Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: ELECTROMAGNETIC SMOG IS A HAZARD TO YOUR HEALTH !
Message-ID: <698@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 18:36:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: psivax.698
Posted: Fri Aug 30 18:36:41 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Sep-85 23:20:32 EDT
References: <2066@ukma.UUCP> <499@cadre.ARPA> <1118@cbdkc1.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Distribution: na
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 30
Xref: tektronix net.med:02354 
Summary: 

In article <1118@cbdkc1.UUCP> tjs@dkc1.UUCP ( Tom Stanions) writes:
>
>Here's an interesting point, what the holistic health field knows has to be 
>proved by the same methods as conventional medicine????  If a pro-conventional
>person wants to state a point he simple picks up an "approved" source, quotes
>it, and voila --- "TRUTH".  Yet when a holistic practitioner speaks from
>experience or knowledge or simple fact he must present bonified documents.

	You show a misunderstanding of the scientific method. It makes
no claim at finding "TRUTH", nor does it reject personal experience
per se.  The skepticism of a scientist is based on the knowledge that
appearences can be *misleading* and that people often see what they
*want* to see.  The scientific method is an attempt(admittedly
imperfect) at limiting the scope of such distortions of perception.
Thus for a new idea to be accepted it must pass certain standards of
evidential support, to at least show that it is reasonable to rule out
distorted perception.  I, at least, do not automatically accept as
true everything I read in proper journals, but I generally give such
more credence because they have met certain standards of evidence.
Also such an author has put his ideas on the line, and is riking being
"disproved" - it happens quite a bit.  So if you cannot meet the
standards of a scientific journal, and are not willing to submit your
ideas to critical review, I do not see how I can really take them
seriously.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa