Sequel Thread To Holistic Doctors, and medicine

Buz, I'd like to address some things you said in the other thread, in Message #302

quote:

---

The beneficial enzymes which enhance digestion are no longer alive and functioning. The properties of drinking water is "changed" when separated from contaminants. So are the properties of milk, vegetables and other foods when cooked and processed.

---

Enzymes are never alive. Enzymes are protein molecules.Also, the only enzymes that the human body uses for metabolic purposes are produced by the body. Any enzymes that are ingested are denatured the moment they hit the hydrochloric acid in the stomach, just like any other protein.In other words, they are digested.And yes, milk and other foods are molecularly changed when exposed to heat, acid, bacterial fermentation, exposed to cold, exposed to air after picking, etc. etc. Sometimes, cooking food increases its nutritional value in whole or in part, as in carrots and tomatoes. Sauerkraut has far more bioavailable vitamin C than fresh cabbage.

quote:

---

Try to make good wine out of pasturized grape juice. LOL.

---

That is an entirely different thing, Buz, and has nothing to do with enzymes. The microorganisms present in unpasteurized grape juice intended for the production of wine convert the sugars present in the juice to alcohol in an anaerobic fermentation process. Once the sugar is all gone or the alcohol content gets to a certain level, they all die. If you've ever had an unfiltered bottle of wine, some of the sediment in the bottle is dead yeast cells.The reason you can't make wine from heated grape juice is because all of the yeasts have died, not because you are damaging any enzymes.

quote:

---

Our "Solu C" Maximum Living C vites have some properties combined in the suppliment so as to make the C more effective for greater antioxidant potential. These are 1000 MGs of vitamin C as calcium absorbate, escorbyl palmitate, magnesium ascorbate, zinc ascorbate, and rosehips. They contain 100 MGs of bioflavinoids from lemon, grape and citris skins/rinds, 50MG of rutin from buckwheat and 50 MG of green tea from camellia sinesis leaf. I suppose the reason for all this is to make the suppliment more of a concentrate of some of the properties in the orange so as to increase the antioxident capability of the suppliment.

---

So, how do you know all of this is true, Buz?What sort of professionals figured out all of this stuff was good for health?

Ah, so I didn't have the full story. Thanks for the correction.

quote:

---

I kind of got the impression that my writing is a logical mess and that I'm disseminating a lot of misinformation. Unfortunately some of my sources have not been faultless and I have to admit that this is the case. But I'm fine with being made to sharpen up, I'm going to try to work on that.

---

This attitude is very rare here at EvC, I can assure you. I am sure I speak for many of us here when I say that you are to be admired for maintaining it.Way, way back in the day, when I first started participating here, I got slapped around a bit, too. If "sharpening up" is what you'd like to do with your debate skills, this place will definitely help you with that!I will also second Rat's comment that you write beautifully.

quote:

---

No one has ever proved that there is a chemical imbalance involved in mental illness

---

Untrue.For example, there is tons of evidence to suggest that schizophrenia involves chemical imbalances in the brain.What we don't know yet is the cause of most chemical imbalances. There are indications that there are genetic causes for atypical brain chemistry, too.

From the wiki on schizophrenia:There are lots of references to peer reviewed papers within the whole entry, so you can have a looksee at the original research if you like.

quote:

---

It's like saying that because you took aspirin and your headache went away, your headache must have been caused by an aspirin deficiency.

---

No, it isn't.Glutamine and dopamine are neurotransmitters which are part of brain biochemistry, while acetylsalicylic acid is not a normal part of human biochemistry.

quote:

---

The medications discussed in your citation have been deemed by someone, at some point, to have a therapeutic effect on schizophrenia.

---

Well, no, it doesn't really work like that. Some scientist doesn't wake up one day and decides that the above is true.Again, you seem to not understand the rigor involved in the scientific process. Successful, respected scientists do not just throw unfounded speculations around, willy nilly, and expect their collegues to just accept them. The scientific community is, in general, very conservative when it comes to accepting new claims, and only after replication will a claim start to be accepted.

quote:

---

Therefore schizophrenia must be a dopamine deficiency. Or a glutamate deficiency. The truth is that no one really knows; this is all guesswork.

---

This is a strawman of the information I provided. The actual science is not stated anywhere near as strongly as you just characterized it.The evidence indicates that schizophrenics consistently display very particular differences in their brain biochemistry compared to non-schizophrenics.

quote:

---

The brain attempts to maintain homeostasis by reducing the numbers of receptors for whatever neurotransmitter is flooding it due to drug intake.

---

Your evidence for this is what?

quote:

---

You set up the clinical trial as the gold standard

---

Yes.That's because we have learned

quote:

---

(keeping in mind that studies can be flawed)

---

Yes, but there are systems in place to minimize the incidence of flaws, and also to eventualy weed them out if they do get through.That's why cold fusion, free energy machines, and the canals on Mars were investigated, then rejected by the scientific process.Anecdote, by contrast, has no systems whatsoever to deal with error, or bias, or mistakes, and as such is rife with error, bias, and mistakes.

quote:

---

With "the preponderance of medical opinion" being as often wrong as it is right,

---

You soupport for this asserion would be...?

quote:

---

It can take a long time for a new idea to be accepted.

---

So, how much randomized, double-blind research do the organizations and companies that promote and sell and market these alternatives to mainstream medicine fund?Are they careful to not prescribe any substance or treatment without it being tested thorouughly first?what are the results of those studies? What new discoveries have they made that have been replicated?Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

But what evils do you expect to find in vitamins, exactly?

---

How about being prescribed a bunch of vitamins (or herbal drugs, or topical treatments, etc.) for a disease or condition that those vitamins have not been demonstrated to have any effect upon?

quote:

---

By the way, who has convinced you that naturopaths are so very dangerous? (As opposed to, say, doctors prescribing drugs with risks of side effects that can include death.)

---

Naturopaths have prescribed drugs with risks of side effects that can include death.Moreover, they can cause people to dely getting effective treatment for diseases until it is too late.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

"If we doctors threw all our medicines into the sea, it would be that much better for our patients and that much worse for the fishes." Oliver Wendell Holmes, M.D.

---

Tell me, what is the non-Allopathic method used to treat anaphylactic shock brought on by a severe allergic reaction to a bee sting?What is the non-Allopathic way to cure a kidney infection so advanced there was blood in the urine? Or severe tonsilitis so bad that the tonsils were completely covered with white blood cells?If it wasn't for mainstream medicine, I would be dead at the age of 6, or I'd have permenent kidney damage from the age of 25. Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I think the diagnose-and-prescribe philosophy is wrong, when "prescribe" almost always means drugs.

---

My mother in law has rapid-onset Altzheimer's disease and bipolar disorder. Before she was diagnosed, she was a raving paranoid delusional lunatic. She had thrown out all most all of the family photographs in her posession. She was violent towards my 83 year old father in law who is frail and gets around with a walker and an oxygen tank. She stopped paying her bills and taking her other medications, so her heat and phone were turned off. The police had been called to the house and she screamed and yelled at them and threw furniture. She was dangerous to herself and her husband. she hated all of her sons and accused them of trying to kill her. She was also miserable and afraid.All of this happened within a couple of months.After her diagnosis and going on those horrible, evil medications that you hate so much and tell everyone that they should avoid them like the plague, she is now nonviolent, makes jokes, cooks, watches TV, is loving and wonderful towards everyone in her family like she used to be, and in general is very happy now. Oh, and the rapid progression of her Altzheimer's is has been slowed due to those terrible medications, too.There. That's my anecdote. Seems to run completely counter to your stories, doesn't it? Which one of us wins the battle of the anecdote?

quote:

---

Sometimes drugs and surgery are necessary, I've never denied that here.

---

That is not the impression you are making.Not at all.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

People take risks with their lives; whether smoking, alcohol, driving, sports, etc. Unless we are unconscious adults supposedly have an option of what risk they will take, even when it comes to medical procedures.

---

ND's and other non-scientific practitioners and manufactuers generate fabulous profits while encouraging people to take often completely unknown risks with their health.

quote:

---

I have agreed many times since the beginning of this discussion that laws, procedures, etc. need to be put in place to protect the average person from quacks. But I don't agree that the natural approach should be abandoned or made inaccessible.

---

If a natural approach to any particular disease or condition is shown to be effective and safe, as many have, then they become part of mainstream medicine. If an herb or procedure is demonstrated to be worthless, it absolutely should be abandoned or made inaccessable. The responsibility for demonstrating safety and efficacy should fall upon the manufacurers, and they should do so before they are permitted to profit.But why should the manufactuers and marketers of medicinal herbs, for example, be allowed to profit from the sale of their products before their products are demonstrated to be safe and effective?Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Studies can help to see through selling techniques, but studies don't always address the naturopathic ideas, which deal with giving the body what it needs to heal itself.

---

One of Naturopathy's central themes is the idea of the "vital force", a mystical energy force described by Canadian Naturopath Dr. Andrea Hornyak N.D thusly: Let us not also forget that Naturopathy reularly uses Homeopathy, a thoroughly debunked, utterly quack idea.Tell us again why Naturopathy should be given any credence whatsoever. Please.

quote:

---

Just as independent MD's have different philosophies in their practices, so do naturopaths.

---

The thing is, this "vital force" is a basic tenet of Natuopathy that, as far as I can tell, is taught as such in most, possibly all schools of Naturopathy. Disease occurs, according to Naturopathy, when the "Vital Force" is "out of balance". Naturopaths are supposed to be helping their patients "free" their "Vital Force" so that health and "balance" can be restored and maintained.What you seem to be saying is, "Some Naturopaths accept the concept of the 'Vital Force' as one of the long-standing, basic, core concepts of Naturopathy as taught by their schools, and some reject that very core concept."My question is, how can they reject that core concept and still remain effective? Does the "Vital Force" matter at all when evaluating Naturopathic practice or not? If not, then why do they teach it as a core concept? If so, then why hasn't your Naturopath mentioned it?Now, by contrast, I can't think of any schools of thought of various MD's who differ that widely on the basic tenets of science and medicine, can you? I mean, can you find a MD who doesn't really accept the Germ Theory of Disease, for example? That's how basic a concept this is.

quote:

---

Just like I can tell my MD I don't want surgery, I tell an ND I'm not interested in homeopathy.

---

But PD, the fact that schools of Naturopathy actually teach that Homeopathy actually has any value whatsoever should give you pause, should it not?Clearly, if even the masters, the people so knowledegable about Naturopathy that they teach at the university level don't seem to understand that Homeopathy is pure, easily-spotted quackery, what makes you think they can tell if anything else is pure bunk? How can you trust anything they say?It would be if our medical schools started teaching that psychic surgery was an effective way to remove someone's appendix, or that bacterial infections can be cured with a precisely-administered foot massage. Sure, you can reject the foot massage, but any rational person would also be thinking, "WTF are they thinking?? Have they lost their minds?"Would you let an MD who believed that those things really worked treat you for even a hangnail? I certainly wouldn't, and I'd promtly report him to the state medical licensing board. Edited by nator, : No reason given.