Philosophy Discussion Forums

Sushan wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 4:24 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 3:27 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 3:10 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 3:01 am

You are bringing up several mildly interesting but unrelated issues.

First, you are correct that you can't patent a natural product. Why should you be able to? They're found naturally, they're not your's.

Second, herbal medicine is well recognized in modern medicine, ie it is a myth that modern medicine is unaware of natural products. True, large drug companies aren't enthusiastic about products with a low profit margin, but everyone who has walked by the supplement aisle knows that they are widely available at this time, so go ahead cure your cancer with apricot pits.

There are accepted ways for treating cancers in Western Medicine. The conventional doctors never and also cannot prescribe whatever the herbal supplements as they need for treatments because there are approved ways and regulations for everything. For that such drugs or supplements should undergo proper research and included in the accepted drug regimes. Being freely available does not make them either accepted or better medicine.

Your postings are confused or confusing. First, doctors don't prescribe supplements because... they are available without a prescription. They are over the counter. You don't need a doctor to get them. If you think apricot pits will cure your cancer, and are upset that your insurance company never heard of it, good news, you don't need a doctor nor a prescription to buy it.

As to doctors using medications off label (for nonFDA approved uses) that's done all day, every day. It's routine.

Yes, doctors do not have to prescribe them. Anyone can freely buy them. But that does not guarant them anything. What can happen is people can be mislead and go for various supplements rather than following accepted treatment protocols and get their conditions worse. If anyone can buy whatever the supplements they want and treat their own illnesses what is the use of doctors? On the other hand, if such supplements are freely available and good as treatments why they are not supported by health insurances?

LuckyR wrote: ↑July 5th, 2021, 1:59 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 4:24 am

LuckyR wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 3:27 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 4th, 2021, 3:10 am

There are accepted ways for treating cancers in Western Medicine. The conventional doctors never and also cannot prescribe whatever the herbal supplements as they need for treatments because there are approved ways and regulations for everything. For that such drugs or supplements should undergo proper research and included in the accepted drug regimes. Being freely available does not make them either accepted or better medicine.

Your postings are confused or confusing. First, doctors don't prescribe supplements because... they are available without a prescription. They are over the counter. You don't need a doctor to get them. If you think apricot pits will cure your cancer, and are upset that your insurance company never heard of it, good news, you don't need a doctor nor a prescription to buy it.

As to doctors using medications off label (for nonFDA approved uses) that's done all day, every day. It's routine.

Yes, doctors do not have to prescribe them. Anyone can freely buy them. But that does not guarant them anything. What can happen is people can be mislead and go for various supplements rather than following accepted treatment protocols and get their conditions worse. If anyone can buy whatever the supplements they want and treat their own illnesses what is the use of doctors? On the other hand, if such supplements are freely available and good as treatments why they are not supported by health insurances?

You are more than correct. In the US (under the jurisdiction of the FDA) not only do supplements not guarantee to treat problems, the manufacturer is prohibited from claiming they treat any problem.

Here's the situation.
1. No one can patent a natural product.
2. In order to show something works it needs to be studied
3. Studies cost money
4. No one is going to pay for a study to show that an unprofitable product works.

Anand_Haqq wrote: ↑July 25th, 2021, 12:47 pm . Nature is the only true law in existence ...

. And since you're part of existence ... is also ... the only true law of human beings ...

. Democracy, is a means to create subtle chaos amoung people. It has been failing through ages ... It's time for a new Man; it's time for a new consciousness ...

. If you impose laws upon people, you're already creating chaos. Why is it so ... ?

. Because, that laws are borned out of your fear of the possibility of people's rebellion; out of possibility of people's living their own Life, in their own way ...

. Because, you are afraid of people's immorality ... you try to impose morality. But, that morality is not for nature, is against nature ... is forced. And anything forced, will create more chaos, whether consciously or unconsciously ...

. The only law in existence is understanding ... not discipline. Understanding is the true coin; control is the false coin. A man of understanding is a man of intelligence, because he lives out of his spontaneity ... not out of his suppression or controlling. He does not need to suppress anything .... he simply lives in harmony with existence!

. Because, you're afraid of people lack of intelligence, you create laws. That's the biggest sin, humanity has ever seen. No intelligent being, needs laws. He lives totally his Life, according to his own nature. He lives Life, at it's fullest. And everything whole is Holy ...

. But politicians don't want intelligent people; they need subtle slaves even in the 21th century. And this pretension has been occurring for ages ...

. Otherwise, why the existence of ambitious neurotic individuals who want to control others ... if people were truly responsible; totally free; totally aware of their acts ... ?

. Politicians, talk about freedom ... but they live for slaves; they live because of the existence of slaves. If there were not slaves, there would not exist politicians ...

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 26th, 2021, 10:46 am The simplest answer that, the law of nature is superior. I do not believe that any arbitrary man-made law should prevail over natural one. The question is whether something is moral or immoral whatever it is, because morality is not man-made. It's natural.

SP

Sushan wrote: ↑July 28th, 2021, 12:14 pm

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 26th, 2021, 10:46 am The simplest answer that, the law of nature is superior. I do not believe that any arbitrary man-made law should prevail over natural one. The question is whether something is moral or immoral whatever it is, because morality is not man-made. It's natural.

SP

Morality can be a natural thing. But it is defined as well as maintained and valued by humans. It is true that morality has nothing to do with rules. But I think the man made rules are important to protect the moral people from the disturbing acts of the relatively immoral people.

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 29th, 2021, 1:19 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 28th, 2021, 12:14 pm

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 26th, 2021, 10:46 am The simplest answer that, the law of nature is superior. I do not believe that any arbitrary man-made law should prevail over natural one. The question is whether something is moral or immoral whatever it is, because morality is not man-made. It's natural.

SP

Morality can be a natural thing. But it is defined as well as maintained and valued by humans. It is true that morality has nothing to do with rules. But I think the man made rules are important to protect the moral people from the disturbing acts of the relatively immoral people.

I have no problem with the law as long as it is consistent with morality, the problem is however that power tends to abuse the monopoly of the legislature. Because that's a nature of power. We rather should explore laws in universal morality, than create laws arbitrary. In order to this would be fulfilled, the authority should be kept checked by citizens.

SP

Sushan wrote: ↑July 31st, 2021, 1:06 am

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 29th, 2021, 1:19 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 28th, 2021, 12:14 pm

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 26th, 2021, 10:46 am The simplest answer that, the law of nature is superior. I do not believe that any arbitrary man-made law should prevail over natural one. The question is whether something is moral or immoral whatever it is, because morality is not man-made. It's natural.

SP

Morality can be a natural thing. But it is defined as well as maintained and valued by humans. It is true that morality has nothing to do with rules. But I think the man made rules are important to protect the moral people from the disturbing acts of the relatively immoral people.

I have no problem with the law as long as it is consistent with morality, the problem is however that power tends to abuse the monopoly of the legislature. Because that's a nature of power. We rather should explore laws in universal morality, than create laws arbitrary. In order to this would be fulfilled, the authority should be kept checked by citizens.

SP

Well, I am not saying that there are no occasions that laws are being used in wrongful manners, and also the laws are not having any loopholes. And the laws of nature are very much applicable and practical. But since people have their personal agendas and also people either bending or ignoring the laws of nature, the man-made laws are of utmost importance to avoid chaos.

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 31st, 2021, 3:46 pm

Sushan wrote: ↑July 31st, 2021, 1:06 am

Stoic Spirit wrote: ↑July 29th, 2021, 1:19 am

Sushan wrote: ↑July 28th, 2021, 12:14 pm

Morality can be a natural thing. But it is defined as well as maintained and valued by humans. It is true that morality has nothing to do with rules. But I think the man made rules are important to protect the moral people from the disturbing acts of the relatively immoral people.

I have no problem with the law as long as it is consistent with morality, the problem is however that power tends to abuse the monopoly of the legislature. Because that's a nature of power. We rather should explore laws in universal morality, than create laws arbitrary. In order to this would be fulfilled, the authority should be kept checked by citizens.

SP

Well, I am not saying that there are no occasions that laws are being used in wrongful manners, and also the laws are not having any loopholes. And the laws of nature are very much applicable and practical. But since people have their personal agendas and also people either bending or ignoring the laws of nature, the man-made laws are of utmost importance to avoid chaos.

True, but man-made law can cause chaos either. The balance is the most important here between chaos and order. Merely impossible to control everything, unless every single citizen is accompanied by policeman. This means if we humans enforce too much arbitrary order on nature (including the human nature), the ballance collapses, and chaos strikes back exponentially. For example post-world war Germany, or the USSR at the late 80s and early 90s. The chaos followed tyranny in both cases. So it's better to be very careful with law-making. The nature can't be tricked.

SP