Well, based off of personal experience and completely consistent reports from all over the world of shamans "magically" curing disease, I speculate that the psychedelic experience can affect someone's mental processing to the degree that a placebo healing effect occurs, I'm not entirely sure the physiological basis for this, but it's been shown that very frequently in clinical studies, placebo pills still are effective, even if the patient KNOWS it's a placebo!

This tells me that the human mind's ability to conceptualize and interpret reality can literally affect the physical body on a direct level, and I feel like psychedelics produce some of the most acute, perceivable mental and emotional effects, so it makes sense to me that they would have the ability to produce drastic placebo effects, even on the level of physical healing.

..> I think there's some misunderstanding, Citta. Nobody's romanticising Psychadelics as a cure all, but they have been used in ancient cultures to cure some diseases, and still are being used as such.. Sure they cannot heal everything, but they do have a place in society. Thanks to the plant knowledge gained from Ayahuasca, shamans have learnt of the uses of jungle plants to cure illnesses they otherwise wouldn't have discovered. I know that i am not ignorant of these facts. I have heard reports of people being cured of Cancer thanks to Ayahuasca, etc...

-ALSO psychadelics have the ability to cahnge peoples thinking and ways of living which is more likely to be true to themselves, which is healthier and more meaningful than perhaps living otherwise??

-Psychadelics are a part of life in my opinion.A backbone if you like, don't take my word for it, though....just look at history and past cultures instead....

-

do you have any references to support this claim?
there's a significant difference between a "cure" and a treatment

Benzyme, have you not read of people being cured of Cancer, thanks to Ayahuasca?? I find this hard to believe. I thought this was well known. as of yet i have no references. I simply don't accumulate such information, since i don't find such news interesting or indeed anything out of the ordinary for the miraculous powers of Ayahuasca, etc.

-I'll extend this by saying that i have READ and seen people talking about how Ayahuasca has turned peoples lives around for the better, as well as curing or treating Cancer, whichever way one wants to explain it. The bottom line is this. That most Cancer is the reSult of a negative lifestyle. Ayahuasca can help many people out of a negative lifestyle and into a positive one.

-These are my views, however if you disagree, then that's ok by me. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. However i'm sticking to Ayahuasca's side on this one, haha

It's not well known - I've never read it in a medical journal. Feel free to look for yourself:

http://scholar.google.com/
http://www.nejm.org/
http://jama.ama-assn.org/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/

Perhaps not, because not all people cured will mention why, etc, for fear of being looked at as silly. Who knows. Maybe i am wrong on this. I'm no expert, but i would rather put my faith in a jungle medicine that's been around before doctors and hospitals and pharmacies existed...

EDIT-look at this... http://www.phfawcettsweb.org/ayahuasca.htm

I don't think that's the song you'd be singing if you or a close family member had cancer. Most likely, you'd put the root bark aside and go get proven treatments.

That is ridiculous. Not romanticising psychedelics, huh? That is exactly what you are doing. You are ready to disregard years of research and documented clinical effects for some hallucinogen brew in the amazon? This is exactly the kind of attitude I find really disturbing, and you should really reconsider your beliefs on this one because they are far off, really far off.

Just because something has been around for longer doesn't mean its better. Scientific method can show if the jungle medicine works or not, its not biased, like faith... That is exactly the problem Citta claimed, and I agree.

If you make claims that ayahuasca cures cancer on a forum where discussions are based on evidence (as the attitude page says), and then there isnt a single publication showing what you said, well, as you see, its innapropriate. But not only that, I think more significantly, it is a dangerous claim. Spreading these kind of ideas can influence people to believe they can cure cancer just with ayahuasca and no other treatment and this can lead to someone else dying due to this misinformation/unproven claims.

Now Im not saying you cant speculate when you are explicit about it, and give informed arguments why ayahuasca may help with this or that.. The problem is when cures are claimed or speculation is mentioned as fact.

OK then read this the.... http://www.phfawcettsweb.org/ayahuasca.htm

-scroll down, and see the bit where it links to her being cured of cancer by a shaman. ps, there is no need for the hash negative nasty vibe, Citta.

- In no way , shape, or form have i been harsh or negative to you. Please leave the attude issue out. Thank you.

That is hardly a serious reference.

And yes, there is need for harsh and negative attitudes against this kind of belief that you hold. Why? Because they are dangerous, because beliefs like this happen to get people killed. This is why we are concerned by beliefs like this, I hope you can understand that eventually.

Citta, i'm afraid i do think your attitude is harsh and nasty in tone. You know this and still print your words. I very much doubt anyone with Cancer is gonna be looking on the nexus for a Cancer cure, unless they have always been curious of Ayahuasca anyhow, etc. So i really doubt that anyone's gonna die because of a little conversation about a psychadelic ve scientific viewpoint thread. That is just plain ridiculous for you to say so, and well over the top IMO... I really think you need to chillout, because you're taking this far too seriously.

-No offense meant, Chris.

If you are disagreeing with his point of view for being harsh, dont also call what he says as ridiculous, how is this setting an example for the conversation?

Christian, whether or not there is a large probability that a person will look for cancer cures in the Nexus, discussions here still have to be based on evidence and reasonable backed arguments, and speculation cannot be claimed as facts. Thats a basic condition for Nexus communication, that all must respect.

Okay, I am sorry for being rude. I will try not to be in this reply

The point is not this spesific conversation Chris, but the general attitude that you, certain other members here and people elsewhere in the world have in matters like this. Perhaps you having this attitude is not a big problem for you and your loved ones, but if you look past your own subjective experience, beliefs akin to those you hold can lead to decision making that is dangerous for the one or the ones that they are made for. They do get people killed, because some people hold a firm belief in traditional healing, through sacraments such as ayahuasca or otherwise, that makes them disregard school medicine that have documented effect and years of research to back them up. This is a problem, and there are many examples of this happening. In the worst case scenarios people die because they don't get proper treatment.

That is one of the reasons I react in such a way to beliefs like this, and that is why I react in such a way to you, because you hold beliefs that are unsubstantiated and that can lead some people to very poor decisions. It is of uttermost importance to be critical to ones own beliefs and opinions, and it is very important not to ignore our modern, scientific knowledge of the world - either it is medicine, physics, chemistry, geology or whatever. They are very important for our lives and our understanding, and enable us to make good decisions in technical, environmental and futuristic questions in politics that concerns not only you and me, but the whole of mankind.

That's a fair point,Citta.

Thanks for the apology. , however, i never said that Ayahuasca was the cure all, or a definative cure for cancer, etc.

- However i did send a link. whether or not it's legit i dunno.

-Chris.

i don't know if psychadelics specifically can heal humans from diseases and illness

but plants certainly can
many medicinal plants of the world can really work wonders for many ailments , like ginseng , gurana , even syrian rue can help in opiate withdrawls , iboga cures addiction in some , cannabis is a healing plant and works better than prozac for many , plants can heal , many medicines are made from plants whether they are psychadelics or not does not matter at times when it comes to plant and healing , there are thousands of plants that are healers

psychadelics might heal the soul or even the mind for some

plants heal , even looking at the green leaves heal my heart

You can re-connect people to nature trough science.
Listen to people like Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan and Brian Cox talk about nature and They'll say it's amazing, beautiful
and awe inspiring.
They seem pretty connected to nature, at least to me.

The more one starts to probe and understand nature the more amazing and complex it gets.
People who has a poor scientific understanding of how computers, laptops, trees and bees etc works, are
more likely to say things like: it's "just" a tree or it's "just" a phone.
Spreading the scientific method of understanding nature will create more respect and understanding
for the universe we live in.

Not much knowledge is needed to give people a more humble view of nature.
I can take an example of a friend i Showed a BBC documentary about butterflies. He used to view
them as "disgusting flying larvae" while after a little understanding of how complex
and extraordinary they truly are his views have changed for amazement.

So for people to get more in touch with nature I would vote for the spreading
of the scientific method route.

Interesting points, Imp and Jin.

-I think nature, and science is the same, just in different concentrations, that's all. And when humanity has a good understanding and respect for concentrations, then i think the human race can benefit. But humanity is plagued by greed, despite it's best efforts.

-Imp, I think that through science we re-connect through nature, because without nature, there is no science.

-Jin, I'm glad that plants are being used more these days than before. Plants can help heal, and i think that a lot of todays ill's are because of mans' seperation from the nature, by living in the "concrete jungles of suburbia"...

-

If you think science and nature is the same, and that we connect ourselves to nature through science; then why do you insist on putting your faith outside of science, on unsubstantiated beliefs? It shows only that you ignore (at least to a certain degree) what science has to tell, which doesn't seem to fit what you are saying above. And what do you mean by "different concentrations"?

Citta, I say science and nature is the same, because everything in life is in the end, Natural. Whether man has changed it or not. Science is perhaps mans way to understand and get to control the forces of nature. Such as "concentrating nature", as in nuclear power, Refining fuels, making granulated sugar, etc. You name it....for example.

>But whatever man thinks he is, Nature will always have the advantage over his "tweakings". No amount of science can stop a tsunami, earthquake, volcano, hurricane, etc.

--I'm all for living and enjoying the benefits of science, but no matter how pure a chemical can be made, i'll always respect the fact that that "chemical" came from nature in the first place.

-And for that reason alone, i hold "original" nature in high esteem over any human endaveoured twist on "new" nature.