- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 623
- Reaction score
- 2
Blah Blah BLah - double post
You should have told him that, considering the trends, you'd be an idiot to go the allopathic route unless of course you wanted to just work with the 20% that it's good for.
Then, just for kicks tell him that the reductionist approach really works well if you're an auto mechanic...according to my brother who is one.
Then, take a pic of his expression!
I know you're trying to communicate but I have no idea what you are trying to tell me.
English, please.
When you have only one framework from which to operate, you'have limitations, don't you?
zenman, a couple questions for ya
1) Do naturopaths believe in the germ theory of disease?
2) Do naturopaths believe in immunization?
Just FYI, Josh L.Ac. is into Naturopathic Medicine. Zenman is a nurse who is into tribal forms of healing.
- H
Am I? Just because I went to school with NDs and practice the sCAM modality of acupuncture / Chinese herbal medicine does not mean that I'm into Naturopathic medicine.
But I do think that the different aspects of naturopathic medicine should be evaluated just like everything else, rather than being simply dismissed via the same logical fallicies that the NDs are accused of making.
Personally, I think there are a few good treatment options hidden away in what we call alternative medicine. But the problem is, there is no way to seperate it from the chafe due to a complete lack of standardization or peer review. Who's to say what is just placebo effect, what is complete crap, and what truly works?
Anyway, I've heard of a lot of naturopaths who advise their patients not to immunize, and that crime immediately outweighs any good their profession otherwise may achieve.
Freudian slip?
Am I? Just because I went to school with NDs and practice the sCAM modality of acupuncture / Chinese herbal medicine does not mean that I'm into Naturopathic medicine.
But I do think that the different aspects of naturopathic medicine should be evaluated just like everything else, rather than being simply dismissed via the same logical fallicies that the NDs are accused of making.
I'm sorry. I thought you were an ND. My humble apologies.
I knew that Zenman was NOT a ND.
And the "sCAM" thing is mine...
- H
Okay, try it in Greek. I speak Greek. I guess that's two frameworks. What, you don't speak Greek? You're kind of limited there.
zenman, a couple questions for ya
1) Do naturopaths believe in the germ theory of disease?
2) Do naturopaths believe in immunization?
Just FYI, Josh L.Ac. is into Naturopathic Medicine. Zenman is a nurse who is into tribal forms of healing.
- H
No problem, I know to outsiders we sCAM providers all kinda look the same.
No problem, I know to outsiders we sCAM providers all kinda look the same.
Josh, I was in Singapore last week and saw several impressive TCM clinics. All had full waiting rooms. One was even part of a hospital. I'm in Vietnam now and haven't seen a single acupuncture clinic.
Yeah, I'm sure us evil allopaths are all the same to you too!
BTW - I've actually used accupunture to help with building appetites in ICU patients.
- H
My wife is Vietnamese and her parents weren't too excited that she went to acupuncture school. For them, American is better (except for TVs). I think that attitude is pervasive even in Vietnam.
My mother-in-law did get acupuncture last year in Vietnam from a wandering buddhist nun. She got great results for her leg pain...and she didn't seem to concerned when I asked about the needles that were used - not sterilized, in a bag, probably reused.
Sigh.
The TCM hospitals in Chengdu were interesting...apparently they also share the same concern for the germ theory as my mother-in-law.
So the general consensus seems to be: acupuncture works for chronic pain, but most everything else is just placebo effect?
So the general consensus seems to be: acupuncture works for chronic pain, but most everything else is just placebo effect?
No. The general consensus is that accupuncture works by a placebo effect on those who are culturally conditioned to believe it.
I bet ya' if I went to three different accupuncturists with the same complaint they'd all diagnose a different disorder of qi and stick needles in different places.
Non Causa Pro Causa
Translation: "Non-cause for cause", Latin
Alias: False Cause
Type: Informal Fallacy
Exposition:
This is the most general fallacy of reasoning to conclusions about causality. Some authors describe it as inferring that something is the cause of something else when it isn't, an interpretation encouraged by the fallacy's names. However, inferring a false causal relation is often just a mistake, and it can be the result of reasoning which is as cogent as can be, since all reasoning to causal conclusions is ultimately inductive. Instead, to be fallacious, a causal argument must violate the canons of good reasoning about causation in some common or deceptive way. Thus, to understand causal fallacies, we must understand how causal reasoning works, and the ways in which it can go awry.
Causal conclusions can take one of two forms:
1. Event-Level: Sometimes we wish to know the cause of a particular event, for instance, a physician conducting a medical examination is inquiring into the cause of a particular patient's illness. Specific events are caused by other specific events, so the conclusion we aim at in this kind of causal reasoning has the form:
Event C caused event E.
Mistakes about event-level causation are the result of confusing coincidence with causation. Event C may occur at the same time as event E, or just before it, without being the cause of E. It may simply be happenstance that these two events occurred at about the same time. In order to find the correct event that caused an effect, we must reason from a causal law, which introduces the next level of causal reasoning:
2. Type-Level: A causal law has the form:
Events of type C cause events of type E.
Here, we are not talking about a causal relation holding between two particular events, but the general causal relation holding between instances of two types of event. For example, when we say that smoking cigarettes causes lung cancer, we are not talking about an individual act of smoking causing a particular case of lung cancer. Rather, we mean that smoking is a type of event which causes another type of event, namely, cancer.
Mistakes about type-level causation are the result of confusing correlation with causation. Two types of event may occur simultaneously, or one type always following the other type, without there being a causal relation between them. One common source of non-causal correlations between two event-types is when both are effects of a third type of event. For examples of causal fallacies, see the Subfallacies of Non Causa Pro Causa:
Subfallacies:
* Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc
* Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc
* The Regression Fallacy
* Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
Resource:
David Hackett Fischer, Historians' Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought (Harper & Row, 1970), Chapter VI: "Fallacies of Causation".
Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension):
- attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position.
For example, the claim that "evolution means a dog giving birth to a cat."
Another example: "Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."
On the Internet, it is common to exaggerate the opponent's position so that a comparison can be made between the opponent and Hitler.
So the general consensus seems to be: acupuncture works for chronic pain, but most everything else is just placebo effect?
Just placebo effect?
If a drug or a surgical procedure is JUST as effective as a placebo, why aren't we studying the heck out of the placebo?
I actually had an interview with an ND the other day, just for s**ts and giggles. She spent half the interview working on her inferiority complex and telling me how the ND path is equal to MD...
...more interestingly, she threw out how I might not be as well suited for the field because I am male.
Ignoring the blatant and possibly actionable gender discrimination for a moment... perhaps it's true that alternative medicine follows a fundamentally feminine model, as opposed to the typically male cold logic and science of the Western model. Maybe that's what attracts a lot of people to that field.
I actually had an interview with an ND the other day, just for s**ts and giggles. She spent half the interview working on her inferiority complex and telling me how the ND path is equal to MD... more interestingly, she threw out how I might not be as well suited for the field because I am male.
Ignoring the blatant and possibly actionable gender discrimination for a moment... perhaps it's true that alternative medicine follows a fundamentally feminine model, as opposed to the typically male cold logic and science of the Western model. Maybe that's what attracts a lot of people to that field.
Just placebo effect?
If a drug or a surgical procedure is JUST as effective as a placebo, why aren't we studying the heck out of the placebo?
That's why only subjective complaints will respond to a placebo. "Mr Smith, this is a super-modern cure-all pill that will make you feel better. How do you feel?"
Taking nothing away from your experience, this only shows that your rheumatologist misdiagnosed the cause of your pain, which was well within the confines of Western medicine. It's not like you were prescribed prayer beads and chakra paste - you were given a reasonable explaination and had reasonable tests done on you. Had this been done by, say, an infectious disease physician, this would be lauded as "thinking outside the box."
who cares if it works, only thing that matter is whther it is perceived to work
That is not true in the slightest. A LEEP can prevent cervical cancer. A strange oriental herb purported to cure cervical cancer won't. No amount of religious belief is going to prevent dysplastic cells on the cervix from becoming cancerous.
We don't start a course of treatment on any patient by saying, "This is going to absolutely cure you if you only believe hard enough."
Rattlesnake venom is natural. I'm sure somewhere somebody is advocating it for cholesterol purposes.
Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's safe.
Placebo effect?
Is the fact of something being prescribed proof that it works?Hi everyone,
Did you know that in Germany, doctor's prescribe St John's Wort for depression?
Obviously there is evidence that this works so when will UK dorctors be allowed to do the same?
hmm I personally believe in the chinese system of using Herbs. They have few thousand years with their "technology" now. Sometimes, when I had a cold, the western medicine basically have no cure. Most doc. will tell you take more rest, eat some oranges, drink a lot of water and that's it. In chinese world, they believed some herbs can increase the ability of figiting disease in your immune system rather just give pills that may cause another trouble in patient body.