/* * Patch for filter_var() */ if(!function_exists('filter_var')){ define('FILTER_VALIDATE_IP', 'ip'); define('FILTER_FLAG_IPV4', 'ipv4'); define('FILTER_FLAG_IPV6', 'ipv6'); define('FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL', 'email'); define('FILTER_FLAG_EMAIL_UNICODE', 'unicode'); function filter_var($variable, $filter, $option = false){ if($filter == 'ip'){ if($option == 'ipv4'){ if(preg_match("/(\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3})/", $variable, $matches)){ $variable = $matches[1]; return $variable; } } if($option == 'ipv6'){ if(preg_match("/\s*(([:.]{0,7}[0-9a-fA-F]{0,4}){1,8})\s*/", $variable, $matches)){ $variable = $matches[1]; return $variable; } } } if($filter == 'email'){ if($option == 'unicode' || $option == false){ if(preg_match("/\s*(\S*@\S*\.\S*)\s*/", $variable, $matches)){ $variable = $matches[1]; return $variable; } } } } }
Warning: people have died trying "breatharianism," aka inedia.Why did you post this?
"Few breatharians have submitted themselves to medical testing; of those that have, including a hospital's observation of an Indian mystic surviving without food or water for 15 days,[6] none have undergone peer review with results independently reproduced. In a handful of documented cases, individuals attempting breatharian fasting have died,[7][8] and among the claims investigated by the Indian Rationalist Association, all were found to be fraudulent.[9]" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inedia)
Most people I know experience a drop in food requirements from the beginning but I am not sure all his claims are accurate.
Because the guy at http://solarhealing.com/process/ claims to follow a Breatharian diet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inedia#Hira_Ratan_Manek), the most deadly of diets (anyone who sticks to it 100% is guaranteed to be killed by it). This is from his site:PP
"Food is not a necessity for the body to function, only energy is. Conventionally, you are indirectly getting the sun energy while eating food, which is a by-product of sun energy. If there is no sunlight, no food will grow.
Therefore, as you consume the original form of food, hunger goes down starting to disappear eventually. By eight months, you should see hunger almost gone."
When I first saw Breatharianism mentioned a while ago I thought it was a joke, but some people take this dangerous advice seriously, and I am concerned that raw-al may be taking it slightly seriously:
PPSorry, but I seriously doubt that what he does has anything to do with actual breatharianism, ie getting food energy from the sun to the point where his caloric needs are diminished to nothing or nearly nothing over many months and years. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not his hearsay or that of his cohorts. So it looks like we can agree to disagree on this one.
If you read the stuff he writes and watch his videos on Youtube he says that the breatharian part is something that happens naturally and is not something that you will yourself to do.
He has been monitored as he did it in a hospital in India as an experiment.Here's what the link I provided reported about that:
The paper[35] published by Dr Sudhir Shah makes it clear that dozens of people had access to Hira Ratan Manek during the study and he went on at least one excursion: "Most surprisingly, he had himself climbed the famous Shatrunjay mountain (Palitana hill) on 4.4.01, on 401st day of his legendary fasting along with 500 fellowmen without anybody’s help, within 1.5 Hrs. only". The paper reports that the subject lost 19 kg of weight during the study period. Neither the experiment, as described in the paper, nor the paper itself have been validated by any other well-known scientific or medical journal.
There are breatharians in the worldAnd they have all reportedly proven to be either frauds or sadly misguided when investigated. As I noted, some have even reportedly even died as a result of misguided breatharian notions.
and I am not sure that someone is going to stop eating on a whim or after reading my post.Like I said, the first time I heard about it I thought it was a joke and didn't take it seriously. Then I discovered that some folks were actually taking it seriously, which is concerning. It's the most dangerous diet (perhaps "non-diet" would be more appropriate) I've come across so far.
Sorry, but I seriously doubt that what he does has anything to do with actual breatharianism, ie getting food energy from the sun to the point where his caloric needs are diminished to nothing or nearly nothing over many months and years. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not his hearsay or that of his cohorts. So it looks like we can agree to disagree on this one.PP,
Here's what the link I provided reported about that:
And they have all reportedly proven to be either frauds or sadly misguided when investigated. As I noted, some have even reportedly even died as a result of misguided breatharian notions.
Like I said, the first time I heard about it I thought it was a joke and didn't take it seriously. Then I discovered that some folks were actually taking it seriously, which is concerning. It's the most dangerous diet (perhaps "non-diet" would be more appropriate) I've come across so far.
PP,
It appears that you have missed the whole point of the thread which had zero to do with whether there are breatharians in the world.
...Most people I know experience a drop in food requirements from the beginning but I am not sure all his claims are accurate.
He has been monitored as he did it in a hospital in India as an experiment.
When your eye doc said what they said, you have to bear in mind that they make a living from people with poor eyesight so since this is all free and it helps your eyes, they are not likely to look (pun intended) into it.Yes, and just as I apply healthy skepticism to the sun guru guy's claims I also do so to my optometrist's claims. Skeptical is my middle name ;) and no one like me who takes a controversial therapy like Ortho C seriously and eats high meat could ever be mistaken for someone who takes all conventional claims at face value. :)
We don't do LSD and that story about the guy damaging his eyes while spaced out, is as old as Lysergic acid diethylamide.Yeah, I was skeptical of it too, but he didn't say it was the only reason not to and I figured better safe than sorry, especially given my history of light sensitivity. I rarely wear sunglasses and I do sun gazing, which are already radical steps as compared to most people.
I stopped wearing them altogether since I started gazing. I think they are a hoax.Again, the only time I wear sunglasses is in my car when the sun blinds me while driving so that I'll likely die if I don't, which is very rare (generally only when the sun is low and shining directly into my eyes and is stronger than usual)--death by car accident because I'm blinded is no joke--or when I'm on the lake in the summer and the sun is painfully strong because the rays are bouncing off the lake. I find that the longer I'm on raw Paleo, the less I need the sunglasses. I NEVER wear sunglasses out of fear of the sun's rays. I only wear sunglasses to reduce glare for driving safety and pain minimization, not to block UV rays.
There is another thread on the Bates Method. I know someone who experienced 2 or 2.5 improvement but when he stopped it went back somewhat.Yes, the experiences I've seen reported were even less thrilling, with multiple people reporting no improvement at all. Granted, I was skeptical of the technique from the beginning and Bates Method promoters might claim that it requires belief for the technique to work, but truly effective techniques shouldn't require belief for them to work. I was open minded enough that if I had any positive result at all I wouldn't have dismissed it.
I also know a guy who had psychic surgery done by a friend of his and he doesn't wear any reading glasses (age 60+)I mean no offense or disrespect, but as someone with a skeptical epistemocratic philosophy (one that recognizes that human knowledge is very limited and likely always will be and is highly skeptical of claims of ability to forecast or fully understand highly complex matters), claims mean nothing to me. I find evidence more persuasive. The more extraordinary the claims, the more extraordinary the evidence must needs be to support the claims. If the psychic surgeon can actually demonstrate his/her paranormal abilities, there's a $1 million prize waiting for him (http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html). After he wins the prize I'll take some interest in his abilities, but I won't invest any time in it beforehand.
I recall reading somewhere in an Ayurvedic book that there was some thing that if a woman did it while pregnant it would cause vision problems 2 generations down the line.This matches knowledge about the damaging epigenetic effects of modern foods on fetuses and Pottenger's cat experiment in which he found that a biologically inappropriate diet caused increasing problems with each generation that were particularly damaging starting with the third generation. Do you remember the Ayurvedic book title or author?
If I knew then what I know now I would have stopped that madness. I went to him in an effort to get prescription safety glasses and he tried overprescribing me for reading glasses because he said he was "saving me money" He laughed when I asked him what exercises were good for your eyes after I explained the ones I do. He said there is nothing you can do for your eyes. He wasn't a bad person just misguided.Not surprising. You were asking him to give up much of his livelihood by claiming that there is something beyond prescription lenses or surgery that can resolve myopia. Did you really expect a different answer? Nutritional and lifestyle factors in myopia have been reported by scientists since at least the 1930s. Unfortunately, there's little to no profit motive supporting them, so they continue to be largely ignored.
Yes, the experiences I've seen reported were even less thrilling, with multiple people reporting no improvement at all. Granted, I was skeptical of the technique from the beginning and Bates Method promoters might claim that it requires belief for the technique to work, but truly effective techniques shouldn't require belief for them to work. I was open minded enough that if I had any positive result at all I wouldn't have dismissed it.2 to 2.5 diopter improvement is quite substantial. Problem with Bates Method is that it requires effort, which most people balk at. Everybody wants a pill or a knife to make problems go away. Bates Method requires no belief and indeed no money as I have seen copies of the book online and downloadable. You have to persist and do it regularly. Last time I looked there was a forum on it but that was years ago.
I mean no offense or disrespect, but as someone with a skeptical epistemocratic philosophy (one that recognizes that human knowledge is very limited and likely always will be and is highly skeptical of claims of ability to forecast or fully understand highly complex matters), claims mean nothing to me. I find evidence more persuasive. The more extraordinary the claims, the more extraordinary the evidence must needs be to support the claims. If the psychic surgeon can actually demonstrate his/her paranormal abilities, there's a $1 million prize waiting for him (http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html). After he wins the prize I'll take some interest in his abilities, but I won't invest any time in it beforehand.
This matches knowledge about the damaging epigenetic effects of modern foods on fetuses and Pottenger's cat experiment in which he found that a biologically inappropriate diet caused increasing problems with each generation that were particularly damaging starting with the third generation. Do you remember the Ayurvedic book title or author?
Not surprising. You were asking him to give up much of his livelihood by claiming that there is something beyond prescription lenses or surgery that can resolve myopia. Did you really expect a different answer? Nutritional and lifestyle factors in myopia have been reported by scientists since at least the 1930s. Unfortunately, there's little to no profit motive supporting them, so they continue to be largely ignored.
I have some sympathy for James Randi given psychic frauds, but I still think he is at the other extreme, a total sceptic who will never be convinced by things that aren't covered by mainstream science.Skeptics also are a dime a dozen. Rupert Sheldrake covers them quite eloquently and displays (some of them) as frauds themselves by in one instance pitting a skeptic versus a neutral observer at the same experiments. The skeptic actually influenced the experimental outcome as is predicted by quantum theory. Very fascinating discussion.
I have some sympathy for James Randi given psychic frauds, but I still think he is at the other extreme, a total sceptic who will never be convinced by things that aren't covered by mainstream science.Sure, it's possible that he and his organization may go overboard, which is a natural failing of human beings, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they have never revealed any frauds or bogus claims. There are countless hoaxes in the world and new ones devised seemingly every day. I myself have encountered con artists and know friends who were either conned or luckily avoided being conned by scammers.
Problem with Bates Method is that it requires effort, which most people balk at.Insufficient effort or imperfect application is a common excuse made for therapies that don't work. For example, it is an excuse frequently made for vegetarianism/veganism and I suspect the same is true for the Bates Method. If it really works marvelously it would seem likely that it shouldn't require extreme effort to get the slightest improvement.
Everybody wants a pill or a knife to make problems go away.I think you mean many people as you obviously don't want that, nor do I. I agree that it is a common problem, but it doesn't apply in my or your case and so is irrelevant to this discussion.
You have to persist and do it regularly.Some people report rapid and effortless improvements from it, yet if anyone doesn't get improvements then proponents claim that extraordinary persistence is required, and as I mentioned, it's a common excuse made for bogus therapies, along with "You must not have done it right" and so forth. Again, no disrespect is intended, but this serves to increase, rather than diminish, my skepticism. If more people reported small improvments even with just small effort, as was reported with Ortho C, this would increase my interest (though it still wouldn't prove anything, of course).
Regarding the psychic surgery, the proof was in the individual whom I witnessed reading without glasses. It was done to him by a friend and required the exchange of no money and indeed his friend was not interested in doing it for others.I highly doubt that the fellow wouldn't want $1 million dollars. I doubt even more that all psychic surgeons in the world would forego a million dollars if they really had the ability. It doesn't matter to me whether they think they have the ability. It only affects my life if I think they have the ability and to convince me of that they'll need to produce evidence rather than just make claims or have others who make claims for them. Besides, if they refuse to demonstrate their ability they have already conceded the issue for all practical purposes.
It is not important if you feel that you are a superior scientist and all this is hooey. It either occurred or it didn't. I witnessed it.It doesn't require me or anyone to feel superior to not adopt a belief in an extraordinary claim and your witnessing is not hard evidence any more than my witnessing to the existence of the Celestial Teapot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot) is evidence. When it comes to real, knowable matters that could negatively affect real people, then "the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others" (whether this applies to unknowable Black Swans is another matter). To insist that other people believe something simply because you claim to have witnessed it and to suggest that they feel superior if they don't accept your claim at face value is unreasonable and impolite.
As far as a practitioner being interested in impressing anyone...Where did I write that someone was trying to impress anyone? I don't recall that. If the psychic surgeon doesn't want to impress anyone he could win the prize anonymously. If he doesn't want the money he could donate it or just refuse it. The point is that I'm not going to believe something just because someone tells me to. There's no harm in evidence and a little evidence goes a long way in improving credibility. You can try all sorts of arguments to try to convince me of this person's paranormal abilities, but they won't work without evidence.
A friend of mine is capable of this stuff...Another unsupported claim. If he's capable of it then I'm happy for him and if he doesn't want the million dollars, he can donate it to the charity of his choice or I'll gladly take it. :) If the Amazing Randi's organization is misguided or malevolent then surely the money would be put to better use with a good charity? Heck, if your friend can prove his ability, I'll make a donation to his favored charity myself. It would be the first proof of a human with paranormal powers and a world-shaking event that would likely inspire millions.
and he made the mistake of doing it for some people with a sob story. He regretted it as people started nagging him. They want an even easier solution than a pill or a knife.A little nagging is hardly the end of the world, especially when his powers have such enormous potential to do good, if they are real.
BTW I hope that I do not sound snotty as it not my intention, I was just relating a story.You didn't sound snotty, but I don't appreciate the comment about my feeling superior, as it is untrue and unkind, though I'll give the benefit of the doubt that it was not intentionally so. If you believe that of me then you don't understand the philosophy of skeptical empiricism, which is pretty much the opposite of feeling superior. It means that all I know for certain is that I know nothing. One of the things I don't know for certain is the factualness of your claim re: psychic surgery.
If there are people in larger cities who claim to do these things I would be wary.I would be skeptical of all who make such extraordinary claims, particularly if they charge any money for their services. Since the person you're referring to apparently didn't charge anything then he sounds largely harmless, though it's possible that someone might forego necessary therapeutic treatment, such as improvement in diet to a raw Paleo diet, if they are convinced that psychic surgery is all they need and have an issue which the psychic surgery doesn't fix but they believe it has.
Re the book, "Ayurveda Mother And Child" by Vaidya Bhagwan Dash. Probably in the first couple of chapters.Thanks for the citation.
While I'm no fan of psychic surgery as a notion, I don't think Randi's 1 million dollar prize means anything. I mean, given the fanatical devotion Randi has to mainstream science(re his stance on homeopathy etc.), he will always come up with ways to avoid having to hand over that prize. For example, he always expects a 100 percent success-rate for his open experiments; but the fact is that if, say, a dowser gets it right "only" 80 percent of the time, that would still imply that dowsing was a valid practice.Thanks Tyler and PP,