|
Author
|
Topic: Holistic Doctors, and medicine
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
|
Message 76 of 304 (417496)
08-21-2007 10:48 AM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by purpledawn
08-21-2007 10:27 AM
|
|
Re: Herbs, Medicine, or Natural
quote:
It is strange that when one is skeptical about taking herbs or vitamins, that when things start to clear up; we wonder was it the herbs and vitamins or did it just clear up on its own. We don't seem to say that when taking medicines. I wonder if the same comments were made when medicines were introduced to the skeptical.
We know when things don't clear up with medicines, herbs, or vitamins; but when things start to get better we aren't always sure what is doing the trick. Depends on where our trust lies.
Depends upon what our trust is based upon, I would say.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by purpledawn, posted 08-21-2007 10:27 AM | | purpledawn has not replied |
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
|
|
Message 77 of 304 (417497)
08-21-2007 10:52 AM
|
Reply to: Message 69 by riVeRraT
08-21-2007 10:32 AM
|
|
Re: Muscle testing
It is complete crap. Pseudoscientific woo-woo bullshit quackery of the highest degree. Applied Kinesiology: Phony Muscle-Testing for "Allergies" and "Nutrient Deficiencies" | Quackwatch
Although the claims of applied kinesiology are so far removed from scientific reality that testing them might seem a waste of time, competent researchers have subjected the muscle-testing procedures to several well-designed controlled tests and demonstrated what should be obvious to rational persons. Some have found no difference in muscle response from one substance to another, while others have found no difference between the results with test substances and with placebos. One study, for example, found that three practitioners testing eleven subjects made significantly different assessments; their diagnoses of nutritional deficiencies did not correspond to the nutrient levels obtain by blood serum analysis; and that the responses to nutrient substances did not significantly differ from responses to placebos . Another study found no effect from administering the nutrients "expected" to strengthen a muscle diagnosed as "weak" by AK practitioners." Other researchers who conducted an elaborate double-blind trial concluded that "muscle response appeared to be a random phenomenon." Another study showed that suggestion can influence the outcome of muscle-testing. During part of this experiment, college students were told that chewing M&M candies would give them instant energy that would probably make them test stronger.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 69 by riVeRraT, posted 08-21-2007 10:32 AM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 94 by riVeRraT, posted 08-23-2007 11:39 AM | | nator has not replied |
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
quote:
You can say nothing moe than yur results, but it won't prove that faith in these measures is false.
That's where replication comes in, mike. Lots of different stabs at the issue by many researchers, and eventually a picture begins to form. Is it perfect knowledge? No. Is it proven to be a reliable way to figure out what generally works and what doesn't? Yes.
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
|
|
Message 79 of 304 (417500)
08-21-2007 11:02 AM
|
Reply to: Message 72 by riVeRraT
08-21-2007 10:41 AM
|
|
Re: Herbs, Medicine, or Natural
quote:
This whole holistic thing relies on you believing it will work, before you even get treatment. I just got off the phone with my holistic doctor, and that was her exact words.
She's a quack then. What she just told you is that it is your fault the "treatment" she prescribed isn't working because you don't have enough faith in it. She also just described her "treatement" as a placebo. I hope you didn't drop too much cash on her herbs and appointment, rat. Real drugs have an effect on the body regardless of if the person believes that they will work or not. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 72 by riVeRraT, posted 08-21-2007 10:41 AM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: 12-09-2001
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
quote:
I have hayfever and take chlorphenamine maleate. Apprently works on hayfever, skin allergies, food allergies, pet allergies, mould spores etc.
Does this mean, in your opinion, it will certainly work on an individual with one of these problems?
No. But it has been demonstrated that is will help a majority of people with these problems better than placebo.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 73 by mike the wiz, posted 08-21-2007 10:43 AM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3485 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: 04-25-2004
|
|
|
Message 81 of 304 (417502)
08-21-2007 11:10 AM
|
Reply to: Message 50 by molbiogirl
08-20-2007 11:40 AM
|
|
Not a Contest
Buz writes: Diseases like cystic fibrosis, lupus, epilepsy, Huntington's, hemophelia, et al can all be helped to some degree by proper nutrition and wholistic healtcare, some to a significant degree. quote:
Link? I found no research to support this.
Cystic Fibrosis FoundationOver the years, some research have indicated that people can gain health benefits by increasing their intake of antioxidants, either by eating more fruit and vegetables or by taking supplements. We don't have to choose only one type of health care to manage our health. We do what works for us, but proper nutrition is considered an important part of healing.
"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 50 by molbiogirl, posted 08-20-2007 11:40 AM | | molbiogirl has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 97 by nator, posted 08-23-2007 5:57 PM | | purpledawn has replied |
|
mike the wiz
Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: 05-24-2003
|
|
|
Message 82 of 304 (417503)
08-21-2007 11:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 78 by nator
08-21-2007 10:56 AM
|
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
Lots of different stabs at the issue by many researchers, and eventually a picture begins to form. Is it perfect knowledge? No. I quite agree. It is not perfect knowledge. A picture beginning to form is infact a colloquial-irrelevancy, and from thereon you have opinion. You can't just drop parsimony when it suits. There are factors which logic dictates, which experimentation can never account for. An example can be given; Prayer, in faith, to God - who will respond, is by it's definition impossible to replicate without assuming a number of factors; 1. That God will play ball. 2. That God's answer isn't what we were expecting. etc. You might handwave these objections away, but, science only has credence because of logic. When science is proved effective, then what it really does is it gives logic credence. Since logic has credence, and had credence before science, through epistemological inquiry, then we are obliged to observe logic, and what is says, above science. These factors I have mentioned, are logical. There are many such like problems that "science" which is generally inductive-based, is weak to. On these grounds shraff - you can never win. You can never prove our faith is false, no matter how badly you want science to do that for you. Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given. Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 78 by nator, posted 08-21-2007 10:56 AM | | nator has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 88 by ringo, posted 08-21-2007 1:53 PM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
mike the wiz
Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: 05-24-2003
|
|
|
Message 83 of 304 (417504)
08-21-2007 11:23 AM
|
Reply to: Message 78 by nator
08-21-2007 10:56 AM
|
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
The picture that forms. What is that exactly? That under certain conditioned circumstances, you get certain results, based on the conditions ONLY. Anything outside those tests, are not under evaluation, nor are they regulated by potentially faulty implications. Such as; If God answered prayer, then he'd get better. What is actually proved, is that the experiments work under their own rules. But you Shraff, blindly treat them as some kind of unbreakable absolutely conclusive activity. Science is tentative is it not? Even the scientists must agree with everything I have said. They know they have to.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 78 by nator, posted 08-21-2007 10:56 AM | | nator has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 100 by nator, posted 08-23-2007 6:14 PM | | mike the wiz has replied |
|
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2669 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: 06-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 84 of 304 (417510)
08-21-2007 12:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 61 by riVeRraT
08-21-2007 8:48 AM
|
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
Sounds like a cure for a chronic disease. It is one thing to produce results in vitro. It is quite another to produce results in vivo. If it were true that in vitro = in vivo, cancer would be cured (because many things have "worked" on cancer in vitro). Now. On to homeopathy.
Homeopathic products are made from minerals, botanical substances, and several other sources. If the original substance is soluble, one part is diluted with either nine or ninety-nine parts of distilled water and/or alcohol and shaken vigorously (succussed); if insoluble, it is finely ground and pulverized in similar proportions with powdered lactose (milk sugar). One part of the diluted medicine is then further diluted, and the process is repeated until the desired concentration is reached. Dilutions of 1 to 10 are designated by the Roman numeral X (1X = 1/10, 3X = 1/1,000, 6X = 1/1,000,000). Similarly, dilutions of 1 to 100 are designated by the Roman numeral C (1C = 1/100, 3C = 1/1,000,000, and so on). Most remedies today range from 6X to 30X, but products of 30C or more are marketed. A 30X dilution means that the original substance has been diluted 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times. Assuming that a cubic centimeter of water contains 15 drops, this number is greater than the number of drops of water that would fill a container more than 50 times the size of the Earth. Imagine placing a drop of red dye into such a container so that it disperses evenly. Homeopathy's "law of infinitesimals" is the equivalent of saying that any drop of water subsequently removed from that container will possess an essence of redness. Robert L. Park, Ph.D., a prominent physicist who is executive director of The American Physical Society, has noted that since the least amount of a substance in a solution is one molecule, a 30C solution would have to have at least one molecule of the original substance dissolved in a minimum of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of water. This would require a container more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth. Home Page | Quackwatch Allow me to summarize: Homeopathic "medicines" are tap water.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by riVeRraT, posted 08-21-2007 8:48 AM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2669 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: 06-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 85 of 304 (417511)
08-21-2007 1:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 79 by nator
08-21-2007 11:02 AM
|
|
Re: Herbs, Medicine, or Natural
rat said:
This whole holistic thing relies on you believing it will work, before you even get treatment. I just got off the phone with my holistic doctor, and that was her exact words. Well. At least she was honest.
Real drugs have an effect on the body regardless of if the person believes that they will work or not. Good point! (pause) But, you know, the more I think about it ... maybe if I believe, REALLY BELIEVE, then that cyanide I just swallowed won't hurt me!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 79 by nator, posted 08-21-2007 11:02 AM | | nator has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 87 by mike the wiz, posted 08-21-2007 1:45 PM | | molbiogirl has not replied | | | Message 91 by Taz, posted 08-21-2007 9:02 PM | | molbiogirl has not replied |
|
mike the wiz
Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: 05-24-2003
|
|
|
Message 86 of 304 (417514)
08-21-2007 1:34 PM
|
Reply to: Message 75 by nator
08-21-2007 10:45 AM
|
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
The reason anecdotal evidence is meaningless in science is that personal experience is extremely likely to be riddled with emotion and subjective impressions. I already know why anecdotal evidence isn't assumed to automatically be true. This doesn't prove that science insists that anecdotal evidence is necessarily meaningless. I think you want science to insist that it is meaningless. - The real problem is this; what if the subject's story was true? Then what? Since many will be true - it proves logically that science itself isn't perfect. That's why logic doesn't say that testimony is irrelevant. That's exactly the problem with the limits of science. You can't just stop at science, otherwise you can make the mistake of thinking that something outside of science is false or irrelevant, simply because they can never be proved scientifically. The process of logic never stops with "science says". It just becomes more complicated. Think about it. You say you will only accept that which is evidenced, yet here, when somebody only has their testimony as evidence, even if their testimony is true, it is unacceptable. True = unacceptable therefore regarded as false false= unacceptable therefore regarded as false That's a nice neat way of making it impossible for something to have credence, even if it's true. it also seems obtuse. By all means disbelieve testimony, but that won't make it any less true, or relevant. Truth doesn't stop at science. Science doesn't own truth. Logic allows that testimony is relevant. Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 75 by nator, posted 08-21-2007 10:45 AM | | nator has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 98 by nator, posted 08-23-2007 6:00 PM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
mike the wiz
Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: 05-24-2003
|
Re: Herbs, Medicine, or Natural
But, you know, the more I think about it ... maybe if I believe, REALLY BELIEVE, then that cyanide I just swallowed won't hurt me! It's true that many many people could use the "believe then see" card as an ad hoc means of escape. But again, it's very vague to simply handwave away that which is inherently dependent upon faith because so many propositions are proved nonsense. Infact belief in God is the core element of the bible, for example. The NT in particular, is all about faith and it is inherent to it. which means that it would be a pre-hoc error to say that bible belief, for example = false. Your example is that of reductio ad absurdum. "If believe then see ....then this silly example". The problem with the implication is that it is vague to say the least. I could give an example of believing you can walk a tightrope, and indeed, this would stem your fears. So we can't dismiss ALL belief based on ONE absurdum. Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 85 by molbiogirl, posted 08-21-2007 1:06 PM | | molbiogirl has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
mike the wiz writes: You can never prove our faith is false, no matter how badly you want science to do that for you. Come down off your cross, Saint Mikey. Nobody's trying to disprove your faith.
“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels -------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 82 by mike the wiz, posted 08-21-2007 11:15 AM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3485 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: 04-25-2004
|
|
|
Message 89 of 304 (417532)
08-21-2007 5:01 PM
|
Reply to: Message 72 by riVeRraT
08-21-2007 10:41 AM
|
|
Re: Herbs, Medicine, or Natural
quote:
This whole holistic thing relies on you believing it will work, before you even get treatment. I just got off the phone with my holistic doctor, and that was her exact words.
I don't really understand the holistic approach. I can't get a grip on what it is supposed to be doing. The naturopathic approach works on giving your body the nutrition it needs to heal itself. That I can understand. I realize our minds can have an effect on our health, but it shouldn't have to help the "remedy". 
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 72 by riVeRraT, posted 08-21-2007 10:41 AM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3319 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 90 of 304 (417556)
08-21-2007 9:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 64 by riVeRraT
08-21-2007 10:07 AM
|
|
Re: Wholistic The Only Safe And Effective Way
I wonder... does anyone here know if being allergic to certain things, like strawberry and dog, is genetic or not? As far as I know, I'm not allergic to anything at all. I'm not even allergic to poison ivy. Just blows my mind that so many people have such severe reactions to certain things.
Disclaimer: Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style. He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 64 by riVeRraT, posted 08-21-2007 10:07 AM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2