yes, but that does not by definition conflict with what I said. The Buhner protocol is based on herbal products that have medically PROVEN to work for similar diseases or problems (e.g. against syphilis) and that have biochemical actions (based on scientific research) that can help with the known symptoms in lyme disease (e.g. super anti-oxidants like resveratrol, or immune-modulating substances like the alkaloids in cats claw). This is not much different from the use of antibiotics against spirochetes because these antibiotics have proven to work on bacteria (which are entirely different) or treponema (which is still very different from Bb genetically).Claudia wrote: Buhner is big on the Doctrine of Signatures (plants will resemble what they will treat, for example a plant that looks like hair will treat baldness).
In fact, I'm fascinated by how in the past (long before 'science' ) people come up with the use of very specific plants for specific problems. It does NOT work by trial and error and I think it could some kind of 'unscientific' law behind it, something that works and cannot scientifically be explained (yet).
first of all: I already mentioned that the drug ivermectin seems to behave a bit according to this 'signatures' idea as well. That it works is strange but FACT, there simply is no scientific explanation (yet?) why it works over such a broad range of species.Claudia wrote: Because you are a scientist/biochemist, I was surprised when you asked/posted that. To me this supports a Creationist view of plants instead of an evolutionary view, which seems scientifically illogical to me.
and no, it is not creationist at all. Buhner can be linked to Gaia theory which is a kind of scientific version of creationism to some, and scientifically controversial, but definitely NOT unscientific (and definitely NOT 'religious' in the common interpretation either). Gaia theory in its weaker incarnations (kind of a super-ecology of the planet) is probably accepted by a majority of biologists/ecologist. I think it offers interesting views on subjects like why diseases like Lyme are spreading (and potentially, what you could do against that). Buhner has some strong opinions about that (they are not in the Healing Lyme book); they are 'unscientific' in the sense that they are probably outside the reach of current science. But there may be some truth there, I'm open to alternative ideas especially when science has very little to offer.
Life on earth evolved together; the plants being much older than us 'know' things genetically that science does not yet understand (and maybe will never understand). They are natures biochemical factories to the extreme, producing probably millions of components including many we do not yet know. Many animals use herbs for specific problems; do you think they found out what to use by scientific experimentation?