scientists in their thinking, processes, and openess to follow the evidence. they just lacked the medical history we have behind us that led to our evolution to modern medical science and modern technology.

the ancient indians even had a remarkably modern knowledge of quantum physics. alot of their ideas are parrallel to modern theories.

people are smart no matter what the technology. in fact, with more natural selection going on, an argument can, and has been made that people were smarter. the less intelligent were weeded out. jared diamond states this in his book, "guns, germs, and steel".

[ungoliant]

I doubt the difference is significant. You need energy to cool your body in summer (Though I don't know how much.). And wearing warm clothes in winter reduces the energy needed for warming your body.

now you seem like you are just being stubborn and pooh-poohing ideas not your own. you seem closed minded. and your ideas are not born out by evidence or practical experience.

people eat less in the summer and more in the winter. in the summer you eat 'lighter' foods and in the winter you eat 'heavier' foods. for instance, fruit in summer and soup in winter.

no one goes out and runs on a full stomach, it is uncomfortable and people have been known to vomit while engaged in heavy activity with such. people eat lite before going out to be active and then eat a big meal when they get home.

state whatever numbers you want and whatever chemistry evidence you want. all of it is not germain to the argument. which is, directly: whether eating according to the seasons is practical advice or woo. and the evidence points overwhelmingly towards it being practical.

[.13.]

no one goes out and runs on a full stomach, it is uncomfortable and people have been known to vomit while engaged in heavy activity with such.

Exactly. Now what does winter/summer have anything to do with this? Would I not vomit if I ate too much before running in the winter?


state whatever numbers you want and whatever chemistry evidence you want. all of it is not germain to the argument. which is, directly: whether eating according to the seasons is practical advice or woo. and the evidence points overwhelmingly towards it being practical.

Present the evidence please.

[ungoliant]

Exactly. Now what does winter/summer have anything to do with this? Would I not vomit if I ate too much before running in the winter?



Present the evidence please.


people are more active in the summer and less so in the winter.

and i have provided evidence all throughout this thread.

once again, you sound close-minded and argumentative. i am not gonna argue this forever.

http://www.health24.com/dietnfood/Weight_Centre/15-51-86,28358.asp

Do you always gain weight in winter? Most people will answer, “Yes” to this question. It is a common feature that human beings tend to pile on the kgs during winter, and then spend most of spring and summer trying to lose this accumulated fat. What causes this phenomenon?

c) Decrease in activity
Let’s face it, it’s not as much fun to exercise in winter, as in summer. Most people want to stay indoors if it is cold and raining. This decrease in physical activity is probably the single most important reason why people gain weight over winter.

[.13.]

people are more active in the summer and less so in the winter.

So basically the advice should be: Eat lighter before you excercise. No matter what time of the year it is.


and i have provided evidence all throughout this thread.

Really? I haven't seen any.


Do you always gain weight in winter? Most people will answer, “Yes” to this question. It is a common feature that human beings tend to pile on the kgs during winter, and then spend most of spring and summer trying to lose this accumulated fat. What causes this phenomenon?

c) Decrease in activity
Let’s face it, it’s not as much fun to exercise in winter, as in summer. Most people want to stay indoors if it is cold and raining. This decrease in physical activity is probably the single most important reason why people gain weight over winter.

Everything in your post seems to go against your advise. If you are less active in winter you should eat less so you wouldn't gain weight. And when you get more active (in summer in this case) you should eat more. If you want to maintain your weight that is. If you want to loose you shouldn't eat more ofcourse.

[ungoliant]

So basically the advice should be: Eat lighter before you excercise. No matter what time of the year it is.

Really? I haven't seen any.

Everything in your post seems to go against your advise. If you are less active in winter you should eat less so you wouldn't gain weight. And when you get more active (in summer in this case) you should eat more. If you want to maintain your weight that is. If you want to loose you shouldn't eat more ofcourse.

people exercise more in the summer. statistics and common sense bear this out.

of course you haven't seen any evidence, you are not looking for any. once again, you are the type of close-mided skeptic i wrote this OP for. you say, "no" because you think you see woo rather than research and find out yourself.

what you think someone "should" do, according to your interpretation of my evidence, is not in fact what people "do" do. so, i have all the evidence of human experience, including your own.

people gain weight in the winter because they exercise less and eat more. so, you say people should eat less in winter and more in summer? THAT'S THE AYURVEDIC ADVICE! thanks for proving my point.

[.13.]

people gain weight in the winter because they exercise less and eat more. so, you say people should eat less in winter and more in summer? THAT'S THE AYURVEDIC ADVICE! thanks for proving my point.

But in your first post:
firstly, the ayurvedic suggestions given for how needs change with season and age and living circumstance are not woo. they are common-sense approaches, such as sleep a little more in winter, (which one does naturally), and eat lightly in the summer, and eat more if you change to a more active lifestyle.

Which is it? Eat lightly in the summer or winter?

Your advice to eat more if you change to a more active lifestyle seems to contradict your advice of eating lightly in the summer. Which is it?

And again I must emphasise my point: Eat more if you are active and eat less if you are inactive. Why bother with seasons at all?

[Tony4245]

yes, but it would still put out the fire. so, later on when that fictional religion is disproved, does water stop putting out fies? do you ask firemen to stop using hoses?

And this line of argument applies to your original point... how?

I was under the impression that we were discussing the road you take to get there, not the final destination. :cool:

by using logic if you prove some aspects to be true then those aspects are technically not woo anymore, making the overrall woo science less woo.

By this line of reasoning, geocentric models of the solar system based on religion are just as logical as demonstrated heliocentricity.

Logic, in and of itself, is NOT science. I can (and used to) go on all day using deductive logic to 'prove' woo concepts. Remember the GIGO law (Garbage In, Garbage Out).

[Tony4245]

Why bother with seasons at all?

Because the spiritual guy who came up with all of this stuff, way back when, decided that certain 'elements' were affected by different seasons. And hours of the day.

At least that's how I learned it.

[Jekyll]

suprisingly, ancient ayurvedic physicians had a remarkably accurate picture of how the human body and human physiology worked. they understood from years of observation. thousands of years.


Let's get this thread moving.

http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/chopra.html

Here we have a list of some of the fallacies and bad-practices in ayurvedic yoga, from a website respected among the sceptic comunity.

One of the key points is this form of yoga was almost entirely 're'-created in 1980's after the wisdom of the ancients had been lost for hundreds of years.

And if you scroll down to the bottom there's a link to how they were selling liquid butter as a health food.

Do you have any thoughts/comments?

[drfrank]

the ancient indians even had a remarkably modern knowledge of quantum physics. alot of their ideas are parrallel to modern theories.

OK, now this I must see the evidence for :jaw-dropp

Personally I'd like to see an ancient pot with the Schrodinger equation on it ;)

[Mojo]

Do you always gain weight in winter? Most people will answer, “Yes” to this question. It is a common feature that human beings tend to pile on the kgs during winter, and then spend most of spring and summer trying to lose this accumulated fat. What causes this phenomenon?

c) Decrease in activity
Let’s face it, it’s not as much fun to exercise in winter, as in summer. Most people want to stay indoors if it is cold and raining. This decrease in physical activity is probably the single most important reason why people gain weight over winter.This may be the case nowadays, when food storage and preservation techniques (not to mention transporting it from the other side of the world) make plentiful food available all the year round, and many people have sedentary occupations so that physical exercise is optional. Go back a while, and I suspect that you'll find that people put on weight in the summer when food was comparatively plentiful, and lost weight over the winter, when food was more difficult to come by and more energy was needed just to keep warm.

[ChristineR]

This may be the case nowadays, when food storage and preservation techniques (not to mention transporting it from the other side of the world) make plentiful food available all the year round, and many people have sedentary occupations so that physical exercise is optional. Go back a while, and I suspect that you'll find that people put on weight in the summer when food was comparatively plentiful, and lost weight over the winter, when food was more difficult to come by and more energy was needed just to keep warm.

The real truth is that you can't really generalize because people have lived in so many climates and in so many cultures, but as far as European cultures, the tradition is to eat fresh food, quick growing foods, in the summer, heartier foods like apples and squash in the fall, high calorie preserved foods in the winter, and then to loose weight in the Spring when the food starts to run out.

In other words: Thanksgiving in the fall with turkey and potatoes, Christmas in the winter with dried fruit and animal foods and alcohol, Lent in the spring with legumes and whatever is left, then young animals, milk, and fresh produce in the summer.

Fall and summer are times of high activity, spring is a time of low food, but winter is the low activity/high calorie time of the year.

[Tony4245]

now you seem like you are just being stubborn and pooh-poohing ideas not your own. you seem closed minded. and your ideas are not born out by evidence or practical experience.

And then:

state whatever numbers you want and whatever chemistry evidence you want. all of it is not germain to the argument. which is, directly: whether eating according to the seasons is practical advice or woo. and the evidence points overwhelmingly towards it being practical.

I can't believe I let THIS one slip by me.

Since you don't seem to think that either numbers or chemistry can provide evidence, then what does??? Don't fall into the woo habit of summarily badmouthing or dismissing evidence that disproves something you want to believe in.

Did you come in here looking for skeptical advice, or was this whole thing a troll setup?

[PBTree]

I read once that about 32% (give or take a couple) of the worlds population are about as bright as a brick.

So, if you want people to believe something that you claim is real, lets say it fills a 10 page book, all you have to do is make sure that there is a certain amount of truth in the story. If three of the story's pages have self evident truths and the rest is just gobbledygook, then there is a very good chance that some people will believe the whole 10 pages.

I think we all agree that there may be some truths or benefits, such as hygiene or calcium for older women in this ayurveda thing so lets call them, the first 3 pages of the "ayurveda book".

Now, if you then put those 32 percenters I mentioned before into contact with the "ayurveda book", what do you get?

Instant believers.

[Flange Desire]

Welcome to the forum PBTree.

[PBTree]

Welcome to the forum PBTree.


tvm sir. been hiding in the thickets watching this one with interest.

certainly are some weird and wonderful people out there. might even start up my own medical system, if its this easy to suck people in.

How does I'maconningyou sound for a first draft?

[Jekyll]

tvm sir. been hiding in the thickets watching this one with interest.

certainly are some weird and wonderful people out there. might even start up my own medical system, if its this easy to suck people in.

How does I'maconningyou sound for a first draft?
How about the Maconiehew system of personal wellbeing?
Passed down through the great scotish clan of the Maconiehew's it describes how the the path to imortality consists of eating only deep fried porridge and drinking iron brew.