Re:More on pyschological
[email protected]
I am reminded by this discussion of this story Deepak Chopra tells about a
medical doctor who had not had a check up for 25 years. (Physician! Heal
thyself!) When he was compelled to get a physical due to life insurance
requirements, a large dark spot was found on his lung. It was diagnosed as
inoperable cancer. The doc died a couple of months later. Some days after the
funeral, Chopra was sorting through the physician's effects and came across a
chest x-ray that was 25 years old. Out of curiosity, he put it up to the
light and, lo and behold, there was that same dark spot on the lung! The
deceased doctor had lived a vigorous life all those years and was, in effect,
killed by the diagnosis and not the disease.
lovemary
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
medical doctor who had not had a check up for 25 years. (Physician! Heal
thyself!) When he was compelled to get a physical due to life insurance
requirements, a large dark spot was found on his lung. It was diagnosed as
inoperable cancer. The doc died a couple of months later. Some days after the
funeral, Chopra was sorting through the physician's effects and came across a
chest x-ray that was 25 years old. Out of curiosity, he put it up to the
light and, lo and behold, there was that same dark spot on the lung! The
deceased doctor had lived a vigorous life all those years and was, in effect,
killed by the diagnosis and not the disease.
lovemary
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lynda
I don't agree. If the guy was a doctor and he had the x-rays, then he knew
his diagnosis all along. I'd want to know if an autopsy was done and what
that determined to be the cause of death because the spot wasn't news to the
doctor. If he had kept the x-rays, then he did it for a reason. One cannot
know what his reasoning was, but he certainly knew about the spot and the
diagnosis 25 years before.
Deepak Chopra does these leaps and selective use of facts to fit the
scenario he wants to promote quite frequently.
Lynda
his diagnosis all along. I'd want to know if an autopsy was done and what
that determined to be the cause of death because the spot wasn't news to the
doctor. If he had kept the x-rays, then he did it for a reason. One cannot
know what his reasoning was, but he certainly knew about the spot and the
diagnosis 25 years before.
Deepak Chopra does these leaps and selective use of facts to fit the
scenario he wants to promote quite frequently.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <lite2yu@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 10:37 AM
Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
> I am reminded by this discussion of this story Deepak Chopra tells about a
> medical doctor who had not had a check up for 25 years. (Physician! Heal
> thyself!) When he was compelled to get a physical due to life insurance
> requirements, a large dark spot was found on his lung. It was diagnosed as
> inoperable cancer. The doc died a couple of months later. Some days after
the
> funeral, Chopra was sorting through the physician's effects and came
across a
> chest x-ray that was 25 years old. Out of curiosity, he put it up to the
> light and, lo and behold, there was that same dark spot on the lung! The
> deceased doctor had lived a vigorous life all those years and was, in
effect,
> killed by the diagnosis and not the disease.
>
> lovemary
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/21/2001 11:45:53 AM Eastern Standard Time,
lurine@... writes:
. . it is pure conjecture on your part.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
lurine@... writes:
> One cannotYou have absolutely no way of knowing this or even proving it so why say it.
> know what his reasoning was, but he certainly knew about the spot and the
> diagnosis 25 years before.
>
>
. . it is pure conjecture on your part.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lynda
Of course I have a way of knowing this unless Deepak Chopra is telling tall
tales! According to your story, the x-rays were found in the doctors files.
The x-rays could only have come from a facility that takes x-rays. X-rays
do not leave facilities without, at minimum, a "wet read." A formal written
report would follow. All reports list "findings" and the findings in this
case would have defined the "spot" in the x-rays. Thus, he had a diagnosis
25 years ago.
X-rays do not belong to patients, they belong to the facility where they
were taken. On a routine basis facilities send out requests to have x-rays
returned to them. Obviously the doctor made a conscious choice to keep
these x-rays.
So, actually it is pure conjecture on the part of ol' Deepak Chopra that the
doctor didn't have the diagnosis.
The doctor had the x-rays, he knew the diagnosis. Sorry if that messes up a
nice story for you but facts is facts. Unless of course you are implying
that he wasn't a good enough physician to have determined that there was a
spot there by himself????
Lynda
tales! According to your story, the x-rays were found in the doctors files.
The x-rays could only have come from a facility that takes x-rays. X-rays
do not leave facilities without, at minimum, a "wet read." A formal written
report would follow. All reports list "findings" and the findings in this
case would have defined the "spot" in the x-rays. Thus, he had a diagnosis
25 years ago.
X-rays do not belong to patients, they belong to the facility where they
were taken. On a routine basis facilities send out requests to have x-rays
returned to them. Obviously the doctor made a conscious choice to keep
these x-rays.
So, actually it is pure conjecture on the part of ol' Deepak Chopra that the
doctor didn't have the diagnosis.
The doctor had the x-rays, he knew the diagnosis. Sorry if that messes up a
nice story for you but facts is facts. Unless of course you are implying
that he wasn't a good enough physician to have determined that there was a
spot there by himself????
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <lite2yu@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
> In a message dated 11/21/2001 11:45:53 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> lurine@... writes:
>
>
> > One cannot
> > know what his reasoning was, but he certainly knew about the spot and
the
> > diagnosis 25 years before.
> >
> >
>
> You have absolutely no way of knowing this or even proving it so why say
it.
> . . it is pure conjecture on your part.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
LisaBugg
> The doctor had the x-rays, he knew the diagnosis. Sorry if that messes upa
> nice story for you but facts is facts.Lynda,
Where were you able to obtain your facts in re this story?
Lynda
The original story stated that after the doctor died they found an x-ray
from 25 years ago were found in his files, "Chopra was sorting through the
physician's effects and came across a chest x-ray that was 25 years old."
If the physician had the x-ray, then he knew what the diagnosis was. For
whatever reason after having the x-ray taken he decided to keep it.
If by the other facts you mean what do I base my statements on, I worked in
radiology for years. Radiologists are MDs that have specialised in the
field of radiological diagnosis (reading x-rays, nuclear med, cat's, pet's,
MRIs, EEG, EKGs and ultrasound, etc.). I also worked in the Health
Occupations Department of a college where rad techs were trained. The
criteria, give or take a minor detail or two are the same in all 50 states
and most of the rest of the world (we had students from 107 countries).
X-rays belong to the facility. Patients, for a fee, can get copies. All
x-rays are read. Thus any x-ray that is taken would have a diagnosis which
the patient, particularly if the patient is a doctor, would know about, or
at least their physician would know about.
It would have made a better story if it had been approached from the other
angle--see how the mind can cure/keep at bay a disease for 25 years.
Lynda
from 25 years ago were found in his files, "Chopra was sorting through the
physician's effects and came across a chest x-ray that was 25 years old."
If the physician had the x-ray, then he knew what the diagnosis was. For
whatever reason after having the x-ray taken he decided to keep it.
If by the other facts you mean what do I base my statements on, I worked in
radiology for years. Radiologists are MDs that have specialised in the
field of radiological diagnosis (reading x-rays, nuclear med, cat's, pet's,
MRIs, EEG, EKGs and ultrasound, etc.). I also worked in the Health
Occupations Department of a college where rad techs were trained. The
criteria, give or take a minor detail or two are the same in all 50 states
and most of the rest of the world (we had students from 107 countries).
X-rays belong to the facility. Patients, for a fee, can get copies. All
x-rays are read. Thus any x-ray that is taken would have a diagnosis which
the patient, particularly if the patient is a doctor, would know about, or
at least their physician would know about.
It would have made a better story if it had been approached from the other
angle--see how the mind can cure/keep at bay a disease for 25 years.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: LisaBugg <LisaBugg@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
>
> > The doctor had the x-rays, he knew the diagnosis. Sorry if that messes
up
> a
> > nice story for you but facts is facts.
>
> Lynda,
> Where were you able to obtain your facts in re this story?
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/21/2001 8:08:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lurine@... writes:
foolish. You absolutely have all the facts and know the story much more than
anyone who was there.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
lurine@... writes:
> Unless of course you are implyingYou know what Lynda, Of course you are right. How could I have been so
> that he wasn't a good enough physician to have determined that there was a
> spot there by himself????
>
> Lynda
>
foolish. You absolutely have all the facts and know the story much more than
anyone who was there.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
LisaBugg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynda" <lurine@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
> The original story stated that after the doctor died they found an x-ray
> from 25 years ago were found in his files, "Chopra was sorting through the
> physician's effects and came across a chest x-ray that was 25 years old."
> If the physician had the x-ray, then he knew what the diagnosis was. For
> whatever reason after having the x-ray taken he decided to keep it.
We don't know anything other than the 3 sentences posted by one poster,
about what she remembered. We have nothing else to work from. We don't know
when or where or why Chopra was going through the man's files. What came to
him when, or how. We don't know ANYTHING of a *factual nature*. We only
have an antedoctal story that may or may not be backed up by peritent
information.
> If by the other facts you mean what do I base my statements on --
Nothing you listed here has anything to do with the actual story of the
actual participants. Ergo, you cannot say *facts are facts*.
Sigh.
Kolleen
>The original story stated that after the doctor died they found an x-rayIF, in fact, this actually did happen (basing the 'facts' on the
>from 25 years ago were found in his files, "Chopra was sorting through the
>physician's effects and came across a chest x-ray that was 25 years old."
>If the physician had the x-ray, then he knew what the diagnosis was. For
>whatever reason after having the x-ray taken he decided to keep it.
reputation of Deepak Chopra) there still isn't a diagnosis.
A spot on an X-ray isn't a diagnosis until a biopsy has been taken.
I suppose one can look at it from BOTH sides:
1. The man's mind kept the disease at bay because he left it unconfirmed.
2. When it was confirmed, he accepted his fate and allowed death to take
over.
kolleen
Lynda
Oh for crying out loud. do a little research, the guy is a con-artist. HE
probably wasn't even there and it is probably just one more of his stories
where his supposed facts don't jive with reality.
Lynda
probably wasn't even there and it is probably just one more of his stories
where his supposed facts don't jive with reality.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <lite2yu@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
> In a message dated 11/21/2001 8:08:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> lurine@... writes:
>
>
> > Unless of course you are implying
> > that he wasn't a good enough physician to have determined that there was
a
> > spot there by himself????
> >
> > Lynda
> >
>
> You know what Lynda, Of course you are right. How could I have been so
> foolish. You absolutely have all the facts and know the story much more
than
> anyone who was there.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Lynda
Alrighty, I withdraw my statement. So, now tell me, how does that nice
little story support the thread? The sentences that were used in support of
the theory don't work. If there is more to the story, or any other "facts,"
not his unsupported anecdotel stories, then they should be used because the
supposed facts as stated don't support the theory.
And, as I said he is reknown for his leaps and shall we say rather
interesting "medical" theories. We are talking about a man who advises
folks to scrape their tongues, spit in a cup of water and then wash their
eyes with it to cure their cataracts (which hasn't happened to date); that
meditation with levitation will cure your ills AND that it is supported by
quantum physics (it isn't). The guy's a snake oil saleman.
Lynda
little story support the thread? The sentences that were used in support of
the theory don't work. If there is more to the story, or any other "facts,"
not his unsupported anecdotel stories, then they should be used because the
supposed facts as stated don't support the theory.
And, as I said he is reknown for his leaps and shall we say rather
interesting "medical" theories. We are talking about a man who advises
folks to scrape their tongues, spit in a cup of water and then wash their
eyes with it to cure their cataracts (which hasn't happened to date); that
meditation with levitation will cure your ills AND that it is supported by
quantum physics (it isn't). The guy's a snake oil saleman.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: LisaBugg <LisaBugg@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lynda" <lurine@...>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 7:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
>
>
> > The original story stated that after the doctor died they found an x-ray
> > from 25 years ago were found in his files, "Chopra was sorting through
the
> > physician's effects and came across a chest x-ray that was 25 years
old."
> > If the physician had the x-ray, then he knew what the diagnosis was.
For
> > whatever reason after having the x-ray taken he decided to keep it.
>
> We don't know anything other than the 3 sentences posted by one poster,
> about what she remembered. We have nothing else to work from. We don't
know
> when or where or why Chopra was going through the man's files. What came
to
> him when, or how. We don't know ANYTHING of a *factual nature*. We only
> have an antedoctal story that may or may not be backed up by peritent
> information.
>
>
>
> > If by the other facts you mean what do I base my statements on --
>
> Nothing you listed here has anything to do with the actual story of the
> actual participants. Ergo, you cannot say *facts are facts*.
>
> Sigh.
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/22/2001 3:16:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,
lurine@... writes:
otherwise. He is not the authority on anything just as you and I aren't, but
he has valid research and opinions. I realize you don't share those opinions
and that is fine. However, there are many onlist who are interested and do
share some of these types of beliefs and it IS valid to the discussion.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
lurine@... writes:
> And, as I said he is reknown for his leaps and shall we say ratherThis is all your opinion. . . there are millions of people who believe
> interesting "medical" theories. We are talking about a man who advises
> folks to scrape their tongues, spit in a cup of water and then wash their
> eyes with it to cure their cataracts (which hasn't happened to date); that
> meditation with levitation will cure your ills AND that it is supported by
> quantum physics (it isn't). The guy's a snake oil saleman.
>
>
otherwise. He is not the authority on anything just as you and I aren't, but
he has valid research and opinions. I realize you don't share those opinions
and that is fine. However, there are many onlist who are interested and do
share some of these types of beliefs and it IS valid to the discussion.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bridget
--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "LisaBugg" <LisaBugg@u...> wrote:
few words it is impossible to make the leap that was being made and
in fact given that slim picture it was easier to make the opposite
point.
[snip]
of where she got her information.
Bridget
> We don't know anything other than the 3 sentences posted by oneposter,
> about what she remembered.Yes, that's true. However, Lynda's point was (IMHO) that from those
few words it is impossible to make the leap that was being made and
in fact given that slim picture it was easier to make the opposite
point.
[snip]
>the
> > If by the other facts you mean what do I base my statements on --
>
> Nothing you listed here has anything to do with the actual story of
> actual participants. Ergo, you cannot say *facts are facts*.There were some "facts" in Lynda's post in response to the question
>
> Sigh.
of where she got her information.
Bridget
Lynda
No he doesn't have valid research. In fact, he refuses to participate in
any research that can be varified.
Lynda
any research that can be varified.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <lite2yu@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 3:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:More on pyschological
> In a message dated 11/22/2001 3:16:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> lurine@... writes:
>
>
> > And, as I said he is reknown for his leaps and shall we say rather
> > interesting "medical" theories. We are talking about a man who advises
> > folks to scrape their tongues, spit in a cup of water and then wash
their
> > eyes with it to cure their cataracts (which hasn't happened to date);
that
> > meditation with levitation will cure your ills AND that it is supported
by
> > quantum physics (it isn't). The guy's a snake oil saleman.
> >
> >
>
> This is all your opinion. . . there are millions of people who believe
> otherwise. He is not the authority on anything just as you and I aren't,
but
> he has valid research and opinions. I realize you don't share those
opinions
> and that is fine. However, there are many onlist who are interested and do
> share some of these types of beliefs and it IS valid to the discussion.
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>