“Until Science Can Prove It”, It’s Not REAL…Or Is It?
So what about love?
I guess that by applying this type of scientific thinking, nobody has ever been “in love”. After all, there is no tangible proof of “love”. You can’t reproduce it in a lab, and double-blind studies certainly would be impossible.
Only to complicate the “science” of love, even more, is that “feeling of euphoria” experienced when one is in love. If love can’t be scientifically proven, then this feeling of euphoria, which by the way physically boosts our immune system and promotes a more positive attitude, must simply be a placebo effect (a positive health effect caused by belief). And we all know how science views the placebo effect!
Placebo = All in your Mind = Not Real Science = “Pseudoscience”!
So technically speaking, love and being “in love” are purely anecdotal, thus not real.
What about the flip-side of being in love? Everyone knows the struggle and stress of a failed relationship. The negative effects can easily go beyond depression and bring on more serious health conditions such as heart disease, immunity issues, and even cancer. If falling in love is nothing more than the placebo effect than logic would suggest that falling out of love is congruent with the nocebo effect (negative health effect caused by belief).
In both cases, how you “feel” is subjective, not objective, thus scientifically they are both nothing more than “feelings” that were created “in your mind”.
Okay then… what if we apply this same logic to something more “scientific”?
The medical science community often shuns holistic, or natural, remedies because many of these remedies have not been proven “scientifically”. Despite the hundreds of thousands of positive health outcomes reported by people recovering from various ailments, including serious health conditions such as autoimmune, cancer and diabetes, any acknowledgment by the medical community is virtually nonexistent. Instead, the medical model follows only what has been “scientifically proven” by using the scientific method of evidence-based medicine.
If major diseases such as cancer, diabetes, heart conditions and autoimmune are on the rise despite the use of pharmaceuticals, and if the pharmaceuticals were approved by the FDA only after satisfying the requirements of the scientific method of evidence-based medicine, then what does this say about the scientific method? Especially when many of these pharmaceuticals are later recalled due to serious health complications, including death. Oh, and let’s not forget all the horrific “acceptable” side-effects!
This brings up an interesting question…
On what basis within the scientific method of evidence-based medicine are those pharmaceuticals “approved” in the first place?
In medical science, the double-blind study is the standard to prove the effectiveness of a specific drug. There are two control groups: one group receives the actual drug, while the other group receives a placebo, or “fake” drug (usually a sugar pill). Neither the groups nor the doctors who administer the substances know which group is receiving which substance. This is to “ensure” that the drug is more effective than the placebo at treating whatever symptoms it has been designed to treat. Of course, all side-effects from both groups are reported.
However, there is a secret that the pharmaceutical companies don’t want you to know about it.
The reported positive effects from the double-blind studies are often greater from those who took the placebo than from those who took the drug!
This means the placebo is often more effective than the drug!
Doesn’t this technically make the scientific method itself pseudoscience since many pharmaceuticals fail due to the placebo effect?
Furthermore, are the “reported” side-effects really science based? Isn’t “reporting” a headache, joint pain, or stomach upset really only anecdotal or subjective? Can a headache be “proven”? And what if the headache came from the control group who took the sugar pill?
Honestly, when it comes down to the basics, I can understand why the placebo effect gets such a bad rap from the science community: it’s bad for business!
Think about this…
If people understood that they have the power to actually heal themselves (and now research is starting to prove the effectiveness of mental imaging and the power of the mind!), then who would profit?
The truth is, the power to heal and to maintain one’s health has always been within the mind of the individual. And every day, more and more people are waking up to this amazing concept!
- Who’s in Control of Your Life? Control, Fear and Disease
- More Proof that Medical Science Wants You on Drugs!
- US Beef Too Toxic to Eat?
- Your Scientific Reasoning Is More Flawed Than You Think
- Placebos Are Getting More Effective – Drugmakers Desperate to Know Why
- New Research on the Antidepressant-vs.-Placebo Debate