Since most modern medicine evolved from historical methods and in most cases is also the only method proven safest in clinical trials, modern medicine is always my first choice. If that doesn't work, then I would try just about anything if it had worked in the past for someone.



>>Did you really expect answers? :o)
>
>I kind of hoped not. ;)
>
>> Honestly, if it were my daughter, I would explore every avenue no matter the strangeness of it and as long as the risk wasn't greater than the benefit. I don't care if 'happy thoughts' heal her, modern medicine, or a spiritual healer does the trick as long as she is healed.
>
>Sure, but it's not about what you would try (no matter how obscure or odd-seeming), but about which one you expect would work, and mostly it's about which one you would try first.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>You may find this hard to believe, but your sister and I probably have more in common than we do! :o) I grew up studying herbs for their healing properties (since I was 10) and new age religions (although it wasn't called that back then). :o) I'm sure that she is already aware of dandelion root then? (The new(old) thing for cancers)
>>>
>>>If it exists, and it's a herb, she's heard of it. As I said, I have no problem with the belief that herbs can be beneficial. A lot of our modern pharmacology comes from herbs, but tell me. If you got cancer, would you see a doctor or would you get your toxins purged and call yourself cured? Or... better question, what if the 'patient' were your daughter instead?
>>>
>>>Would you have spent money on those plastic glasses, or would you have recognised them for the scam they were? How often do you astral travel, and how many past lives can you recall? There is more dealing with ghosts and the 4th dimension, but I'll leave those for now.
>>>
>>>If you really do have much in common with my sister, your answers should be interesting. ;)
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The real question is, did anyone actually wear them long enough to find out if they worked or not? or possibly even made the person's eyesight worse?
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, considering they don't seem to be advertising them any longer...
>>>>>
>>>>>My sister is into everything that I see as snake oil. I'm not averse to the idea of herbs as beneficial, but she believes there is a herb to cure every ailment from cancer to Parkinsons. She said that if she ever gets cancer, she will not see a doctor, she will go to a 'health practitioner' and have her toxins purged. This will cure her. Either that, or aromatherapy - I don't think she's decided which yet. She's a vegetarian (I have no issues with this), but when she sits down to eat, she also unloads a pharmacopeia (all natural, of course) from her purse onto the table around her plate. She told me, "I don't want to have to worry about getting sick". I said that I'd never met anyone in my life who worries more about getting sick. It occupies her every waking moment. All her thoughts and actions revolve around worrying about getting sick.
>>>>>
>>>>>She remembers some of her past lives, and has out of body experiences. And all that is just the beginning.
>>>>>
>>>>>She's my sister and I love her, but we don't see much of each other.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I have 1x reading glasses that I bought at Walmart (per the eye doctor's recommendation) and use for reading fine print on medicine bottles, ingredients on food products and shampoo, et al. I finally had to admit that the print wasn't getting smaller and it was my eyes :o)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I had good eyesight until recently - maybe last 5 years - but eventually it turned into a kind of push ups for the eye, so I started getting reading glasses. Started with 1.25, then 1.5 and am happy with a 2.0 now.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>My usual frustration is exactly the shampoo. The print isn't getting smaller, it's the word "shampoo" (vs "conditioner") that is getting smaller and smaller and being tucked into unexpected corners of the label. You get a lot of large print on the bottle, but it's all the words that help sell the bottle, not exactly the words that could help you know what's inside.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>When I want to ascertain which is the shampoo, in the shower, I make a wee pin-hole with my thumb and curled index finger, and peer through that. You'd be surprised that you can read ANYTHING, without glasses, that way.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>About 10 or so years ago, there was a product advertised in a TV infomercial that was based on this concept. It was a pair of glasses. The lenses were black plastic covered with pinholes. The pitch was that if you wore these for a while (a year? 2 years? who knows.) you'd be able to see while your eyes would get exercise and you wouldn't need glasses. I know about this because my sister bought a pair. She proudly told me about them at thanksgiving dinner one year. As you might imagine, I was a little incredulous, not at the fact that my sister would by them (you'd have to know her), but at the concept. My first question was, "you wear glasses so that you don't have to wear glasses?". Anyway, I tried them on, and immediately felt like a fly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I hope you didn't go and regurgitate all over the turkey then crap on the butter!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I could see hundreds of duplicates of very small parts of everything I looked at. What a stupid idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Sure you weren't looking through a kaleiderscope? Maybe you should have had your own pin-hole prescription?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Strange, as the concept is the same as the camera obscura, or "instamatic" film camera.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Are you sure? Didn't the instamatic still only have one aperture? These 'glasses' had many holes regularly spaced all over the lenses.