Korifaeus Magazine

••• The Big Brother's, oops, i mean Apple's Gazette ••• A Sophisticated Periodical with Panache and a Sense of Humor

When “TRUTH” is NOT “TRUTH”

Relativity
By Korifaeus

“Truth” is “relative”. Everything is relative “outside” of mathematics; the theory of relativity in a nut-shell.

The latter paragraph is what I suggested to a fellow giving me one of these “truth” lectures, to which he “insisted” it’s not true that everything outside of mathematics is relative, with him using the example of “colors” = “But the TRUTH is that this yellow flower ( pointing to a yellow flower ) is yellow. That is the truth and it’s not relative”, he “insisted”.

I tend to disagree, i told him, because its color is “relative” to the “light” it’s exposed to; would that flower be placed in black-light ( purple light bulb), it would take on a very different color in ” appearance” and may look greenish in black light ?

Of course there are some scientific truths, as in laws of nature, but
the truth “insistence” on pseudo-science facts seems to have almost reached its height and appears to have become epidemic and alarming when folks, unable to rationalize proposed “truths”, repeat it as though its hewn into stone, then lecturing others.

“Broccoli is good for you and very healthy”, is one of these pseudo-science statements with parents “urged” to feed their children broccoli because it’s ‘supposedly’ very healthy for *them (* all children/people)

I beg to differ and i “insist” on my “right” to my personal opinion and reject the argument that broccoli is healthy for “everyone”.

I can’t stand broccoli. The smell of steamed broccoli alone makes me feel nauseated, as does the smell/taste of cucumbers, water melon and brussel sprouts.

All of the above are said to be healthy, specifically “broccoli”.
But if the mere smell of a food gives me the feeling of nausea, makes my nose crawl and i would be regurgitating these foods were i to “force” myself to consume them, how can that possibly be healthy for me ?

If forcing down a specific food results in a negative “physiological” reaction, how can that be good for me ?

Broccoli, or the other aforementioned foods, may be healthy for a lot of people, but not for “me”.

To insist something is healthy for “all” people is flawed science because it does not take individuality – physiological, genetical, psychological – into consideration.

Green vegetables are good for us – of course – they’re a necessity for our body’s health and I most certainly devour greens but prefer kale or collard greens to broccoli. Who is to say that’s not a healthier choice, since the two have far more nutrients and taste much more delicious to me ?

In fact, ask any biologist; broccoli is “the least” nutritious of ALL the medium to dark green vegetables – which makes one wonder why this particular vegetable, of all the green vegetables available, while the least liked amongst children, was the one vegetable chosen to be promoted as the “ultimate healthy” one ?

Sadism ?

A truth stays a truth; it won’t suddenly change into untruth, but many so called “truths” from yesteryear are no longer considered true, ergo it wasn’t “truth” in the first place. 15 years ago Cardiologist recommended vitamin E supplements, said to prevent heart disease, which turned out to actually be dangerous.

When i grew up and the generations before me, we were told to go and play in the sun = “Sun is good for you.”
Did my parents lie and the generations before that, since kids are nowadays told to get OUT of the sun = “Sun is not good for you,” ?
….. and IF going into the sun then only when thickly covered in sunscreen.

What’s the truth ?
Is it not relative to one’s genes – individuality ?

I come from a mixed gene pole and am not fair skinned; I don’t burn, instead tan and get darker and darker the more i’m exposed to sun rays.

When northern folks whose forefathers had not lived in climates with great sun exposure, thus very fair skinned, move to Arizona, Australia, or other hot climates, and find the hot sun suddenly beating down on their skin, it’s only natural they take precautions, don’t get too much sun, avoid sun burns and sun allergies, thus use sun screen.

But to insist the sun is harmful to ALL people, fair skinned, olive skinned, brown, etc. ? We’re not ALL the same – we ALL have different skin types; not to take that into consideration is that not ….err, unconventional ?

And because not everyone is able to endure sufficient sun exposure to benefit from it through getting vitamin D2, vitamin D is added to the milk for ALL people ?

Such milk is not good for “me”; with the calcium in the milk, plus the added vitamin D, i may end up getting hypercalcemia, since vitamin D helps absorb calcium; but there is only so much calcium a body needs. The excess not being eliminated, instead absorbed, ends up in arteries, joints, neurosystem and possibly results in “Morbus Fahr” ( calcification of the brain) and diagnosed as dementia.

Doctor asking patient with symptoms of forgetfulness during a clinical trial/analysis into the effects of vitamin D supplementation:” Did you drink a lot of vitamin D3 enhanced milk ?”

Patient:” I don’t remember”.

.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: