I've often suspected a connection between my general nonreceptivity to religion and my general apathy towards drugs.
Hmm. My very best "religious experiences," quite a bit better than listening to a fantastically good organist at Easter services, were LSD- or mescaline-fueled. A "glimpse of the other" in either case.
As you can view in the link to that old thread I provided, I am talking about people who were prescribed comfrey by naturopaths or who ingested comfrey leaves in the belief that they were theraputic who subsequently suffered liver failure due to the known liver toxins present in comfrey.
Your claim that these folks simply ingested comfrey leaves is bogus. Read your own cited reports carefully and you will discover that in none of these cases was it established that it was leaves alone and all cases were questionable in one way or another.
questionable aspects writes:
The authors suggest that the patient's protein deficient diet could have played a contributory role; they attributed comfrey as a possible cause due to the temporal sequence of events. In a separate review of potential risk to consuming comfrey published in the Australian Medical Journal (15), the author declined to consider this case in his report because "there is some controversy surrounding this case."
Although some cases of liver damage may have been due to something other than the herbs, in most instances, other sources of the disorder were not evident or were deemed improbable.
Based on the Belgium recommended limit for PAs in herbs at 1 ppm, it would require ingestion of 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of an allowed herb to yield 1 mg (the smallest amount cited as toxic for comfrey ingestion), so the limit set would appear to be quite safe, in terms of any potential for acute reactions. Normal daily intake of herbs is usually only a few grams, so there is a large margin of safety;
A homeopathic doctor recommended comfrey tea. She consumed as many as ten cups per day in addition to taking comfrey pills by the handful,....
Btw, tea can be either from leaves or root. Nothing substantiates that a reasonable amount of comphrey leaf is dangerous. If the FDA were 1/100th as pickey about the horrendous life threatening pharmaceuticals as they were about the naturals, we'd all be safer.
Again the controversy over this natural product is all about $$$, power and control.
I pay a lot more attention to what I eat than I ever did before. ........There is absolutely no question that I am much healthier today...........
Those two phrases are are the bottom line to the good health life minus the pharmaceuticals. Now go for the real long term satisfying high Add to the mix, daily doses of Biblical principles and a one time shot of Holy Spirit baptism/conversion/spiritual birth like bike stuntman Evel Conevel who once thought he had all one could desire recently did. :cool:
quote:Those two phrases are are the bottom line to the good health life minus the pharmaceuticals.
Just so that we understand each other, I want to make clear that I'm not condemning responsible use of pharmaceuticals. I'm simply agreeing with you that they're easily abused, and not just by the patients who take them but also by the doctors who prescribe them.
My sister is an RN and she would also agree on this point. She knows doctors whom she suspects have prescribed things more because of the benefits that will accrue to them from the pharmaceutical companies than for any benefits to the patient. Also, she complains about some of the drug ads on TV, saying that people will go to their doctor and say "I want Celebrex" or whatever and the doctor, in order to keep his or her patient happy, will prescribe it even though he may believe that the patient would be just as well off with a non-prescription pain reliever or even a change in diet.
The bottom line is that doctors and drug companies are just as likely to be dishonest and corrupt as anyone else.
(...)for the $$$, for power/control and for undermining the real remedies for disease
(..)the good health life minus the pharmaceuticals
Not that I disagree with you Buzsaw. I think that many people are dependant on pharmaceuticals when they do not need to be. I am more curious to know if you reject all pharmaceuticals or a general refusal of medications unless a health situation requires it?
My only reason for asking is regarding certain specific medications that I am familiar with because of my job. The examples I immediatly thought of are epilepsy, diabetes, asthma, and infections. I am sure I can think of more, but what I am hoping to show is that some medications do save lives, and do not have an herbal alternative. The people/situations I am thinking of are not your average med abuser who walks into a clinic - I mean like severe epileptics who, without medication to control it, would simply die.
Is your rejection of medication a more general attitude or a complete rejection of all pharmaceuticals? As I say, I pretty much mirror your opinion, but I am curious about the details. :)
One issue I have with Buz is that he irrationally views the pharmeceutical/conventional medicine industry as money-loving, entirely self-serving and evil but considers the highly profitable nutritional supplement industry as operating only through the goodness of their hearts.
I very much agree with his and your position that the drug manufacurers have far too much influence and that our healthcare system has encouraged people to try to find health in a pill instead of making much more difficult but also more effective and cheaper lifestyle changes.
In general, I think profit motive is a terrible way to drive healthcare considerations.
But anyway, I keep asking Buz to tell me the annual earnings figure for the nutritional supplement/herbal drug industry because it is just as profit-driven and self-serving as the conventional drug companies. This is why they fight so hard against any law that would require them to demonstrate that their products are safe and effective. It would cut into their profits.
Buz is living in fantasy land if he thinks that the nutritional supplement industry cares a whit about his or anybody else's health. They care about money, just like any other big corporate industry.
Since we all know that Buz will never look up the information, I did:
The estimated 2006 earnings of the nutritional supplement/herbal drug industry was just under 6 billion dollars.
quote:...I keep asking Buz to tell me the annual earnings figure for the nutritional supplement/herbal drug industry because it is just as profit-driven and self-serving as the conventional drug companies.
Indeed it is, as is any profit-driven enterprise. I agree with you that we desperately need to move away from profit-driven health care.
I'm not all that well-informed about the controversy over supplements and the companies that produce them. I know there is one, and one of the sticking points, I believe, is over whether the FDA should approve supplements before they can be marketed. Is that correct? If so, I say yes, the FDA most certainly should have to approve them.
But however Buz might feel about supplements vs. pharmaceuticals (and I don't doubt what you're saying), I inferred an agreement between us that the first and best method for most people to achieve good health is through diet and exercise. That includes actually eating the foods that contain the nutrients, not taking a supplement. If the supplements are any good at all, they should be used as just that: a supplement for situations where it's difficult to maintain a good diet.
quote:I'm not all that well-informed about the controversy over supplements and the companies that produce them. I know there is one, and one of the sticking points, I believe, is over whether the FDA should approve supplements before they can be marketed. Is that correct? If so, I say yes, the FDA most certainly should have to approve them.
Right now, the nutritional supplement industry is nearly completely unregulated. The industry has fought any law that would require them to prove their products' efficacy and safety. There is no standard for potentcy or dosage of most herbs. There is little known of herb/herb, herb/synthetic, or herb/food interactions. There is a great deal we don't know about herbal medications, including what chemical compounds are in them and what their effects might be, if any.
quote:But however Buz might feel about supplements vs. pharmaceuticals (and I don't doubt what you're saying), I inferred an agreement between us that the first and best method for most people to achieve good health is through diet and exercise.
Sure. He's never had my disagreement on that point.
However, he has also claimed that for every and any affliction one might suffer from, there is a "natural" or herbal treatment or cure.
I wonder what he thinks the herbal cure for epilepsy or cancer is?
quote:That includes actually eating the foods that contain the nutrients, not taking a supplement. If the supplements are any good at all, they should be used as just that: a supplement for situations where it's difficult to maintain a good diet.
This is where he equivocates.
I agree that "nutritional supplements" should actually be nutritive.
But some things, like comfrey, that he calls "nutritional supplements" have no nutritive value and are more accurately classified as "herbal drugs".
The lobbyists wrote the law to lump Citamin C and comfrey together under the same term, "nutritional supplement", to avoid having to show that their products are safe and effective.
The estimated 2006 earnings of the nutritional supplement/herbal drug industry was just under 6 billion dollars. Yes, Buz, that's billion, with a "b".
LOL. That's pocket parking meter dimes compared to the pharms. Pfizer alone, just one of the hundreds of pharms did 52 billion (also with a "b") in one year. The entire nutritional supplement/herbal industry only did in 2006 what just one of the lesser pharms did in 2004.
My guess is that the entire pharm industry does over half a trillion in a year and possibly a trillion or more.