Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 19 Sep 2009 03:32 PM
I investigate my paranormal experiences from the skeptical point of view. I have not chosen those experiences, but I experience them, and I search for an explanation for them, and that should be encouraged.

Nor do I believe that I can dictate what you do or say. But the law can, and will, if necessary, no matter how many lies, half truths, misleading statements, and different versions you offer them.

I believe you are a liar. I believe you are unethical,  completely lacking in empathy, and, quite possibly, mentally unstable. You have provided nothing that persuades me to believe otherwise.  If I feel that your continuing unethical behavior poses a threat to the wellbeing of others, I will file a complaint with the State Medical Board and initiate an investigation into your actions. It will be up to them, by law, to decide if any violation has occirred, and take the appropriate action.

If you don't like it, tough. And I could give a flying fig what the statutes that regulate the Board of Massage Therapists state. You are off in La La Land, talking about reflexology. I am in the real world,. addressing the issue of you violating the Medical Practice Act. Two very different things.

I am convinced that your motives for warning me are based on benevolence and I appreciate being informed of the laws that regulate how a person might be allowed to attempt to treat a person's migraine symptoms. Meanwhile, I have only attempted the migraine treatment with one person and that person is to be considered a friend, and laws do permit friends to give friends with a headache a massage and I have already carefully outlined what was and what was not involved in the att. treatment and so to date I have not violated any laws or regulations regarding att. migraine treatment.

Of course there is the concern that I intend to try again and with other persons. I have already made contact with the North Carolina Board of Massage and Bodywork Therapy and will make sure that I carefully outline in advance exactly how another att. treatment would be carried out and to check that I am allowed to do it. I am equally concerned of the safety and well-being of these persons, but then again that is why I am looking into this in the first place.

Posted By UncaYimmy on 19 Sep 2009 07:08 PM
Anita claimed on the JREF, "UncaYimmy did once try to talk me into giving him ownership and access to my website." This is at best a misleading statement and at worst a lie. We were discussing on the JREFF Forums what Anita would give up if she ever took the IIG test and subsequently failed. I did not trust her to actually retract her claims, so I suggested that she transfer her website over to me.

It's right here in black and white.

So, you are illustrating that when I said you had asked me to hand over the ownership to my website www.visionfromfeeling.com to you it was true. Lie? Misleading? Not at all. It's right here in black and white.

No, it shouldn't, because the only explanation you will accept is the one that you want: that your alleged abilities are paranormal.

If you were genuinely searching for the truest explanation of them, then you would have started by either confirming or eliminating all rational and logical explanations for them, such as mental illness, synesthesia, etc. You have not done this, thus your pseudo investigation is not worthy of encouragement.

And how does mental illness or synesthesia explain how a person can look at someone and know that they are missing a left kidney? That is why this is a paranormal investigation, and not of a different kind.
 

Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 20 Sep 2009 03:08 AM

And how does mental illness or synesthesia explain how a person can look at someone and know that they are missing a left kidney? That is why this is a paranormal investigation, and not of a different kind.

 False dichotomy and conclusion for three reasons.  One is that there are other possiblities not reflected in your question.   The second is that you don't have synesthesia.  Finally, you didn't detect any such thing as you claim; you just made that up afterwards.   You may not be able to tell that this is the case, but everyone else can.   You do understand 'everyone', don't you?

Apart from that, mental illness would go a long way towards an explanation, although as a sufferer you could hardly be expected to realise this on your own.   A problem is that your constant unevidenced rejection of the possibility that you're suffering delusions is a bit suspect, and explains why many people see evil intent in what you are doing.

You could stop this whole mess if you got some professional help, but it seems the initial hurdle is for you to realise what a mess you're in.   Can't you see that this whole VfF nonsense is now a major part of your curriculum vitae?

The only way you're ever going to be able to explain any of this trip to a future employer is if it were some kind of psychotic break that you managed to finally deal with.   It's difficult to see any other explanation not painting you as deliberately setting up a transparent and pathetic hoax, for whatever purpose.

Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 20 Sep 2009 03:02 AM 

I am convinced that your motives for warning me are based on benevolence and I appreciate being informed of the laws that regulate how a person might be allowed to attempt to treat a person's migraine symptoms. Meanwhile, I have only attempted the migraine treatment with one person and that person is to be considered a friend, and laws do permit friends to give friends with a headache a massage and I have already carefully outlined what was and what was not involved in the att. treatment and so to date I have not violated any laws or regulations regarding att. migraine treatment.

Of course there is the concern that I intend to try again and with other persons. I have already made contact with the North Carolina Board of Massage and Bodywork Therapy and will make sure that I carefully outline in advance exactly how another att. treatment would be carried out and to check that I am allowed to do it. I am equally concerned of the safety and well-being of these persons, but then again that is why I am looking into this in the first place.

You are incorrect in several ways, and I have no desire to read whatever further spin you give to your story.

I am not debating this further. If you continue to 'treat' people for migraines, and that includes any 'study' or 'test', I will file a complaint with the State Medical Board to initiate an investigation into your claims. It's just that simple. 

Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 20 Sep 2009 03:08 AM

And how does mental illness or synesthesia explain how a person can look at someone and know that they are missing a left kidney? That is why this is a paranormal investigation, and not of a different kind.

Once again, if you were genuinely searching for the truest explanation, then you would have started by either confirming or eliminating all rational and logical explanations for them, such as mental illness, synesthesia, etc. You have not done this, which takes us back to the only explanation you will accept is the one that want: that your alleged abilities are paranormal.

False dichotomy and conclusion for three reasons.  One is that there are other possiblities not reflected in your question.   The second is that you don't have synesthesia.  Finally, you didn't detect any such thing as you claim; you just made that up afterwards.   You may not be able to tell that this is the case, but everyone else can.   You do understand 'everyone', don't you?

Apart from that, mental illness would go a long way towards an explanation, although as a sufferer you could hardly be expected to realise this on your own.   A problem is that your constant unevidenced rejection of the possibility that you're suffering delusions is a bit suspect, and explains why many people see evil intent in what you are doing.

You could stop this whole mess if you got some professional help, but it seems the initial hurdle is for you to realise what a mess you're in.   Can't you see that this whole VfF nonsense is now a major part of your curriculum vitae?

The only way you're ever going to be able to explain any of this trip to a future employer is if it were some kind of psychotic break that you managed to finally deal with.   It's difficult to see any other explanation not painting you as deliberately setting up a transparent and pathetic hoax, for whatever purpose.

Are you people for real? Listen to me very carefully: when I look at people, I see images in my mind that depict internal tissues and organs and health information. Those images are automatic in the same sense that I see colors associated to physics equations. Ok, that in itself is nothing to worry about. It is most likely synesthesia. I have an ordinary sense of reality and I am well capable of keeping a clear distinction between objective reality and subjective impressions. I do not have automatic sense of belief in the perceptions.

But what interests me, are cases where the medical perceptions have correlated with actual health information. So yes, I could be probably reading external clues subconsciously that my brain picks up on and translates into corresponding images. However, the reason I am investigating these experiences, is because I have accurately perceived things such as that a left kidney was missing.

I have not lied about my past experiences with accurate medical perceptions. No amount of you telling me that I am lying is going to change the fact that I was not lying. I have been entirely honest, and self-deception is not an option. I certainly do not expect you to believe me, but I would certainly hope that you could respect the fact that I just might be telling the truth, and your "trying to help me come to my senses" is in that case actually just hurtful.

Please wait until the official IIG test, because it will show once and for all, for both of us, and with definite evidence, whether I am able to accurately describe the number of kidneys in a person well beyond chance or guessing. It is clear that we disagree. I maintain that I was telling the truth, and you try to convince me that I was lying. Can't we just wait for the test and find out definitively.

I am not debating this further. If you continue to 'treat' people for migraines, and that includes any 'study' or 'test', I will file a complaint with the State Medical Board to initiate an investigation into your claims. It's just that simple. 

Go for it. I will certainly have investigated what I am allowed to do before continuing with a second att. migraine treatment so all should be fine. There are so many massage therapists and alleged energy healers out there and there are cases where they are effective in accomplishing relief in several pain conditions, and it can be done legally, responsibly, effectively, and ethically. Could be that in order for me to obtain a license to treat migraines I would have to complete a certified education program and become an educated massage therapist with proper knowledge of muscles, nerves, risks, etc, to ensure high-quality educated treatment. I would be prepared to do that. If by any chance I am able to offer relief for migraines I will most certainly make sure that I establish that I have such an ability and obtain all the proper education and license and begin practice. I think the migraine sufferers are entitled to it.

Once again, if you were genuinely searching for the truest explanation, then you would have started by either confirming or eliminating all rational and logical explanations for them, such as mental illness, synesthesia, etc. You have not done this, which takes us back to the only explanation you will accept is the one that want: that your alleged abilities are paranormal.

But how does mental illness or synesthesia lead to accurate perceptions of health information that should not be accessible to ordinary senses of perception? The official test will determine whether there is a significant accuracy or not and I will go from there.

Why do you keep typing "att. treatment", VfF? You don't habitually shorten any other words, not even quite complex long ones which you use often (like synaesthesia). Is there a reason why you are shortening this particular word and no other? Are we being led to believe that you are intending one word when in fact you are meaning another one?

Does 'att.' stand for attempted? Attainted? Attentive? Attested? Attractive? Attitudinal? Attributed? Attenuated? Attendant?

I have asked these questions the JREFF as well.

When I write att. it means attempted. According to North Carolina laws it is illegal for me to call myself a therapist or to describe what I do as treatment, so I make sure I do neither by calling what I do attempted treatment, and that's what it is too. I abbreviate it with att. and it will always mean attempted and nothing else.

Note: It is not a play of words. It really still is only attempted treatment. When I first did it with the man who had migraines I did not know if it would work, so it was only an attempt. And if I could try it again it would still be attempted treatment, since I have not established whether it was responsible for the improvement in his migraine condition or whether it could accomplish that consistently.

Posted By Agatha on 20 Sep 2009 12:22 PM
if it is illegal to call what you do 'treatment', then I very much doubt it is legal to modify it by sticking 'att.' or 'attempted' in front of the word treatment. I expect Desertgal will know [or can find out] better than I.

However, this doesn't explain why you have suddenly taken to abbreviating that word and no other. I suspect it is because you are trying to distance yourself from the qualifier 'attempted'.

I already said "Note: It is not a play of words. It really still is only attempted treatment. When I first did it with the man who had migraines I did not know if it would work, so it was only an attempt. And if I could try it again it would still be attempted treatment, since I have not established whether it was responsible for the improvement in his migraine condition or whether it could accomplish that consistently."

If I do another attempted treatment I will have properly checked what I can and can not do. And why am I not allowed to abbreviate a word I use so very often? All of you call me VFF? Do you guys then call me VFF so that you can later say that you were not actually saying VisionFromFeeling, but something else with the same abbreviation? I'm just abbreviating because I write it so often, there is no hidden agenda behind it I assure you! You'll just have to see that there is not! 

Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 20 Sep 2009 11:49 AM

Go for it.

Okay.

Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 20 Sep 2009 11:49 AM

I am not debating this further. If you continue to 'treat' people for migraines, and that includes any 'study' or 'test', I will file a complaint with the State Medical Board to initiate an investigation into your claims. It's just that simple. 

Go for it. I will certainly have investigated what I am allowed to do before continuing with a second att. migraine treatment so all should be fine. There are so many massage therapists and alleged energy healers out there and there are cases where they are effective in accomplishing relief in several pain conditions, and it can be done legally, responsibly, effectively, and ethically. Could be that in order for me to obtain a license to treat migraines I would have to complete a certified education program and become an educated massage therapist with proper knowledge of muscles, nerves, risks, etc, to ensure high-quality educated treatment. I would be prepared to do that. If by any chance I am able to offer relief for migraines I will most certainly make sure that I establish that I have such an ability and obtain all the proper education and license and begin practice. I think the migraine sufferers are entitled to it.

Oh piffle!  It has been explained time and time again why your migraine "treatment" is unethical. You do not care about that, in fact you've made it very clear that you are only concerned with it being illegal.

So here we have a practitioner who refuses to study their treatment under safe lab conditions, has no training in neurobiology, who mucks about in the brains of human being, and does not care that it is unethical.   If you would like more examples of this, please see Zoetron Therapy, Hulda Clark, the Magic Bullet MB33 "AIDS cure" and about a million others.

This is the basis for alternative medicine scams.  A magical talent, or pseudo-science, that can not be tested or is only tested by the practitioner, something for which "science has no explanation" that is offered as a last ditch effort to desperate people. 

 You will say of course that you are trying to test the migraine treatment but using it is not testing it.  You are telling people that it works, no one is fooled by your carefully vague wording.

Migraine sufferers do not need to be scammed.  It does not help them.  Please stop playing the saint, what you are doing is as evil as those who offer fake cancer cures.

Double post, sorry.

Posted By VisionFromFeeling on 20 Sep 2009 12:42 PM

Posted By Agatha on 20 Sep 2009 12:22 PM
if it is illegal to call what you do 'treatment', then I very much doubt it is legal to modify it by sticking 'att.' or 'attempted' in front of the word treatment. I expect Desertgal will know [or can find out] better than I.

However, this doesn't explain why you have suddenly taken to abbreviating that word and no other. I suspect it is because you are trying to distance yourself from the qualifier 'attempted'.

I already said "Note: It is not a play of words. It really still is only attempted treatment. When I first did it with the man who had migraines I did not know if it would work, so it was only an attempt. And if I could try it again it would still be attempted treatment, since I have not established whether it was responsible for the improvement in his migraine condition or whether it could accomplish that consistently."

If I do another attempted treatment I will have properly checked what I can and can not do. And why am I not allowed to abbreviate a word I use so very often? All of you call me VFF? Do you guys then call me VFF so that you can later say that you were not actually saying VisionFromFeeling, but something else with the same abbreviation? I'm just abbreviating because I write it so often, there is no hidden agenda behind it I assure you! You'll just have to see that there is not! 

Not allowed?   Calm down, it's not an order.  I am not the boss of you any more than you are the boss of me. If you are intending to obfuscate, though, you are succeeding.
 

If I understand you, the only reason you abbreviate attempted (a word you use much less than paranormal, synaesthesia, vibrational, falsified, investigation or detection, all of which are as long or longer and which you never abbreviate) is that it's tiring to type.  OK.  A very credible explanation.... if you are Anita.  The rest of us are not so easily fooled. 

 What you are doing is no different from the charlatans peddling cancer 'cures', and as long as you continue with this, I hold your actions in the same contempt.

Posted By Agatha on 20 Sep 2009 12:22 PM
if it is illegal to call what you do 'treatment', then I very much doubt it is legal to modify it by sticking 'att.' or 'attempted' in front of the word treatment. I expect Desertgal will know [or can find out] better than I.

However, this doesn't explain why you have suddenly taken to abbreviating that word and no other. I suspect it is because you are trying to distance yourself from the qualifier 'attempted'.

Is there a legal difference between an "attempted treatment" and a "treatment"? Nope. Until it succeeds or fails, every treatment is an "attempted treatment". (Boy, it was tiring to type that. I may have to take the day off.)

Yawn. Just more of Anita being a fraud. She probably assimilated "att. treatment" from somewhere. She does that. You all didn't expect her to come up with something original, I hope?