cisternachyli In reply to sugarcoat [2011-04-22 05:38:01 +0000 UTC]

i don't see it?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

sugarcoat In reply to cisternachyli [2011-04-22 14:53:28 +0000 UTC]

awww booo... maybe it waas just the day I saw he had fav'd a crap load of spiders!!! oh well

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

sugarcoat In reply to sugarcoat [2011-04-20 22:44:33 +0000 UTC]

talk about portraying your fear pretty accurately....
[link]


and I want, no DEMAND a response!!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to mant4106 [2011-03-16 06:45:19 +0000 UTC]

my pleasure. i think very highly of your style. minimal meets surreal. i really, really dig it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

mant4106 In reply to cisternachyli [2011-03-17 22:23:10 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, my friend. I really appreciate your support.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to metathesiomania [2010-12-22 05:53:20 +0000 UTC]

duh

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to ejectionletter [2010-06-25 00:19:02 +0000 UTC]

and i'd pour it! and another, and another...

what i DID do was shrug it off and pretend to be too cool to care.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ejectionletter In reply to cisternachyli [2010-06-25 01:52:58 +0000 UTC]

but of course.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to Alchemisticpurplepig [2010-06-25 00:20:42 +0000 UTC]

hey thanks there piggie. you MIGHT be interested to see my old account then, who knows? [link] course i think most of it's crap but some people disagreed with me

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Alchemisticpurplepig In reply to cisternachyli [2010-06-25 00:31:10 +0000 UTC]

haha i'll check it out eh, compared to your new stuff it may not be FANTASTIC but im sure it's good!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to Alchemisticpurplepig [2010-06-25 21:55:42 +0000 UTC]

it's true that i left that account for a reason but mostly because that whole demonblack thing really got on my nerves!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Alchemisticpurplepig In reply to cisternachyli [2010-06-26 00:13:47 +0000 UTC]

Ah, im pretty picky about my user-names too. alchemisticpurplepig works for me though, It's pretty unique and it doesn't really let people make to many assumptions about what sort of person I am so its good. You've got a lot of literature on there i'll be sure to read some of it

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to TheKnell [2010-05-05 03:38:07 +0000 UTC]

you f'in rock. deeply appreciative to you and my new buddy gallymont!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TheKnell In reply to cisternachyli [2010-05-05 04:01:41 +0000 UTC]

Our pleasure.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to metathesiomania [2010-04-30 05:06:10 +0000 UTC]

fuck yea, congrats! what zine?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

metathesiomania In reply to cisternachyli [2010-04-30 14:12:48 +0000 UTC]

[link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to metathesiomania [2010-04-30 17:37:11 +0000 UTC]

awesome!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to Sapph0 [2010-04-19 17:05:30 +0000 UTC]

hey thanks! my old dA account is [link] and i never got around to deleting stuff over there. take a look if so inclined!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sapph0 In reply to cisternachyli [2010-04-19 17:47:50 +0000 UTC]

Awesome

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-04-09 06:41:15 +0000 UTC]

awesome thanks man. just joined.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-03-14 23:53:15 +0000 UTC]

i am currently, but not normal medicine. energy medicine. how have you come across the cisterna chyli?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Leurindal In reply to cisternachyli [2010-03-15 13:40:19 +0000 UTC]

I'm a medical student - read about it while studying the anatomy of the abdomen and the lymphatic system. anyway, congrats for the originality

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-03-15 15:12:53 +0000 UTC]

ah, so you are on track for a ritual brainwashing by the medical corporation! so far so good?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Leurindal In reply to cisternachyli [2010-03-15 19:40:03 +0000 UTC]

so far so... tolerable

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-03-15 21:49:04 +0000 UTC]

ah, yes, well.

wait till you start thinking it's laughable for anything to exist that you can't see. it will be very enjoyable for you and your colleagues to laugh at homeopaths and such from the bow of your private yacht.

maybe i'm being presumptuous. maybe it will be a private jet financed by pfizer.

ok ok i'll get off it now.

how far into this brainwashing session are you?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Leurindal In reply to cisternachyli [2010-03-15 22:06:49 +0000 UTC]

well, well. I doubt I'd be interested in a jet, or even a humble yacht. A malaria-infested hut in Nigeria would be just as good for me. And as they're busy laughing their asses off at homeopathy, I'd be laughing my own ass off at the leaks in their yacht.

Not all of us are in it for the money, you know.

I'm halfway through my second year, and am considering stopping. Not because of the canker in the system - I've long been aware of that, and don't think that it makes medicine any less noble. I'm considering quitting because medicine never did quite turn me on, not the way literature does.

Then again, perhaps I'll hang on. Dreams are precious.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-03-15 22:56:50 +0000 UTC]

this is when the practical side of me comes out - you're probly better off (and so are nigerians) being a doctor who dabbles in literature than the other way around

anyway i'm glad i am grossly mischaracterizing you.

if you are ever interested in things you will never learn in medical school give "the persecution and trial of gaston naessens" a read. honestly, it's awful as literature but supremely awesome as a look into alternative thoughts on medicine and for forming your own personal mythology (which, after many years thinking about the work of joseph campbell... i think is tremendously important).

unfortunately the entire medical institution is based on a dogmatic system of thought (germ theory and nothing but germ theory) so you will never hear about somatids even though they are proven to exist. and their existence disproves germ theory... people don't like this since germ theory is so profitable... i could get into that if you want...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Leurindal In reply to cisternachyli [2010-03-16 16:53:21 +0000 UTC]

I'll give it a read, should the book and I ever cross paths.

I'm interested in alternative medicine but don't think that any of us are in a position to renounce the "standard" medical knowledge that we have. It makes sense, it's empirically-based (most germs can actually be visualised microscopically) and there are millions of recoveries that keep proving this all the time. It's imperfect, but as it's as good as it gets.

You may interpret that as 'I'm already brainwashed/corrupted' if you want, but I think that that couldn't be further from the truth.

Been nice talking to ya

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-03-16 17:30:10 +0000 UTC]

i'm not debating the existence of germs or the merits of allopathic medicine but i do think the system of thought around germs (and health in general) is incomplete and inethically-driven.

the problem with how allopaths see germs is that they are the end of the story - kill germs and you kill the problems they're causing. this is warfare. and i guess i'd be ok with that if it were also effective, but it's not (for the same reason there will always be terrorists in our current paradigm... that's a whole 'nother rant). no one really asks (except the woo-woos like me) why the germs are there in the first place. a medical doctor's job is to eliminate the threat and ta-da your job is done. but the "real threat" never leaves until you look deeper, and in my opinion, to look deeper you have to acknowledge unseen things. there is no room for unseen things the way allopathic medicine is set up. a person is only the blood and guts and systems and nerves, and there is no room for anything that precedes that (ie a soul or something). this is very profitable. and it doesn't actually get to the root of healing people.

but if i break a leg or fall out of a helicopter i'm going to see an allopath. anything else and i'm gonna hang out with people who genuinely care about me and my health.

i'm not saying you don't care about people and health, but the system you're learning absolutely does not, and you might not even notice.

all this to say i'm glad for your intentions, but want to be a little birdie on your shoulder that reminds you you're missing something big in that school of thought.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Leurindal In reply to cisternachyli [2010-03-16 18:46:10 +0000 UTC]

I think that the weaknesses or limitations you are referring to are concomitant to the scientific nature of medicine - it's empirical, and therefore treats "tangible" symptoms with "tangible" treatments. I wouldn't necessarily correlate that to profitability (though it certainly is), but to the nature of the scientific method itself, which is after all the method used to reach a diagnosis.

It is for this reason that alternative medicine is considered to be alternative medicine - it is a possible resort when the scientific method yields no beneficial results.

In essence, I agree with your criticism, particularly of the way doctors are becoming social parasites themselves, rather than healers. But I still believe in "scientific" medical principles where safeguarding health is involved. Concepts of soul, spirit, ki and all that, while certainly interesting and the kind of stuff I love writing poetry about, are not very reliable concepts to go treating patients by, if you ask me. Not because I apotheosize science, but because talk of faith and such elements raises too many questions - more than its scientific counterpart.

And can't an allopath also care for your health? I, for one, would like to be one such allopath. Can I not be within the system but not part of it?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cisternachyli In reply to Leurindal [2010-03-16 22:56:01 +0000 UTC]

personally, i think it's damn near impossible but that doesn't mean you can't do it. like, the little i know of patch adams... he seems alright. he at least acknowledges people as more than piles of meat (this sounds like an exaggeration but i honestly don't think it is) and it got him famous. holy crap a doctor who cares! ya know? the allopathic community is not known for pumping out empathetic people.

anyway if you are prescribing pharmaceuticals i think that right there, for the most part, is enough to say you're doing people more harm than good. this is my own personal bias about the drug industry.

don't get me started about the whole "alternative" moniker. it is an exceedingly rare licensed medical doctor who can actually treat chronic asthma, just for instance. a doctor who prescribes a steroid inhaler is doing this classic falsity that people know to be a falsity but do it anyway - treating the symptom instead of the cause. people bitch about this all the time. all thinking people know that this is not the way to heal - yet so many do it this way anyway. this is a huge disconnect for my brain.

for something like chronic asthma the MDs just aren't looking at it right. allopathic medicine's work should be mostly limited to life or death situations in my opinion. the bottom line in this case is - no pharmaceutical is doing anyone any good (except for big pharma).

it is a money making endeavor, not a reduce-human-suffering one. simple as that.

oh and there are schools of thought out there that say diagnosis is virtually unnecessary. i tend to agree. allopathic medicine (again this comes back to the germ theory foundation) says if you can diagnose asthma - boom this drug will eradicate it. it's again this idea of warfare, and i just don't believe warfare with our bodies makes any sense.

what naessens has discoverd is life forms smaller than cells that are pleomorphic, that is, they turn into viruses or bacteria whenever there is an environment in the body that requires a virus to eat up toxicity. from this point of view - the presence of bacteria is the RESULT, not the CAUSE, of sickness. when the body can rid itself of the toxicity, the bacteria/virus/whatever will go away. this isn't just an idea or a philosophy, this is proven science (based largely on naessen's work), but it literally threatens the entire foundation of allopathic medicine, and allopathic medicine has the money and power and influence to keep discoveries like this out of the mainstream.

i can go on and on.

um, i'll say something about this idea of soul/spirit/ki you bring up too. i think you would probably agree that a soul (i'll just call it that from now on) precedes the physical form? (this is sort of an esoteric realm, and in those circles it is accepted as true, and the idea has been around for thousands of years.) if the soul precedes the physical form, then wouldn't it make sense to treat this soul instead of just the body? this is again a case of treating the symptom rather than cause. i suppose to allopaths this idea would be impossible but it's not at all. acupuncturists have been doing it for centuries. shamans before that. homeopathy is still pretty young (only as old as allopathic medicine actually) but it seems to be pretty successful too.

there is also this idea of suppression, which is related to symptoms rather than cause. if you have a rash a doctor will prescribe cortisone cream or something, suppressing that physical expression. the cause of the rash still remains, does it not? it seems pretty common for people to understand they are suppressing symptoms rather than freeing themselves of sickness, but i guess they keep doing it because they don't know there are other options. (this is because of the power and influence that comes from an industry as profitable as the modern health and pharmaceutical industries.)

i can keep going

still with me?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Leurindal In reply to cisternachyli [2010-03-19 14:57:50 +0000 UTC]

(sorry for the late reply - I stay away from dA when I'm down)

Well, I think that a large proportion of medical care is about treating the symptoms, rather than the underlying disease, because in many cases no reliable cure has yet been found. This doesn't make medicine useless - just think of the science of analgesia. Masking pain doesn't cure the underlying pathology, but it sure does help making our lives easier.

Now that you mention it, I'm not quite sure as to whether alternative medicine treats underlying causes any better than its traditional counterpart. My knowledge of homeopathy is very poor, but I do know that practises like acupuncture have a scientifically-proven mechanism of action - the gating mechanism of pain - which does not treat underlying causes but masks the pain, just like morphine or paracetamol does.

Besides, surely you must agree that there are many medications which target the underlying disease, including antibiotics, hormone replacement therapies, and endless others.

I'm not knowledgable about pleiomorphic life-forms and the like, and thus cannot contribute a well-informed opinion, but I think that the existence of bacteria/viruses and their susceptibility/resistance to specific antibiotics is quite beyond question. And that, I think, already justifies the hours of work at the infectious disease department.

Our debate could go on indefinitely, I think. Perhaps we should conclude by agreeing that all forms of medicine should be encouraged as long as they are effective and motivated by the right ("selfless") reasons?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1