Naturopathy
Vanman
Greg G.
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
The good thing is that the body usually heals itself. Somebody takes a
medicine and they either get better or worse, so they take more. Then
they either get better or worse. So they try something else. They
either get better worse, or die. If they get better, they give credit
to whatever they took. If they get worse, they take more. If they die,
the practioner says they should have come to them sooner.
The bad thing is that some people will use these products when they
really need real medicine.
Homeopathy is based on lunacy. There is nothing in it that would have
any effect. There's nothing in the theory that stands to reason.
All it has are anecdotes from people who still favor it. There are no
studies that have been done properly that support it. Test have shown
that many natural products do not always have the active ingredients,
perhaps being harvested out of season.
My own experience does not support the claims made by practioners but
that is just an anecdote. My opinions are primarily based on
investigations by experts.
Mark Buchanan
My own experience is similar. I have found this site helpful for
specific companies:
My advice would be to stick to evidence based medicine. If there are
specific things you are considering then do the minimum web research
both for the product and the company supplying the goods - there are
reliable sources out there.
Mark
David Hare-Scott
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
It depends on what you mean by naturopathy as it tends to be used as a
hold-all for a variety of systems.
Some of those systems (eg some herbal medicine) my be useful if the
substance ingested is appropriate for the condition and actually contains an
appropriate amount of the active ingredient. Since these things are not
regulated or regularly tested (in Oz at least) there is no knowing what is
actually in them and one-off tests have shown wide variations in active
ingredient content
Chiropractic and osteopathy may help some neuromuscular conditions just as
phisiotherapy can be useful, massage and manipulation have a place in
treating some conditions. In China massage is mainstream treatment and many
public hospitals have a massage department. These systems can be grossly
over-sold when they are claimed to be treatment for such things as asthma,
high blood pressure or even a panancea which clearly they are not.
Other systems such as iridology and homeopathy are quackery all the way
through and rely on the placebo effect.
David
Inez
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
I don't see any sensible reason to focus on "natural" remedies to the
exclusion of all else. Natural substances can be toxic as easily as
anything else is; if you run out into the woods and start eating
random berries and leaves you'll be in trouble. I suspect that all
the chemically sounding drugs you get from the pharmacy are based on
natural substances. Where else would you get them?
Kermit
Just a note: in the US the osteopaths have long been disassociated
from their quack roots. My doctor is an osteopath; their training is
similar to normal medical schools and regulated by law. About the only
difference is they are *somewhat more reluctant to recommend drugs
(AKA medicine) or surgery. My doctor offered statins for borderline
elevated serum cholesterol, for example, but preferred a nutritional
approach and is working with me on my diet.
Kermit
Kermit
When an alternative medicine is found to work they just call it
"medicine".
Kermit
Kermit
Supernatural substances!
The main difference is pharmaceuticals have ostensibly been tested,
are in known doses, and are not contaminated. Some people (like ASI)
would suggest that Big Pharm is not to be entirely trusted (and he'd
be right!) but he would then dismiss the dangers of dishonest
strangers over the net making claims as to efficacy and purity for
their herbs. If an herb has an effect on the body, of course, it's a
drug.
Kermit
el cid
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
My elderly father has low total cholesterol but also low HDL (the good
one so that's not good).
Rather than tell him to take fish oil, his MD put him on statins
and I can't talk him out of them though he has recently halved
his dose due to signs of rhabdomyolysis, a known risk and side
effect of statins. I've told him he's halfway there, just needs
to element the other half (and not play a Zeno game)
"Traditional" medicine can be misunderstood to be defensive
medicine by MDs overly influenced by the pharmaceutical
industry. In this case, fish oil, will provide him with
many of he benefits associated with increased HDL (without
actually raising his HDL). Also good is moderate alcohol
consumption, so an evening brandy is good for him.
So to the extent that "alternative" medicine is simply aware
of the medical literature and not tied into the pharma
industry, they can offer good advice. But the homeopathic
stuff is worse than snake oil.
Nashton
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
>
Like for any other form of alternative medicine, do not replace evidence
based practices with anything that hasn't been proven effective.
Alternatively, don't ask for advice here, most posters haven't even
completed high school and if they have it was a fluke.
David Hare-Scott
>
> Alternatively, don't ask for advice here, most posters haven't even
> completed high school and if they have it was a fluke.
Yet another allegation with no evidence - or given despite the evidence.
Once more an insult offered instead of fact or logic. Substantiation has no
value in your house.
David
chris thompson
Hi Nashton!
Being as highly educated as you are, can you please explain why
endogenous retroviruses are not evidence of common descent?
That would be great.
Chris
Dan Listermann
"Nashton" <na...@na.ca> wrote in message
news:hha62h$ko2$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> Vanman wrote:
>> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
>
> Like for any other form of alternative medicine, do not replace evidence
> based practices with anything that hasn't been proven effective.
>
Evolution is "evidence based" whereas creationism isn't, it is dogma based.
.
Nashton
Why don't you explain, Chris. You were the one that brought it up.
Unless your knowledge is restricted to being able to read and parrot
whatever you can find on the t.o. archive.
Nashton
Isn't it the morons in here that keep on repeating ad naseam that direct
evidence is not required? I have no direct evidence that most of the
idiots in here can barely read, just going by the crap they spout.
HTH
Louann Miller
a791-72b...@d21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
> Just a note: in the US the osteopaths have long been disassociated
> from their quack roots. My doctor is an osteopath; their training is
> similar to normal medical schools and regulated by law.
You beat me to that caveat.
Ye Old One
Sounds just like the creationists on the group.
--
Bob.
NashtOff - the moron who claimed "All drugs are derived from the ToE."
chris thompson
Now, now. You already told me I didn't know what they were all about.
You clearly believe they have some significance other than as evidence
of common descent.
In the time you took to reply like that, you could have made a good
start on explaining your position.
Why not just go ahead and tell us about endogenous retroviruses, and
why they're NOT evidence of common descent?
Thanks!
Chris
Kermit
Yes, evidence is required. But we do not need to observe the process
in order to study it. Processes in the *real world, such as biological
evolution, murders, the life cycle of stars, plate tectonics, etc.,
have consequences in the real world. We only need to see the
consequences and verify those observations, and explain them with a
testable model (that is, it predicts other consequences, not yet
found). Hence, we can (sometimes solve murders, even if there are no
witnesses, and know that all Terran life has a common ancestor.
Unless you have another testable model that fits all the data?
But I know you don't, for none has ever been offered. (That is,
lately. Earlier models to explain extinctions and the fossil record,
such as Lamarckism, have been falsified.)
Kermit
David Hare-Scott
So because they disagree with you they must be ignorant. We can add
excessive pride to your list of unappealing characteristics.
You are constantly insulting and dismissive, saying that your opponent has
nothing to say instead of engaging and trying to provide evidence that they
are wrong. This displays your own weakness rather than theirs.
David
David Fritzinger
wrote:
Reading Nashton's posts, it becomes clear that he is basically either
dishonest, or a moral coward. Let me cite two examples of his
interactions with me. First, in one thread, I had mentioned that ASI
claimed fish willfully changed their genes so they would become smaller.
Nashton called me a liar. When I produced, and referenced the exact
quote of ASI, Nashton disappeared from the thread. Or, at least he never
responded to me. In a second instance, Nashton claimed (again, as usual)
the the ToE was useless. I responded by explaining how I used evolution
and the relatedness of proteins from different organisms in my research,
both to plan experiments, and to explain results obtained. Nashton's
only reply was some snarky remark about how long my research was taking,
totally ignoring my point. I explained the methodology in my research,
and he again ran.
Stuart
Says the wuss who won't tell us what field his *science* degree is in.
LOL.
Stuart
Stuart
You made the claim Nashie... you back it up.
Perhaps we need to keep a list of claims made by Nashie
that he won't back up.
Like his *science* degree...
LOL
Stuart
Dick C.
@newsfe08.iad:
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
>
My brother had a heart condition, chose to use naturopathic medicine
instead of real medicine. He died last June at age 52. Guess what my
opinion of it is.
--
Dick #1349
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~Benjamin Franklin
Home Page: dickcr.iwarp.com
email: dic...@gmail.com
bpuharic
>Vanman wrote:
>> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
>>
>
>Like for any other form of alternative medicine, do not replace evidence
>based practices with anything that hasn't been proven effective.
IOW it has as much evidence as creationism: none.
>
>Alternatively, don't ask for advice here, most posters haven't even
>completed high school and if they have it was a fluke.
this guy's never had to test an idea or write a lab report. he's not a
scientist but plays one on TO
Earle Jones
wrote:
*
Nashton: Do you have a degree in Science?
earle
*
Steven L.
news:2d3181b2-433d-4f9f...@d21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
At Massachusetts General Hospital where I'm going for a kidney
transplant, the cardiologist in their Transplant Unit is a D.O. (Doctor
of Osteopathy). First osteopath I ever dealt with.
--
--
Steven L.
sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the "NOSPAM" before sending to this email address.
Mike Painter
>
> At Massachusetts General Hospital where I'm going for a kidney
> transplant, the cardiologist in their Transplant Unit is a D.O.
> (Doctor of Osteopathy). First osteopath I ever dealt with.
>
>
anybody with much training (The ER Nurse at one hospital was the one on duty
in a particular wing who knew where the ER key was.) tended to be good
doctors.
They certainly seemed to be more aware of diet and exercise then the average
MD was at the time and that the patient was better off being treated as a
whole rather than addressing a single area.
I had a friend who was scheduled for major back surgery. He got a tooth ache
and it turned out be be a massive infection that he was not aware of.
When he recovered from that he no longer needed surgery as all the pain in
his back was gone.
Reffered pain is another example of "Intelligent Design"
Desertphile
wrote:
> Just curious as to your general opinions on Naturopathic medicine.
There is no such thing.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz