Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Alternative medicine v religion

  • 06-03-2014 10:09am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭


    Which is more makey uppy? Religion seems to get its claws into all sorts of people, taking their money and promising them things, but so does alternative medicine.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which is more makey uppy? Religion seems to get its claws into all sorts of people, taking their money and promising them things, but so does alternative medicine.

    I think on the International Scale of Makey-Uppyness, the ISMU, they are pretty similar. Depending on the individuals chosen.
    Scientology is very very makey-uppy, since it was made up intentionally.
    Other religions seem to be explanations for things we didn't understand at the time but seemed to make sense. So I would count those as less makey-uppy and more putting the pieces together incorrectly.

    The same can be said for Alt. Medicine. "I don't fully understand how this works but it seems to." VS. "I'm mental and the angels told me to do this." VS. "These people are stupid and how can I take advantage of that."


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,838 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Depends on which religion and which branch of alternative medicine, there's lots of both. Do you lump homoeopathy, traditional Chinese medicine, osteopathy, faith healing, reiki and chiropractics together for example? Similarly do you lump Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism and Islam together?

    They're all pretty makey-uppy, but some have sharper claws than others.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which is more makey uppy? Religion seems to get its claws into all sorts of people, taking their money and promising them things, but so does alternative medicine.


    What's wrong with makey uppy .... almost every woman is using makey uppy


    Would be nice if you could be more specific regarding religion and alternative medicine


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Waking-Dreams


    People can be atheists and still get taken in by alternative medicines and some of the new age thinking that goes with it. I reckon it is a bit more persuasive because you often see it presenting (flawed) studies to support its claims whereas religion has to rely on the ‘faith’ argument. People can be swayed by these studies and while rejecting religious ideas don’t do the same for the home remedy that ‘seems to work every time’.

    It’s hard to say which of them in general is more made-up. Probably religions as some alt medicines borrow from treatments which can work but then take them to really far-out, silly levels.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,295 ✭✭✭✭Duggy747


    I've a far bigger problem with Alt. Medicine than I do religion, it's a nasty market that goes for the sheer scientific ignorance / desperation of people despite the mountains and mountains and mountains of empirical data, evidence, studies, and rejection of those medicines from the scientific and medical community.

    It's the biased studies (funded by manufacturers / resellers of said medicine) and twisting of actual studies, taking them so far out of context that gets my goat. Something that happens in any industry but what I noticed to be prominent in the Alt. Medicine market.

    In this modern day and age, with the technology and advances that we have, it's depressing that people are so against science / medicine and reject evidence because "Western Medicine" lacks spiritualness, doesn't have some kind of Eastern philosophy attached to it, doesn't have the label "Chinese have been doing for thousands of years!", or because someone on Oprah came out and vomited up bile about "Western Medicine" or "Big Pharma"

    Fùck, I hate Oprah's woo-peddling show. Many of the proponents of woo got their start from her.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 278 ✭✭rughdh


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which is more makey uppy? Religion seems to get its claws into all sorts of people, taking their money and promising them things, but so does alternative medicine.
    It depends on the 'medicine' and the behaviour of the practitioner. For example, homeopathy seems to be the whipping boy of the alternative medicines, but as a 'medicine' it's harmless, (if indeed it's only water and as long as it's not contaminated in any way). However, it would be harmful if the client was hydrophobic or was told that it'd cure their terminal disease.

    I wouldn't rule out the positive effects of being given a bit of attention from a snake-oil seller for a significant amount of time. If a person is a sucker for hokum, then they could do worse than chose something like homeopathy. Real medicine is not without its faults.

    It's not the makeyuppiness itself that I'd have a problem with, its the level of emotional damage that's caused and I think it depends on the religion and the 'medicine'.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,948 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    rughdh wrote: »
    It depends on the 'medicine' and the behaviour of the practitioner. For example, homeopathy seems to be the whipping boy of the alternative medicines, but as a 'medicine' it's harmless, (if indeed it's only water and as long as it's not contaminated in any way). However, it would be harmful if the client was hydrophobic or was told that it'd cure their terminal disease.
    http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which is more makey uppy? Religion seems to get its claws into all sorts of people, taking their money and promising them things, but so does alternative medicine.

    They're both forms of snake oil so they have the exact same quotient of makey-uppy-ness, i.e. completely and utterly made up both of them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    Duggy747 wrote: »
    In this modern day and age, with the technology and advances that we have, it's depressing that people are so against science / medicine and reject evidence because "Western Medicine" lacks spiritualness, doesn't have some kind of Eastern philosophy attached to it, doesn't have the label "Chinese have been doing for thousands of years!", or because someone on Oprah came out and vomited up bile about "Western Medicine" or "Big Pharma"

    And the most amazing thing is that those citing the "Chinese are doing this for thousands of years" are mostly dead wrong, because the "Traditional Chinese Medicine" was a concept invented on the orders of Mao to disguise the fact that the country had run out of proper medicine, so the CCP invented the idea of thousands of years old, very effective, treatments which were wholly Chinese (to pander to the Chinese sense of superiority) while just making up bull**** treatments.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    28064212 wrote: »


    I rather go with this

    http://www.uclh.nhs.uk/OURSERVICES/OURHOSPITALS/RLHIM/Pages/historyofrlhim.aspx

    Or do you want me to come up with a list similar to yours that shows all the flaws and fatalities associated with mainstream medicine ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,948 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    weisses wrote: »
    Go ahead
    weisses wrote: »
    Or do you want me to come up with a list similar to yours that shows all the flaws and fatalities associated with mainstream medicine ?
    Wow. Just... wow. Do you honestly not understand the difference, or do you need it explained?

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    And the most amazing thing is that those citing the "Chinese are doing this for thousands of years" are mostly dead wrong, because the "Traditional Chinese Medicine" was a concept invented on the orders of Mao to disguise the fact that the country had run out of proper medicine, so the CCP invented the idea of thousands of years old, very effective, treatments which were wholly Chinese (to pander to the Chinese sense of superiority) while just making up bull**** treatments.

    You might want to read up on Huangdi Neijing

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huangdi_Neijing

    And maybe alter the wiki adding your own well informed views on it


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    28064212 wrote: »
    Go ahead


    Wow. Just... wow. Do you honestly not understand the difference, or do you need it explained?

    Yes please ... explain how Homeopathy killed all those people


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    weisses wrote: »
    Yes please ... explain how Homeopathy killed all those people

    Only after you explain how any Alt medicine has cured anything. Ever.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,948 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    weisses wrote: »
    Yes please ... explain how Homeopathy killed all those people
    Where did I say it did? No-one can be killed by homeopathy (except drowning victims I suppose). However, homeopathy was a huge contributory factor in many of their deaths. Very first one: Dr Cowley: "Jackie Alderslade, an asthmatic, only needed to take the tablets she was prescribed, but she did not get them". She died, because she believed homeopathy was a viable alternative to actual medicine

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    28064212 wrote: »
    Where did I say it did? No-one can be killed by homeopathy (except drowning victims I suppose). However, homeopathy was a huge contributory factor in many of their deaths. Very first one: Dr Cowley: "Jackie Alderslade, an asthmatic, only needed to take the tablets she was prescribed, but she did not get them". She died, because she believed homeopathy was a viable alternative to actual medicine

    The lack of conventional treatment would/could be the contributing factor to their deaths

    You cannot have it both ways.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,948 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    weisses wrote: »
    The lack of conventional treatment would/could be the contributing factor to their deaths

    You cannot have it both ways.
    You didn't read the links, did you? There was a conventional treatment. She was prescribed tablets that would have saved her life. She chose to follow a homeopathic treatment instead, and died because of it

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    28064212 wrote: »
    You didn't read the links, did you? There was a conventional treatment. She was prescribed tablets that would have saved her life. She chose to follow a homeopathic treatment instead, and died because of it

    Is that because of the Homeopathic treatment or the lack of conventional treatment ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,948 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    weisses wrote: »
    Is that because of the Homeopathic treatment or the lack of conventional treatment ?
    annnddd.... I'm out

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    28064212 wrote: »
    annnddd.... I'm out

    Of course you are ......... Not surprised really


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Only after you explain how any Alt medicine has cured anything. Ever.

    Acupuncture maybe ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    weisses wrote: »
    Acupuncture maybe ?

    What cured acupuncture?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    lazygal wrote: »
    What cured acupuncture?

    It is very beneficial for people with lower backpain


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,838 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    weisses wrote: »
    You might want to read up on Huangdi Neijing

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huangdi_Neijing

    And maybe alter the wiki adding your own well informed views on it

    TCM most certainly pre-dates Mao, even though he did have a tendency to rewrite bits of Chinese history here and there. It does have other problems though, in that it comes from a time when people were short lived, minor ailments could often prove fatal, and there was no reasonable alternative. From my understanding, much of TCM is Taoist in origin so also contains certain religious overtones. I've no doubt that some of the health exercises, such as certain qigong sets, are good for general health and well being, particularly in the elderly, in much the same way a certain yoga sets are.

    The issue comes when substituting an alternative medicine for a needed medical intervention. Using faith healing to cure cancer, or homoeopathic contraception, is unlikely to give the desired outcome.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    smacl wrote: »
    The issue comes when substituting an alternative medicine for a needed medical intervention. Using faith healing to cure cancer, or homoeopathic contraception, is unlikely to give the desired outcome.

    Couldn't have said it better


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    weisses wrote: »
    It is very beneficial for people with lower backpain

    Better than placebo?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dave! wrote: »
    Better than placebo?

    Yup

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20529520


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    weisses wrote: »


    Nope
    "No significant differences between acupuncture and sham acupuncture were found in any trial."

    Also nope
    "[...] no conclusions can be drawn about its effectiveness over other treatment modalities as the evidence is conflicting."

    Also also nope.
    "The data do not allow firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture for acute low back pain."


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    weisses wrote: »

    Your link doesn't say that.

    In fact it says...
    acupuncture can be superior to usual care in treating chronic low back pain, especially, when patients have positive expectations about acupuncture.

    ...which is like the very definition of placebo.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Nope
    "No significant differences between acupuncture and sham acupuncture were found in any trial."

    Also nope
    "[...] no conclusions can be drawn about its effectiveness over other treatment modalities as the evidence is conflicting."

    Also also nope.
    "The data do not allow firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture for acute low back pain."

    Ohh dear

    Maybe you should write to N.I.C.E because they apparently have it all wrong

    http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11887/44334/44334.pdf

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229352/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Dave! wrote: »
    Your link doesn't say that.

    In fact it says...



    ...which is like the very definition of placebo.

    Aahh the famous cherry picking exercise

    What if i alter the quote you gave
    especially, when patients have positive expectations about Chemo therapy

    Which is very much a possibility

    Makes that chemo therapy a placebo ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,295 ✭✭✭✭Duggy747


    weisses wrote: »
    Ohh dear

    Maybe you should write to N.I.C.E because they apparently have it all wrong

    http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11887/44334/44334.pdf

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229352/

    The only RCT in that paper that concluded that acupuncture be a viable means of treatment was also the only one that was considered of having a high risk of bias.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    weisses wrote: »
    Aahh the famous cherry picking exercise

    What if i alter the quote you gave



    Which is very much a possibility

    Makes that chemo therapy a placebo ?

    No, because chemotherapy has been shown to have actual physical effects (both positive and negative) upon the diseases and/or patients it has been used to treat, unlike, say, acupuncture.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    As a general rule if the medicine has no quantified side effects it's bullsh­it.

    Alternate medicine is only bad if you ignore the necessity of conventional medicine. Thankfully most people have some level of dissonance that provides a remove. They don't for example expect a diluted car wreck to cure them of car accident injuries.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    No, because chemotherapy has been shown to have actual physical effects (both positive and negative) upon the diseases and/or patients it has been used to treat, unlike, say, acupuncture.

    And according to scientific studies acupuncture does the same ... but of course you can ignore that... just to make your point


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Jernal wrote: »
    As a general rule if the medicine has no quantified side effects it's bullsh­it.

    Alternate medicine is only bad if you ignore the necessity of conventional medicine. Thankfully most people have some level of dissonance that provides a remove. They don't for example expect a diluted car wreck to cure them of car accident injuries.

    I just love your comparisons


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Duggy747 wrote: »
    The only RCT in that paper that concluded that acupuncture be a viable means of treatment was also the only one that was considered of having a high risk of bias.
    RESULTS

    Fifteen randomised controlled trials were identified. Of these, four met the eligibility criteria and were critically appraised. These trials suggest acupuncture can be superior to usual care in treating chronic low back pain, especially, when patients have positive expectations about acupuncture.

    CONCLUSIONS

    NICE guidelines of a course of acupuncture, offered according to patient preference as a treatment option for chronic low back pain, are justified.

    And despite the risk of Bias they come to this conclusion ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    weisses wrote: »
    And according to scientific studies acupuncture does the same ... but of course you can ignore that... just to make your point

    Link to such a scientific study?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    Link to such a scientific study?

    This is what NICE base their approval of acupuncture on

    http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11887/44334/44334.pdf


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    weisses wrote: »
    This is what NICE base their approval of acupuncture on

    http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11887/44334/44334.pdf

    I like how you keep touting that one when I provided 3 examples that don't show it has any discernible effect.
    What makes that study better?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    weisses wrote: »
    Ohh dear

    Maybe you should write to N.I.C.E because they apparently have it all wrong

    http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11887/44334/44334.pdf

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229352/

    You really really didn't look at those links, did you?
    Because 2 of them are actually from NICE.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    I just read all the NICE (9.2.1.1) and I'm a little bit skeptical at how they came to the conclusion of recommending acupuncture to patients. In the highly systemic studies any magnitude that was observed was tiny. It seems an odd recommendation. Don't get me wrong acupuncture might be good for people but I'm confused why such low incidences of efficacy were seen as a reason to recommend it to people. Or is this one of those issues for chronic pain where any hope, any plan or procedure provides relief compared to none at all? (There is nothing more psychologically distressing to an individual than the sense of something being completely outside a person's control.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 278 ✭✭rughdh


    28064212 wrote: »

    This doesn't disagree with what I said above. What we have here is a case of adults self-harming if they are taking harmless substances in place of a conventional treatment that has been shown to reverse or slow or otherwise positively manage a disease process. In the cases of children, it's parental negligence. If the substances are harmful it's criminal negligence on behalf of the practitioner. People need to take responsibility for the choices they make with regard to their own healthcare and to that of their children. I give a damn about vulnerable people being taken advantage of, but there's only so much you can do. I'm very strongly opposed to protecting adults from themselves from a societal point of view.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    As is common with these discussions, it basically revolves around definitions. What do you mean by religion and what do you mean by alternative medicine? I think the religion topic has been flayed to death on another thread, but the alternative medicine topic is worthy of serious discussion.

    First of all, alternative medicine is a somewhat inaccurate term, as it implies "instead of", when "along with" or complementary is a more accurate definition covering the broad range of treatment options available. The NIH and most medical establishments today use the term CAM (complementary and alternative medicine), and integrative medicine which combines traditional medicine and CAM is widely taught in medical schools in the US at least. Both traditional medicine and CAM are subject to stereotypical based error. Many regard CAM as a fraudulent scam, and many regard traditional medicine as focused solely on symptoms (drug peddling) rather than underlying conditions. Although there is an element of truth to this, the reality as always is far more nuanced.

    In a very general sense, CAM focusses on maintaining health and preventing disease while traditional medicine focusses on treating symptoms after a disease has manifested. The value of integrative medicine is the recognition that both are important. Doctors coming out of medical schools today are well versed in both preventative and treatment medicine, and there is much more focus on preventing disease within the broad medical field, which is to be welcomed. Highly beneficial lifestyle choices such as proper nutrition, avoiding toxins, yoga, meditation, etc. came from CAM sources and are now part of integrated medicine.

    There are of course many scam artists and fraudsters in the CAM industry, which is why we have regulation. Anyone claiming alternative medicine as a treatment option "instead of" a traditional option for disease treatment should be and are quite correctly prosecuted. The same is true for traditional medicine, which is also heavily regulated for good reason. The pharmaceutical industry is the same as any other corporate industry in that it is primarily driven by profit and left to its own devices without regulation, the evidence is overwhelming that profit comes before wellbeing of individuals and society. I could give countless examples, but Astra Zeneca for example were marketing Seroquel for years to treat the elderly and children for a variety of mild symptoms (attention problems in kids) when it was only approved for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and had known serious side effects from numerous studies. They were fined $520M in 2004 for off label marketing, an impressive number but actually a small one compared to the revenue generated by sales through off label marketing.

    The truth is that people are becoming more aware of their ability to influence their own health. Diseases like heart disease and cancer are decreasing in the western developed world as people are becoming more educated about the lifestyle issues related to the onset of these diseases(calorie laden food, physical inactivity, stress). In fact, cancer is increasing in developing countries as they adopt western lifestyles, and the food industry pack supermarket shelves with harmful products no longer sold in the developed world. This is all supported by modern science, as we know that everything to do with health is a combination of nature (genetic) and nurture, and the latter is increasingly been shown in scientific studies to be as important and in many cases more important than the former.

    http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/19/8/1893.full

    Finally, medicine or drugs have been around for thousands of years in a wide range of cultures, to suggest that in China for example they were "invented" by Mao is a hilarious argument from ignorance. In fact many modern medicines are derived from traditional plant medicines (Aspirin, Morphine, Taxol, Reserpine to name just a few), and much of the history of pharmacology derives from synthesizing compounds found in nature with known medical application, a science that started in the early 19th century.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    You really really didn't look at those links, did you?
    Because 2 of them are actually from NICE.

    I did look at them ..bottom link is from 2005 ... My link is from 2010 ... 5 years later

    Strange that nice is contradicting itself apparently


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    weisses wrote: »
    I did look at them ..bottom link is from 2005 ... My link is from 2010 ... 5 years later

    Strange that nice is contradicting itself apparently

    And the middle one is from 2012, 2 years later.
    What's you point?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,749 ✭✭✭weisses


    And the middle one is from 2012, 2 years later.
    What's you point?

    I will take you seriously if you stop with the selective quoting


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Waking-Dreams


    nagirrac wrote: »
    There are of course many scam artists and fraudsters in the CAM industry, which is why we have regulation.
    I do accept that there are many CAM practitioners who believe they are helping people and are not out to ‘scam’ them. But the biggest problem is that many CAM treatments are not required to be regulated or subject to the same trials that drugs must be.

    Also, there is no statutory professional regulation of CAM practitioners. If I decided to put up a sign tomorrow advertising my services as a CAM practitioner, there is nothing illegal about doing so, even though I have no ‘training or experience’. This means that if one of my ‘clients’ had a very bad experience because of my treatment/advice they have no special legal rights beyond normal civil and criminal law. This is a huge problem.

    Doctors and nurses can get struck off their respective registers for serious malpractice/misconduct, etc., and, thus, can be prevented from practising in their chosen professions again. Not so with CAM practitioners.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,086 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which is more makey uppy? Religion seems to get its claws into all sorts of people, taking their money and promising them things, but so does alternative medicine.
    They're both made up. Did you think they grew on trees?

    Science is made up, too, obviously.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement