7 ms·

It is interesting this validates what functional medicine practitioners have been saying for years. This was poo pooed as not being evidence based due to lack o

It is interesting this validates what functional medicine practitioners have been saying for years. This was poo pooed as not being evidence based due to lack of rigorous RCTs, and it demonstrates the establishments reflexive defense against new ideas. They probably prevent a lot of disasters, but how many good ideas are delayed for decades as a result?

pestatije 3y ago
disasters cost millions, good ideas might not give a cent
bee_rider 3y ago
What’s a functional medical practitioner? Like a general practitioner or something? It wouldn’t be that surprising for GP’s to notice a trend in an ad-hoc fashion, right? They have direct contact with the biggest dataset… patients. Since they are respected professionals with licenses and training I’m sure there’s a way for the research community to hear from them and start systematizing their observations… or at least, I sure hope there is!
- Broken_Hippo 3y ago
  What’s a functional medical practitioner? Like a general practitioner or something? If only. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine
  - s3graham 3y ago
    Sounds like a medical practitioner that ... doesn't mutate any state.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      “Contrary to scientific evidence, Joe Pizzorno, a major figure in functional medicine, claimed that 25% of people in the United States have heavy metal poisoning and need to undergo detoxification.” Sounds like another supplement scam.
- lelanthran 3y ago
  > Since they are respected professionals with licenses and training I’m sure there’s a way for the research community to hear from them and start systematizing their observations… or at least, I sure hope there is! There is. Nothing stops a GP from writing a paper and submitting it. All they have to do is keep track (for a particular symptom) of the exact symptoms, the treatment supplied and ask followup "did it work" questions the next time the patient visits. They already do this, but per-patient.
nradov 3y ago
What exactly were functional medicine practitioners saying? Do you have any references? New approaches to medicine often start with case studies before anyone invests in a rigorous RCT. Are there any such case studies where a patient was diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease, the clinician treated them for candida albicans infection, and symptoms approved? That wouldn't necessarily prove anything but it would indicate a possible approach for further research.
lelanthran 3y ago
> It is interesting this validates what functional medicine practitioners have been saying for years. I don't know what the difference is between a "functional medical practitioner" and a "medical practitioner". > This was poo pooed as not being evidence based due to lack of rigorous RCTs, Well, unless there's evidence, a conjecture is still just a conjecture, right? After all, the people in the article had a conjecture, so they went to look for evidence.
- nradov 3y ago
  There isn't a strict definition of functional medicine. It isn't a specific specialty. In general it focuses on diagnosing and resolving root causes of medical conditions rather than just treating symptoms. This is difficult to do within the current US medical system. Practitioners need a deep understanding of the interactions between multiple organ systems and biochemical pathways. And it takes a lot more time than a typical 10 minute office visit. There are also a lot of quacks pushing pseudoscience woo.
- CuriousCosmic 3y ago
  > I don't know what the difference is between a "functional medical practitioner" and a "medical practitioner". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine
canadiantim 3y ago
Yeah there's a reflexive defense mechanism that prevents a lot of good people from paying attention to non-mainstream health advice. I hesitate to even use the words non-mainstream or alternative, because they get made fun of, but it just goes to show how successful the push to demonize alternative health practitioners has been. A shame too, because health is the most important thing in the world and too often these well-intentioned people have a very terrible terrible effect on the world.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  Most alternative medicine is crap. Useless or actively harmful, e.g. arsenic in homeopathy or heavy metals in many Ayurvedic preparations. Where it isn’t, it’s often incorporated into medicine—its practitioners pretend to be persecuted as a marketing tactic. (A lot of “food-based medicine”, i.e. targeted nutrition, falls into this category.)
  - canadiantim 3y ago
    I bet you also criticize homeopathy for having dilutions so strong that they don't have any active ingredients in them at all (which is true!), but funny juxtaposed against an argument that homeopathy is poisoning people with arsenic. The reality is that non-alternative medicine is that subset of medicine which has been regulatory captured. Whatever medicine couldn't be made profitable was then deemed alternative and relegated to the quacks. It's a shame we've handed health and medicine to big business on a silver platter.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > funny juxtaposed against an argument that homeopathy is poisoning people with arsenic As I said, useless or harmful. If super diluted, useless. If insufficiently so, harmful. > Whatever medicine couldn't be made profitable was then deemed alternative and relegated to the quacks This is nonsense. If your doctor is never recommending e.g. a diet change or physical exercise or even PT, and only prescribing medication, get a new doctor. Most medical research is not pharmaceutical.
f6v 3y ago
Examples? Who’s been saying it and who shat on it?

pestatije 3y ago

disasters cost millions, good ideas might not give a cent

bee_rider 3y ago

What’s a functional medical practitioner? Like a general practitioner or something? It wouldn’t be that surprising for GP’s to notice a trend in an ad-hoc fashion, right? They have direct contact with the biggest dataset… patients. Since they are respected professionals with licenses and training I’m sure there’s a way for the research community to hear from them and start systematizing their observations… or at least, I sure hope there is!

Broken_Hippo 3y ago
What’s a functional medical practitioner? Like a general practitioner or something? If only. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine
- s3graham 3y ago
  Sounds like a medical practitioner that ... doesn't mutate any state.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    “Contrary to scientific evidence, Joe Pizzorno, a major figure in functional medicine, claimed that 25% of people in the United States have heavy metal poisoning and need to undergo detoxification.” Sounds like another supplement scam.
lelanthran 3y ago
> Since they are respected professionals with licenses and training I’m sure there’s a way for the research community to hear from them and start systematizing their observations… or at least, I sure hope there is! There is. Nothing stops a GP from writing a paper and submitting it. All they have to do is keep track (for a particular symptom) of the exact symptoms, the treatment supplied and ask followup "did it work" questions the next time the patient visits. They already do this, but per-patient.

nradov 3y ago

What exactly were functional medicine practitioners saying? Do you have any references? New approaches to medicine often start with case studies before anyone invests in a rigorous RCT. Are there any such case studies where a patient was diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease, the clinician treated them for candida albicans infection, and symptoms approved? That wouldn't necessarily prove anything but it would indicate a possible approach for further research.

lelanthran 3y ago

> It is interesting this validates what functional medicine practitioners have been saying for years. I don't know what the difference is between a "functional medical practitioner" and a "medical practitioner". > This was poo pooed as not being evidence based due to lack of rigorous RCTs, Well, unless there's evidence, a conjecture is still just a conjecture, right? After all, the people in the article had a conjecture, so they went to look for evidence.

nradov 3y ago
There isn't a strict definition of functional medicine. It isn't a specific specialty. In general it focuses on diagnosing and resolving root causes of medical conditions rather than just treating symptoms. This is difficult to do within the current US medical system. Practitioners need a deep understanding of the interactions between multiple organ systems and biochemical pathways. And it takes a lot more time than a typical 10 minute office visit. There are also a lot of quacks pushing pseudoscience woo.
CuriousCosmic 3y ago
> I don't know what the difference is between a "functional medical practitioner" and a "medical practitioner". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_medicine

canadiantim 3y ago

Yeah there's a reflexive defense mechanism that prevents a lot of good people from paying attention to non-mainstream health advice. I hesitate to even use the words non-mainstream or alternative, because they get made fun of, but it just goes to show how successful the push to demonize alternative health practitioners has been. A shame too, because health is the most important thing in the world and too often these well-intentioned people have a very terrible terrible effect on the world.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
Most alternative medicine is crap. Useless or actively harmful, e.g. arsenic in homeopathy or heavy metals in many Ayurvedic preparations. Where it isn’t, it’s often incorporated into medicine—its practitioners pretend to be persecuted as a marketing tactic. (A lot of “food-based medicine”, i.e. targeted nutrition, falls into this category.)
- canadiantim 3y ago
  I bet you also criticize homeopathy for having dilutions so strong that they don't have any active ingredients in them at all (which is true!), but funny juxtaposed against an argument that homeopathy is poisoning people with arsenic. The reality is that non-alternative medicine is that subset of medicine which has been regulatory captured. Whatever medicine couldn't be made profitable was then deemed alternative and relegated to the quacks. It's a shame we've handed health and medicine to big business on a silver platter.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > funny juxtaposed against an argument that homeopathy is poisoning people with arsenic As I said, useless or harmful. If super diluted, useless. If insufficiently so, harmful. > Whatever medicine couldn't be made profitable was then deemed alternative and relegated to the quacks This is nonsense. If your doctor is never recommending e.g. a diet change or physical exercise or even PT, and only prescribing medication, get a new doctor. Most medical research is not pharmaceutical.

f6v 3y ago

Examples? Who’s been saying it and who shat on it?