Or what Atreides said sums it up better..
Or what Atreides said sums it up better..
Bold and underline are a contradiction. Their claims haven't held up to science, therefore their face validity makes them true? I think you need to read more about the nature of validity and reliability in research.
Many, many drugs that exist today are simply concentrations of active ingredients found in natural remedies. To say that the medical industry ignores natural remedies is simply, outright, barefacedly ignorant. Claims of alternative medicine are routinely investigated by pharmaceutical companies because that's how you develop new drugs. Drugs that are completely synthetic, created only by theory and raw chemistry are simply in the minority, and many of them started out by investigating naturally occurring phenomena.
That's why there are nutritionists who doctors can refer someone to if it's a persisting problem.
my point was that it was unfair to write off say, entire subjects like acupuncture or the entirety of chinese herbal medicine just because Extenze doesn't make your penis bigger.
You do realize I agree with you for the most part, right? Nitpicking at the one statement in my argument you don't like and telling me that I need to go read isn't exactly the nicest way to have a discussion![]()
Yes, I know Extenze doesn't work and isn't FDA approved, that's exactly my point.
Anyway, in no way am I ignorant just for keeping an open mind about something that can't be stated with 100% certainty, and I really don't appreciate being labeled as such. Like I said, I agree with you for the most part so I'm not exactly sure what calling me names is supposed to accomplish.
edit: yea my point was that using the fact that Extenze doesn't work in no way excuses throwing out the entirety of something like Traditional Chinese medicine, which is what you seemed to be implying above, simply because we've conveniently lumped them into the same genre. The fact is that after hundreds of years of practice we're only just beginning to acknowledge the benefits of acupuncture, and research into traditional Chinese medicine in the west has only really focused on acupuncture without even scraping the surface of herbs. In the US most of the stuff, if it's even available, is just labeled as a dietary supplement for expediency's sake and therefore doesn't even have to undergo FDA testing. Does that mean it doesn't work? No.
I think you have to tread lightly with the open-mindedness business. In your posts it sounded to me like you were giving 50/50 estimations about alternative treatments. You argued that a treatment's face validity lends just as much veracity to it as actual scientific inquiry. That kind of logic is just plain incorrect. The difference that I sense here is that I demand real evidence, and you are willing to accept pseduo-evidence on the basis that you personally haven't investigated the claim.
It's placebo.The fact is that after hundreds of years of practice we're only just beginning to acknowledge the benefits of acupuncture
Hmm... that's not what I meant, and I apologize for giving that impression. I agree that evidence is required but I think the difference is I'm not willing to say with 100% certainty that something doesn't work until it's been proven that it doesn't by the same standards... not that I condone its use but I rather that I refuse to condemn it.
And yea read my edit :<
The thing I don't get is how you can say it's placebo when there have been numerous studies in the west that say acupuncture has more of an effect than placebo, with some drugs passing FDA screening with even less scrutiny and having even less efficacy. Even simply looking it up on wiki shows like 5 or 6 studies performed in the United States that show there's some positive benefit over that of placebo, problems with experimentation aside.
As for Chinese herbal medicine, I can understand not wanting to sing its praises without FDA approval, but I disagree that that means we should just ignore it completely. The fact of the matter is there hasn't been enough research into it herbal medicine to say conclusively that it's good or bad. In it's defense, in places like Japan traditional Kampo medicine is routinely prescribed by regular medical practitioners, sanctioned by the Japanese equivalent of American health authorities, and even reimbursed by insurance companies. In China/Hong Kong/Singapore/Taiwan western medicine is practiced alongside traditional medicine for great benefit. Of course this isn't evidence that it works, but I'm not going to say something that's been in use for centuries by over 2 billion people is merely placebo effect and nothing more.
If you read the blog I posted, or even searched it, you'd know that plenty of tests of traditional forms of alternative medicine have been attempted, and they have failed to provide any sort of benefit beyond a placebo.
Is that a 100% proof negative? Of course not, but there's still no evidence it works beyond anectodes, which aren't acceptable as data because of the aforementioned placebo effect.
Cite one.
Also just because something has been in use for centuries doesn't mean it works. Science-based medicine is an incredibly powerful tool that has only recently been developed, the alternatives of the past are slowly being discarded because evidence-based approaches work.
Yea, I'll concede the point about acupuncture but to use that as an example of how ALL alternative treatments are 100% proven to be bunk still seems foolhardy, when there's plenty out there that simply hasn't been tested yet.
I agree that alternative treatments deserve investigation, I think there's an entire branch of pharmacology called ethnopharmacology that looks at the natural products used by indigenous peoples and tries to derive the compounds that produce the effect ascribed to them. And I think they've gotten some good leads and such. But that's still an evidence-based approach. At some point, we should be able to conclude certain things are more effective than others. If acupuncture relieves pain for someone, that's all well and good, but if a doctor knows the weight of the evidence suggests the effect to be placebo, is it their job to suggest it?
Most doctors these days are open to allowing a person to pursue alternative treatments, so long as the side effects don't conflict with any other drug regimen a patient might be on.
I agree with you, I suppose in a lot of people's minds the problem with western medicine is that it seems to focus a lot more on treatment of symptoms and not a lot on prevention which is more than likely one of the main reasons why alternative medicine has the power over people that it does.
So I had a post all written up and every time i re-read it, i kept taking stuff out. anyway, long story short, ive had Crohn's Disease for 5 years and the only things that have helped are diet, exercise (k not really, im too lazy), and modern medicine.
also, your state of mind is important. if you feel like shit but are in a good mood, you dont notice the shittiness as much and you feel a little better. if you feel like shit and are in a shitty mood, guess what, youre pretty fucking shitty.
If we're talking about a strictly mental health scenario, it couldn't hurt. They are already fucked in the head to begin with. It's not like the treatments would make them go even more crazy. Now alternative medicine from a physical health view is nothing but a crock of shit. You use it when you're down to the end. Instead of wasting what little time you have left trying alternative medicine you should use that time to get yourself right in the head and make sure your family is provided for before your inevitable demise.