Anita Moorjani Experiance?

[John Nowak]

1) The entire story may be made up.

2) The story happened but is wildly exaggerated.

3) The therapy she underwent in the hospital worked.

4) She lucked out. As was pointed out before, cancers are known to sometimes go away on their own.

All or some of the above would explain what happened, without invoking prayer or positive thoughts.

It's not like we have a perfect understanding of cancer or the mechanisms the human body uses to fight it. "Medically impossible" is actually rarer than a spontaneous remission.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I want to see Kumar's answer before I provide the actual answer.

Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk

Sorry. Can you convince him to put me on Ignore? Then I would not have to worry about re-railing the thread.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

…and thus we have mind over matter. Aren’t you excited to discover that you and Kreskin have so much in common!




How could I give an example of such an event when it is plainly impossible to explicitly establish how the mind is involved. All we have are claims. Some claims are robust, some are suspect. None can be definitively confirmed any more than any can be summarily dismissed. Lots of stupidity involved on both sides of the question.




Of course she’s only presented a claim. How on earth could any of it be verified?

...but then again, how can anything be verified about the most insignificant moment of your own subjective experience...or anyone's?




If the mind is involved, then there is a cognitive event. That’s what cognitive means.




…the occurrence of which is also a complete mystery.




Bare assertion.




Bare assertion.




Bare assertion.




…and you need to stop waving your hands about like an epileptic on a red-ant hill.




The skeptic equivalent of a National Enquirer editorial. Slander, misrepresentation, bare assertion. Facts…who needs facts!

Good for you.




Clever boy.

If you flap your arms any faster, I still don't think you'll fly. But to answer just the comment you directed at me. So what? Because we can't explain therefore woo-ish unmeasured and unmeasurable forces?

You should thank that Evolution by Natural Selection has bubbled up a few humans who can think else we would still all be wondering if it was worth living in caves rather out in the rain.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Any other trusted link please?

Other than the one at Wikipedia you have now been given twice? You can even follow up the references yourself.

Can we deny possibility at all?

We can deny the possibility mostly, based on the lack of any objective evidence and prior similar cases that have been investigated and shown to have more mundane explanations.

 

[abaddon]

I just seen the article.

What article? I referenced no article. I simply asked you what you thought noetic concordance was.

 

[abaddon]

Sorry. Can you convince him to put me on Ignore? Then I would not have to worry about re-railing the thread.

Sorry. Nobody can convince Kumar of anything.

 

[Daylightstar]

…and thus we have mind over matter. Aren’t you excited to discover that you and Kreskin have so much in common!
...

And thus? How so? Don't forget to say how.

…
How could I give an example of such an event when it is plainly impossible to explicitly establish how the mind is involved. All we have are claims. Some claims are robust, some are suspect. None can be definitively confirmed any more than any can be summarily dismissed. Lots of stupidity involved on both sides of the question.
...

^{Hilite by Daylightstar}Alright, can you give an example of such a robust claim?

…
Of course she’s only presented a claim. How on earth could any of it be verified?

...but then again, how can anything be verified about the most insignificant moment of your own subjective experience...or anyone's?
...

One could start by establishing that she actually had cancer as claimed and that remission actually did occur.

…
If the mind is involved, then there is a cognitive event. That’s what cognitive means.
...

..... the mind as currently established to function as far as knowing, understanding and perception is concerned. How could any of these functions be involved in 'mind over matter'?
Would you include another type of functioning of the mind which is not like the above mentioned?

 

[Daylightstar]

Yes, this can be one and science of pontaneous Remission is unclear. Something is mentioned on following link.



Frequently Asked Questions about Spontaneous Remission
http://www.noetic.org/frequently-asked-questions-about-spontaneous

These are a bunch of irrational clowns who latch onto unknowns. Choose your friends wisely .....

 

[Kumar]

1) The entire story may be made up.

2) The story happened but is wildly exaggerated.

3) The therapy she underwent in the hospital worked.

4) She lucked out. As was pointed out before, cancers are known to sometimes go away on their own.

All or some of the above would explain what happened, without invoking prayer or positive thoughts.

It's not like we have a perfect understanding of cancer or the mechanisms the human body uses to fight it. "Medically impossible" is actually rarer than a spontaneous remission.

Science can not be based on asumptions. If "cancers are known to sometimes go away on their own" as you pointed out, should we not try to understand its science?

 

[Kumar]

Other than the one at Wikipedia you have now been given twice? You can even follow up the references yourself.



We can deny the possibility mostly, based on the lack of any objective evidence and prior similar cases that have been investigated and shown to have more mundane explanations.

Are those trusted sites?

I do not deny that science can be there behind any happening. It is different issue that that still is a miss or weakness of science. I do have some faint idea about spontaneous remission, may or may not be valid on advanced scientific research and studies. Best thing was from you that you have first mentioned it.

 

[Kumar]

Oh please do share

Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk

I am now simply interested in trying to understand possible science of so thought "spontaneous remission in cancer". I have faint idea about it and also already indicated indirectly but we all should try to understand it. Nature has gifted us a strong survival mechanism.

 

[Kumar]

What article? I referenced no article. I simply asked you what you thought noetic concordance was.

No not like that. I meant that I had just seen the article on google search about spontaneous remission.

 

[Kumar]

Sorry. Nobody can convince Kumar of anything.

No anyone can provided if he can go upto universal truth or atlease upto absolute truth. I usually mention A&F.

 

[Kid Eager]

No anyone can provided if he can go upto universal truth or atlease upto absolute truth. I usually mention A&F.

Alfalfa and Fluorine?

 

[Kumar]

Alfalfa and Fluorine?

No, spontaneous remission should be dependent on spontaneous happenings in body due to any disease. It is not absolute thinking?

 

[Daylightstar]

No, spontaneous remission should be dependent on spontaneous happenings in body due to any disease. It is not absolute thinking?

Kumar, your posted 'considerations' are not valuable to the world. In fact, they are a disgrace to humankind.
You will not ever learn about spontaneous remission, or anything else for that matter, you will just continue to add your own confusion and ignorance to any discussion as the most important aspect of that discussion.

It's a display of exactly what the world doesn't need.

 

[Kid Eager]

No, spontaneous remission should be dependent on spontaneous happenings in body due to any disease. It is not absolute thinking?

Incorrect. Happenings need not be spontaneous.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Because it is remarkable how many times these miracle cure people do not tell the truth.

Bare assertion.

Cancer treatment isn't an instant cure, and takes considerable time to work. Things often get worse before they get better. It is quite common that patients undergo a course of treatment which knocks them about but actually has an effect - cancer treatment is rough, no doubt, and it can make you morose and hallucinatory.

When some patients end that treatment, go home and take their herbal remedies, homeopathy or rainbow unicorn therapy, this just happens to coincide with them getting over the actual treatment and starting to recover. But they confuse cause and effect, and credit the woo therapy with any improvements.

Moorjani was being treated with conventional medicine for lymphoma, just prior to her "NDA episode". She says as much herself.

They make up lies about everything so that they can get publicity and money.

Bare assertion.

Moorjani now travels the world doing lectures on her experiences. That's an expensive hobby. So do you think she affords this from her housekeeping and seeks no publicity? Maybe she hasn't published a best-seller book either...

Their lies fool people who accept them. and think they are true.

Bare assertion.

Do you think her assertions are true or false? Do you think she knows herself if they are true or false? Do you think her audience would be different if they were proven false?

So in this case, you really need to do some more research.

…and you need to stop waving your hands about like an epileptic on a red-ant hill.

I work in a children's hospital and I see every day the outcomes of people who do NOT do their research but take these charlatans' notions on board unquestioned, only to have to turn to conventional medicine when it is far too late. Others on this forum are doctors and will have more similar stories. Be very careful who you disparage.

I am betting you will find this person was never sick with cancer, she never went to hospital, she never had a near-death experience and she never had a miraculous cure. She made it all up as a story to fool gullible people.

The skeptic equivalent of a National Enquirer editorial. Slander, misrepresentation, bare assertion. Facts…who needs facts!

The facts are readily available on this person, and often on all these people who make miraculous claims.

 

[Kumar]

Incorrect. Happenings need not be spontaneous.

How it can be done? Or how spontaneous remission can be taken as treatment given?

Do you define spontaneous remission as a natural remission without any modern medical intervention?

 

[Nay_Sayer]

How it can be done? Or how spontaneous remission can be taken as treatment given?

Do you define spontaneous remission as a natural remission without any modern medical intervention?

I suspect you don't really care about any answer that would be given to you.