3 ms·

Your point seems to be that any efficacy of non-mainstream medical practices is so minor and marginal that it should all be ignored. Please understand my point

Your point seems to be that any efficacy of non-mainstream medical practices is so minor and marginal that it should all be ignored. Please understand my point is simply that a somewhat more balanced and open approach is warranted, as it may lead to more breakthrough discoveries like Artemisinin. To your points: 1) Artemisinin has scientific, peer reviewed research to support its claims. Yes, of course, I agree completely. But the point is that people who push the view that any medical practice that comes from the natural/traditional/alternative medicine world is by-definition false and harmful snake-oil are overlooking the fact that there are several important medical breakthroughs that had already been practiced in the medical fringes for years/decades/centuries before anyone in the mainstream got around to researching them. Other promising recent examples include: - the microbiome/neurology link [1], - the use of infrared light to treat neurodegenerative illnesses such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, MS and ALS [2], and - the use of low-intensity pulsed electromagnetic fields to shrink tumors [3]. 2) "The market" is provably an unreliable source of evidence given the historic success of snake oil and the popularity of many treatments later found to be dangerous. Note I said "at least somewhat suggestive of some degree of efficacy". Yes of course the market is fallible. It comprises at least 7 billion people, many of whom are delusional. But some of them are also discerning, intelligent, educated, science-literate people who, having exhausted all the options offered by mainstream medicine, seek an alternative and find it extremely beneficial. 3) Your friends absolutely cannot reliably detect a placebo effect. No one can, that's the whole reason to double blind tests. Sure, but I'm talking about cases where someone has suffered a chronic condition like migraine or CFS or fibromyalgia for many years, and has gone through 5, 10 or more treatments (both mainstream and natural), all without success, then finally they discover a treatment that permanently relieves their issue. Someone who has been through that (of which I am one) knows how to tell whether or not a treatment is effective. That said, the validity of your comment depends on exactly how you define 'placebo'. If you were to respond that these conditions are likely emotional in origin, and that the treatment just relieved the emotional issue, I would agree with you. However, in these cases there are have still be physiological symptoms that corrected after the treatment (which could be verified with pathology testing). It's at this point you risk descending into a debate about whether placebos can actually have physiological effects or are rather just imaginary feelings of wellbeing [4], at which point I lose interest in the discussion, as my only real concern is in getting well and helping others do the same, not wasting time in arguments over definitions. 4) Please don't misquote me. I did not say alternative medicine is "never more effective than a placebo". The statement was "almost none" which is true My apologies, that wasn't meant as a quote of yours, but rather a characterisation of much of the standard position I'm used to hearing from avowed "skeptics". But the problem with taking the "almost none" position with medicine is similar to the "almost all startups fail" position, which is that the exceptions, whilst they may be very rare, are also the most important cases. It's quite easy to be highly successful predicting the failure of startups; you just predict the failure of every new startup to launch, and achieve a > 99% success rate. But the problem is that you'll miss the next Google, Facebook, Airbnb etc. I.e., the times you're wrong are the times it matters most to be right. In my experience and observation, the case is very similar with medicine. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4662178/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4662178/ [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4707222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4707222/ [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3770670/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3770670/ [4] https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-harnessing-the-power-of-placebo-worthwhile-to-treat-anything/ https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-harnessing-the-power...

WhitneyLand 10y ago
>"people who push the view that any medical practice that >comes from the natural/traditional/alternative medicine >world is by-definition false and harmful snake-oil" I don't see prominent people in medicine saying this at all. They don't mind if you pull the medicine out of your ass, as long as it's efficacy and safety is tested with some rigor before advocating it. >people who, having exhausted all the options offered by >mainstream medicine, seek an alternative This practice is dangerous and has resulted in many negative outcomes. This is navigating through a minefield of unsupported claims, no quality evidence, anecdotes, and people trying to scam you. Very difficult without professional guidance. >"Almost all startups fail too..." False equivalence. Most failed startup don't kill people. Besides, no one said alt medicines shouldn't get a shot. The promising leads will continued to be followed. It just has had an extremely low hit rate.
- tomhoward 10y ago
  Just note the words/tone you use when addressing this topic: - They don't mind if you pull the medicine out of your ass - This practice is dangerous and has resulted in many negative outcomes. This is navigating through a minefield of unsupported claims, no quality evidence, anecdotes, and people trying to scam you. - Most failed startup don't kill people. Think about how much harder it makes it to get any proper research done, when this is the attitude held and promoted by people in the mainstream science community. It's all very well for people to look at the artemisinin case and say "yes well it's only thanks to modern science we could establish the efficacy of that". Which is true, but it's also only because of the people who avoided/resisted succumbing to the zealotry of mainstream science that it was able to get on the radar of mainstream science at all. In truth, serious harms and deaths as a direct result of alternative medicine are very few. The overwhelming majority of natural/alternative medicine involves educated people undertaking low-risk treatments for non-life-threatening conditions, and experiencing an improved quality of life as a result - hence they keep going back. Primary examples are: yoga, meditation, hypnotherapy, massage, muscular/structural adjustment (osteo/chiro) - all of which work to relieve stress/trauma and release the effects of stress, leading to a long-term reduction in stress-related illness; nutrition, probiotics and detoxification treatments to improve digestion and metabolism. That list probably captures over 95% of the natural/alternative medicine. Practitioners of these therapies are trained, registered, and answerable to regulators, professional bodies, insurers, clients, society and their own conscience. Unethical/incompetent practitioners are exposed and put out of business. Where serious harms or deaths occur, it is front page news. As for efficacy, for these treatments I maintain that the market is a strong indicator. People who experience benefits keep going back, and in growing numbers. But there are also plenty of studies that indicate that people who engage in the above practices enjoy better health over the long term. Here's a study that demonstrates improvements in neurotransmitter levels after 12 weeks of yoga [1]. Meanwhile, deaths just from prescription opioid painkillers numbered over 28000 in the US in 2014 alone [2]. My own experience makes me certain that at least some of those people could have avoided that fate had they undertaken some of the treatments mentioned above. Please have a think about what instinct is really driving you here. I understand it; I spent several years as a fanatic of Dawkins and his atheist/materialist mates; indeed that's actually what started me on the path to where I am now, because at least I (unlike many) picked up the importance of questioning everything and deeply examining all my own beliefs, assumptions and biases. But the attitude you're exhibiting here, and the fact that it is so dominant in the mainstream scientific world, is actually holding back the discovery of more breakthroughs like artemisinin, and thus is slowing the progress of science. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111147/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111147/ [2] https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/ https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/

WhitneyLand 10y ago

>"people who push the view that any medical practice that >comes from the natural/traditional/alternative medicine >world is by-definition false and harmful snake-oil" I don't see prominent people in medicine saying this at all. They don't mind if you pull the medicine out of your ass, as long as it's efficacy and safety is tested with some rigor before advocating it. >people who, having exhausted all the options offered by >mainstream medicine, seek an alternative This practice is dangerous and has resulted in many negative outcomes. This is navigating through a minefield of unsupported claims, no quality evidence, anecdotes, and people trying to scam you. Very difficult without professional guidance. >"Almost all startups fail too..." False equivalence. Most failed startup don't kill people. Besides, no one said alt medicines shouldn't get a shot. The promising leads will continued to be followed. It just has had an extremely low hit rate.

tomhoward 10y ago
Just note the words/tone you use when addressing this topic: - They don't mind if you pull the medicine out of your ass - This practice is dangerous and has resulted in many negative outcomes. This is navigating through a minefield of unsupported claims, no quality evidence, anecdotes, and people trying to scam you. - Most failed startup don't kill people. Think about how much harder it makes it to get any proper research done, when this is the attitude held and promoted by people in the mainstream science community. It's all very well for people to look at the artemisinin case and say "yes well it's only thanks to modern science we could establish the efficacy of that". Which is true, but it's also only because of the people who avoided/resisted succumbing to the zealotry of mainstream science that it was able to get on the radar of mainstream science at all. In truth, serious harms and deaths as a direct result of alternative medicine are very few. The overwhelming majority of natural/alternative medicine involves educated people undertaking low-risk treatments for non-life-threatening conditions, and experiencing an improved quality of life as a result - hence they keep going back. Primary examples are: yoga, meditation, hypnotherapy, massage, muscular/structural adjustment (osteo/chiro) - all of which work to relieve stress/trauma and release the effects of stress, leading to a long-term reduction in stress-related illness; nutrition, probiotics and detoxification treatments to improve digestion and metabolism. That list probably captures over 95% of the natural/alternative medicine. Practitioners of these therapies are trained, registered, and answerable to regulators, professional bodies, insurers, clients, society and their own conscience. Unethical/incompetent practitioners are exposed and put out of business. Where serious harms or deaths occur, it is front page news. As for efficacy, for these treatments I maintain that the market is a strong indicator. People who experience benefits keep going back, and in growing numbers. But there are also plenty of studies that indicate that people who engage in the above practices enjoy better health over the long term. Here's a study that demonstrates improvements in neurotransmitter levels after 12 weeks of yoga [1]. Meanwhile, deaths just from prescription opioid painkillers numbered over 28000 in the US in 2014 alone [2]. My own experience makes me certain that at least some of those people could have avoided that fate had they undertaken some of the treatments mentioned above. Please have a think about what instinct is really driving you here. I understand it; I spent several years as a fanatic of Dawkins and his atheist/materialist mates; indeed that's actually what started me on the path to where I am now, because at least I (unlike many) picked up the importance of questioning everything and deeply examining all my own beliefs, assumptions and biases. But the attitude you're exhibiting here, and the fact that it is so dominant in the mainstream scientific world, is actually holding back the discovery of more breakthroughs like artemisinin, and thus is slowing the progress of science. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111147/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111147/ [2] https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/ https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/