-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How do you feel about "Alternate Medicine"?
- Thread starter Kinitari
- Start date
- Status
umop_3pisdn
Member
Do you really think that? Because I was thinking something more along the lines of some lack of temporal and spatial resolution in brain imaging technologies, individual brain differences, differences in the variety of meditative techniques, a general difficulty in accounting for the perceived quality of subjective events perhaps in accordance with the explanatory gap problem in philosophy, etc. I suggested repeatedly not that it's impossible to confirm, but rather that our current techniques are seemingly lacking. I don't think it really benefits the tone of this discussion to assume that I'm making some kind of mystical pronouncement when nothing I have said has suggested that that was my intention.
Also, you asked me if meditative concentration is a 'scientific term'. You never really specified what your argument was, so all I have to go from is this question which is essentially nonsensical. Phenomenon don't really have a scientific vocabulary, just like there's no scientific term for 'redness', our only access to it is via direct experience, it occupies some kind of distinct ontological category than what science is even concerned with, even if only by way of subjective property.
That doesn't surprise me at all. But there's also a fairly easy way for people to investigate how meditation may improve their quality of life as an adjunct to medical intervention when suffering various illness.
Yes.
I think this is a great way to look at it.
I worked as an imaging tech for 20 years and western medicine isn't as close to being as wonderful as some of you make it out to be. I think because of this, I used acupuncture for a condition that my doctor could only prescribe pills for (that came with their own negative effects). It worked and I continued to be monitored by my physician. My doctor even acknowledged that it worked so I'm not making shit up. And to be honest, I didn't go into it really believing that it would work. I was pretty blown away actually. I've explained it in other threads so I won't go into detail here, but I can at least vouch for it in some limited situations. No, I would not get my primary cancer care from it, but for nausea or other secondary things, it really may help (without hindering my primary care).
Hell, how long did western medicine take to admit that pot was helpful for some medical conditions? Have they completely?
hockeypuck
Member
No scientific term for redness? What? Adobe might have something to say about that.
Properly conducted studies have no trouble demonstrating the effects of meditation being identical to that of relaxation or a nap. You seem to be judging the abilities of current research based upon the results you assume they must arrive at, meaning until they agree with your conclusion it's really just the equipment's fault.
CornBurrito
Member
What about the stuff that is proven to be detrimental?
Paper please. Exactly which modern medicine procedures or drugs do equal or worse than placebo?
And how did you discover that most studies have confirmation bias? Are you suggesting clinical trials and the statistics involved are falsified?
umop_3pisdn
Member
For the quality of redness, the point I've been harping on this entire time but failed to make explicit this time, no.
I'm not capable of assessing the methodological quality of these studies myself, but subjectively speaking I know that the practice of meditation is nothing like relaxation or taking a nap. Direct experience is grounds for not regarding these things as essentially identical, and by extension being somewhat unconvinced of results that would present that they are. I could accept that from a medical perspective that might be true, but it certainly isn't from the perspective of experience, so that does raise some concerns.
CornBurrito
Member
The active ingredients in those plants or herbs may have some beneficial effects. And they may be used in prescription or over-the-counter drugs.
Those herbs seem to be brought up relatively often so I'm sure it would be easy to find papers proving or debunking their effectiveness.
It's good for anything that doesn't involve a serious disease such as cancer, pneumonia and other similar deadly things.
For example if you have backhache, headhaches, things like that. Some things can be more effective and more healthy than just consuming pills.
But for anything serious? Nope. I can be used at the same time, but should never be the only therapy.
For example if you have backhache, headhaches, things like that. Some things can be more effective and more healthy than just consuming pills.
But for anything serious? Nope. I can be used at the same time, but should never be the only therapy.
You said "saner" instead of healthy before your edit. What makes consuming pills less healthy or sane?
Quality of redness? Like which color is better? That's entirely subjective whereas the ability for meditation to have some unique physical effect isn't.
We're not speaking subjectively. You originally responded to what was meant to be an objective, science based assessment of meditation. Objectively our current understanding is that meditation is no better than relaxing or taking a nap. You can't really hope to overcome this in the context of this thread with your personal subjective anecdotal accounts.
hockeypuck
Member
Just for future reference, the first side of a scientific debate to bring up anecdotes loses. It's an unwritten GAF rule.
umop_3pisdn
Member
Why we experience particular wavelengths of light as 'red' in the first place. Again, I'm talking about experience which the thing we're in direct contact with. We knew there was a phenomenon called "red" before we knew there were wavelengths of light that caused it.
And meditation is just a body of mental exercises, the benefit would be of the same type as any kind of way we would try to 'retrain' our minds.
Considering the post that you quoted I really had no idea what you were responding to.
That may be true, but adopting the practice may clarify the matter for individuals and isn't likely to cause any harm, or interact with the appropriate medical treatment as it is non-pharmacological. There is a reason I was emphasizing phenomenological observation and that's because it's typically concerned with investigating and assessing things like our quality of life which aren't particularly easy to quantify, and often depend on things like our perspective. Generally the reason people cultivate a practice in meditation is to find more 'peace of mind', another unscientific thing which isn't really a bad thing to have when facing illness.
But there is a valid means of empirical observation, it just happens to rely on introspection. I understand the merit of this point, but my point is that the substance of this question is still a matter of 'try and see for yourself'.
It does, but that doesn't really mean that they actually understand everything they've studied. Some doctors have a surprisingly horrible knowledge of certain things (just like I, for example, don't know everything about biology since there are areas of it that I have studied less).
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
How exactly do you do that? Say you have chronic lymphocytic leukemia, which of the myriad of alternative treatments do you try? Chelation therapy, acupuncture, chiropractic, homeopathy, reiki, aloe Vera, light therapy, magnets, red clover, dong quai, light therapy, music therapy, ear candling, echinacea, prayer, feverfew, ginseng, yohimbe etc. How do you measure if they are working for you, which do you try first, how long do you wait to see if it is working, should you combine them?
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050191
It's not about falsifying numbers, confirmation bias in clinical trials would be about not publishing studies with unfavorable results. Though, this is an old lit analysis, and they mention a 2007 FDA law to try to wean out confirmation bias in study publications. Haven't been up to date in terms of how studies are published these days.
ctrl + f "chiropractor". Ah, yes. Americans and their hatred for chiropractics.
To be fair, there seems to be a bit more "crooks" in this market there, too. There are definitely certain things a chiropractor can do that can cause harm, no doubt about that. But finding chiropractor victims should also be subject to consideration of "cherry picking". There are incredibly many more people that are medicated wrong and subsequently die than there are anything bad having happened with chiropractors - the field is that much bigger. There's a low standard of certification of chiropractors in the US, so that's worrisome. But when the pill industry can persuade the FDA to ban e-cigs, it should at least cross your mind that the fantastically huge industry of pills might be doing some slander here. Especially in America, where the guys with the money often have the "factual statement".
Here in communist Norway, chiropractics is covered by virtually any health insurance, and is partially reimbursed by the government along side such things as x-rays and surgeries. GP's often send you to a chiropractor for certain back-problems, and there's an arduous process of certification. You are not a PhD, but you have 5 years master and something like 2 years as an intern before you get to do anything yourself. You make OK money - nothing near being able to cruise around in Lamborghinis, so you're by no means the "quack" many chiropractors might be in the US. So when certain countries embrace it as and like traditional medicine, health insurance reimburse treatments and the government does it too, it should at least have some critical thoughts go through your mind before you yell that Norway must be full of lunatics and conform to the cognitive dissonance you'd say the ones thinking this is actual medicine have.
To be fair, there seems to be a bit more "crooks" in this market there, too. There are definitely certain things a chiropractor can do that can cause harm, no doubt about that. But finding chiropractor victims should also be subject to consideration of "cherry picking". There are incredibly many more people that are medicated wrong and subsequently die than there are anything bad having happened with chiropractors - the field is that much bigger. There's a low standard of certification of chiropractors in the US, so that's worrisome. But when the pill industry can persuade the FDA to ban e-cigs, it should at least cross your mind that the fantastically huge industry of pills might be doing some slander here. Especially in America, where the guys with the money often have the "factual statement".
Here in communist Norway, chiropractics is covered by virtually any health insurance, and is partially reimbursed by the government along side such things as x-rays and surgeries. GP's often send you to a chiropractor for certain back-problems, and there's an arduous process of certification. You are not a PhD, but you have 5 years master and something like 2 years as an intern before you get to do anything yourself. You make OK money - nothing near being able to cruise around in Lamborghinis, so you're by no means the "quack" many chiropractors might be in the US. So when certain countries embrace it as and like traditional medicine, health insurance reimburse treatments and the government does it too, it should at least have some critical thoughts go through your mind before you yell that Norway must be full of lunatics and conform to the cognitive dissonance you'd say the ones thinking this is actual medicine have.
CornBurrito
Member
Please feel free to post a study that shows why they are undeserving of such hate.
It has only demonstrated effectiveness for lower back pain as far as I know. And some chiropractics swerve right into crazyville and suggest germ theory is a grand conspiracy and that misalignment of the spine is the cause of every illness.
Terra Firma
Banned
A doctor's approach to alternative "medicine" is to nod and smile at the patient and then warn them if there are detrimental effects or emphasize adherence and compliance to an actual medicinal regimen if there is no evidence for either benefit or harm.
It is ridiculous to shut down a person for practicing alternative "medicine" - that is unless money is being made off of it. If a person wants to eat this or that weed because they think it gives them better memory, there is no need to ridicule the person. The only problem would be if it is found out that it is detrimental to their health or is interfering with preexisting pharmaceutical therapy.
IMO naturopathy and other pseudoscience fields that affect a person's health should be banned, though.
It is ridiculous to shut down a person for practicing alternative "medicine" - that is unless money is being made off of it. If a person wants to eat this or that weed because they think it gives them better memory, there is no need to ridicule the person. The only problem would be if it is found out that it is detrimental to their health or is interfering with preexisting pharmaceutical therapy.
IMO naturopathy and other pseudoscience fields that affect a person's health should be banned, though.
hockeypuck
Member
I still haven't seen this meta-analysis, or whatever else type of study. Do you have a link to an abstract?
They're insane. They really are. And that's very bad for the field. I know a handful of chiropractors, as I've been seeing a chiropractor since I was 18 (as an example, that year I went once, the next year zero times, the year after that maybe some times, then more, then less - all dependent on the amount of activity I was up to). There's a two way split in the field, and the chiropractor I have been seeing for years is the leader for the chiropractic society here in Norway, and he is trying to unify them, as well as taking them into the way the field will be tomorrow.
One I've seen made me uncomfortable. Not with his adjustments, I felt completely safe there, and he's a real long term practitioner. But he went to a school in the US, and he has a funky instrument that my current and new main chiropractor doesn't even want to talk about. The thing he has said about it is "hold that up to a broom handle, and the indicator needle will swing, then, too). When I asked the chiropractor with that instrument, I was genuinely intrigued, and I asked him if it was using conductivity and what I figured would have to be a difference in resistance to send a tiny current over, and the alternating resistance would indicate inflammation. His respond was nothing, really. That worried me, and I felt a bit like being in a psychic healing season.
He's been around longer than the certification process in Norway, though, so he's noted as being "of the old school". My current chiropractor is a man that helps me a lot. Let me just note here that any healthily active adult should rarely need to see a chiropractor. For me, I can get stiffness in my lower back, and my chiropractor is really focused on my hamstring, and its effect on my lower lumbar spine and hips. It's not medicine, for me, it's a way for me to keep a healthy function of my spine.
Sublocations are very real to me, since I've felt them in other people's spines and I can subsequently pin-point the tensions it has caused, and such. It's fascinating how tension in the neck can result in headaches. I get my girlfriend to stretch my lower spine and do some manipulations on my upper back. It works wonders.
As for studies - well, I don't have any. I'd be frantically searching google, and I'd be cherry picking something that said what I want it to say. So I won't do that. But I think, as I said, that the fact that Norway attributes it to be standard medicine should be an indication that there might be some positive studies about it out there.
A physiotherapist is a completely different field. It's about rebuilding lacking parts of the body, helping preventing ailments due to incorrect posture, usage, etc. A chiropractor is more to alleviate existing conditions and ensure free movement. In serious cases, any good chiropractor will use a cross-medical team, including anything and everything from an MD in case of painkillers or inflammation-inhibition, to a massage therapist (to release tensions in the muscles, caused by the subluxations the chiropractor fixes - or vise versa), to a physiotherapist to build up lacking muscles to prevent this from happening again. You simply can't replace one with the other. My father recently replaced his knee, and is seeing a physiotherapist. He was skeptical at first, since they're not certified or as highly trained as a chiropractor, and he'd almost want to see a chiropractor instead, especially the last time he operated on his knee, the therapist was a bit of a tool, not knowing how to do various things. But he's understood the separation of the two field, and he's seeing a crafty physiotherapist now. So they have their fields.
Since we're on the topic of Alternative Medicine, does anyone have any advice in dealing with a significant other who believes and practices it?
My girlfriend doesn't do the Homeopathy stuff, but she does see a chiropractor, does the "Eat Right for Your Blood Type" diet, and has seen Naturopathic doctors in the past. Now, she's not full into it; she does what they call "CAM" (Complementary and Alternative Medicine), the same shit Dr. Oz talks about. Basically, she'll go to the hospital and take prescription drugs if it's serious, but she's suggested I get a lymphatic massage, get my back "adjusted", and talks about "toxins" in my body. (This isn't 24/7, but when I'm feeling sick or unwell, she'll bring it up.)
I've let her know about my feelings regarding alternative medicine, and we kind of have a "truce" about the matter, but it really worries me going forward. The thing is, she's not dumb, so it just frustrates me how she gets bamboozled by this stuff. I especially worry about raising kids with her if she's going to push the Naturopathic route. Anyone in a similar situation?
My girlfriend doesn't do the Homeopathy stuff, but she does see a chiropractor, does the "Eat Right for Your Blood Type" diet, and has seen Naturopathic doctors in the past. Now, she's not full into it; she does what they call "CAM" (Complementary and Alternative Medicine), the same shit Dr. Oz talks about. Basically, she'll go to the hospital and take prescription drugs if it's serious, but she's suggested I get a lymphatic massage, get my back "adjusted", and talks about "toxins" in my body. (This isn't 24/7, but when I'm feeling sick or unwell, she'll bring it up.)
I've let her know about my feelings regarding alternative medicine, and we kind of have a "truce" about the matter, but it really worries me going forward. The thing is, she's not dumb, so it just frustrates me how she gets bamboozled by this stuff. I especially worry about raising kids with her if she's going to push the Naturopathic route. Anyone in a similar situation?
CornBurrito
Member
And certain parts of Africa have practicing Witch Doctors. You won't see me making a jump and claiming that their usage of Witch Doctors is an indication that albino limbs can make an excellent cure-all.
Anyway I am glad if it works for you, but I'd like to see peer reviewed papers from credible sources to ascertain the validity of it beyond possible placebo effects.
that1dude24
Member
albeit not entirely in-depth, i found one published in a journal :
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199510053331406#t=abstract
But this is borderline cognitive dissonance, and merely confirmation bias at this point. It goes for the both of us, if you like. But if you refute what I said with what you just said, then I'm seeing a lot of cognitive biases at work, rather than healthy debate.
It's a hard topic, but it goes to show that there are some places we can be better in not standing up and demanding damning evidence for any proposition anyone has. Most people don't, and someone that does is probably so prepared for a conversation on the topic, that you should be equally vary of what they have to say.
The fact that you compare Norway embracing chiropractics with African witch doctors just ridicules the entire situation, and is harmful to the discussion. At any rate, I have said what I can about the subject. I could be fleshing out about my personal experiences on the field, and what authorities I have heard to, but we could run in circles and call it all kinds of cognitive biases.
I was curious to see if anyone would stop to think if they were subject to the very terms they were throwing around, themselves.
Being overly interested in the field, I know how fleeting it is. It's a field people are trying to figure out. A current hot topic is if subluxations cause tight muscles, or the other way around. My chiropractor says "we don't know, but I know I can help you by releasing it." And if I don't, the subluxation can lay dormant for years, and in the end cause certain muscles to reposition, and one day having worn down tendons and even vertebrae. I think it's sad if we should refute what can be said to be a cautiously optimistic field, just because they're not fully capable of explaining every aspect of it. And that's the problem with this "proof based argument" that's highly popular on the internet.
EDIT: it's funny, because in Norway, the only skepticism is connected to "isn't it uncomfortable when they adjust your back?" - not if it's legitimate. I've actually only encountered one person, a friend, considering it 'alternate medicine', and he's highly interested in America. It's funny, because there really is no other country than America that has this inherent "boo, chiropractor"-attitude. Every friend of mine who's had trouble with their back, that have gone to the chiropractor, no matter their initial skepticism (girls tend to be freaked out by 'the cracking in the joints'), everyone has had huge benefits. But, you know. We're a society where it's not common-place to seek help to keep healthy. We like to go on our daily business until we break down, or our backs give out, or do what we do until it's so painful that we can't do it anymore. I keep myself from ever getting there, and I can always feel when it's time to go for a visit, and it's always due to inactivity and PC-gaming. Static mouse usage is hell for the shoulder. But I'm never in serious pain when I go. We normally don't do that. We don't go to a psychologist just to talk and see what the doctor can say, we do it when we've already broken down.
So do you think the acupuncture connected to your chi and cleared the negative energy in your blood flow, or what?
I take B complex 100 to bring up my mood and energy and D-Calcium-Magnesium to help with pain and stiffness. I also use a foam roller, Tiger Tail, and racquet ball for myofascial release. All of these are way better than any pain pills and antidepressants I've been prescribed. New age doctors suck when it comes to this stuff.
Charoncaori
Member
So apparently some physical therapy falls under alternative medicine? I wish stuff that is actually good for you didn't get lumped in with the crazies.
Sutton Dagger
Member
It's just a terrible argument though. Norway embracing chiropractics is irrelevant to their efficacy. The private health insurance agencies in Australia pay on homeopathy, using your reasoning we should all accept homeopathy. The bottom line is, if there isn't scientific evidence to support its use, then it's best that we avoid it and use other means that actually have demonstrable results.
afreaknamedpete
Member
This what I really dislike about alternative medicine.
There are studies that suggest efficacy of acupuncture. Numerous Cochrane meta-analyses support the idea that acupunture works for some types of pain. Acupuncture stumbled onto something that WORKS yet mire it down with these completely BS explanations about chi and meridian flow. To me, this is why acupuncture and some other treatments are still considered "alternative" - since the practitioners won't separate it from magic voodoo.
Sutton Dagger
Member
Actually the current hot topic is if subluxation even exists and if so, what is it? There isn't a consensus amongst chiropractics about its nature, and there is no scientific evidence regarding the subluxation, even though it's a scientific claim. It really is a text-book case of pseudoscience.
I never want to belittle someone's achievement in beating cancer, but maybe it was spontaneous remission? If it was alternative medicine, than it would literally be a ground breaking breakthrough that would change the face of medicine forever.
So, what alternative medicine treatments did she have?
afreaknamedpete
Member
Alternative medicine to the exclusion of other medication or treatments?
Many people have gotten cancer into remission from alternative medicines, unless they all had spontaneous remission.
No Chemo or any of that.
Peddlers of alternative medicine are just as corrupt and profit driven. I would say even moreso since they don't have to prove anything actually works.
Natural stuff that actually works becomes medicine. See Aspirin, Penicillin etc. They don't remain on the sidelines as an "alternative" medicine.
What the hell are you talking about? Alternative medicines are tested all the time. Because they have no discernable effect compared to placebos they never become actual medicine. Not because "Big Pharma" is keeping the little man down.
Read up a little on http://www.quackwatch.com/
is there a list, some statistics, some study of various cancer busting alternative medicines and their effectiveness? Something other than someone just saying "it happens a lot"? I don't mean that to be snarky, but if there is even a correlation, I'd be interested
I think that this was his point, precisely (which does align with mine, too): he only charged when there was factual proof that the treatment worked, as in, the patient condition was solved. Whatever it was due to placebo effect or not, it is irrelevant: it worked for some particular cases, and thanks God it did. You can argue that the guy didn't made anything special, afterall placebo effects are based in the fact that the patient's mind can help to recover its own body. But that is an unfair characterization of it, me thinks. It is like saying that playing a violin has no value, for it is our brains that segregates serotonin afterall, not the violinist. As I view it, my friend helps to trigger placebo effects for people who does need them, and that's an undeniably good thing. To think that this has no value merely because he does it while thinking that he is moving vodoo spirits or whatever is is quite narrow minded, me thinks, righteous fury about how he can be so wrong and believe on these things be damned.
Make no mistake: I am not advocating that these type of things should be employed in the same fashion or put in the same foot as regular medicine, or that shuddenly a handful of positive results are undeniable proof that cosmic healing energies exists. I am pretty sure that there's no hard, conclussive evidence that Reiki work beyond a placebo effect. But I consider illness like a kind of total war: you want to trow everything you got at it. Considering that the human mind and body are heavily intertwined, I think that the placebos and therapies aimed to ease the patient's mind by aiding and tapping into his own beliefs (which, as irrational as they could be they can be damn useful) shouldn't be dismissed outright when there's no harm into adding them to the regular treatments, in the same fashion that praying for one's health is not going to harm the patient either. And the advantage of these type of therapies is that, as many psycologists point out, rituals do make a difference for us, that's why they exist on the first place: to elicit a certain type of emotion, kinda like an artistic performance. That's also the reason why placebos that mimmick traditional medicines work best when coupled with intrincate dosage instructions and multiple intakes, too.
However, I've got the feeling that some of you guys are painting a kind of a caricature of anyone that argues that there's something else more to a person's health and pysical well being other than a 100% orthodox, materialistic angle. Noone here have argued for dismissing scientific - based medicine outright.
I don't know, maybe? Try google.com.
I just know how my aunt dealt with it and have met other people who have gotten their cancer in remission from it, it's why she went that route. It could be just coincidence and they all had it just miraculously go into remission and the medicine did nothing i am not a doctor or a scientist i don't know anything about it other then having a family member doing it.
Dr.Guru of Peru
played the long game
How was the cancer diagnosed?
It's my aunt not my mother, i wasn't with her from step one.
She had stage 1 hodgkins(sp?) lymphoma, she went to the hospital because she knew something with wrong then spent about a month and a half getting 2 lymph nodes removed, testing and seeing other doctors for 2nd opinions. Who/What/When/Where i am not 100% on, again.. It's my aunt, i didn't even find out she had it till she started her alternative treatments because she didn't want the family trying to guilt her into doing chemo because she didn't want to do that.
I could ask her all the details if you really want.
Well the problem here is that you put forth a pretty "miraculous" claim without detail, let alone evidence. How is anyone supposed to respond to this statement other than "oh okay" (or less nice words).
If you had some more information, like the method of alternative medicine, the clinic our happened in, if she had non alternative medicine as well, any sort of detail or data, this would be a really fascinating conversion.
As it is now, people will just be short with you, and that's probably because they're willing to put the effort into a deep discussion regarding such an interesting topic.
So if you can share anything else, please do.
- Status