4 ms·

Is there objective evidence that any element of naturopathic medicine has consistent, reproducible, positive value?

by carbocation 14y ago

Alex3917 14y ago
By element do you mean a specific plant or the broader principles of naturopathy?
- carbocation 14y ago
  I guess I'm thinking specific interventions, whether botanical or otherwise.
  - Alex3917 14y ago
    Here is one example, marijuana for muscle spasticity: http://blog.norml.org/2010/02/17/%E2%80%98gold-standard%E2%80%99-studies-show-that-inhaled-marijuana-is-medically-safe-and-effective/ http://blog.norml.org/2010/02/17/%E2%80%98gold-standard%E2%8... The vast majority of commonly used plant medicines have undergone at least some scientific testing. The efficacy of specific drugs for specific conditions varies from extremely beneficial to completely useless or outright dangerous, the same as with any other medicine. And as with other medicines there are a lot of gaps and uncertainties in the research, although with plant medicines its usually because of lack of funding rather than because of bias stemming from the funding mechanisms.
    - carbocation 14y ago
      Interesting, but marijuana is used in standard modern medicine already. Any examples of things not used by modern medicine that are shown to have efficacy? Do you have a source to support the concept that the problem with plant medicine is the lack of funding in the face of promising early studies?
      - Alex3917 14y ago
        "Interesting, but marijuana is used in standard modern medicine already." First, marijuana is still illegal for doctors to prescribe in all 50 states, so saying that it's already used in modern medicine is a bit dubious. Any examples of things not used by modern medicine that are shown to have efficacy?" This largely depends on how you define 'modern medicine' and 'have shown efficacy'. E.g. modern as in modernism, or modern just meaning anything that's currently widely used? Because if you're defining modern in terms of modernism, which would be the most natural use of the word, then by definition no plant medicine can ever be part of modern medicine since it goes against everything that modernity stands for. If on the other hand you're defining modernism as anything that's currently widely used as part of medicine, then you get into the issue of widely used by who? In any event I'm going to take a pass on answering that only because I think it's largely a moot point to begin with, as I was only arguing that naturopathy can be useful and not that it is never used by 'modern' medicine (however you define it). "Do you have a source to support the concept that the problem with plant medicine is the lack of funding in the face of promising early studies?" So lack of funding is only one of the problems. Another big problem is 'blobology', which Willoughby Britton explains here: http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2012/10/bg-266-mindful-binge-drinking-and-blobology/ http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2012/10/bg-266-mindful-binge-dr... The basic concept is that every study is looking at something a little bit different, so even if there are hundreds of studies on some medicine and they are all positive, it still isn't necessarily conclusive. If you google for studies on the efficacy of, say, aloe vera for treating burns, you will see that pretty easily. And it shows up pretty widely, as it's just a problem that's inherent with science right now. I haven't taken the time to find a great source for funding specific stuff, but just a quick Google search shows that total US biomedical research spending is about 94 billion as of 2003, and the total NIH grants for CAM research (so not just naturopathy) are 441 million. (And presumably the amount of commercial research done on naturopathy is almost zero since plants can't be patented.)
        carbocation 14y ago
        > First, marijuana is still illegal for doctors to prescribe in all 50 states, so saying that it's already used in modern medicine is a bit dubious. Dronabinol is on formularies all over the US. There are marijuana dispensaries in many places. MDs write letters saying they believe their patients are best served by inhaled marijuana. What is legal and what has evidence are sometimes two different entities. > And presumably the amount of commercial research done on naturopathy is almost zero since plants can't be patented. Plant derivatives are patented all the time, so this isn't the reason that nobody is willing to invest in naturopathy.

Is there objective evidence that any element of naturopathic medicine has consistent, reproducible, positive value?

Alex3917 14y ago

By element do you mean a specific plant or the broader principles of naturopathy?

carbocation 14y ago
I guess I'm thinking specific interventions, whether botanical or otherwise.
- Alex3917 14y ago
  Here is one example, marijuana for muscle spasticity: http://blog.norml.org/2010/02/17/%E2%80%98gold-standard%E2%80%99-studies-show-that-inhaled-marijuana-is-medically-safe-and-effective/ http://blog.norml.org/2010/02/17/%E2%80%98gold-standard%E2%8... The vast majority of commonly used plant medicines have undergone at least some scientific testing. The efficacy of specific drugs for specific conditions varies from extremely beneficial to completely useless or outright dangerous, the same as with any other medicine. And as with other medicines there are a lot of gaps and uncertainties in the research, although with plant medicines its usually because of lack of funding rather than because of bias stemming from the funding mechanisms.
  - carbocation 14y ago
    Interesting, but marijuana is used in standard modern medicine already. Any examples of things not used by modern medicine that are shown to have efficacy? Do you have a source to support the concept that the problem with plant medicine is the lack of funding in the face of promising early studies?
    - Alex3917 14y ago
      "Interesting, but marijuana is used in standard modern medicine already." First, marijuana is still illegal for doctors to prescribe in all 50 states, so saying that it's already used in modern medicine is a bit dubious. Any examples of things not used by modern medicine that are shown to have efficacy?" This largely depends on how you define 'modern medicine' and 'have shown efficacy'. E.g. modern as in modernism, or modern just meaning anything that's currently widely used? Because if you're defining modern in terms of modernism, which would be the most natural use of the word, then by definition no plant medicine can ever be part of modern medicine since it goes against everything that modernity stands for. If on the other hand you're defining modernism as anything that's currently widely used as part of medicine, then you get into the issue of widely used by who? In any event I'm going to take a pass on answering that only because I think it's largely a moot point to begin with, as I was only arguing that naturopathy can be useful and not that it is never used by 'modern' medicine (however you define it). "Do you have a source to support the concept that the problem with plant medicine is the lack of funding in the face of promising early studies?" So lack of funding is only one of the problems. Another big problem is 'blobology', which Willoughby Britton explains here: http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2012/10/bg-266-mindful-binge-drinking-and-blobology/ http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2012/10/bg-266-mindful-binge-dr... The basic concept is that every study is looking at something a little bit different, so even if there are hundreds of studies on some medicine and they are all positive, it still isn't necessarily conclusive. If you google for studies on the efficacy of, say, aloe vera for treating burns, you will see that pretty easily. And it shows up pretty widely, as it's just a problem that's inherent with science right now. I haven't taken the time to find a great source for funding specific stuff, but just a quick Google search shows that total US biomedical research spending is about 94 billion as of 2003, and the total NIH grants for CAM research (so not just naturopathy) are 441 million. (And presumably the amount of commercial research done on naturopathy is almost zero since plants can't be patented.)
      - carbocation 14y ago
        > First, marijuana is still illegal for doctors to prescribe in all 50 states, so saying that it's already used in modern medicine is a bit dubious. Dronabinol is on formularies all over the US. There are marijuana dispensaries in many places. MDs write letters saying they believe their patients are best served by inhaled marijuana. What is legal and what has evidence are sometimes two different entities. > And presumably the amount of commercial research done on naturopathy is almost zero since plants can't be patented. Plant derivatives are patented all the time, so this isn't the reason that nobody is willing to invest in naturopathy.