Hi Gilbert, I noticed that you avoided answering my questions, asking me an unrelated question, instead, to obfuscate matters. Moreover, you are asking me to buy your own personal revisionist definition of scientific inquiry, which has no connection with the real scientific world, and implying that the fact that National Cancer Institute is funding some so-called complementary and alternative therapies means that the latter are somehow legitimate and effective. The NCI is testing them because as it clearly states "it is important that the same rigorous scientific evaluation used to assess conventional approaches be used to evaluate CAM therapies". If these remedies are not subjected to rigorous testing by the scientific method, the poor cancer patients who take them would end up being victims of quackery.
You are also making wild claims about osteopathy and cognitive therapy. Here, please read about the unscientific nonsense in osteopathy on this Quackwatch website: http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/QA/osteo.html Cognitive therapy for the most part can only address psychological problems such as anxiety and depression. Please see this list of problems addressed by it, provided by the American Institute of Cognitive Therapy: http://www.cognitivetherapynyc.com/problems.asp Finally, here is my direct answer to the extraneous question you have asked. I hope you will have the courtesy to answer the questions i have asked in my previous posts. "Please tell us the names of five theological books you have studied (not just read)?" I have not studied any theological books, and have never claimed to have done so. Christian or non-Christian Theology is not required to be part of any medical school or science curriculum. Please answer my original questions now without going off on another tangent. Cheers, Santosh
