Golf Forum | golftuitiononline.com - View Single Post - Has anyone experienced Q-link

bloodredsun · #6 (**permalink**) 10-12-2006, 11:36 AM

I have trouble with all the pseudoscience on the site.

There is no such proven entity as a "Biofield". The only time you will see this mentioned is in journals such as "Journal of alternative and complementary medicine", hardly Nature or Science. It's a made up entity to justify how some medical practices (Reiki, SRT, Crystal healing) may work as current theories show them not to.

"Sympathetic Resonance Technology" has no link that I can see to quantum physics bar spouting the buzzwords such as "Zero point energy" and "Scalar waves". All the explanations are splattered in "wallpaper" words (ones that cover the cracks) sich as "thought to", "believed to", "may work" as opposed to phrases that show how it does work.

None of the "scientific" papers are published in any journals. I can only imagine that it is because they lack scientific rigour. If they could show scientifically that these changes did occur, then journal would be falling over themselves to publish the findings and major awards would be in the post. Anecdotal evidence (reports from individuals) proves nothing. Only scientifically rigourous double-blind placebo controlled studies by experts in their fields really counts.

Sorry if I get on my high horse on this, but science often gets taken for a ride when money is involved (130 bucks for 75 ft of copper wire anyone).

If you feel better wearing it then that's great, keep wearing it, but don't pretend that it's because of a scientific theory that those stuffy-shirted conventional scientists are trying to supress just coz it's so gosh darn effective.