Alvin, thanks for taking a shot at this. It's good to try to reach a high standard of reasoning.
Alvin said:
>> I am trying amaroli for about 2 weeks. Now I am taking about 10ml a day. I don't feel any noticeable benefits, so I won't increase my dosage. Although it could not do any harm, I too have some concerns about its effectiveness.Not everyone notices it. And indeed, we don't have any scientific knowledge of its range of effectiveness through different people.
Alvin said:
1. First of all, there are really no scientific proofs. No articles on peer-reviewed journals. The "hormesis" theory can, at best, provide a possible "explanation" when/if it works at all. But it does tell you whether amaroli works. Absolutely true, but let's not think that all things that are good for us have articles in peer-reviewed journals validating them.
Alvin said:
Think about this: will you take DDT in small amount on a regular basis (say every morning) simply because SOMETIMES the phenominon "hormesis" happens? No. Nor do I do amaroli merely because sometimes the phenomenon "hormesis" happens. Was there supposed to be some logical implication to your question?
Alvin said:
2. The nutritive values of a cup of urine could not be more than a cup of milk, except that urine may indeed contain some used hormones. So the "nutritive" explanation which many people used simply fail, unless they don't eat nutritive foods.Clever, but fallacious. You overlooked something. Let me explain your fallacy; it derives from a view of 'nutrition' which is overly simple.
Urine certainly contains many substances which are not in food. While it is true that food can ultimately be
converted into these substances by the body, possibly with energetic 'losses', this does not mean that there cannot be benefit from receiving them directly, in a form that does not need to be converted.
Your reasoning is fallacious in the same way as it would be fallacious to say that a city which has access to a quarry cannot get energetic benefit from ready-made bricks.
Alvin said:
For one thing, it could not do too much harm because it's present in our body all the time without having to take it orally. For the other, it could not do us too much good either because of the same reasons. Very clever again, but fallacious again -- a mistaken assumption is contained in the underlined. Perhaps you assumed that for hormesis to work, the levels of toxin in the blood have to be higher than occur in normal fluctuations?
Did you realize that a sudden, 'unexpected' increase in the
levels of these toxins could be what sets off the hormetic reaction? Urine is absorbed by the body in a few minutes. Perhaps that sets off a sudden jump in toxin levels (which are being 'watched' by the body by various mechanisms), and the body responds to this unexpected jump. The response could be due to the sudden jump in toxin levels even though actual toxin levels do not get out of normal range.
Alvin said:
In the final analysis, it's your subjective feeling, right? And subjective feelings are, unfortunately, not reliable. By our subjective feeling and placebo effects (which could turn out to be very real), even placebo can do us much good.It is true that I can provide no scientific proof for you at this time of the effectiveness of amaroli. In fact, I don't even know if it would be effective for you. What I am very strongly convinced of is its effectiveness for me, because of what I felt. Regarding placebo, I know that what I felt was not placebo -- I have tried many things in my time and I know that this was too strong and definite to be a placebo effect. But you can't know that it was not a placebo effect in me. You don't have the view of my internal workings that I do.
From what I have experienced, along with my regard for the Yogis, and their ability to find stuff that works, I am very convinced of its effectiveness on the 'advanced yoga' path.
Regards,
-David