I know I can be longwinded, but honestly, glancing through that long post looks like not only my reasonably long post has been misunderstood or, more likely, not read, just quoted and added a long read that will take much longer than Just A Minute, and with repetition and diviation (but sadly no hesitation or I'd have buzzed).
OT: Conventional v alternative medicine
- Thread starter pharphis
- Start date
If you read my post you would have seen that I responded directly to each of your paragraphs in succession just as we previously did. If you think I misunderstood what you said, back it up.
BTW it's only 610 words
*buzzes*
It is a matter of opinion.
I already stated that those who promise dangerous things should be kicked out.
So what is left is a matter of opinion. Some people are helped by alternative healers. They will feel better. You won't, so you don't go there. Nor will I tell you to go to alternative healers, you have the right to your own opinion. You do not have the right to force your opinion on others.
And that is what it is: an opinion.
When it's been established, by proper diagnosis, that nothing serious is the matter, and that the person is still unwell, this person has the right to chose whatever he or she thinks will suit best to at least feel better. To have less cramps, to have less itchy skin, all kinds of minor issues for which sometimes alternative healing will help.
Proper herbal remedies really do help, and regular doctors will tell you so. You just have to take a high dose and not a watered down option.
Why is it you want to take away other people's opinion when there is no harm done, as you consider alternative healing not to be damaging in general? Putting beautiful gemstones on people will not heal them, nor will it make them sick. Some people believe praying helps. I don't think it does but it sure will not make it worse either. If someone believes it makes them feel better, makes that - harmless, remember! - itch feel less bad, then what is your issue? Why does your opinion, your way, your thoughts, have to be the right ones?
Personally, I don't believe in most of it. I think gemstones are a beautiful wonder of nature and I like looking at them. I am certain they don't heal a damn thing. Herbal remedies have been proven to work - after all, some regular medicins are derived from nature, but won't cure serious ailments, and we've already established that serious things should be dealt with by regular doctors.
We're talking about small, nitty gritty, nuissances, pains, itches, problems, that remain after the diagnosis that nothing serious is out of order.
You can buzz me for repetition, aswell as diviation, and while my English is not bad, it's never my first language so buzz for hesitation aswell and get the point.
Maybe Kestegs will blow the whistle after the 60 seconds have elapsed.
I've bolded the strawman that I've tried to already correct. Efficacy is not a matter of opinion. A patient's right of choice is completely different and not what I have been discussing. However, patients have the right to be properly informed, of which alt med practitioners do NOT do because they don't have the tools to properly inform.
I've said that MOST things are of little risk in alt med (in moderation). That doesn't mean that they are of NO risk. Besides, receiving non-treatment instead of real treatment is harm. It is essentially self-neglect when there is an effective alternative to not use it. Similarly, children have the right to receive real treatment and not be misinformed and receive fake treatment, like 2 Canadian native american girls have recently fallen victim to:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-tale-of-two-children-dying-from-cancer-one-past-one-future/
BTW, while you say that "We're talking about small, nitty gritty, nuissances, pains, itches, problems, that remain after the diagnosis that nothing serious is out of order." this is actually not true. It is certainly true some of them time, and maybe the majority of the time, but a large number of alt med practitioners believe they can help with serious problems, when they cannot. the public is misled into believing it, too.
I've already provided a list of anecdotes that help illustrate the risk of alt med either through treatment, lack of real treatment or bad advice. Here it is again
http://whatstheharm.net/
I also barely even mentioned previously that almost all of what alt med practitioners use and prescribe is not regulated unlike real medicine, thanks to lobbying. (in both Canada and the US and probably most places). So not only do they not require evidence that their medicine works, but they often don't even require that the medicine contain what the label says it does.
Kestegs
New member
- Aug 27, 2008
- 49,770
- 12
- 3
I could write a long post arguing with every point you've made, but then I'd just have to keep doing it. You have set the scientific community up to be the standard of knowledge and yourself as their representative of truth. There is no purpose in discussing something with someone that isn't willing to listen. If we are required to prove alt medicine by the standards of the scientific community then we have no chance of proving anything. Because they have intentionally set it up to not be proven.
Alt medicine works. It doesn't work for everyone in every situation, but it works.
I'll give you a small example of one of the things it's helped me with: Allergies. I've had seasonal allergies since I was a teen. They get severe at times, especially if I'm in am aggravating situation. I've taken medicines like Clairton and allegra at times. And guess what? They worked pretty well! One problem through, I'm a zombie while taking them, because they make me extremely tired. After my mom graduated from school she started treating me. One acupuncture session and some herbs and I'm good to go. Same effect as the drugs, except for that sleepiness problem. And I don't have to keep taking them all summer, just for a month or two.
And for the record she's also tried to help me with other stuff that's had no effect at all.
Edit : Darn, that was longer than I intend.
Alt medicine works. It doesn't work for everyone in every situation, but it works.
I'll give you a small example of one of the things it's helped me with: Allergies. I've had seasonal allergies since I was a teen. They get severe at times, especially if I'm in am aggravating situation. I've taken medicines like Clairton and allegra at times. And guess what? They worked pretty well! One problem through, I'm a zombie while taking them, because they make me extremely tired. After my mom graduated from school she started treating me. One acupuncture session and some herbs and I'm good to go. Same effect as the drugs, except for that sleepiness problem. And I don't have to keep taking them all summer, just for a month or two.
And for the record she's also tried to help me with other stuff that's had no effect at all.
Edit : Darn, that was longer than I intend.
I too have a background in science and I go to a chiropractor because it works for me. My daughter goes to an acupuncturist for impacted sinuses because it works for her. Whether or not it is placebo effect or not, we don't give a shit, freedom from pain is good. Much of what we do is "supernatural", hell the placebo effect is supernatural. A recent paper I read found that the placebo effect was greater if the person being treated was told the "drug" was expensive and the effect was lessened if they were told it was cheap. So there is not only is there a placebo effect going on, there is a value judgement too. We know that people can die of a "broken heart", we know the mechanism as to why they die but not what initiated the mechanism. We also know people can die through sheer willpower alone. Eating is a fundamental drive, but people have starved themselves to death for political reasons or through psychological difficulties. Will can win over a biological imperative. Then there is the rock-climber who had to cut his own arm off with a pocket knife to survive, again will power. And before you talk about adrenalin etc., if it were biochemistry alone everyone could do it. I believe in the supernatural, to me the supernatural is something what science has yet to quantify. And when it does, all the mystery will be gone from life.
I tend to agree with pharphis as I know first hand the hoops that drug companies have to jump through to get something approved ~ it can take upto 5 years for a drug to pass through clinical trials.
That said if something works for you, great. Just be aware that not all naturapath drugs have been proven safe and be sure to let your physician no what you are taking.
Case in point my mother in law has rheumatoid arthritis and takes drugs for it. As a consequence her liver function etc is monitored. She had a fall in Hong Kong, went to see a Chinese doctor and wad given herbs. They worked, but the combination of drugs caused some liver damage. She's ok now, but just be very careful with alt meds and there interactions.
That said if something works for you, great. Just be aware that not all naturapath drugs have been proven safe and be sure to let your physician no what you are taking.
Case in point my mother in law has rheumatoid arthritis and takes drugs for it. As a consequence her liver function etc is monitored. She had a fall in Hong Kong, went to see a Chinese doctor and wad given herbs. They worked, but the combination of drugs caused some liver damage. She's ok now, but just be very careful with alt meds and there interactions.
This is insane. If the standard for evidence is "too high" for a treatment, we shouldn't lower the standard until it is acceptable for some things and not others. "big pharma" has to go through all this work and since it doesn't work for the alt med community they have to get their panties in a twist and say it's stacked against them. Well, no. Perhaps if you believe in something that proves not to be true, you should reevaluate your beliefs. That's conspiracy propaganda and the kind of thing that would be pushed by conspiracy websites like natural news (shudder).
Maybe some things do work. I argue that it's best that those things which may work are tested properly for safety and efficacy first before claiming it does through anecdotes. Anecdotes are essentially the worst kind of evidence and if anecdotes were reliable we would all have to believe in every kind of medical treatment or religious belief, for example.
The placebo effect is also greater if the person treating you is in a lab coat (or giving advice, etc.) from what I've heard. This wouldn't surprise me. I don't think that means it is supernatural. It is complicated, but I would argue that it is completely natural.
Science by definition cannot address the supernatural, and things once thought to be supernatural become natural if testable by science. I would argue that just because we don't understand the biological mechanism for a medical condition disappearing on its own or through placebo or whatever, doesn't mean it is acceptable to insert the supernatural explanation (such as "god did it"). Will power can do a lot of things, sure. That doesn't seem closely related to alt med since much of it is treatments with real costs and risks and minimal or contradictory evidence for efficacy.
Also, to everyone reading, this discussion originally started when I brought up the fact that NDs in the US (and elsewhere) are trying to increase their scope of practice to be able to prescribe drugs and other things that they should not be legally allowed to do, which is in direct contrast to what @Ariadne said about what alt med practitioners normally try to treat/are able to treat. We have these checks and balances in place so that only the properly educated and trained people can be primary care physicians, and the unscientific are lobbying and misrepresenting their credentials in order to do so. The article is very long and I didn't expect many or possibly anyone to read it, so to quote just one portion of the article:
The bottom line is that naturopathic programs do not adequately train their graduates to practice at the same level as a Physician Assistant or Nurse Practitioner.
In fact from the chart below, we see that naturopathic programs spend nearly twice the hours teaching homeopathy and botanical medicine than pharmacology. Even more interesting, ND programs spend around 200-300 hours teaching chiropractic manipulations, hydrotherapy, and cranio-sacral as an integrated topic called “naturopathic manipulations.” Homeopathy, botanical medicine, and naturopathic manipulations are an utter waste of time.
(links were my own for those too lazy to google)
If you don't find that alarming I don't know what would.
No matter where you look to find the definition of supernatural, the placebo effect definitely fits the definition. It is outside scientific understanding or the "laws of nature". Or should I say outside the current scientific understanding or the "laws of nature". Once the "laws of nature" were that man cannot fly, but technology changed that law. We are using the LHC to see if there are other dimensions. What if there are and it is possible to cross over to them? Could this not explain things like ghosts or UFOs, or even totally unexplained disappearances? Like flying once was, don't you think that scientific understanding and the "laws of nature" can change to encompass what is now the supernatural? Quackery aside, science must keep an open mind and constantly challenge the status quo, there is no place in modern science for another Galen!
But the placebo effect is known about through repeated observation. We know of ways to increase and decrease the placebo, and even the nocebo, which most people don't know about. I would classify these as natural phenomena.
There is no strong evidence for ghosts and UFOs can be literally anything. There are no examples that cannot be explained through natural means, though.
I do think things that are currently considered supernatural could be determined to be natural through scientific inquiry. Science is open-minded by definition, despite what it's detractors suggest. Evidence is what changes that open mind.
All posts prior to this point were copied from the EMB.
Interesting article.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-way-scientists-twist-the-facts-10158229.html
Interesting article.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-way-scientists-twist-the-facts-10158229.html
I'm personally not acceptive for alternative medicine. Partly because of lack of serious research that is relevant at confirming something, and more important reason is because today's world is about money and getting even more money, so it is questionable how many alternative medicine practicants are actually serious in their work, and how many of them are just trying to get money from people. Those practicants would ruin any serious research anyway. Perhaps not closely related, but when I see those astrology freaks on TV and their tarot stuff + their act + how many people are actually buying that stuff from them... I'm not surprised how money making some alternative stuff can be cause people are very superstitious and in general not very observant to recognize obvious circus clowns who are not serious practicants.
As for serious practicants, I don't have experience about them. Some alternative medicine stuff might really work, I do give them that "chance". I'm not willing to test that on my skin though, especially not giving money for that. I know people who are kinda acceptive toward gemstone therapies and I got nice gemstones from them as a gift. Whatever works for them, but at least it is cool to have real amethyst on table to bring me luck while crafting caster amulets \o/
As for serious practicants, I don't have experience about them. Some alternative medicine stuff might really work, I do give them that "chance". I'm not willing to test that on my skin though, especially not giving money for that. I know people who are kinda acceptive toward gemstone therapies and I got nice gemstones from them as a gift. Whatever works for them, but at least it is cool to have real amethyst on table to bring me luck while crafting caster amulets \o/
Last edited:
Con artists, shams, thieves, scams, and all the synonyms you can think of I am sure that you can use to label this type of care. However, you must realize that there is no way to stop this, the same way every minute practice must only be ignored and until then it will gain in followers?
And besides, if it is not your money, let it be squandered as you so vehemently oppose. Who would mind? It's not your money. It's not mine. Nobody's, but the one paying for the faulty service is harmed. Self-harm through this procedure merely stems from ignorance, of which we all divulge to a degree. The practice harms nobody but the patient to himself, with the cost included from that source.
Again, I ask, who minds this? Does it affect you personally? Does it do anything except harm the prospects of "faster" Scientific discoveries? They said the same about doomsayers and cults and those who spake against God, or the King, and yet they gained no traction once given a voice and place to stand.
Ultimately, I ask that you see this in the most practical light given your view. It may work, it may not, it could be useful, it couldn't be, but that depends wholly on the subject. In the end, your feelings are indeed considered but fundamentally inconsequential to the freedom of money and a service (however you so feel against such a service).
And besides, if it is not your money, let it be squandered as you so vehemently oppose. Who would mind? It's not your money. It's not mine. Nobody's, but the one paying for the faulty service is harmed. Self-harm through this procedure merely stems from ignorance, of which we all divulge to a degree. The practice harms nobody but the patient to himself, with the cost included from that source.
Again, I ask, who minds this? Does it affect you personally? Does it do anything except harm the prospects of "faster" Scientific discoveries? They said the same about doomsayers and cults and those who spake against God, or the King, and yet they gained no traction once given a voice and place to stand.
Ultimately, I ask that you see this in the most practical light given your view. It may work, it may not, it could be useful, it couldn't be, but that depends wholly on the subject. In the end, your feelings are indeed considered but fundamentally inconsequential to the freedom of money and a service (however you so feel against such a service).
Yes, actually. Though I consider it society's job to protect those who cannot protect themselves (ie children and the scientifically illiterate).
There are some things that come to mind immediately:
1) Not only are potential patients for clinical trials and other important medical studies being split across other fields with less prior plausibility (most, but not all of alt med) but money goes to these institutions lending credibility. For example, some medical hospitals (sorry, can't remember the names atm) are not "integrating" alt med to become the "best of both worlds". Academic institutions, too. This leads more people to believe they are credible.
2) NDs (naturopathic doctors) DCs (chiropractic doctors (the chiro on my university campus hands these out, for example)) and probably other labels I'm unaware of are very anti - vaccine. This is a public (and global) health concern.*
*I want to point out that this is an issue of properly informing patients. My argument has nothing to do with vaccine exemption laws so I don't find it relevant to the discussion. The point is that NDs and DCs misinform patients. I can give many examples of this (some above) but it is also easy to find by simple google searches.
That said, conventional medicine is much better regulated, including the treatment and pharmaceuticals. This is not true for "supplements" in both Canada and the US and probably other places and you're simply not going to get the group inside to push for better regulation. It is this group that specifically lobbies for fewer regulations and as I showed in the OP they lobby to increase their scope of practice which is frightening.
I wouldn't consider most of the alt med crowd to be thieves, frauds, etc., though, because I believe that they believe what they're doing is effective via confirmation bias and anecdotal evidence.
Last edited:
I've been nearly kicked off this board before for this exact topic, so I'll tread lightly and avoid any political, economic, or religious debate.
In my own personal observation, it seems that there are two ways to treat, prevent or cure almost every disease: One of the ways is behavior modification, the other is medication. Both options require some level of adherence from the patient.
Take for example Type 2 diabetes. The patient could learn to eat foods with a lower amount of sugar. Or the patient can take Metformin. Both methods have the potential to reduce the flow of blood sugar to the blood stream, which is the most effective mode of treatment for the disease.
It is my opinion that the simplest and least invasive option should always be explored first. Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate.
In my own personal observation, it seems that there are two ways to treat, prevent or cure almost every disease: One of the ways is behavior modification, the other is medication. Both options require some level of adherence from the patient.
Take for example Type 2 diabetes. The patient could learn to eat foods with a lower amount of sugar. Or the patient can take Metformin. Both methods have the potential to reduce the flow of blood sugar to the blood stream, which is the most effective mode of treatment for the disease.
It is my opinion that the simplest and least invasive option should always be explored first. Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate.
This is the kind of anti-science propaganda I warned of, and it's a very common trope in the alt med community. What, exactly, do you mean by this? To me, this demonstrates a lack of understanding of what the scientific method is, which as I said before, is open minded by definition.
To quote rationalwiki:
"The scientific method demands open mindedness because it requires consistency with available data and evidence, regardless of where that leads. Sometimes evidence will lead to a conclusion that defies common sense, which an otherwise closed mind would have trouble with. Quantum mechanics is the most illustrative example of this process, as practically every aspect of quantum physics appears to defy ordinary common sense; duality, slit diffraction and quantum entanglement are all completely at odds with the way that we have evolved to view the world. Without the open-mindedness to reject our common sense view of the world, some of the most complex and counter-intuitive science would be off limits to human endeavour."
(my bolding)
Being closed minded would apply to any group which accepts some dogma unflinchingly. Examples of groups like this are Answers in Genesis which have a statement of faith. They don't care what the facts are, they care about what facts they can use to spin their narrative, and will exclude anything else.* This is similar to the alt med community from what I've read but I won't attribute it to the whole group like you have to scientists.
*This is not a bash on religion or anything like that, but one specific example of what being closed minded is
Well this just isn't true. The scientific community itself is built mostly on people being wrong. The whole reason that the scientific method works is that it is checked and double checked and triple checked and so on and so forth. In the scientific community, a negative result on an experiment is just as valuable as a positive result. People spend their lives trying to disprove theories that are already taken as fact, just to make sure. There are people out there right now, and have been for the last 110 years, that are trying to prove Einstein wrong.
The scientific community has been wrong before, and it will be again. Many times. The difference is, if someone can prove to them that they are wrong, and why they are wrong, they'll accept it.
There will always be people who refuse to be wrong. You can't get away from that, and it isn't specific to any one group of people. If the scientific community as a whole never wanted to be wrong, you'd be slapping leeches on yourself every time you got sick, or hacking off the front part of your brain if you acted like too much of a deviant. I don't want to live in that time.
EDIT: I would just like to clarify that I am not bashing alternative medicine. I do believe that is has its uses if it can be applied alongside medical treatment, not as a substitution for it. I also believe that one of the big aspects of alternative medicine that is BETTER than traditional medical treatment, is that the practitioners of such things tend to pay more attention to the people they are treating.
People (in general) want to feel like they are being cared ABOUT, not just cared FOR. This is an area where our medical system has failed, to some degree. It is also, in my opinion, a big reason why people tend towards naturopaths and the like, as they tend to put more emphasis on their patients as a person, instead of a chart. Is this placebo? Yes. Does it work? Sometimes. Is it a substitute for getting proper medical treatment for ailments that deserve them? No.
Last edited:
Google