Luke, I agree. He must hurry, because each day we are losing I don't know how many species. A lot of animals feature prominently on the endangered list. The way global warming is going we might also have to go on the list one of these days. Then there's mad scientists playing around with 'Armageddon' viruses (see above article). Bad times ahead. I studied the prophecies of Daniel extensively, and if my interpretation is correct, a few things must still happen before the end arrives. But that's another thread altogether.
Posts by Vidqun
-
148Who designed cancer?
by snare&racket inone thing i regret, is not listening to the questions in my head whilst a jw.
one i didn't ask until years after leaving was....who designed disease?
of course the first thing to realise is the complexity of disease, the histology, pathology and aetiology.
-
-
-
148
Who designed cancer?
by snare&racket inone thing i regret, is not listening to the questions in my head whilst a jw.
one i didn't ask until years after leaving was....who designed disease?
of course the first thing to realise is the complexity of disease, the histology, pathology and aetiology.
-
-
Vidqun
Stonewall, good point. Granted, circular reasoning at its best. I believe each must work out his own salvation, whatever form it takes. Certainly, it takes a leap of faith to be religious. But what is good for the goose is good for the gander. The same goes for the theories of the biologists.
There is a certain method in my madness. I have a scientific background so I try my best to apply scientific method, even when it comes to something abstract as God and religion. As a theory is postulated, input from all sides will decide whether the theory should be approved or rejected. I believe, at the moment, the only way one can prove the existence of God is though prophecy, i.e., accurate prediction of the future, something that we humans are incapable of. I am working on it. So far, because of a lack of information, the jury is still out on God.
To summarize: I'm guided by the following: Scientific method starts with the postulation of a theory. The process includes observation and accumulation of evidence. From these a theory can either be proved or rejected. What complicates my quest for truth, is preconceived ideas (mine and those of others), which pose a threat to scientific method. These could 1) prevent objective reasoning to take place, 2) entice one to tamper with the evidence, 3) cause one to adapt one's data to suit the occasion, or 4) to ignore that which contradicts.
This is what helps me get through life, for what it's worth.
-
148
Who designed cancer?
by snare&racket inone thing i regret, is not listening to the questions in my head whilst a jw.
one i didn't ask until years after leaving was....who designed disease?
of course the first thing to realise is the complexity of disease, the histology, pathology and aetiology.
-
-
Vidqun
This is a recents news article. It is called: Scientist create 'Armageddon' virus in lab. And this is certainly the negative side of Medical Science. Perhaps an article for a new thread.
London - A super-strain of bird flu that could infect and wipe out millions has been developed in a laboratory.
Dutch scientists who created the “Armageddon virus” say it is “probably one of the most dangerous viruses you can make”.
Their research focused on what it took to convert bird flu - which can kill more than half of those infected but does not spread easily - into a highly-contagious virus. They said this knowledge would be vital for the development of vaccines and drugs to prevent a possible pandemic.
But others argue the virus should never have been created - and warn the potential for the bug to escape from the lab is “staggering”. There are also fears the recipe will be seized on by terrorists looking for a biological weapon.
The US government is so concerned that its advisers are trying to block the details of the virus’s manufacture from being published.
National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity chairman Paul Kiem, an anthrax expert, said: “I can’t think of another pathogenic organism that is as scary as this one. I don’t think anthrax is scary at all compared to this.”
However, others pointed out that similar fears - raised six years ago when another team of scientists recreated the Spanish flu virus that killed up 50 million in 1918 - proved groundless. The latest controversy surrounds the H5N1 bird flu virus. In 2005, there were warnings of a potential bird flu global pandemic which would kill hundreds of millions.
Of the 573 people that have caught the bug so far worldwide, 336 have died. However, the germ’s inability to spread easily from person to person means the predicted pandemic has never materialised.
Now, scientists at the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam have created a H5N1 bird flu that spreads as easily as winter flu. In experiments on ferrets - whose flu symptoms are most like humans’ - just five mutations in two key genes turned the “normal” bird flu into a highly contagious, super-spreader. The scientist behind the project, Ron Fouchier, said: “We now know which mutations to watch for in the case of an outbreak and we can stop the outbreak before it is too late.” A university spokesman said: “If this type of research is carried out under maximum safety conditions, the benefits are greater than the risks.”
But Donald Henderson, an expert in biosecurity who spearheaded worldwide drive to eradicate smallpox, told New Scientist magazine if a highly contagious virus with a 50 percent kill rate got loose, “a catastrophe would result”.
The journal Science said the US government’s request to publish only an abbreviated version of Dr Fouchier’s work was being taken very seriously. - Daily Mail
-
148
Who designed cancer?
by snare&racket inone thing i regret, is not listening to the questions in my head whilst a jw.
one i didn't ask until years after leaving was....who designed disease?
of course the first thing to realise is the complexity of disease, the histology, pathology and aetiology.
-
-
Vidqun
Snare&racket, view it as revision. I have been idealistic in my time. I also thought Medical Science was going to come up with all the answers. I was horribly disappointed. Don't worry, you'll get there. In the end, you and your patients will have to face a final reality, all grow old, fall ill and die.
Firstly, let's not go into detail. Been there, done that. My medical textbooks are also old and not 100% up to date. My interest is the religious and theological side of things, and there my library's reasonably more up to scratch. In connection with cancer and viruses, I must admit, there I have lost track of the latest research, and I'll take your word for it. But it still boils down to the fact we are deteriorating, not improving.
Secondly, I refer you to my first post on this thread (second post overall). There I dealt with genetic mutation. I might add, this is caused by many outside factors, e.g., radiation, ultraviolet, chemical and viral agents, some of them also being hereditry, e.g. trisonomy 21 or Down syndrome. This fits well with the hypothesis I am suggesting.
Rising life expectancy: Thank God for proper hygiene, diet, antibiotics, etc. It did wonders for life expectancy. It's definitely not because we are getting better or improving as a species.
People die because their organs give out. There, you've said it. Why do they give out? I refer you to my previous posts.
Teeth. Perhaps if we were related to sharks, it would have gone better with our teeth. A new set every so many years. However, one's teeth can last longer if one looks after them. That goes for animal teeth as well. But few want to brush their pet's teeth. Whatever the case, the fact that our organs are not regenerating, replacing old and worn out cells, is a riddle in itself.
Most posters on this board have Watchtower on the brain. Watch out, that borders on fanaticism, which makes one lose sight of the more important things. E.g., the Nazis were so intent on destroying the Jews, they forgot they were fighting a war. Forget the Watchtower for one moment. The border of Hayflick I learnt in Virology. Granted that was a few years ago. Perhaps you want to research that. Quiz your Virology professor and come back to me on that.
No, I am not interested in the views of biologists. Let me tell you a little story: The Greeks believed in spontaneous generation. The came Antonie von Leuwenhook (spelling?) with his microscope, and Pasteur, and they proved spontaneous generation doesn't exist. These were the fathers of a new science called Microbiology. Then I turn to my biology text books to read that life did indeed originate spontaneously. You need a great amount of faith to believe that.
I glad you use the term "make". Because man can play with the genetics, but making a cell from scratch. I don't think so. If he can do that he will have solved all our problems. No, we are not there yet. I think you are not only dazzled by science, you're blinded by it.
Depending on which cancer I contract one day, I will indeed decide whether I will accept treatment or not. I have seen many a patient being stripped of their belongings by greedy oncologists. Then he or she dies in any way. If my doctor tells me I have 5% or 10% chance of surviving, I will ask for a big presciption of morphine, and call it quits.
The question is: Who will have the last laugh? Time will tell. If you put you faith in Medical Science, you will be sorely disappointed. It's a promise. Bottom line, if God had kept his hand on things, on the earth and on nature, as well as those one earth, things would not have deteriorated the way they did. If things go on the way they do, what type of future are you and your children looking forward to? Can you hear this penny dropping?
-
34
could Jonah have survived in the belly of a whale?
by highdose inits not like he had access to oxygen, light, fresh water or food.
what about the digestive jucies in the belly?.
please correct me if i'm wrong, but surely this just can't be possible?.
-
-
Vidqun
Room215, I believe this part of the narration is based on fact. That's human nature for you. You preach to your enemies, they have the audacity to repent. No fireworks, what a disappointment!
-
148
Who designed cancer?
by snare&racket inone thing i regret, is not listening to the questions in my head whilst a jw.
one i didn't ask until years after leaving was....who designed disease?
of course the first thing to realise is the complexity of disease, the histology, pathology and aetiology.
-
-
Vidqun
Again from a Biblical persective, animals do not entertain the prospect of eternal life, therefore something had to be designed to take them out (Please don't ask me about the dinosaurs. I really don't know what happened there). Unfortunately man is now in the same boat. Unfair, I know, but I didn't make the rules.
-
148
Who designed cancer?
by snare&racket inone thing i regret, is not listening to the questions in my head whilst a jw.
one i didn't ask until years after leaving was....who designed disease?
of course the first thing to realise is the complexity of disease, the histology, pathology and aetiology.
-
-
Vidqun
From a Biblical persective it's not too hard to explain: With a perfect immune system, you would be able to ward off any disease. Because of imperfection you grow old and die.
We were taught live cells (of the human body) are graveyards of viruses. When viruses replicate themselves they use our DNA/RNA. In the process, things can go wrong. One's DNA is changed or damaged. Cancer results. But an optimum immune system will keep out all bacteria and viruses. Problem solved.
Mutations result because of faults in the DNA or RNA of our parents. When two of these faults overlap, its a disaster for the offspring. Since man chose independence from God, we have been going down hill fast. Medical Science has made great strides, but eventually we grow old and die.
Babies are susceptible to many diseases because of underdeveloped immune systems. Old people are susceptible to many diseases because of faulty or aging immune systems. When cells are young, they flourish. When they become old they start dying off because of the "Border of Hayflick," something that could not be explained in my day. The understanding of these things might have changed. It is a long time since I studied. Only cells that I know of that do not die off, are cancer cells, i.e., when you cultivate them on growth media.
I was always impressed by the design and working of living cells. Man has not succeeded to create even one of them, even with the most advanced laboratories. That means man can replicate but he cannot create. I know the evolutionsists will have a different take on the matter. However, the above is compatible with my Bible-based faith, so I would explain it this way.
-
21
I have a question about the blood video
by blindersoff induring the week of jan 30 at the service meeting, the society's video "a video that highlights an important medical trend" will be discussed using the 12 questions listed below.
does any one know if any of the information in this particular video is mis-quoted or mis-represented?
notice that none of these questions involve scriptures - only medical viewpoints.
-
-
Vidqun
Don't shoot the messenger because you don't like what he says. And be careful not to criticise just because you don't like the source of the information. One of my lecturers always urged: Think, it may be a new experience for you. Feel free to check the facts. And yes, of course there's pros and cons in all medical emergencies. Depends on where you had your training. Some believe blood cures all ills of society. Others are more careful, realizing that blood can be dangerous. I fall in this category. Each case is different, and must be evaluated according to merit. However, each must make up his or her own mind. I have worked in a Clinical Pathology environment for over ten years, and that's my experience. Even in automated environments there is something called human error, which can kill you. Specimens are marked by hand. E.g. pilots are highly trained individuals and they make mistakes. Would lab personell be different? Also remember, the Bloodbanks are pushing their own agendas. The facts coming from them are not always hundred percent sound. Coming back to the illnesses contracted by blood, the Hepatitis family have grown to quite a number. Do they test for all these variations? And did you know, in the eighties and nineties the hemophiliac population of the United States was virtually wiped out by AIDS? That demonstates my argument. You decide for yourself. I repeat, this is from a medical perspective.
-
21
I have a question about the blood video
by blindersoff induring the week of jan 30 at the service meeting, the society's video "a video that highlights an important medical trend" will be discussed using the 12 questions listed below.
does any one know if any of the information in this particular video is mis-quoted or mis-represented?
notice that none of these questions involve scriptures - only medical viewpoints.
-
-
Vidqun
I'm sorry, but I have some bad news for you. It makes 100% sense to refuse a blood transfusion. Let me put it to you this way: If you or a family member is involved in an accident, say in Africa. Would you take blood or allow a family member to be tranfused? I know I will not, over my dead body. I'll take my chances without it. Then, while in Africa, ask any person involved in the Medical profession, whether they will take blood, or allow a family member to take blood. They will answer: Never. Why?
If you have been to these bakward places, like Africa, you will know the standards are not very high. There the doctors bury their mistakes. First of all, there are compatibility issues. Not two people's blood are the same. Your blood is as unique as your finger prints. ABO and Rh+ or - are major antigens. The rest they do not take into consideration because they seldom cause problems. How sure are you that the technician did a proper job when he tested for them? The manual method is especially dicey, because you must continue shaking the tube to see if the blood coagulates. If you shake too hard, the blood cells break up, and could cause a false positive.
Secondly, there's a pandora's box of diseases you can acquire, especially in Africa and the tropics. How do you know the blood they are going to put in your veins is not contaminated? Stored blood also have an expiry date. How do you know that expiry date is not long gone?
As far as I know, studies did prove that those people that were not transfused (e.g. JWs) recover quicker from major operations and that they have less infections. Remeber, when any foreign antigen is introduced into the bloodstream, the immune system will react against it. So the immune system of people that were not transfused can concentrate on the job at hand and does not have to fight foreign invaders.
Please take note. The above is from a medical and not a religious persective.
I asked my Physiology Professor about it, and he remarked that blood was like dynamite. If you don't treat it correctly, it will kill you.
-
34
could Jonah have survived in the belly of a whale?
by highdose inits not like he had access to oxygen, light, fresh water or food.
what about the digestive jucies in the belly?.
please correct me if i'm wrong, but surely this just can't be possible?.
-
-
Vidqun
In an old Ripley's Believe It or Not (book), I read the story of a seaman on a wahler falling overboard, and being swallowed by a whale. Eventually the whale was harpooned and they discovered the mariner inside it, alive. However, he was bleached white by the gastric juices in the whale's stomach. It certainly is a case of, Believe it or Not.