nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Reflexology in Galway..

LadyMayBelle

Anyone got any experience in going to see a reflexologist? Or foot massaging people in general? My feet are killing me these past few weeks and someone suggested it..I know Dr and Herbs on Shop Street have a chinese medicene reflexology..any one know of anywhere else?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

cooperguy

inisboffin wrote: »

Isn't acupuncture (and how it works) pretty much accepted by 'Western medicine' these day? It has a lot of magical pathways going on!:p

No it isnt at all!

dapto1

Head The Wall wrote: »

I'm sure even you can differentiate between pain and no pain

Wow, a non-sequitir response to what I posted and an ad hominem attack in one sentence, fair play.

Head The Wall wrote: »

That must be a great Crystal ball you have that can see into the future and tell you what does and doesn't work.

Em, I'm going on empirical evidence. Not a crystal ball. But I hear crystals are really good for your "energy" as well, I know a guy who can hook you up with one for the low low price of €79.99!

Head The Wall wrote: »

You are just making yourself look really stupid here with your "My way or the highway" attitude.

Where have I said that? Actually, I said:

"Best of luck with it man. Whatever decision you come to, I hope it works out for you."

Head The Wall wrote: »

Unless your science articles conclusively that 100% of people gain no benefits from alternative therapies then they mean absolutely nothing

"My" science articles? As much as I'd love to be published by some of those publications, I haven't been. And your statement shows a complete lack of understanding of the scientific method.

dapto1

inisboffin wrote: »

A good friend of mine had sinus trouble for years, she was on prescription meds and about to look into surgery. She's a bit of a cynic (by her own admission) but her cousin persuaded her to *try* a combo of acupuncture (mainly for stress relief as the condition was making her miserable) and a Neti Pot,
She tried both and had a huge turnaround in just under a month. The neti pot is a little daunting at first, I have tried it, but found it gave a lot of relief when I had a sinus infection.

The Neti Pot seems to have a sound anatomical and physiological basis. It physically cleans out the nasal canal.

inisboffin wrote: »

Isn't acupuncture (and how it works) pretty much accepted by 'Western medicine' these day? It has a lot of magical pathways going on!:p

No, it isn't.

lighthouse

Dapto,
I think you have made your point and I appreciate it as I appreciate all the other people who have posted. Now I would appreciate it if you do not post anymore on this thread instead of the nitpicking you are going on with. Thanks in advance of your cooperation.

dapto1

I'm not "nitpicking", I'm responding to posts. And with all due respect, I don't think you can tell me where to post.

lighthouse

I am not telling you. I am asking you.

dapto1

I'll post if I feel I have something to add, or if someone asks about something I've posted. If there's something I've said that's bothered you please let me know here or by PM, I'm not trying to cause offence.

lighthouse

I was only joking but your posts do seem to be upsetting people.

inisboffin

In fairness we are all gone a little off topic here.

Mrs OBumble

dapto1 wrote: »

Or even having an actual physically possible mechanism by which reflexology is supposed to work? There is none.

Just because we don't (yet) understand the actual mechanism by which it works doesn't mean there isn't a mechanism: good scientists know how little they really know, and are open to new knowledge and discoveries.

As with vitamin C and physiotherapy, it's quite possible that there are characteristics which mean they're effective for some people but not others. We just don't have tests to work out who they're effective for (yet). If it was just placebo effect, I'd have expected the same from eccanacia (urg, bad spelling there!), but I don't have one.

Re someone's question about quackery: I don't think that reflexology is any more morally repugnant than the fact that that doctors get paid even when they misdiagnose people or give advice that doesn't meet accepted standards. Eg, a friend of mine went to the GP with a pregnant woman who didn't have much English. The GP's instructions included drinking Guinness every day, to keep her iron levels up. Suffice to say that they found another GP - and that they still had to pay the initial incompetent one.

It would be nice if we could apply strict science to all health services, but I'm afraid humans are just a bit too individual.

Head The Wall

dapto1 wrote: »

Em, I'm going on empirical evidence. Not a crystal ball. But I hear crystals are really good for your "energy" as well, I know a guy who can hook you up with one for the low low price of €79.99!

Where's the evidence that no one has ever benefited from some form of reflexology. According to you no one ever has, hence the crystal ball comment as seemingly you know everything. That is the attitude you are portraying here

And then you reckon I want some crystals, I have already stated I am a cynic here but I am aware that what works for some won't work for others. You meanwhile are portraying the thought process of Homer Simpson here.

dapto1 wrote: »

Where have I said that? Actually, I said:

"Best of luck with it man. Whatever decision you come to, I hope it works out for you."

No here is what you said.

dapto1 wrote: »

No, I wouldn't. Because it doesn't work.

So without ever trying something you say it doesn't work. That's narrow minded thinking

dapto1 wrote: »

"My" science articles? As much as I'd love to be published by some of those publications, I haven't been. And your statement shows a complete lack of understanding of the scientific method.

Do I have to understand the scientific method as to how cancer treatment works etc for it to work, my arse I do.

I was on about the articles you have posted here or seem so versed on, what do these science articles say about someone that goes for reflexology and gains a benefit for it.

JustMary has explained it perfectly below, It doesn't matter a crap what it's called, what it does, how it does it etc. If it helps people that's all that matters

JustMary wrote: »

Just because we don't (yet) understand the actual mechanism by which it works doesn't mean there isn't a mechanism: good scientists know how little they really know, and are open to new knowledge and discoveries.

As with vitamin C and physiotherapy, it's quite possible that there are characteristics which mean they're effective for some people but not others. We just don't have tests to work out who they're effective for (yet). If it was just placebo effect, I'd have expected the same from eccanacia (urg, bad spelling there!), but I don't have one.

Re someone's question about quackery: I don't think that reflexology is any more morally repugnant than the fact that that doctors get paid even when they misdiagnose people or give advice that doesn't meet accepted standards. Eg, a friend of mine went to the GP with a pregnant woman who didn't have much English. The GP's instructions included drinking Guinness every day, to keep her iron levels up. Suffice to say that they found another GP - and that they still had to pay the initial incompetent one.

It would be nice if we could apply strict science to all health services, but I'm afraid humans are just a bit too individual.

dapto1

Head The Wall wrote: »

So without ever trying something you say it doesn't work. That's narrow minded thinking

That's not logical. I've never tried to fly, because I know it doesn't work. You don't need a degree in anatomy (which I have) to know that the reasoning befind reflexology is completely made up bunkum.

Head The Wall wrote: »

I was on about the articles you have posted here or seem so versed on, what do these science articles say about someone that goes for reflexology and gains a benefit for it.

You obviously didn't read any of the sources I posted. Regression to the mean and confirmation bias account for people's belief that reflexology has worked for them. The placebo effect and the pleasant feeling of a foot massage also play a part.

Sometimes people just get better, even when nothing is done. If someone goes for reflexology, and then gets better, they are likely to believe it was because of the reflexology. Think of it like this: if a footballer performs well in a match when he performs a certain pre-match ritual, he may believe the ritual caused the performance- not that he just happened to have a good game. That is correlation, not causation.

Another example: A person has a non-permanent illness, either short term or medium term. They happen to go to a reflexologist just as their illness is at its worst in it's natural arc before the body's immune system deals with it. After, they begin to feel better (as they would have done anyway). Thus, they attribute their improvement to whatever happened right before they improved. Humans look for patterns wherever we can, even if it defies common sense or logic.

With regards to JustMary's post, I'll respond to that in it's own right.

Head The Wall

Everyone knows that Humans can't fly, unless you're tripping.

The same can't be said for alternative medicine, some people believe it works some don't. So you can't come along and say 100% that it doesn't work without trying it.

Again you are making a load of presumptions in relation to the human body and the same could be said for what western medicine also achieves.

Look I'm not saying reflexology works or doesn't work so we can go round in circles all you want,

I am open to the idea that it may work for some people where you are straight out 100% adamant that it achieves absolutely nothing for no one. It's be easier to prove that God exists than what you are implying

dapto1

JustMary, you make some very fair points here.

JustMary wrote: »

Just because we don't (yet) understand the actual mechanism by which it works doesn't mean there isn't a mechanism: good scientists know how little they really know, and are open to new knowledge and discoveries.

I absolutely agree with this. That is why claims made by reflexologists have been investigated numerous times. However, the evidence thus far shows no benefit to reflexology beyond placebo. And while there is a huge amount we certainly don't know about the human body, the peripheral nervous system is quite well understood. There has been no evidence found to substantiate the claims by William Fitzgerald (the founder of reflexology) that ten vertical bands of "bioelectric energy" run through the body in corrsepondence with the fingers and toes.

JustMary wrote: »

If it was just placebo effect, I'd have expected the same from eccanacia (urg, bad spelling there!), but I don't have one.

Unfortunately the placebo effect is not as straightforward as that. For an excellent account of the placebo effect, highly recommend the book "Bad Science" by Dr. Ben Goldacre. A shorter introduction to the placebo can be found on the website I mentioned earlier, Skeptoid: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4151

For analysis of the effectiveness of the placebo effect, and it's misrepresentation I recommend: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200105243442106

and

http://mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD003974/frame.html

JustMary wrote: »

Re someone's question about quackery: I don't think that reflexology is any more morally repugnant than the fact that that doctors get paid even when they misdiagnose people or give advice that doesn't meet accepted standards. Eg, a friend of mine went to the GP with a pregnant woman who didn't have much English. The GP's instructions included drinking Guinness every day, to keep her iron levels up. Suffice to say that they found another GP - and that they still had to pay the initial incompetent one.

There are certainly problems in the health service. People, as you say are individual. Unfortunately this means incompetent people can be found in every profession. But this does nothing to prove the effectiveness of reflexology.

JustMary wrote: »

It would be nice if we could apply strict science to all health services, but I'm afraid humans are just a bit too individual.

I think you're confusing regulation and science, here.

dapto1

Head The Wall wrote: »

The same can't be said for alternative medicine, some people believe it works some don't. So you can't come along and say 100% that it doesn't work without trying it.

Actually, I went for reflexology (and homeopathy, and acupuncture) for asthma and sinus problems when I was a teenager. They didn't work. But I haven't brought this up (only now because you have directly mentioned it) because I place a lot more trust in systematic analyses than anecdotal evidence.

Head The Wall wrote: »

I am open to the idea that it may work for some people where you are straight out 100% adamant that it achieves absolutely nothing for no one. It's be easier to prove that God exists than what you are implying

I'm not saying it achieves nothing for anyone. Foot massages feel nice, and they definitely could help in reducing stress. And that is completely harmless. If people want to pay for their fantasy, then they have every right to (and I don't mean that in a sarcastic or pejorative way whatsoever). The danger is that a desperate person, justifiably frustrated by their or their loved one's lack of progress, turns away from medical attention and tries to use pseudoscience. Brian Dunning put it well:

This is the central risk of reflexology: that a believer, or even a naive victim, will turn to reflexology in the belief that it can treat an illness, at the expense of proper medical treatment. This delay of treatment can result in serious injury or death.

And as I'm quoting him, here's another one which puts it well:

There are an endless number of crazy, unsupported claims out there, and I'm not going to go try them all without hesitation (considering that it would bankrupt me; reflexology certainly isn't free). If there was a hypothesis behind reflexology, even some remote suggestion as to how or why it might have a medicinal effect, then it's something I'd be glad to take a look at. That's the problem with almost all of these quack quasi-medical schemes: None of them offer any hypothesis or explanation of exactly what they do or how they do it. Almost none: A lot of them say that it involves some form of "energy". Well, sorry; made-up definitions for scientific sounding words like "energy" do not constitute a hypothesis, and certainly not a theory. Present me with a claim behind reflexology that can be measured and tested, and I'll commit right now to trying it.