Page 1 of 3

Food results are in

PostPosted: March 24th, 2014, 9:19 pm
by Watereddown
TO all the food experts on this board:

My food results are in. A few things to note here.

As it turns out, I am allergic to eggs. The normal level is < 10. My level was 2000+ with a side not of "severe reaction to eggs". Also, the standard range of IGA is between 110-580, with 110 being really low. Mine was 90. My doctor told me this indicates to her that although it doesn't show on the blood test that Im gluten intolerant, I indeed am, since my immune system is not strong enough to create an effect against the gluten since its at 90.

She firmly believes that the eggs and the gluten are the cause of my BFS. Anyone else on this board allergic to eggs? I eat eggs A LOT. Which explains why I constantly feel like $&*^. I just never see eggs thrown out here before. I'm really interested if anyone else is. I am a little skeptical that eggs are the root of all my problems, but I am definitely going on a strict diet to see how I feel. Will keep posted.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 25th, 2014, 8:34 am
by SecretAgentMan
Your results do not surprise me. Many cultures for vaccines use egg whites to incubate the viruses used, which is one of the reasons why egg allergies are believed to be on the rise. You won't hear that from mainstream medicine though. I would suggest you talk to your doctor and ask them to read up on Leaky Gut Syndrome if they are not already familiar with it. It is also known as Increased Intestinal Permeability. It is treatable through diet and supplements. It can very well be a major contributor to your BFS symptoms but it is likely just another manifestation of lifestyle choices that need to be addressed.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 25th, 2014, 12:16 pm
by Watereddown
Thanks for the reply SAM. She mentioned leaky gut syndrome, and how gut permeability can lead to unwanted substances crossing the blood-brain barrier. it is pretty interesting

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 25th, 2014, 4:09 pm
by SecretAgentMan
It sounds like you're in component hands then. Just for your information I was treated for LGS and my BFS symptoms responded very well. Hopefully you have similar results.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 28th, 2014, 6:43 pm
by Little Lost
Just banged this out so sorry if post full of typos, I dont know about a lot to do with this BFS lark, but I used to work in this immunology area.

I just want to advise you to use caution when interpreting results of antibody levels. These tests are often misinterpreted and misread. There is temptation to overstretch their significance and some practitioners (and patients) will often give them too much weight in the diagnosis of allergy. Some clinics love them, especially the large screening ones, as they usually come up with a positive to something, which sends the patient away happier.

However there is a big drawback…….Many of these tests are notoriously inaccurate.

3 main reasons for this inaccuracy.

1) The tests detect specific antibodies but here is the stumbling block. Not all antibodies are pathogenic, some are protective and actually guard against inappropriate immune responses. (so may be allergy preventing rather than allergy promoting). Kind of like a chaperone, i.e. taking the food substance by the arm and leading them protectively past all the angry solders of the immune system. These antibodies are an important and normal part of immunotolerance (the processes by which the immune system is educated not to respond to harmless antigens). So the immune system shows dichotomy i.e. both pathogenic and tolerant responses and antibodies can be involved in both processes. So elevated antibodies can be a normal physiological response to frequently ingested proteins and are commonly detectable in healthy adults with no pathology (especially true of IgA) Conventional Ig E testing (a test of immediate reactions), has got problems, including cross reactivity (binding non specifically to the test allergen giving false highs) and problems such as I list below in reason 3.

2) Inaccuracy is also due to the fact that not all allergic reactions are Ig mediated. You can have what seems like allergy without antibodies even playing a role. Examples of this are food additives binding to mast cells directly, general inflammatory reactions of the innate immune system ( no antibodies) Additionally some people lack the ability to break down certain foods due to lack of the enzymes.

3) Some of the sample allergens tested are in the raw form. For example you may be allergic to raw egg, have lots of pathogenic IgE, but when we cook it the protein changes and it all denatures, so there is no raw allergen left, and you may tolerate it in this form, i.e. you might not be allergic to cooked egg.

So are there specific differences between the tests.

Out of them all the most useful antibody test is the RAST serum IgE (ImmunoCAP), however for some of the food antigens it can still give misleading results, false positives and negatives. Originally designed for use in specialised field to be USED ONLY as an indicator and as PART of a full allergy work up, it must never be used in isolation to diagnose allergy.

(Funny story: We used to call the machines that process these samples the terminators, because the immunology department had 10 of them, all with little swinging robotic arms back and forth relentless, going zeee zeeee day and night nonstop for years, trying to keep up with the huge amounts of patient samples). The only time they got turned off was if someone was having a breakdown and shouted “TURN the dam terminators OFF…just for a minute so I can think”. On days when they were out of sync…was like a continual cats choir of ZeeeZeZe s….bad days, emotionally disturbing. Even Xmas day Zee Zee Zee Zee all day long). Anyway jokes aside these are useful tests but only in conjunction with the full work up.

The other testing method which is growing in popularity especially amongst non medical clinics is quantitive serum IgG levels (any of the subclasses of it), Seen as a scam, it plays little role in either immediate or delayed type hypersensitivity. It is not recognised by the world allergy foundation etc and a single patient sample sent to 10 different labs can yield 10 completely different results in 80% of cases. You may as well be testing for monkeys in the blood, they would be of more significance. There is no regulation for cut off points, because none exist, so who decides the cut off point at your lab, could be a local celeb, perhaps Billy Joe Armstrong or Steven Tyler or both of them for all they care. Bit like pin the tail on the donkey, a stab in the dark, stay clear.

So in summary: Results vary from test to test and within and between antigens. Also depends on individual levels of exposure, and immunostatus at time of testing. Manufacturers of these tests conclude : “ A definitive clinical diagnosis must not be based solely on the results of a single test method”.

So what is needed to diagnose a true food allergy. That work up should combine ALL 3 of the following.

1) Before testing a detailed clinical history strongly suggestive of allergy (rash, urticaria, stomach pain vomiting or diarrhoea after ingestion, lip swelling, facial angiodema- etc, etc). This is very important because the screening is now all encompassing (many allergens, 100s), so odds are in favour of some substance being positive, regardless if it be true allergy or not. So if someone has a headache and ataxia, and the doctor decides on a random allergy testing ( not suggestive by symptoms), and that test says patient sensitive to Pokeweed, then the under qualified practitioner may wrongly connect the two and conclude the symptoms are caused by exposure to pokeweed. ( Confused patient says what the f is pokeweed, doctor replies no idea but it is causing you to be ataxic) and this diagnosis misses the brain tumour. That is why referring symptoms must be significantly suggestive to justify this line of investigation. If not there is temptation to use a positive as an escape goat. Kind of like someone going to a dentist for a sore tooth and getting their shoe size tested, then dentist concludes your tooth is fine the pain is coming from your feet. So clinical history should be strong and relevant.

2) Next follows the allergy testing with an evidenced based method and performed by competent health professional. Skin *beep* testing is useful but is not done routinely because you need to be qualified to use it (risk of anaphylaxis), medics with lesser qualifications and dieticians etc are not allowed to carry it out. One problem is wheal skin reaction size can be increased if damage is done when pricking the skin, giving a false positive, i.e. a reaction to the injury rather than the substance being tested.

3) Any positive test should then be follow up by medically supervised controlled elimination and reintroduction studies. Globally the gold standard for defining true food allergy is known as “ the double blind placebo controlled oral food challenge”. Your doctor SHOULD NOT diagnose any allergy on antibody levels and clinical details alone and then just leave you to perform your own elimination tests. Elimination and challenge diets follow a strict medical protocol, they can be dangerous, ( especially as you were told your allergy to egg seems severe !!!!!) and most patients couldn’t do this on their own. If your doctor is qualified to run the tests and diagnose allergy then they have to follow you through and not just leave the patient at this stage. This part of the diagnosis pathway will give you an answer.

So that is the 3 components of a proper allergy work up.

I am not meaning to be antagonistic, but you should be aware that if you abstain from certain food groups for long periods of time, you run the slight risk of losing the immunological memory of these foods, so by the time you reintroduce them, then you may get a reaction (perhaps a severe one). i.e. the immune system has lost molecular memory of say egg protein. This is because immunotolerance to ingested proteins is easier to induce early in childhood, it is maintained throughout adulthood by memory T and B cells regularly encountering that antigen, and also by the inherently immunosuppressive environment of the gut. If we lose our “lack of response” in adulthood it is not the best to get back. So there are consequences of long complete abstaining from primary foods. They have to be justified, there has to be a true and not perceived allergy.

The other risk is that if you do have a severe allergy to egg, you need follow up. Allergies are temperamental things and not to be messed around with. If you are very allergic as your doctor has suggested, are you at risk from anaphylaxis, should you carry an epipen, what about vaccinations, and can people in your work place eat eggs in the same space as you are in etc etc.

THAT IS WHY YOU CAN’T GET OFF THE BUS WITHOUT PART 3 OF THE WORKUP. True allergies are more complex than just feeling crap.

As I said this post is voicing my concerns about antibody testing in allergy, it is not really about the debate of Leaky gut syndrome which is about systemic effects of gut permeability due to intestinal inflammation, a completely different discussion. However if you feel you have immune driven gut inflammation then it can be detected by markers such as calprotectin levels.

Hope this post helps and doesn’t cause confusion. It is just the words severe allergy on your report alarm me as severe allergy is actually quite rare and unpredictable, and hopefully you are getting proper follow up.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 28th, 2014, 8:00 pm
by SecretAgentMan
Thanks Little Lost for the perspective of an immunology veteran. Early on I used to use the words allergy and intolerance interchangeably but later started gravitating towards using the word intolerance when describing my own experiences regarding food triggered symptoms. I have heard different definitions of both words, so I'm still not entirely sure what the true difference is. I just feel more comfortable using the term intolerance to describe my food related triggers because I know they were directly related to my increased intestinal permeability issue.

My immune system did learn to target those foods proactively though because even after healing I still had anxiety and twitching pop up as a result of unintentional ingestion of something I wasn't supposed to have. This confirmed the blind aspect proving it wasn't placebo. Symptoms would crop up and I would have to go back and investigate what I had eaten earlier only to find a hidden ingredient I was not supposed to have. I also had an anti-body blood test further validating I had an issue with certain foods. Whether it was a true allergy, intolerance, or sensitivity is really just a word game to me. I had a learned immune reaction to something that really shouldn't have been a threat.

To make matters more interesting I was able to completely overcome these reactions using the acupressure based techniques like NAET. Thankfully I was even able to overcome my hay fever seasonal allergies that I had suffered with since grade school. My first spring not having to take allergy pills was amazingly joyous. Whatever the subtle differences between a true allergy, an intolerance, or a sensitivity, they all responded equally well to the energy medicine techniques in my case.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 29th, 2014, 12:26 pm
by Little Lost
Hello again
You are right in that food intolerance is not the same as food allergy even though clinically they may appear similar. Different mechanisms drive them, so medically the terms are not interchangeable.

Food allergy predominantly is driven by a type of antibody called IgE. It can be is a very intense reaction. For example if you have an allergy to PROTEIN X which is in shellfish, this means you have made IgE antibodies that will fit protein X. (People not allergic will not have these antibodies). So this IgE once made will binds to cells called mast cells (round bags full of magic dust) and sit in a state of readiness, it then waits and waits. So you go to a restaurant and you order shellfish so ingest or inhale the allergen X, it binds to the waiting IgE and the mast cell attached to it literally explodes.

This explosion causes inflammatory molecules to be released, they flood the area and your intestines react. The aim of these molecules is 2 fold, to immediately expulse the antigen out of the GI tract ( the runs, vomiting), and secondly to flood the area with fluid ( angiodema), and recruit accessory immune cells to make sure anything left behind is dealt with. Like a mob hit in the ganster films. So typically you are sick while still in the restaurant, with the runs, bad stomach cramps, and then 6 hrs later in comes the systemic response and up goes your temperature and you feel really ill. Interestingly IgE is actually designed as the antiparasitic arm of the immune system, it literally shakes the parasites out of the intestinal tract, hence the much exaggerated violent gut symptoms in true severe allergy. In the airways it does the same, it narrows the airways and produces tons of mucus to trap and cough out.

That is why I wrote the above post to urge further investigation. Watereddown was told she seems to have a “severe allergy” to egg, so she should be followed to verify. Severe, can occasionally be life threatening, and legally you have to inform your workplace. In contrast minor food allergies are very common and everyday, but severe ones are a completely different kettle of fish. That is why I felt I had to write. I didn’t want watereddown to be left hanging, and should know if it is a stream or a river if you get my drift.

You are right food intolerance is different, not IgE related and the presence of antibodies are often a consequence of the disease, and not the cause. There are 100s of causes of various food intolerances, and they can make life miserable, but there effects tend to be more long term, malabsorbtion, failure to develop, toxic metabolites, rather than anaphylaxix.

Some people on here talk about gluten food intolerance which is often related to a disease called celiac disease, you will know all this and probably more, but as it is a common topic on the forum it may be good to explain a bit about it.

This is a common disease, it is NOT caused by gluten, it is caused by an autoimmune destruction of structures called villi in the gut. This damage creates a gut that can no longer process gluten, i.e. celiac disease indirectly causes an intolerance to gluten. Gluten is a protein found in 3 types of cereal, namely wheat, barley and rye. Its symptoms are both local to the gut and systemic body wide. There is a lot of evidence it can have effects on the nervous system which is why a lot of people on here chose to investigate.

True celiac disease can be diagnosed from case history gut problems, failure to thrive in children, biopsy, and the presence of specific IgA antibodies ( these are a by-product , i.e. a useful biomarker), all on a genetic background of something called HLA-DQ2/8 . This HLA type is predominantly found in the European race. Note people with this genetic haplotype also more readily develop Type 1 diabetes and thyroid problems so that is why these diseases are often co associated. Once diagnosed you follow a gluten free diet.

However there have been recent developments because you clearly get a lot of cases where gluten avoidance is associated with improvements of symptoms in patients that don’t fulfil the celiac profile, i.e. they have NO specific IgA antibodies, NO villous atrophy, and whose HLA type does not match the diagnosis criteria. These patients are now diagnosed with something termed “Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity”. Symptoms are similar to true celiac disease. The offshoot of this is you can’t now say gluten intolerance is only seen in celiac patients. As many as 5% of the general public may have trouble with gluten.

(Note the most frequent paper downloaded from publishing journals by GPs is one defining gluten related disorders. So it is very prevalent in their patients)

So with both forms of this disease which I have described, symptoms occur soon after ingestion of gluten and resolve after withdrawal, just to reappear if rechallenged. There is statistically more to it than a placebo effect (i.e. in the patients mind), as SAM pointed out, he was not aware there was gluten in some of the things until he developed symptoms again. This is backed up by the literature.

So are true “celiac disease” and the “non celiac gluten disease” caused by the same thing and the answer is probably no. They have the same end product (i.e. you need to avoid gluten), but don’t reach this end point by the same path. The non celiac form may be a result of inappropriate responses to things called FODMAPs (sugars like fructose) which are high in wheat and legumes. So it is not gluten, but sugars in wheat. Probably these people can eat barley and rye which true celiac disease patients cannot. The jury is still out on this, so tend to advise a gluten free diet as blanket cover.

Celiac disease does without debate cause an increase in gut permeability, especially the D-variant ( diarrhoea predominant). This is not what people argue about. What they to and fro about is whether this leaking is physiologically relevant, or just part of a normal gut process. Look at some studies in a minute.

So permeability is an accepted fact. There are ways of measuring gut integrity and that is a whole science unto to itself. ( suffice to say for those interested these include lactose/mannitol ratios, levels of Claudin 1 and 4, cell infiltrate profiles )etc etc. There was one bit of evidence that is factually incorrect, and a bit cringe worthy. That is when people say the presence of food specific IgA or IgG in the blood is a measure of leaky gut. Antibodies normally travel and interchanging from systemic (body) to mucosal (gut) and vice versa. It is like a motorway with lots of off and on ramps. The immune system in the gut sends antibodies out into the periphery. Additionally antibodies are made in the bone marrow, and how exactly are they to get to the gut if not via the blood. The mucosal and systemic immune system cross talk, things travel. IgA and IgG antibodies to food are not normally pathogenic, they are not IgE …they should be in the blood. This statement is like saying leaky gut exists because I detected blue cars on the motorway. It is the one statement that devalues the whole idea of leaky gut because it makes the messenger look like they do not have basic physiological principles in place.

However leaky gut does occur, but does leaky gut syndrome, i.e. is it enough to cause systemic effects. There is a lot of evidence out there to suggest it does. Many posters on here talk about the effects on the nervous system so what are they talking about. Here are just 2 brief examples.

Example 1
Autism is not caused by gluten intolerance, but may exaggerate certain behaviours. Many elimination and reintroduction studies suggest gluten avoidance may result in modest improvements. Why would this happen. Well various studies suggest that incomplete breakdown of gluten and caesium lead to the generation of substances called opioid peptides. These peptides are thought to cross the gut barrier, enter the bloodstream and in turn cross the blood brain barrier (enter the brain space). Here the excess of opioids affect neurotransmission resulting in amplification of aggressive, repetitive moods. Several studies indicate improvements 8-12 months after gluten avoidance in children and adults.

Example 2
Schizophrenia is associated with celiac disease, this may be through a common genetic makeup which predisposes one to the other, but others argue the release of exorphins food derived peptides from gluten, can exert influence on physiological processes in the brain. Others argue against this and say the excess exorphins are just a biomarker of neuro inflammation.

On this site posters such as SAM and BFSBurger report dramatic changes in twitching patterns after avoiding gluten. I think they are probably quite meticulous, it is not for everyone, as elimination is a big commitment and may or may not yield any results. It may be worth looking into for those who have an interest.

Of course there is scepticism to the concept of gut leaking causing systemic disease, but not as much as some would have you believe. There is massive interest in this field, and much funding. At the moment there are large scale, good quality randomised control trials underway.

The whole gluten free market is exploding, and it does some alternative health practitioners and certain health food producers no harm to create an image of siege mentality to boost sales. i.e. it is us poor isolated holistic practitioners against the big bad world of commercialised medical science, a world full of veterans and old dinosaurs. People susceptible to this propaganda are made to feel like the enlightened and chosen ones, people with insight enough to get on the lifeboats when the big ship of science is failing and sinking. This profile and image could not be further from the truth, most researchers are in their 20s and 30s and very dynamic, enthusiastic workaholics. However stereotyping “true science” as the enemy can certainly boost sales.

As I said the scientific community is not ignoring this, they are embracing it…it is termed HOT SCIENCE (since 2011), which just means topical and well funded.

Such questions currently being addressed in ongoing studies include
Is NON celiac gluten sensitivity permanent or transient?
How wide spread is undetected gluten sensitivity (0.5% -6% is the current scale).
Search for strong biomarkers. (There is currently a huge multicentre placebo controlled study to realise this goal). Good biomarkers mean better diagnosis and better research.
Better methods for testing gut permeability, and defining possible systemic effects. (Numerous cause and effect studies underway in this area).
Lots of bench to bedside articles educating medics about leaky gut syndrome and where abouts the research stands.

So that is where this post ends, there are many who will know more about it than myself.


Ps SAM I am glad your respiratory allergies have cleared as you decreased your gut inflammation. The gut is a major centre for educating the immune response. Some become trained as fighters (fight bacteria etc) and some are trained as peacekeepers (not to respond to harmless food). The gut should in health be immunosuppressive by nature, if aggravated more fighters take over and the peacekeepers can lose their voice. Resolve gut inflammation helps restore balance. It is no surprise you got better respiratory responses as gut and airways are all part of the same mucosal immune system.
I guess the lesson from all of this is to take time and listen to your own body.

pps I do have a life...I am away oot dancing in 4 inch heels tonight and I will suffer badly the morrow with the twitches...

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 29th, 2014, 2:17 pm
by SecretAgentMan
Thank you Little Lost for all of the very useful and interesting info. Much of what you said was mostly validated to me through my own experience. While I do not doubt that some holistic or naturopathic doctors capitalize on or play into the us vs. the rest of the world mentality I can assure you that the doctors I saw did not. I know you didn't direct this comment at anyone directly, but I just wanted to put that out there anyway. My frustrations and suspicions of the conventional mainstream medicine paradigm are based solely on my own observations and reflections on my first hand experience. This does not mean I am anti-modern medicine. I believe the mainstream medical paradigm is exceptional at treating certain conditions. I am a big believer in using the right tool for the right job and just feel that they are largely ineffective in certain areas because they almost completely ignore a tool that is a big part of the puzzle.

I've posted on this before but I believe that missing piece of the puzzle is the subtle energy system that acupuncture and acupressure work with. I realize that you have extensive knowledge in immunology and have probably worked in the field under the mainstream medical paradigm so you probably have significant psychological resistance to such a notion. As an engineer I can certainly sympathize with that perspective because I was once there. After being exposed to different aspects of energy medicine though and achieving results that cannot be explained away by placebo or any other conventional means it caused me to reconsider this perspective. The scientific community is very heavily focused on the non-ambiguous physical side of reality where things can be measured for cause and effect relationships. If you can't see it, touch it, or measure it then it doesn't exist. The energy is there though and it is always exerting it's influence. We do a pretty good job of ignoring it and explaining it away but sometimes it exerts such an influence (especially when directly worked with) that you cannot help but notice.

My gluten intolerance did not gradually go away over a period of time after healing my gut permeability issues, nor did my seasonal allergies/hay fever. These reactions took place over the course of a day each. Monday I had hay fever and by Wednesday it was gone. That is what happened. The only thing that took place in between was an NAET treatment and a 25 hour avoidance period while taking a homeopathic. That's how NAET is advertised to work and that's how it worked. I realize this likely turns everything you've learned on it's head, but that is because you were never taught about the existence of this energy nor were you taught its influence on your physical health. Everything in nature that works does so for a reason. NAET works with the subtle energy system of the body to directly change the way your immune system responds to whatever trigger you are working with.

This energy is not just some strange nebulous thing that only minimally exerts and influence here and there. It is so much a part of you that you would be amazed. It directly responds to your thoughts, your emotions, and your beliefs. Emotional traumas or limiting beliefs can cause the energy to stagnate in certain areas. Physical illness always seems to manifest in the affected energy areas. It does not seem to go the other way around. The energy always seems to precede the physical.

We get glimpses of this energy's influence in our lives from time to time and experiences like this are an accepted part of the human experience. Have you ever walked into a room and although you witnessed or heard nothing you can just tell that people had been fighting? Have you ever been in a crowded area and get a feeling of being watched? You instinctively turn around and immediately lock eyes with that one person far away looking at you? Have you ever thought of someone just before they called you? Animals are very sensitive to this energy too even though we humans rationalize it away. If you've ever watched the TV show the Dog Whisperer, the host Cesar Millan is always talking to the pet owners about projecting their energy as the pack leader. They are always amazed when Cesar walks into the room and minutes later their troubled pets start behaving. Cesar acknowledges this energy and works with it. The dogs pick up on it and respond in kind. Even though he tells people what he is doing and demonstrates it they are still amazed.

This energy does more than just bind all living things together. We set the tone and temperament through which we lead our lives. This energy follows suit and manifests the physical experience that unfolds before us. Our stress, negative thoughts, negative emotions, and limiting beliefs manifest as physical illness and dysfunction. Thankfully we live in a very forgiving universe because there seems to be very little energy behind the negative end of the spectrum. It takes a long time for negativity to manifest on the physical level. The positive end of the spectrum has far more power and thus manifests much quicker. This is why it is never too late to turn things around. The body has an amazing ability to heal when the mind gets out of the way and this process is accelerated when the mind cooperates and facilitates.

If you think all of this seems far fetched I can understand, but one piece of evidence that may help illustrate the validity of these claims can be found here: ... all&src=pm

This article is about how people with multiple personality disorder can have different allergies, drug reactions, blood pressure, and even eye sight depending on what personality they are in. Keep in mind that personalities can be dramatically different and under the energetic model their issues would likewise be completely different therefore driving different physical conditions. It seems the physical world we live in is really just a reflection of our state of energy, individually and collectively. I've been diving into the different aspects of energy since discovering it in 2010 and have not been disappointed. Make what you will of this. I'm just relaying my experiences and my perspective based on those experiences. I've done a lot of research too, but I do realize there is always another angle to be considered. My experience has validated my perspective to me, but then again doesn't everybody's? Thanks for reading.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 30th, 2014, 4:49 pm
by Little Lost

I am sorry to be antagonistic and I know you used the word “probable” but I take slight exception to your words about me

Quote “you probably worked in the field under the mainstream medical paradigm so you probably have significant psychological resistance to such a notion. As an engineer I can certainly sympathize with that perspective because I was once there.”

SAM …..I hope you are not trying to squash me into the stereotypical box I was talking about in my last post, (i.e. about how medical scientists are portrayed by holistic practitioners) because I aint going into no box !!!!!!

If I can be so rude as to turn your words around and suggest you could may have “significant psychological resistance to the notion that someone who works in mainstream science has the ability to have a mind versatile enough to consider a lot more than you would ever realize. I am not a robot, a sheep in a pen, blinkered by prejudice, and I am so sorry if my past posts have conveyed this image to anyone.

Yes I agree there are regimented components to my work. I was taught how to conduct watertight reproducible scientific investigations. To look and relook, to investigate and reinvestigate, and to work within the realms of long established statistic models that said my results were as true as I could get them. Any of my conclusions must be fully backed by numerous observations and physiological models, and must be reproducible. Additionally I can’t have any vested interest in the research, i.e. not able to financially profit from it. We are not allowed to be influenced by our race, religion, or spiritual beliefs. The road from bench to bedside is very long, and very meticulous.

So has working within these strict realms dimmed my eyes, skewed my psychological profile, Is my mind really just a book of collected facts, and the only pages I will consider adding, are those which have been created in a” true scientific way.” No SAM because we have a magical exhilarating and extremely privileged component to our work… a breathtaking privilege….. WE GET TO CREATE AND EXPLORE OUR OWN HYPOTHESISES…..
This is what I do as a research scientist;
1. Observe some unexplained aspect of the universe (with me it is life science).
2. Invent a novel tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results. ( this is where the regimented bit kicks in)
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation (more regimented bits)

Look at stage 2: This means the generation of an original though. What can be more creative than that? How many people in their life get to create in their mind, and then experimentally explore an original thought that they alone have devised? Let me tell you creating hypothesis can be hard, you can’t throw out any possibilities, and a versatile open mind is essential. You need to be open to all possibilities, for example where would gravity be if Newton could not put the moon and the apple into the same box. Research scientists live at the boundary between what is known and unknown. If I became significant psychological resistance to possibility of any notion, then I would fail. I would crawl away into a hospital lab, put on a white coat that is 2 sizes too big, and process patients’ urine samples day after day.

As for your post I did enjoy it and the article you posted seems to fit in with the whole flow of energy through the pathways ( meridians I think they are called). I take it you mean that in each of the personalities the blockage was different or absent, thus giving different or resolution of symptoms. Different information was flowing to the cerebral cortex depending on which personality was in control. What surprised me was how quick it seemed to happen. I thought the change of signal/information would take longer, but it was interesting it was instantaneous in the child.

I hope one day conventional and non conventional medicine will shake hands. I think one sticking point is the lack of regulation and controlled studies, which is poles apart from the hoops jumped through by traditional medicine. They often don’t produce any safety data, and don’t conduct clinical trials. They argue that many therapies are based on a fantastic knowledge of traditional medicines gained and passed down over 1000s of years, and also rightly point out that they rarely get the funding grants to conduct trials. Some also argue that the methods they use cannot be measured within scientific limitations.

There is no doubt alternative medicines have a place.
Quote: Although the approach and focus of different types of alternative therapies may differ, they all seem to share the following characteristics:
• Empowerment of the individual to participate in and take responsibility for his or her own health
• Recognition and emphasis on lifestyle issues, such as proper nutrition, exercise, adequate rest, and emotional and spiritual balance
• Treatment of the individual as a whole person
, as opposed to a series of parts
Emphasis on preventing disease and maintaining health.

As you said the right tools for the right job. I guess not all tools come out a mass factory, some have to be specially crafted.

Now let me get back to my health anxiety……

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 30th, 2014, 6:37 pm
by SecretAgentMan
Little Lost wrote:Hi SAM

I am sorry to be antagonistic and I know you used the word “probable” but I take slight exception to your words about me

Quote “you probably worked in the field under the mainstream medical paradigm so you probably have significant psychological resistance to such a notion. As an engineer I can certainly sympathize with that perspective because I was once there.”

SAM …..I hope you are not trying to squash me into the stereotypical box I was talking about in my last post, (i.e. about how medical scientists are portrayed by holistic practitioners) because I aint going into no box !!!!!!

If I can be so rude as to turn your words around and suggest you could may have “significant psychological resistance to the notion that someone who works in mainstream science has the ability to have a mind versatile enough to consider a lot more than you would ever realize. I am not a robot, a sheep in a pen, blinkered by prejudice, and I am so sorry if my past posts have conveyed this image to anyone.

Little Lost, I did intentionally use the word 'probable' to convey my interpretation and assumption based on your post. Zero offense was intended and I apologize that it came across as it did. I try to be sensitive to the widely varying perspectives and beliefs people have and simply offer my own with as much explanation as I can to 'bridge' the gap that I perceive. I wasn't trying to put you into a box.

Similarly the psychological resistance comment was not meant to belittle or offend you. I believe that we all have psychological resistance to concepts that go against our personal biases. I am no exception to this. I believe it is part of the human experience and goes hand in hand with each of us having a unique perspective separate from any other person's. In re-reading my post I probably could have worded that better, but it is what it is now. Hopefully this clears up any confusion and puts your mind at ease. :)

Going back to the subject of your post regarding the scientific method I do want to highlight one additional aspect that many scientists fail to consider (and no I'm not suggesting this of you). Are you familiar with the two slit experiment in quantum physics? If not this short 5 minute animated video explains it nicely:

Basically at the quantum level small pieces of matter (electrons in the case of the video) can behave as a particle and a wave. They behave as a particle when they are observed and a wave when they are not observed. The perplexing conundrum is, how does matter know it is being observed? This experiment gives rise to things such as the 'observer effect' where the very act of observing something can influence the results of an experiment. There are multiple experiments that back this up including one where people consciously focused on influencing random number generators and showed a significant statistical skew. Other experiments worked with people exerting conscious influence on strands of DNA winding tighter or relaxing.

When we take the observer effect into consideration it is actually impossible to remove our own biasing influence from experimental outcomes. Zero physical interaction is required. Whether observed in real time or after the fact the effect makes its presence known. No matter how strictly controlled an experiment is, the observers will always exert an influence that statistically skews the results in a measurable way.

Another aspect is the 'multiples' effect where throughout history different people in different regions of the world make similar discoveries at almost the exact same time. Many major scientific discoveries fit the multiples pattern including calculus, the electrical battery, the telephone, the steam engine, the radio, decimal fractions, the discovery of Oxygen, color photography, the discovery of sunspots, and even the law of the conservation of energy. There is evidence to suggest that our seemingly original thoughts can actually be shared by many.

The energy that acupuncture works with appears to be part of a much bigger system where everything is connected, including our very thoughts. Interestingly the acupuncture meridian system shares the exact same mathematical properties as a hologram, where a tiny piece contains all of the information to recreate the whole. For example, there is an acupuncture point on your right ear that maps to every other part of your body. The same is true of the left ear, each hand, each foot, etc. Michael Talbot's book 'The Holographic Universe' goes into much of the details of the striking connections.

I'm going into all of this to highlight the distinct possibility that nothing is truly isolated from anything else, especially our thoughts. Under the holographic universe model thoughts are things and drive the energy that drives the unfolding of our physical experience. Modern science has its own dogmas and can act much in the way that religions act for others. Again, I am not accusing anyone here of being too caught up in either of these. I am simply sharing my thoughts on the subject with the added context of the examples I am referencing (and I got a lot more where those came from).

I usually don't go into too much detail on the theories of how energy works or why because the honest, simple truth is that the concepts really are not even necessary in order for the universe to work the way it works. The most important thing I think is to focus on finding our inner peace, coming to terms with our fears, and learning to go with the flow. The rest will fall into place really. I do enjoy discussing the theories and possibilities of how things work and why. After all, everything in nature that works does so for a reason. I love trying to figure out what those reasons are and exploring them. It is partly why I became an engineer. I like to understand how things work and why.

Thank you for engaging in this wonderfully thought provoking discussion. Please understand that I am not trying to impose my views on anyone. I just wanted to say that again in case you get the impression I am trying to challenge you.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 31st, 2014, 5:31 pm
by Little Lost
Thank you for your conversation which was very interesting.

So we have skipped from immunology to leaky gut to quantum mechanics, and the observer effect....OK dont know much about it but in the spirit of things I will give it a go.

I felt the YouTube clip about the 2 slit experiment seems to suggest that the action of simply visually “looking” at an electron, is what made it change its behavior, and in addition to this you ask “How does MATTER know it was being observed”

So the starting point is we know that observing the electron changed something.

View 1
It is the observation itself that makes the wave function collapse. Either the electron is self-aware, or perhaps the consciousness mind can have an direct effect on the physical world, later in the post you put forward an whole array of many fantastic examples of such a possibility (DNA manipulation, consciously focusing on influencing random number generators). So this view has been well represented. However as you will be aware there is a camp 2 and possibly a camp 3, so for the sake of balance let’s air them.

View 2:
In the experiment the observer is not a conscious agent, i.e, not a physicist actually directly visualising it. The observer is acyually a mechanical detector that is part of the experimental apparatus. In order to make an observation, this inorganic detector must interact with the electron, so this opens the possibility that it is the detector device and not a conscious person which collapses the wave function and destroys the interference pattern.

Steven Hawkins addresses this in his book “The Grand Design”. He says it is the “REQUIRING TO SEE” that changes the course. To see things requires the detector to use photons (packages of light) to hit and reflect off the object in this case the electron. Despite photons having no mass or electrical charge they can still move other particles around. Therefore the bouncing of the photons off the electron changes its energy, momentum and position. The electrons state is irrevocably changed thereby altering the outcome of the experiment.

Hawking likens it to rolling of a football along the ground (the electron). Now throw balls at it from the side (the light photons). You are then going to change the way the football behaves by physical interaction. ( additionally if this takes place in the dark it would not be possible to know where or at what velocity the football was moving before the hit).

View 3:
So in this camp are non quantum mechanical explanations. For example some doubt that the electron fired is the same electron that is being detected, due to the inability to establish the trajectory path.

I think they have recently used other methods to try to determine which slit the particle (a photon this time) went through, without interfering with its wave-like properties. This seems to generate even more arguments and counterarguments. It is termed one of the most curious and perplexing puzzles in physics.
It is interesting that one day in the 1920's when Albert Einstein was out walking in the woods with one of his close friends, he suddenly turned around and asked 'does the moon continue to exist when we stop looking at it.

I do understand and was taught about the observer effect. That every measurement changes the object that we want to measure, and this give rise to the whole question of whether we can ever know the true nature of things. How much it influences an experiment I think depends on 2 factors, firstly how large an influence it is , and secondly how predictable are the changes they evoke Hidden variables is one of the main reasons that experiments have to be reproducible Not everything can be compensated for, but variables can be reduced.

Without doubt the “observer effect” is hugely frustrating for certain sciences such as quantum physics, where investigatory methods influence the situation and velocity of small particles. Also running out into a field of lions blinding them with camera flashes will influence the lions' behaviour, but how far should the “observer effect” be considered. For example should we stop taking patients temperatures because the very act of placing the cool probe in the armpit (or ear) will interfere with the result by lowering the actual true temperature, so the reading won’t be true? No because the end result is the same, the patient has a high temperature. The observer effect has not been influential enough to render this equipment useless.

Thank you very much for your views on the energy which acupuncture works with and how it appears to be part of a much bigger integrated system. To be honest I have never had acupuncture, never felt the energy, and so am not in a position to pass judgment. I know very little about it. Perhaps those that are more heavily involved in this form of therapy, and bioenergy in general will have more of a grasp of this concept than me. I am sure they will be nodding their head at your post.

Your conclusions to focus on finding inner peace, come to terms with your fears, and learn to go with the flow. Those are big goals and I am glad you seem to have found the right tools that fit your hands, and a plan which you know will work for you. That is a good position to be in, you are a rich man.

However as they say we each need to find our own path, and some of us have not even started looking for it yet, me I am probably still walking round in circles...someone throw some of Mr Hawkings footballs at me will you....kidding.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 31st, 2014, 6:48 pm
by wjjw
Usually I have to visit a different forum to observe such interesting discussion:

The implications of the observer effect, and whether a conscious observer or an instrument are required comes down to a single question--is consciousness a primary force in reality, or is it an emergent property of a "matter?" I'd bet my overpriced house in NJ that consciousness is primary. For the exact same reason that I've told more than one poster on this site I'd bet the same thing that they didn't have a fatal neurological disease. Because the evidence in favor of those conclusions is overwhelming. If looked at objectively. And doing so is often the hardest part :-)


Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 31st, 2014, 8:54 pm
by SecretAgentMan
Interesting conversation indeed. The conversation has gone deep and far, but I assure you I only went there to illustrate the connection I believe exists between our thoughts/emotions and our physical reality. I also believe this relationship does more than just influence electrons or random number generators, but the very state of our physical health as well. While all of the different views you referenced have their merits, I favor the consciousness interaction aspect as you may have gathered. :) Acupuncture was the first personal experience I had that exposed me to the concept of energy. There were other energy medicine practices that I was exposed to by the same doctor such as the allergy elimination techniques. Imagine my surprise and amazement when they produced results, despite my skepticism. As my interest grew I researched more. When opportunities came along that allowed me to have first hand experiences I tried to take advantage of them. After all, experience is far more powerful than any intellectual discussion, technical book, or documentary movie. It is our experiences that have the strongest influence on our beliefs and our perceptions. After having positive experiences with various forms of energy medicine it only made me that much more curious to seek other experiences.

I was introduced to the concept of remote viewing through the movie 'The Men Who Stare at Goats'. It really was not a very good movie, but the subject that it is based on, remote viewing, intrigued me. It piqued my interest for multiple reasons. The movie started out with the quote "More of this is true than you would believe." Everything in the movie struck me as entirely possible through the energy aspect I had just newly become aware of. I went to the library and got some books on the subject and was learning as much as I could. I later came upon a book that teaches people how to do it and decided to purchase it and give it a try. I read the book twice before attempting. The government and military are incredibly thorough on process and detail. The RV protocols were no exception. They wanted to eliminate any and all forms of contamination so that they could rule out any external influences beyond a shadow of a doubt. RV was always done blind or double blind. In my very first session I got my very own personal experience to draw from. I had enough success to show me beyond reasonable doubt that there was indeed something to it, but I also had enough of a struggle to realize the pitfalls that need to be navigated through learned experience. I really liked the way that the author of my book put it when he talked about the implications of learning RV. He said learning RV gives you first hand knowledge and experience that proves to yourself that you are more than the physical. To be able to access any person, place, or event no matter how removed from you in space, time, or both through your conscious mind alone is amazingly transformative. I believe that almost all fears are born of one single ultimate fear, the fear of death. When you can have an experience that shows you your existence is not merely limited to neurons firing inside a physical mortal brain it sort of takes the edge off of that fear. Once that fear is mitigated or removed, what really is there to be afraid of? Liberating does not even begin to describe it.

Everyone has this ability to varying degrees. When you look at the reality of RV, how it works, and take that into consideration along with things like acupuncture and energy medicine it paints an even bigger picture. My personal experiences did not stop with RV either. I could probably write a book. I'm not going to go too far down the rabbit hole here, but I just want to illustrate that there are very experiential based reasons why I believe what I believe and why I see things the way I do. I am not trying to preach or tell everyone that my way is the right and only way. I offer my perspective in case others are interested in exploring. I never would have known about leaky gut unless someone in a forum mentioned it causing me to look for a holistic doctor close to me that knew more about it. I never would have known about RV unless I had it brought to my attention by a movie. I never would have investigated it if I didn't have the context of energy to consider how it might work. My point is that things need to be brought to our attention in order for us to consider them. In order for us to truly consider them without just dismissing them we need to have some sort of a context that allows them to make sense. I just like to do my part to help raise awareness. If people are interested they will pursue and if not they won't. I'm good with all of that. Anyway, thanks again.

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: March 31st, 2014, 8:59 pm
by SecretAgentMan
wjjw wrote:Usually I have to visit a different forum to observe such interesting discussion:

The implications of the observer effect, and whether a conscious observer or an instrument are required comes down to a single question--is consciousness a primary force in reality, or is it an emergent property of a "matter?" I'd bet my overpriced house in NJ that consciousness is primary. For the exact same reason that I've told more than one poster on this site I'd bet the same thing that they didn't have a fatal neurological disease. Because the evidence in favor of those conclusions is overwhelming. If looked at objectively. And doing so is often the hardest part :-)


Bill, I was hoping you would chime in. I always enjoy your perspective on these matters. The trick I have learned is in working with the properties of consciousness in your favor. Step 1 is to study how consciousness can influence they physical reality we live in. Step 2 is to start working at one of those aspects and work at it to try and accomplish your goal. One aspect at a time and one goal at a time is key! Step 3 is to take what you've learned and move on to the next aspect or next goal. Step 4 is to remember to enjoy the ride and not get frustrated or caught up in the details. :)

Re: Food results are in

PostPosted: April 1st, 2014, 6:29 am
by wjjw
SecretAgentMan wrote:Everyone has this ability to varying degrees. When you look at the reality of RV, how it works, and take that into consideration along with things like acupuncture and energy medicine it paints an even bigger picture. My personal experiences did not stop with RV either. I could probably write a book. I'm not going to go too far down the rabbit hole here, but I just want to illustrate that there are very experiential based reasons why I believe what I believe and why I see things the way I do.

The funny thing is that many people will adamantly deny that RV (clairvoyance) is even real. And this is despite the fact that analysis and meta-analysis of over 30 years and thousands of ganzfeld experiments has shown that it is. The results produced 32 percent in the protocol whereas 25 percent would be expected by chance. And this was with average subjects, not even those who have natural ability or applied themselves at developing it. But if you really want to go down the rabbit hole and look at the "big picture" illustrating that indeed consciousness effects reality, rather than emerges from it, things like this are far more interesting to look at than its effect on RNGs :) :