Re: Forget hi-tech cures and dig out Granny's recipe

From: Rubystars (windstorm_at_swbell.net)
Date: 07/11/04 

Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 08:26:03 GMT

"Dr. Jai Maharaj" <usenet@mantra.com> wrote in message
news:mk97mc6fnn02a2o00@v07rz810rzo7u30al05U...
> Forget hi-tech cures and dig out Granny's recipe
>
> By Carmen Reid
> The Scotsman
> Sunday, July 11, 2004
>
> The heir to the throne, hardly a stranger to controversy,
> is being publicly told off once again, this time for his
> promotion of alternative medicine. The rebuke comes in a
> week when Gwyneth Paltrow, ever the celebrity fashion
> leader, is accessorising her boob tubes with this
> moment's must-have - a string of Chinese "cupping"
> blotches.

I've seen those on tv. I think you could get the same effect by having
someone give you a hickey, or if you're hard up, get a vacuum cleaner and
give one to yourself. It's a lot cheaper than having some con artist create
a vacuum with some cups.

> Prince Charles has recently established his own
> Foundation for Integrated Health and has urged the NHS to
> offer both orthodox and complementary treatment under one
> roof.

Looks like Charles doesn't understand the difference between real medicine
and junk medicine.

> As a result, Professor Michael Baum, a leading breast
> cancer specialist, has erupted in fury in an open letter
> to the Prince in the latest British Medical Journal.

Good!

>The
> professor really has a go, accusing the Prince of abusing
> his power. Power which comes from "an accident of birth"
> he fumes as he denounces Charles. (So, there goes his
> OBE, then.) "He hasn't changed his tune in 20 years," the
> professor states. "He is still promoting the same
> unproven remedies."

Indeed.

> Scientific proof, medical evidence, clinical trials...
> Aren't these the medical magic words which used to
> convince us that doctor knows best? But we're not so
> gullible now, are we? Now that hardly a week goes by
> without a nasty little tale popping up in the press about
> the said medical science and scientific proof. MMR, that
> troublesome vaccine launched on us after a trial, as a
> combination, of... oh... several weeks, wasn't it? Or how
> about the anti-depressant Seroxat? Clinical trials which
> apparently showed it made teenagers suicidal (I'd say
> that's pretty depressed) were covered up.
>
> We should never, never underestimate the pressure medical
> researchers are under to get their work funded and the
> pressure the drug manufacturers are under to get their
> new medicines trialled, licensed, patented and out there
> in every chemist shop across the globe. Of course the
> 'alternatives' remain 'unproven'. Which drug company is
> going to pay for clinical trials of the alternatives?
> What if fasting on carrot juice turns out to cure cancer?
> No one's going to make any money from that are they?

At least standard medicine is actually based on some hard evidence rather
than simply hearsay. If you use untested alternatives, you're basically
volunteering to be a lab rat, and pay for it yourself (sometimes thousands
of dollars per session) rather than being compensated for your risk.

> Hardly anyone these days doesn't at least dabble with
> complementary therapies - Echinacea and Aconite for
> colds, osteopathy and yoga for bad backs, massage for
> stress, banana peel for verrucas.

There's a sucker born every minute.

> It is absolutely bigoted for a leading doctor to dismiss
> the wealth of wisdom held within the wide umbrella term
> 'alternative'.

It's absolutely not bigoted to require someone making a medical claim to
back it up with evidence.

>And isn't good science all about making
> leaps and trying out some pretty far out theories?

It's about testing things using the scientific method, not pushing untested
therapies and chemicals on an unsuspecting public.

> Injecting yourself with a cowpox vaccine or medicine made
> of mould must once have seemed very alternative.

Standard therapies have been objectively demonstrated to work. That's why
all this other nonsense is still "alternative." It doesn't have anything
objective to back itself up.

>Many
> 'orthodox' wonder drugs - Aspirin and Tamoxifan for
> instance - are chemical copies of plant medicines.

What significance does this have?

>There
> is so much Western doctors do learn from the long and
> venerable traditions of Chinese medicine and Asian
> ayurvedic medicine.

It's only valuable information once its been objectively verified. There are
other Chinese and Asian medicines that are completely bogus or even
dangerous.

>Both of these disciplines - from my
> slim understanding of them - treat the body as a whole,

If someone had a stomach ulcer, would they need the whole body treated? If I
get a hangnail on my finger, will foot reflexology cure it?

> rather than in isolated parts, and treat patients as
> individual cases.

There are good doctors who do this too.

> Surely therein lies the problem. Detailed case studies
> need to be made, doctors have to know their patient,
> understand the patient's constitution, history, diet and
> lifestyle. How much easier to have a seven-minute
> appointment and issue a one-remedy-fits-all prescription.

This is turning things completely around. The "one remedy fits all" is
exactly what alternative medicine does. Pinning someone down on exactly what
condition a therapy is supposed to treat can be damn near impossible. Is
reflexology for the common cold, is it for other problems, or what? What
specific disease or injury does acupuncture treat?

I can tell you what Amoxicillin does. It's an antibiotic. It kills
infections. I can tell you what Allegra does. It keeps my allergies away for
a while. I can tell you what Viagra does, it helps a man be able to perform
sexually. Specific drugs have either one or a few functions. Specific
therapies (such as setting a limb into a brace) have specific functions too.

> And it's so convenient for our hectic modern lifestyles
> to take a symptom suppressant rather than get to the root
> cause of an illness.

This is another cop out of alternative medicine. The source of the problem
in infections are the organisms causing the infection. They can be killed
with antibiotics, antivirals, anthelminthics (for worms), or whatever else
needs to be given to kill the particular infection. Bracing a broken limb
helps to hold the bones in place to allow them to heal. Laser eye surgery
corrects bad vision. Anti-histamines block histamine which can cause allergy
symptoms. They don't simply supress symptoms.

> Also, just as the art of home cooking threatens to be
> lost for ever, so does the art of home nursing. Babies
> and children were once carefully nursed through fevers,
> rather than dosed with paracetamol (over-use can cause
> liver damage and has now been linked to asthma, but it
> doesn't say that in the Calpol ads does it?). You used to
> die at home of old age, rather than in hospital being
> treated for something incurable.

Babies can DIE of fever if you dont' take them to the doctor as soon as
possible. An infection like that can rage through their small bodies like a
wildfire. What you're doing is putting innocent babies (and young children)
at risk. Do alternative medicine proponents really want to conduct human
sacrifice in this manner simply to promote their cash flow? Disgusting!
Before modern medicine many babies died when they were young. Don't go back
to the Dark Ages by choice!

> There was a whole range of kitchen remedies: garlic,
> pepper, honey, lemon, ice, hot water, kaolin poultice,
> camomile tea, even brandy, which our great grandmothers
> would have used with confidence and to good effect.

None of which are as effective as a good antipyretic from a real doctor. It
just hurts so much that you would allow children to die just to avoid taking
them to the doctor!

> Previous generations nursed their families through all
> kinds of illnesses, held measles parties to 'catch it
> young', delivered babies in bedrooms and only called for
> the 'bone setter' in an emergency. Well, for surgery
> really, because this is the one area in which Western
> medicine excels. Shame about the superbugs though.

Previous generations had many people die of diseases that can be easily
cured now. People don't need to hold "measles parties". That's abusive!
People can go get something called a vaccine to help their children never
have to suffer through these diseases at all, or run the risk of actually
dying of them or suffering permanent damage from them.

> Not convinced?

Definitely not!

>Here's a fun statistic for you: In the US,
> a 2001 survey of 994 hospitals showed the leading cause
> of death wasn't cancer (553,251 deaths), or heart disease
> (699,697), it was medical drugs, surgery, or medical
> procedures (783,936).

That's a deliberate skewing of the facts. You could play the numbers game
any way you like. Try comparing numbers for infant mortality, lifespan,
deaths from infection, deaths in childbirth, etc. in "previous generations"
to those same numbers now.

> Prince Charles is a strapping 55-year-old, who is only
> ever in hospital when he's fallen off his stallion in the
> polo field. He has two equally radiant-with-vitality
> sons, so I'm taking all the health tips he offers.

Don't be fooled, they're rich enough that they can afford whatever health
care they want or need.

-Rubystars

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Do You Hate Alternative Medicine?
    ... >> Martin's doctor is not promising remarkable results from unproven ... >>> And the poster isn't on trial. ... No, the topic is alternative medicine, not scientific medicine. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: Campaign launched against dietary supplements
    ... > The doctor should be familiar with both and take the best from both. ... holistic caring part of alternative medicine ... > the best of the western impersonal disease oriented side. ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Are all Science Bigots Absurdists?
    ... "What most sets alternative medicine apart, in our view, is that it has ... Different forms of treatment, clearly ... are more challenging to test for then the typical science bigot is able ...
    (sci.med)
  • Are all Science Bigots Absurdists?
    ... "What most sets alternative medicine apart, in our view, is that it has ... Different forms of treatment, clearly ... are more challenging to test for then the typical science bigot is able ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Alternative medicines draw fire
    ... AFTER decades of fighting for credibility within mainstream medicine, ... medicine (CAM) industry of quackery and trickery. ... Shapiro writes in her new book, Suckers: How Alternative Medicine ... which CAM treatments work, and popular science author Dr Simon Singh, ...
    (misc.health.alternative)