james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is Heart The heart code recognized in the scientific community Is it contains incorrect information? What is the purpose of the writer wrote the book and why? does the heart has Cellular Memories control the brain and all the body?? is Cellular Memories responsible for thinking and cognition?? I want a detailed answer ,please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is Heart The heart code recognized in the scientific community I doubt it, very much. It looks like utter drivel. (Why post a random picture, instead of a link to the book you are asking about.) What is the purpose of the writer wrote the book and why? To make money. Read his bio: he writes popular books about nonsense and then gets paid huge amounts to talk about them. does the heart has Cellular Memories control the brain and all the body?? is Cellular Memories responsible for thinking and cognition?? Wikipedia defines cellular memory as "the pseudoscientific hypothesis that memories can be stored in individual cells". So, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 I doubt it, very much. It looks like utter drivel. (Why post a random picture, instead of a link to the book you are asking about.) To make money. Read his bio: he writes popular books about nonsense and then gets paid huge amounts to talk about them. Wikipedia defines cellular memory as "the pseudoscientific hypothesis that memories can be stored in individual cells". So, no. I'm not speak fluent English .. I hope they will continue the same pattern in the use of uk english ok the book http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/44941.The_Heart_s_Code >> a friend told me that the heart code is not a book of science Relying on these links http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3293150 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3831563/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3825033/ ... iam not really good in english and i hope you help me to explain what does this links says in simble words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 a friend told me that the heart code is not a book of science Your friend is correct. It appears to be a work of fiction. Can you find any scientific research that supports the author's claims? iam not really good in english and i hope you help me to explain what does this links says in simble words They provide scientific evidence that the brain is responsible for decision making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 Your friend is correct. It appears to be a work of fiction. Can you find any scientific research that supports the author's claims? They provide scientific evidence that the brain is responsible for decision making. ok what is your opinion about this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=557864&in_page_id=1811 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 ok what is your opinion about this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=557864&in_page_id=1811 If it is in the Daily Mail, then it could just be a story they made up. Much of what they publish is lies. The story even contradicts itself. I woud recommend you avoid reading that ignorant hate-filled rag. On the other hand, millions of people get married and die, and thousands of them have transplants, so some sequence of events like this wouldn't be too surprising. It certainly isn't scientific evidence of anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 If it is in the Daily Mail, then it could just be a story they made up. Much of what they publish is lies. The story even contradicts itself. I woud recommend you avoid reading that ignorant hate-filled rag. On the other hand, millions of people get married and die, and thousands of them have transplants, so some sequence of events like this wouldn't be too surprising. It certainly isn't scientific evidence of anything. this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=558271&in_page_id=1770 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=558256&in_page_id=1774 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=557864&in_page_id=1811 If it is in the Daily Mail, then it could just be a story they made up. Much of what they publish is lies. The story even contradicts itself. I woud recommend you avoid reading that ignorant hate-filled rag. On the other hand, millions of people get married and die, and thousands of them have transplants, so some sequence of events like this wouldn't be too surprising. It certainly isn't scientific evidence of anything. Dr.Annette Deyhle sent me this message Dear James, we have done much research on heart-brain interaction. We have shown, that the heart usually sends signals to the brain first, and the brain responds. Also the electromagnetic energy field of the heart is bigger than that of the brain. The heart has neurons, similar to the brain. We do not say that the heart is only responsible for thinking, however it is more important than science gave it credit for. You can read more about our research in the Science of the Heart: http://www.heartmath.org/free-services/downloads/science-of-the-heart.html so is heartmaths is a real science or not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 this So in response to a criticism of using the Dail Fail as a source, you post more articles from the same rag. I'm not even going to bother reading them. so is heartmaths is a real science or not ? I don't know. Are there are any peer-reviewed scientific papers on the subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) So in response to a criticism of using the Dail Fail as a source, you post more articles from the same rag. I'm not even going to bother reading them. I don't know. Are there are any peer-reviewed scientific papers on the subject? i dont know is there any links prove that The heart code is not a book of science ?? i hope you help me with it Edited February 4, 2015 by james bond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) i dont know Well, if you can't find any scientific support for it, then I would say it is not science. I am not going to waste my time doing your research for you. If you are too lazy to find support for this, why should anyone else bother. is there any links prove that The heart code is not a book of science ?? Sorry, that is not how it works. You don't assume unicorns are real until someone proves otherwise. If you don't have any scientific evidence then we can just ignore this as the nonsense it appears to be. Edited February 4, 2015 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Dr.Annette Deyhle sent me this message Dear James, we have done much research on heart-brain interaction. We have shown, that the heart usually sends signals to the brain first, and the brain responds. Also the electromagnetic energy field of the heart is bigger than that of the brain. The heart has neurons, similar to the brain. We do not say that the heart is only responsible for thinking, however it is more important than science gave it credit for. You can read more about our research in the Science of the Heart: http://www.heartmath.org/free-services/downloads/science-of-the-heart.html so is heartmaths is a real science or not ? As far as I can tell Dr Annette Deyhle is a geochemist. The comments you quote above are ill-informed, poorly written, and unscientific. I do not know of any properly peer-reviewed science which backs up their claims. And their widely trumpeted claims that they are non-profit makes me believe the reverse - that someone is pocketing a vast amount of cash in this sham treatment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://www.paulpearsall.com/info/about.html#a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://www.paulpearsall.com/info/about.html#a That confirms the suggestion that he made a lot of money from writing books and talking about them. I don't wish to talk badly of the dead, so I will assume he believed the nonsense he pedalled, rather than being deliberately dishonest. That doesn't mean you have to believe it. You can take a more rational approach and use your God-given intelligence to question the ideas in a scientific manner. Rather than being a gullible fool like all those who bought his books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://www.paulpearsall.com/info/about.html#a And? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 That confirms the suggestion that he made a lot of money from writing books and talking about them. I don't wish to talk badly of the dead, so I will assume he believed the nonsense he pedalled, rather than being deliberately dishonest. That doesn't mean you have to believe it. You can take a more rational approach and use your God-given intelligence to question the ideas in a scientific manner. Rather than being a gullible fool like all those who bought his books. look http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17455544 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 look http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17455544 There is nothing there but a title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 There is nothing there but a title. The little brain on the heart. The Epoch Times newspaper published an interview with Dr. Rollin McCraty of HeartMath Foundation, which provides treatment for the disease based on the correlation between the mind and the heart, for the idea that the heart can affect the feelings and desires and wisdom. http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/372362-how-the-heart-is-like-a-little-brain-which-is-really-in-control/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Neither Rollin McCraty nor the Epoch Times are exacty neutral in this. Rollin McCraty is not a medic - but is part of an organisation that makes vast sums through selling quack medicines and treatments. The Epoch Times was set up - in part - to defend a form of Alternative Medicine. Dr Armour's article is not representative of the view of the HeartMath organisation as far as I can tell; Dr Armour's article is mainstream and interesting - but it has been picked up by the quacks as it lends superficial support to their claims Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 look http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17455544 Here is another article by the same author: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17981929 The heart has neurons that control its behaviour. Not exactly a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/17/heartmath-considered-incoherent/ fun hatchet job here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) I want a detailed answer in simple english (uk english) about these answers please 1-what is heartmaths ?? $ is it a science ?? 2-what is the brain in the heart ?? & is it control the the brain and body ? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17455544 3-does the heart have any role of thinking ? please guys take your time answering these questions .. i will be absent for a few days Edited February 4, 2015 by james bond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/17/heartmath-considered-incoherent/ fun hatchet job here I really liked: "Also of note: the gut has 100 million neurons. For those of you counting, that’s seven thousand times more than the heart. Maybe “The Institute of BowelMath” didn’t sound sexy enough?" 1-what is heartmaths ?? A money making scam organization selling quack medicine. $ is it a science ?? No. 2-what is the brain in the heart ?? & is it control the the brain and body ? It is a small number of neurons (nerve cells) that control the heart's activity to ensure it meets its requirements for pumping blood. 3-does the heart have any role of thinking ? I don't think so. (My heart says no.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Dear James, we have done much research on heart-brain interaction. We have shown, that the heart usually sends signals to the brain first, and the brain responds. This is very misleading. It's true, but not in most circumstances. The heart regulates its own rhythm and rate, but it gets signals from the brain (and other parts of the body) that make the heart beat faster or slower, depending on the need for oxygen. So this doctor gets to say things that are true if you look at them individually, but when you put them all together into a marketing campaign, it's very misleading. It sounds like she's supporting this crazy idea, but she's really just propping up bad claims with good ones and hoping her audience is too trusting to research it themselves. So, no. Don't trust these claims, they are false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzkpfw Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 People have had hearts replaced by machines; not just having machines pump their blood temporarily during an operation, but permanent replacement. It's still a new science, and the success has been varied. But still, it would have been very obvious very quickly if the ability of the recipient to think had changed significantly. And what about heart transplants? Has any recipient of another persons heart woken up from surgery and asked "what am I doing in this body?"? This stuff is garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james bond Posted February 6, 2015 Author Share Posted February 6, 2015 Guys i want sources of what you are writing like .. What prove that heartmaths is fake what prove that this is very misleading ..ect Phi for All's post i hope u make it clear iam not a doctor .. I couldnot understand what you say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now