55 of 56
55
Nambudripad’s Allergy Elimination Techniques, NAET.  Expensive quackery or miracle treatment?
Posted: 06 May 2012 09:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 595 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2899
Joined  2005-06-15
rp47797 - 06 May 2012 09:36 PM

Of course, your giving your opinion. Which absolutely has value. Ultimately, however it should be up to that particular person to make that decision for themselves.  If it was myself, I would do as much research on my own and talk with those who have direct experience with Naet. The more people you speak with and ask questions to, the more you can sift through and decide for yourself whether it’s worth it or not. I couldn’t recommend for or against Naet. I do not know enough about it.

The best way to know is:
1. To take the courses, decipher the info directly (initiate the opinion if this is BS or not).
and
2. To speak with actual patients who have received the technique. You know some it will have worked on and some it would not have. Nothing is 100% effective.

To assume that it doesn’t work without understanding the theory and mechanism behind it or speaking with those who have had it done, doesn’t result in a conclusive answer.
Just my opinion.

What’s to understand? Nobody has supplied any proof that it does work.

It’s being marketed as a drug and it costs quite a bit of money. People have a right to see proof that it works.

 Signature 

I’m not some ordinary moron.
I’m an Oxy-Moron!

Mental Giant: A very tall person who is more than slightly confused.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 May 2012 09:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 596 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2899
Joined  2005-06-15
rp47797 - 06 May 2012 09:48 PM

I agree that there is no “proof” shown in this thread but there does appear to be at least an association with improvement in some conditions, based upon what some of the members have stated. I apologize for not reading every page in this thread but at least in the initial pages, there appeared to be a chiropractor who had some success with their patients using Naet. Although this is not necessarily proof, it is a start. I do not know if anyone has described the proposed mechanism behind how Naet works but I, for one, would love to hear it. That is something that can be scientifically debated.

If there is “no proof” then it can’t be scientifically debated. There is no “start”.

It can be argued that there has been a placebo effect. That can be scientifically debated.

NAET shows itself to be no more than a rip off. It is a waste of money. It is likely to be dangerous in terms of distracting people from real treatments.

People who sell NAET appear to be snake oil merchants living off the misery of others. I also wonder how they can sleep at night.

 Signature 

I’m not some ordinary moron.
I’m an Oxy-Moron!

Mental Giant: A very tall person who is more than slightly confused.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 May 2012 02:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 597 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6930
Joined  2005-10-21

So anyway, now that I have had a long nap, a nice cup of tea, and a few chapters of The Hobbit, allow me to jump back into the fray:

So I am pretty much seeing you doing nothing but deflecting, which does nothing to improve my opinion of you as a human being. You use the same ‘weasel words’ that carefully skirt the edge of legality. We say ‘we want proof this works’. You respond with ‘Well, everything else isn’t proven, because I say so, so therefore proof is useless’. You are a perfect example of our ‘how not to support your product online’ thread.

Anyway, let us turn to the Wikipedia, shall we? One particular item I am keenly fond of is the listing of logical debate fallacies. Let us see where this takes us, shall we?

First, we have you claiming that studies are flawed, therefore studies should not be used as proof. While there is a very small number of flawed studies, you are attempting to put doubt upon all of them. Hasty generalization or Overwhelming exception, depending.

Next, you claim that clinical practice is the best way to determine effectiveness. This can be chalked up to personal preference, but given that it supports your argument better than other forms, I am going to file it under Cherry-picking your results, especially as you then go on to attack our requests for clinical trials and studies, as covered above. You’re also Moving the goalposts and Special pleading by stating that your form of proof is somehow more valid than our form.

Oh, and the part that annoyed me the most? Claiming that ‘just because you don’t understand it doesn’t mean it’s not true’ - Ad Hominem, Burden of proof, Argument from ignorance, and Appeal to authority by implying that you understand better than us. For your information, we DO understand it, very well, thank you very much, and that even if we did not, it would not mean that your position was correct.

On to your next post:

Let’s see.. yes, yes I do get angry when I am insulted by someone. Especially when they are doing so to discredit myself and my friends. I have often found that when someone says ‘no offense’, it is in fact something that is offensive.

As Peter pointed out, your argument that off-label use of known medicines does not connotate that on-label use of NAET is valid. Non sequitur.

You then go on to attack the validity of clinical studies again, and point out a few examples of failure. This still does not prove the validity of NAET. This is also cherry-picking your results: there are a very large number of prospective medicines that proved to be harmful or ineffective during the trials and studies, and therefore do not make it to the market. We do not like Straw man arguments around these parts.

Yes, you are correct, I, personally, have not linked to any studies which disprove NAET. There are, however, a few links to such studies and their results buried in this monster of a thread, and I am not going to bother to look for them. Mainly because it is not my job to disprove your position. Even if there were no such studies that disproved NAET, it would not change the fact that there are no valid studies which prove it, either. We also do not appreciate attempts to shift the Burden of proof.

Next post:

Peter hit most of the main points, but whether or not something works with or without studies is irrelevant, we want proof that it works, and refusing to give such proof makes one wonder why it is being witheld.

Peter also brings up the good point of safety. I will refer to an earlier post by me - the one right above yours, in fact -  asking for a study which shows NAET to be a safe process. If it can have that much influence on a human being, what would happen if it was performed improperly? Am I going to have a heart attack if a practicioner screws up?

Next post:

So you have no firm opinions on the matter? You might have fooled me. Way to support both sides of an argument.

Next post:

Actually, this is NOT a matter of opinion. This is a matter of facts. True and false that are independant of personal preference. Don’t try and deflect in that manner, it will not work, and will annoy people.

Lacking a condition for which NAET claims benefit, I am incapable of ‘trying it for myself’, and even if I did, my personal opinion would not be valid proof.

We HAVE spoken with people who have tried it, or those close to them. There’s quite a few of them in this thread, if you bother to read back a bit. Even if they support our position, anecdotal evidence is not proof. Yes, that one cuts both ways. This is, however, the sort of ‘research’ you claim supports your position - people trying it and finding it does or does not work.

True, most treatments are not 100% effective - I would counter that amputation cures Athlete’s Foot reliably - but I wonder what you consider to be an ‘effective’ percentage? 90%? 75%? 30%? 10%? Give us a percentage of those who had a positive result with NAET. Then compare that percentage with that gained from placebos. Unless the numbers are signifigantly different, you do not have an effective treatment.

To sum up: your whole argument is one big attempt to shift the Burden of proof onto us, rather than on your shoulders. Your statements are filled with enough Weasel words to fill a bucket, and you still provide us with no proof of your arguments. Instead, you attack the concept of scientific testing as invalid and irrelevant.

Now, to be fair, this DOES imply that I am falling to Argument from fallacy - stating that because your argument is fallacious, that your conclusion is false. Not so - my view that your position is false is based upon a number of other conditions, many unrelated to your argument. The fact that you are deliberately not supporting your position properly does not help that.

 Signature 

1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If it does what it says, you should have no problem with this.
2: What proof will you accept that you are wrong? You ask us to change our mind, but we cannot change yours?
3: It is not our responsability to disprove your claims, but rather your responsability to prove them.
4. Personal testamonials are not proof.

What part of ‘meow’ don’t you understand?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 May 2012 12:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 598 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5150
Joined  2005-01-27

Ok it´s a pointy building, but what is your point?

 Signature 


“By the sweat on our brows, and the strengths of our backs…Gentlemen. Hoist the Colours! And you, madam, I warn you, I know the entire Geneva Convention by heart!”
Trust me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 May 2012 12:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 599 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5150
Joined  2005-01-27
herbmiami - 06 March 2012 05:04 PM

I have some experience with NAET. My wife used to do it in our office.

No, it doesn’t work for everybody, it is labor intensive with dozens of treatments to get the best results and each treatment only treats one allergen.

That aside, many people have great results. We have helped thousands of people and there are some that we haven’t. Thats just the way it is. It’s called life

That’s why we created The Allergy Kit. The Allergy Kit is very loosely based on NAET, but all the negatives have been removed.

1. If it doesn’t work, you don’t have to pay for it. A NAET practitioner can’t say that.

It’s a home treatment protocol based on energy medicine. This allows you to put the power of healing in your hands. It’s really easy to do and you can get started eliminating your allergies right now. You don’t use it up and you can treat all the members in your family. 

2. We treat multiple allergies at the same time. This way, you can treat almost all food allergies in the basic kit which is 7 vials, 7 treatments. Less than a month and you will be feeling much better.

3. Sometimes the treatment doesn’t work the first time. So if that happens, you simply treat yourself again. Most of the time, it does work the first time, but everyone is different.

4. It’s much cheaper than going to a practitioner. And you save lots of time.

You should check it out. We have a practice and have applied what we learned in the office what works and applied it to The Allergy Kit.

And it’s fast. In less than a month, you can get a real head start on getting your health back and you just might be able to say, I used to have allergies.

Here’s the link.

NO IT´S NOT

Watch the video on the home page. There’s a great testimonial that you can hear during the interview with Dr Ben Johnson. He is the only medical doctor featured in the hit movie “The Secret” and he interviews myself and Dr Ynge Ljung, the founder of The Allergy Kit.

PS We have a promotion. We are so sure that it will work, we have a promotion that allows you to try it before you buy it. Just pay $1 plus shipping and we will bill you the balance in 35 days. How does it get any better than that. A money back guarantee and a way that shows that we are putting our money where our mouth. Check it out before the promotion is gone.  It will change your life. We guarantee it.

Herb

You´ve got some serious balls to come here to spam your snakeoil.

BTW you do know sinners go to hell?

 

 Signature 


“By the sweat on our brows, and the strengths of our backs…Gentlemen. Hoist the Colours! And you, madam, I warn you, I know the entire Geneva Convention by heart!”
Trust me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 May 2012 12:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 600 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6930
Joined  2005-10-21
Unfairly Balanced - 11 May 2012 12:09 PM

Ok it´s a pointy building, but what is your point?

Don’t respond to link-spammed threads, Ubie.. It just tells the spammers (who have clicked ont he notify box) that this is a forum that they can spam on and people read.

 

 Signature 

1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If it does what it says, you should have no problem with this.
2: What proof will you accept that you are wrong? You ask us to change our mind, but we cannot change yours?
3: It is not our responsability to disprove your claims, but rather your responsability to prove them.
4. Personal testamonials are not proof.

What part of ‘meow’ don’t you understand?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 May 2012 04:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 601 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2899
Joined  2005-06-15
Robin Bobcat - 11 May 2012 12:42 PM
Unfairly Balanced - 11 May 2012 12:09 PM

Ok it´s a pointy building, but what is your point?

Don’t respond to link-spammed threads, Ubie.. It just tells the spammers (who have clicked ont he notify box) that this is a forum that they can spam on and people read.

You can also expose yourself to the risk of getting viruses. Although that can happen with seemingly safe links so just make sure you update your anti virus software.

 Signature 

I’m not some ordinary moron.
I’m an Oxy-Moron!

Mental Giant: A very tall person who is more than slightly confused.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 May 2012 11:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 602 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

Basically, it all comes down to two points.

First, nobody has provided any real evidence showing that NAET works.  The NAET people themselves have shown some studies performed by NAET people on NAET people and their families, but (even putting aside the matter of the huge conflict of interest these studies involve) these studies aren’t really worth anything. . .as has been already pointed out.  I have not seen a single study performed by anybody who isn’t actively selling NAET that indicates NAET is good for anything more than a placebo effect.  Aside from that, everything in support of NAET is “well, some anonymous person on the Internet said that he tried it and that it worked!”

Second, aspects of NAET have been shown in independent tests to not work as advertised (as has already been mentioned).  The whole muscle kinesiology thing, for example.  There’s also the matter of various aspects of the NAET treatment simply not fitting at all into basic science; not just into vague uncertain sidelines of science, but into basic parts of anatomy and biology and chemistry and physics.  Parts of science that have been proven for centuries.  Parts of science that nobody, not even the NAET people, have shown to be flawed.

So, if something isn’t shown to work and has parts of it that clearly don’t work, it’s more than just “opinion” that there’s something seriously wrong with it.  Even if some parts of it could work, then there’s clearly still a major problem with the system as a whole.  And people are justified in being very wary of the motives and morals of the people trying to sell the system.

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 May 2012 03:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 603 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6930
Joined  2005-10-21

The third point: It’s actively marketed using sleazy tactics and outright lies. Pure fabrications and sleazy marketing. These people KNOW they’re selling snake oil.

 Signature 

1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If it does what it says, you should have no problem with this.
2: What proof will you accept that you are wrong? You ask us to change our mind, but we cannot change yours?
3: It is not our responsability to disprove your claims, but rather your responsability to prove them.
4. Personal testamonials are not proof.

What part of ‘meow’ don’t you understand?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 May 2012 10:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 604 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5150
Joined  2005-01-27
Peter - 11 May 2012 04:15 PM
Robin Bobcat - 11 May 2012 12:42 PM
Unfairly Balanced - 11 May 2012 12:09 PM

Ok it´s a pointy building, but what is your point?

Don’t respond to link-spammed threads, Ubie.. It just tells the spammers (who have clicked ont he notify box) that this is a forum that they can spam on and people read.

You can also expose yourself to the risk of getting viruses. Although that can happen with seemingly safe links so just make sure you update your anti virus software.

Yes indeed.

 

 Signature 


“By the sweat on our brows, and the strengths of our backs…Gentlemen. Hoist the Colours! And you, madam, I warn you, I know the entire Geneva Convention by heart!”
Trust me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 June 2012 03:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 605 ]
New Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2012-06-09

I had NAET treatments a couple of years ago.  I have severe allergy/hay fever symptoms.  After my fourth treatment (where molds were targeted), I woke up the next morning COMPLETELY clear. I could take a deep breath..there was no congestion in my nose. I felt like I was really breathing for the very first time.

It was incredible.

The only problem is that after a few weeks, my symptoms returned. 

I moved shortly after and didn’t continue treatments.  I don’t know if perhaps continued treatments would have improved the results and eventually “cured” my allergies, but I can testify to the fact that NAET DOES work. Maybe not permanently, but it does work.

I am very curious about The Allergy Kit, particularly with the cold laser, but am hesitant to try it without hearing from other folks that it works.

Profile
 
 
   
55 of 56
55