 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / January 2008Researcher Criticizes Alternative Medicine
This comes out of Maryland....interesting read--seems he isn't getting the support he thought his book would bring him. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/health/bal-to.hs.alternative24jan24,0,1454755.story > This comes out of Maryland....interesting read--seems he isn't getting > the support he thought his book would bring him. > > http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/health/bal-to.hs.alternative24jan24,... Interesting that he said: "The world of alternative medicine is populated largely by believers, but Bausell, 65, is not one of them. He said he took the job with Berman to get back into the gold standard of scientific research: randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials. That he would be testing alternative medicine didn't matter." What does testing one poison against another poison for some marginal benefit produce? Vioxx and other bougus cures which kill more than benefit an ill person. In alternative medicine one has to be interested in the "whole" person and just some part of the person. Health, and the restoration of health, cannot be measured by the "gold" standard for the poisons we call drugs/medicines. That guy is a true incompetent with no apparent training or understanding of what alternative medicine is and can do. DrCee An alternative proponent promoting the knowledge of Orthopathic medicine. >> This comes out of Maryland....interesting read--seems he isn't getting >> the support he thought his book would bring him. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > benefit produce? Vioxx and other bougus cures which kill more than > benefit an ill person. Read for content, Chuckie -- he's not doing drug v. drug trials. > In alternative medicine one has to be interested in the "whole" person > and just some part of the person. Health, and the restoration of > health, cannot be measured by the "gold" standard for the poisons we > call drugs/medicines. That guy is a true incompetent with no apparent > training or understanding of what alternative medicine is and can do. That's a nice idea. The question remains, "how can we reliably tell if it's working well enough to trust it?" -- for any value of "it." The question is the same whether you're talking about a "system" for beating the casino, a method for increasing crop yield, or a method for reducing fractures. So, Cee, how do you assess the effectiveness of your interventions to distinguish between their effects and extraneous influences? | Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable | | e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. | | There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. | +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+ > In message <f10b33e0-8952-49e7-a70a-fa110ab9f...@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Let us refer to the medical approach of Sauerbruch and Hermansdorffer circa 1928. Lupus vulgaris was, and still is, incurrable by allopathic treatments. There is no available poison to cure the condition. We know the long term results of no treatment and treatment. Therefore, there is no need for a control group or a placebo group in a study. Following Sauerbruch and Hermansdorffer's protcol, 446 out of 450 patients, all properly diagnosed and documented, walked out of their clinic free of Lupus vulgaris. I think those kind of results do prove the value of alternative medical thought and provide the kind of results we all would desire for whatever medical condition we might be suffering from. As you can see no placebo controlled, randomized, up your a.s, behind your back, expensive research was needed to find the truth. DrCee Not a pharma shill ( I am not here to lie to you or deceive you ) >> So, Cee, how do you assess the effectiveness of your interventions >> to distinguish between their effects and extraneous influences? Ummm -- you didn't answer the question. How do you assess the effectiveness of various interventions? Surely you're aware that there is some disagreement between (for instance) homeopathists and naturopaths on the proper treatment for just about anything, right? So how is one to choose between them? It's an open question. If you don't have an answer (perhaps because you don't think that there's any need in the first place) just say so. > Let us refer to the medical approach of Sauerbruch and Hermansdorffer > circa 1928. > Lupus vulgaris was, and still is, incurrable by allopathic > treatments. There is no available poison to cure the condition. Actually, it seems to respond quite nicely to antibiotics. There isn't a lot of current literature on the subject thanks to tuberculosis being rather rare in Western countries today (which is another subject entirely.) > We know the long term results of no treatment and treatment. > Therefore, there is no need for a control group or a placebo group in > a study. Sure there is. For instance, your treatment could result in lifelong impotence or an aversion to broccoli. Without a control group, it's much harder to tell. It's also harder to tell if you're getting false positives on reported improvement (the Hawthorne Effect.) > Following Sauerbruch and Hermansdorffer's protcol, 446 out of 450 > patients, all properly diagnosed and documented, walked out of their > clinic free of Lupus vulgaris. Some accounts say lupus vulgaris, some say alveolar tuberculosis. A bit hard to tell which since the case notes, etc. haven't been preserved. > I think those kind of results do prove the value of alternative > medical thought and provide the kind of results we all would desire > for whatever medical condition we might be suffering from. I'm not trying to argue the "value of alternative medical thought," I'm asking how "alternative medical thought" assesses proposed treatments, detects errors, and makes changes towards improved outcomes. > As you can see no placebo controlled, randomized, up your a.s, behind > your back, expensive research was needed to find the truth. If your answer is, "we don't need to do any of that because of our superior intellects" or "we don't need to do any of that because of the intuitive obviousness of our methods" or any other reason why empirical investigation isn't needed, by all means just say so. | Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable | | e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. | | There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. | +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+ >In message ><f10b33e0-8952-49e7-a70a-fa110ab9f867@q39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >So, Cee, how do you assess the effectiveness of your interventions >to distinguish between their effects and extraneous influences? Oh, he doesn't have to bother with *that*. He just goes back to his Holy Writ: the writings of orthopaths from the 19th Century. There's nothing more to be said about health, really. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.