DWQA Questions › Tag: skeptics
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
A viewer asks: “The book of Acts 13: 13 to 25 (quoting a Catholic Bible source) includes the passage, ‘The God of this people Israel chose our ancestors and made the people great during their stay in the land of Egypt, and with uplifted arm he led them out of it. For about forty years he put up with them in the wilderness. After he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he gave them their land as an inheritance for about four hundred fifty years.’ How truthful is this scripture about God destroying seven nations in the land of Canaan and how does it fit with the loving nature of God?” Reference: see April 30thhttps://readings.livingwithchrist.ca/
ClosedNicola asked 4 hours ago • 
10 views0 answers0 votes
We have shared comments about the paper in JAMA blowing the whistle on medical dangers, in pointing out that the U.S. healthcare system was the third leading cause of death in America (Starfield, B. Is US health really the best in the world? JAMA 2000 284:483-5). Things continue to raise questions. I just saw a citation of an editorial by Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, one of the world’s top medical journals, published in 2015 in which he says: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.” While this is largely focused on the pressures to publish because of the vested interests of researchers, as well as journal editors, is there a deeper reason that quality and integrity suffer?
ClosedNicola asked 4 hours ago • 
6 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “In his 1970s book, Medical Nemesis, Ivan Illich suggests medicine isn’t the primary reason people survive illness; sanitation, nutrition, and housing matter more. He goes on to say over-treatment and exaggeration of disease are widespread, that healthcare fosters dependency, and that illness is seen as unacceptable. Healthcare often operates less for the benefit of patients and more to serve political, social, or bureaucratic interests – public image, economic concerns, or voter approval over medical advice. His views jarred badly with me. Is it right to say, in 2026, that people avoid confronting mortality and that modern healthcare is more about socio-political optics than illnesses?”
ClosedNicola asked 6 hours ago • 
3 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “An overlooked aspect of modern medicine is perhaps that now normal human experiences—such as minor stress, aging, ‘high’ blood pressure, ‘high’ cholesterol, or childbirth—are labeled as medical problems that require professional intervention. Society has arguably become increasingly dependent on doctors and healthcare institutions, losing confidence in self-care and mutual support. Medical institutions now dictate social norms, defining what is ‘normal’ or ‘deviant,’ and expanding their authority into everyday life. Is this intended to weaken society’s resilience, creating a population that depends on the medical system for a ‘pharmaceutical invasion’ and even the conception of who is ‘ill?'”
ClosedNicola asked 6 hours ago • 
4 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “High blood pressure is conventionally regarded as a health risk and that lowering it reduces risk, especially in moderate-to-severe systolic BP of 140-159 mmHg. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick author of Doctoring Data claims that cardiovascular risk increases more steeply after systolic BP reaches around 160-170 mmHg—well beyond the 140/90 threshold often used to diagnose and treat hypertension. A rule of thumb in medicine is that for older individuals, a systolic BP of around 100 + age is a reasonable upper limit beyond which cardiovascular risks increase significantly. Is hypertension over-treated, given that aggressively lowering blood pressure—especially in older individuals—can be harmful?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
138 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “A 2018 book, Medical Nihilism, by Jacob Stegenga claims the healthcare system over-adopts treatments and under-recognizes risks. He states confidence in the effectiveness of medical interventions should be low because empirical evidence for the efficacy of many treatments is weak due to methodological flaws, publication bias, the influence of commercial interests. He claims positive studies are more likely to be published, screening programs tend to detect and treat cancers that would never cause harm, common treatments can cause long-term complications, short trial durations miss long-term harms etc. How accurate is his view that evidence is systematically skewed and harms are undercounted?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
118 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “Dr. Bernard Lown, a Harvard cardiologist in the 1980s, criticized the rapid rise of surgical Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts (CABG), noting 20–40% were potentially avoidable, especially in stable angina, and many patients had uncertain survival benefit. He advocated medical therapy—nitrates, beta-blockers, lifestyle changes—for symptom control. How accurate is it to say that in 2026, evidence-based guidelines and trials have reduced avoidable CABG to <10% for high-risk, guideline-selected patients, and that for low-risk, stable patients, surgery rarely improves survival, and that beta-blockers, nitrates, ACE inhibitors, lifestyle changes are to be preferred?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
109 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “A 2012 paper in the British Medical Journal “Use of relative and absolute effect measures in reporting health inequalities” concluded that “75% (258/344) [of 2009 papers] reported only relative effect measures.” Absolute risk reduction is often far less impressive and less often stated. This suggests that physicians will overestimate the efficacy of treatments and patients may have a misplaced belief in both effectiveness and risks. To what extent does this practice mislead patients and clinicians and benefit pharmaceutical manufacturers?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
61 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “Dr. Malcolm Kendrick in his book, Doctoring Data, suggests more patients are harmed by over-treatment than helped. He claims published treatment benefits are often exaggerated by hiding behind relative risk (to mask how tiny most benefits are), selective reporting (such as statistical significance without meaningful benefit), or clever framing (such as natural variation in cholesterol or blood pressure) is medicalized as a treatable condition. To what extent is published medical research actually the fabricated appearance of scientific rigor to sell a product?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
83 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “What percentage of patients take drugs for almost no real benefit, even while risking side effects and penalized by the cost?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
114 views0 answers0 votes
If Earth ascends to a higher plane of existence, where we will reside as advanced light beings, will our travels to other worlds throughout the universe all be locations within that higher plane, and not visible to us currently? Will we even visit worlds within the galaxies we physically observe as humans?
ClosedNicola asked 5 months ago • 
138 views0 answers0 votes
Will we incarnate as physical beings on other physical worlds within the universe once we ascend?
ClosedNicola asked 5 months ago • 
153 views0 answers0 votes
We’ve discussed in recent shows the topic of “spiritual vibration.” We have learned from previous channelings of Creator, the complex Free Will Experiment going on in our galaxy, the rules of engagement surrounding the exercise of free will, while limiting the divine freedom to intervene at its sole discretion. Creator has further warned that our home world, Earth, is actually under the indirect, but nearly total, control of an evil Extraterrestrial Alliance whose plans for Earth do not include us humans. Why does it matter? What makes us humans “special” and more important than the other millions of sentient species living in the galaxy, also potentially subject to their world disappearing in the blink of an eye, like the planet Alderaan in the Star Wars saga? If there is ONE thing that matters, is that one thing humanity’s collective “spiritual vibration?” What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 5 months ago • 
156 views0 answers0 votes
As we continue to try to wrap our minds around the term “spiritual vibration,” it seems there are a lot of phrases that attempt to label or identify a kind of both qualitative and quantitative unit of measurement by which to classify and categorize sentient spirits. There is the notion of infant to old souls, and there is the notion of spiritual maturity versus immaturity, or spiritual attainment versus non-attainment. And finally, there is the notion Creator appears to prefer in the form of “divine alignment.” Ultimately, there is also the grand notion of good versus evil. Are these terms attempting to label the same thing, but from different angles? What they all have in common is that they do represent a form of classification, a form of measurement. And when we possess this kind of nomenclature, what seems to inevitably follow is a form of classification. A means by which to determine fitness for inclusion or exclusion from group membership. When it comes to qualifying for Ascension, can Creator discuss how best to label and attempt to understand what it takes to qualify for Ascension?
ClosedNicola asked 5 months ago • 
159 views0 answers0 votes
Let’s say we have a hypothetical “John Doe.” John Doe is literally the last person on Earth to qualify for Ascension. He has just enough of the “right stuff” to qualify, but BARELY. Anybody worse than John in terms of vibration, or attainment, or alignment is excluded. Can Creator give us a profile of John Doe, a spiritual resume, if you will? Or spiritual transcript? What would John be like if he moved in next door to us? Or occupied the cubicle across the aisle at work, or even came into the world as a child of ours? In the newly Ascended Earth, John would possess the title “The New Worst Person on Earth.” What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 5 months ago • 
176 views0 answers0 votes
123…17Next »
Ask Question