Science, Medicine and Babble

thread drift/Is there a way to PM your here. Pogge? Couldn't find one or can I send you a message at BnR?/end thread drift

I should add that the complete denial/refusal of those with power and so-called "scientists" to address the causes of cancer is just as anti-science as claiming that people should take Vitamin C instead of chemo or other cancer drugs.

jeezus I feel like I'm stepping into a drug house here, or wonderland or my favorite bar after midnight or something, but that's ok, I like those places. fun, and interesting, even if a lot of BS is floating around - just like real life.

1. Where the hell's Michelle? I was talking a lot more gently than a lot of the stuff above on another thread and got reprimanded. (not that I think anything either there or here deserves a reprimand, I just expect fairness...)

2. More seriously, I think nobody is getting deep enough here - these days, in PR-land, it's not really about science or medicine at all, it's about politics. It's true that with the internet there are a lot of somewhat challenged people trying to sell weird stuff, and other people trying to make a buck by lying about stuff - but krist, the gov is doing the same thing since big business took over - how are we average people supposed to tell the snake oil guys from the real scientists anymore? Science (and medicine, as a part of science) are compromised all to hell these days, with 'scientific opinions' etc, like politicians, being to a large extent for sale to the highest bidder. It is a very, very bad situation for 'we the average people', when we can't trust these people anymore. And the only way we are going to do anything about it is to take back our country from the capitalists who have appropriated our government.

M. Spector wrote:

G. Pie wrote:

That's like saying "Citrus fruit is not a cure.  Vitamin C is."

What's wrong with that?

Nothing's wrong with that but you wanted to know what a natural cure was.  Polly B gave you eating mouldy bread as a cure for infection.  You rejected that on the basis that it is penicillin not mould that cures.  I see that (and you disagree) as similar to rejecting citrus fruit as a natural cure because it's actually the Vitamin C within the fruit that cures. 

Quote:

Are you saying scurvy can't be cured by taking Vitamin C tablets, but only by sucking on limes?

Of course not.  But Vitamin C tablets don't exist in nature.

"well meaning, but naive" is offensive to me.

As I recall the banning  that was requested was by someone who shares Sineed's values.

Insult?  How is pointing out that Sineed profits from her views an insult, clearly she believes I and others who oppose her views are naive, in fact it is interesting that she would use that word, one that is frequently  used by those who seek to establish themselves as authorities, as far as I am concerned it was an insult.

I know that my biases are obvious and clearly they allow Sineed to dismiss what I am saying, well let's just be clear that if your livelihood is dependent on delivering these drugs to the public then you have a bias and I dismiss what is being said because of that.

ennir wrote:

I know that my biases are obvious and clearly they allow Sineed to dismiss what I am saying,

It is not the bias, it is the complete lack of evidence. We all expect and demand evidence from the pharmaceutical companies. Yet at the same time many think that they should be able to promote, unchallenged, every bit of unsubstantiated, untested (or testd and failed), unproven, "medicine" because it agrees with their worldview.

As Tim Minchin says in his song "Storm"

Science adjusts it's beliefs based on what's observed
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved.
If you show me
That, say, homeopathy works,
Then I will change my mind
I'll spin on a fucking dime
I'll be embarrassed as hell,
But I will run through the streets yelling
It's a miracle! Take physics and bin it!
Water has memory!
And while it's memory of a long lost drop of onion juice is Infinite
It somehow forgets all the poo it's had in it!

You show me that it works and how it works
And when I've recovered from the shock
I will take a compass and carve Fancy That on the side of my cock."

I'm going to quote myself from where I closed the H1N1 thread a moment ago, before I saw this.

Quote:

 

Well here's another thread I should have closed ages ago. It's too bad we can't discuss something like the flu going around without descending into such acrimony and rancor.

For future reference, people are entitled to their own opinions about their own medical care.  No one should post expecting others to agree with their own opinion.  Such opinions may be very personal and strongly held, but as long as one holds them just insofar as they impact on themselves, it is at least bad manners to attack them. 

I'm for the most part western medical model when it comes to my physical health.  For the most part. For mental health not so much. I have family members who would use Reiki as a first response.  A respected colleague of mine is a practitioner of Pranic healing.  We all get along well and respect each others positions. As a mental health worker, I daily shake my head at the practices of big pharma, while sometimes being grateful for their products.

Bottom line is, there were disrespectful comments made here from both sides of the isle, and the same discussion could have been made without them. 

I'm still glad I got my flu shot, and I'm feeling much better today thankyou.

 

.

Honest to God, some days I just want to stick to moderating babble banter. This is a VERY active board and the mods have lives outside of babble.

Actually, I was going to start a new thread on this subject before I saw this, except I was going to do it right. Framing the subject and setting groundrules can be everything.

First, the OP was condescending and set a confrontative tone. It did not do a good job of framing a positive and productive discussion.

Toward the end, I see where Sineeds professional ethics where called into question in the post about her profiting from her veiws. Don't try to weasle out of it, it was an insult, and I would have been a lot madder. Sineed has put a lot of years into a particular area of scientific enquiry, which you might suggest makes her personally invested, but that's obvious and she's up front about it. It also gives her technical expertise which I've occassionally drawn on on this board. I pick this as an example not because I'm really on anyones side, because I'm not, but because it's an example and it's recent. I really don't want to have to go through 64 posts of he said-she said to see who started getting accusatory first.

Trevormkidd wrote:

ennir wrote:

I know that my biases are obvious and clearly they allow Sineed to dismiss what I am saying,

It is not the bias, it is the complete lack of evidence. We all expect and demand evidence from the pharmaceutical companies. Yet at the same time many think that they should be able to promote, unchallenged, every bit of unsubstantiated, untested (or testd and failed), unproven, "medicine" because it agrees with their worldview.

.......

LOL  Evidence.  LOL

"As for "we all expect and demand evidence from the pharmaceutical companies" that implies that the evidence provided by them is true, perhaps you might look up Pfizer and see how good their evidence is, or maybe look and find that a previous employee of Pfizer was awarded monies for blowing the whistle on them, as he said, profit before the health of their patients was their priority.

For the record I have little respect for most alternative health care providers, in  my experience they are happy to treat you as long as you can pay them.  Further, the frightening thing about most of them is they have adopted some simplistic modality and apply it to everyone equally, the only good thing about this is they don't have access to the same toxic medications and testing procedures doctors do.

Oldgoat, are you are referring here to my comment about bread and butter? 

Tigana wrote:

Oldgoat, are you are referring here to my comment about bread and butter? 

I'm unaware of your comment on bread and butter.  I'm all about bread and butter though, should I look for it?

Well written, ElizaQ. You must be on the mend!

To take responsibility for out own health is the key, and to do that we need information. 

siamdave wrote:

 More seriously, I think nobody is getting deep enough here - these days, in PR-land, it's not really about science or medicine at all, it's about politics. It's true that with the internet there are a lot of somewhat challenged people trying to sell weird stuff, and other people trying to make a buck by lying about stuff - but krist, the gov is doing the same thing since big business took over - how are we average people supposed to tell the snake oil guys from the real scientists anymore? Science (and medicine, as a part of science) are compromised all to hell these days, with 'scientific opinions' etc, like politicians, being to a large extent for sale to the highest bidder. It is a very, very bad situation for 'we the average people', when we can't trust these people anymore. And the only way we are going to do anything about it is to take back our country from the capitalists who have appropriated our government.

 I think that part of the problem is that this sort of debate seems to easily descend into binary type aruging. Either for or against, all in or all out,  with some people falling on particular sides and trying to make their respective cases and in doing so labeling anyone that divulges from a side as some sort of total believer in the other.  It makes any sort of more nuanced disscussion very difficult. At least that's how I personally feel and one of the reasons I've avoided the discussion so far.

I'm someone who understand the problems with 'big Pharma', has concerns about certain aspects of mainstream medicine as a whole, yet I'm not against all that 'big pharma' offers or am against mainstream medicine.  I have used and will continue to use both 'mainstream' and 'alternative' as generalized categories in my own personal healthcare.   It is difficult though and I think the reasons that you pointed out is why.  I actually do have a background in one aspect of alternative medicine and under current legal standards could practice it if I wanted, so my experience with 'alternative' comes from an actual place of some study.  However I find in conversation like this elsewhere I get just as maligned by some, be and and end all, alternative proponents because I have no problem whatsoever in calling out alot of the BS that comes from that side.  I see the exact same sort of pattern with systemic problems, likely due to things like the profit motive eg. capitalism over the past 10 years during overall mainstreaming of the industry. They mirror the very same patterns that form the much of the foundation of the main arguments made against the common mainstream medicine field, especially when it comes to arguements made around 'big pharma'.   The fact is that very many of the the cures, supplements etc etc as well as some of the science is now either made or supported by big pharma itself or huge and growing corporate interests.   There is big money to be made no matter what side of the fence one might sit on. 

I do think that at one time the argument that is played all the time about 'corporate interests' protecting themselves and thus maligning, ostracizing etc etc did hold a lot of truth.  However with the growth and interest in the area coupled with the 'oh look huge' market aspect has made that particular argument less weighty.  Science and in many cases good scientist have started studying the area and I personally find that a lot of people do have a problem when results come in that do show that 'some' things or theories aren't all they cracked up to be.  I personnally don't see this as a problem. I think overall it's a good thing and for the most part exactly what some proponants have been asking for all along.  The problem comes with the acceptance of some of the results.

As an example when the issues around vaccines and connections to medical issues like autism first started to see the light of day I fell into the 'uh oh' there could be some truth to this crowd, though I in no way took an activist role against vaccines.  However I did follow the debate and did follow some of the studies that were done around the issue and now feel comfortable with the findings that any connection is specious at best.  However for some it doesn't seem to matter what 'science' is actually done around it because although the demand for the science was made, and in many instances it did happen, and since it came out debunking that particular theory the result were automatically distrusted.  So now you have people claiming that the 'science' is bunk.  It's like a viscious self-confirming circle.   Science is bias, but please do some science on this anyways, oh look at the results they prove science is bias, carry on as before. 

On the other hand I do have some problems with the way that the science part is done on certain things, like with methodology or in what in my particular opinion is misunderstanding or misperceptions about the particular modality is studied.  Start talking about that and then the science be all and end all crowd chimes in with it's all just woo, woo and you're woo woo.   It's sad really because I do think that there are many good things that are offered by looking at health from different perspectives and from different modalities.

The problem as I see it now is that due to the $$$$ aspect there is a whole lot of BS from all corners to wade through.

ElizaQ wrote:

..........

Yes I do feel better today.  I agree about responsibility for ones health and also agree about information. However my point is that I see just as much BS now coming from the 'alternative' side of things as I do from 'big pharma corporate side' of things.   In some cases they are pretty close to each other with how they are marketed. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that the same marketing people are involved. In many magazines I don't see a whole lot of difference in the claims being made about certain pills, supplements etc etc coming from the 'natural' side as the the pills and cures from the big pharma side about the latest wonder drug that the chemists have cooked up.

Thank you for your posts and I am glad to hear that you are feeling better.

I think that once you are very ill then radical changes are needed and no pills, vitamins, cleanses or mangosteen juice are going to fix you up in a jiffy, for some those radical changes are made in consultation with doctors and that is appropriate BUT for many the cause of their illness would be most effectively addressed by lifestyle changes not doctors.  Doctors are illiterate when it comes to proper nutrition and the medications they prescribe to those patients inevitably result in further illness, it only makes sense if you want an industry supported by sickness and by the way that is a three hundred billion dollar industry in Canada.

Did you know, thread drift, that the average time it takes to be diagnosed with celiac is 11 years and that by the time most people are diagnosed with it they have a host of other serious health problems?   What is funny to me is they call celiac a disease, it is not disease, it is damage done by what the body finds toxic and if you follow the SCD (Specific Carbohydrate Di et) you will recover from not only celiac but arthritis and second stage diabetes which are also referred to as diseases.  Strangely, in some European countries they routinely test children for celiac and if they test positive they are kept off gluten and never have problems unlike the milllions of North Americans taking a variety of pills for our guts.  Actually, I don't think it is strange at all, I think it is further evidence of the ineptitude of our system and the greed of pharmaceutical companies.  If anyone is looking to make money I suggest you get in line for the pills they are coming up with for celiac.  LOL

Beautifully written posts, ennir and EilzaQ. Thank you. 

Quote:

I know a couple of doctors and one of the most frustrating things they say they have to deal with is the time with a patient pressure.  There isn't generally the time needed to actually sit down and discuss it all so you end up with coles notes versions of reccomendations.  Eat better, exercise more but no I don't have time to sit here and discuss it in detail.

This might be a bit of drift but, I hate this excuse that doctors just don't have the time to spend with patients. They are choosing not to spend time so they can make more money. My partner and I had midwives when we had our child. We saw the midwife once a month and each appointment would be between 1 - 1.5 hours long. Lots of time for questions, for teaching us about things baby, for getting to know us on the level that someone should before they deliver a baby and give pelvic exams. Believe it or not, their office was nice (they run it as a cooporative) and non of them were living in poverty (for the most part far from it). Yet doctors keep telling us that they can only spend 10mins per patient despite the fact that they get $35 for a basic visit.

I'll second that.  My Dr., who the family has been seeing for over 22 years now, strictly limits his practice and the number of patients he sees.  He's personable and chatty, and gets to know his patients as fully developed people rather than a set of hurridly explained presenting symptoms.  His living circumstances are comfortable, and he will never be and does not wish to be rich.

He talks about lifestyle, and I'd say is open minded about peoples self care opinions, though he has had a falling out with the idea of chiropractic.  Given that, were he to suddenlyget very directive about something, and say "holy crap oldgoat, ya gotta take this treatment!" i'd be inclined to listen to him.

Ghislaine wrote:

I should add that the complete denial/refusal of those with power and so-called "scientists" to address the causes of cancer is just as anti-science as claiming that people should take Vitamin C instead of chemo or other cancer drugs.

US feds knew about common carcinogens in the 1940's and apparently kept it to themselves, And incidence of various cancers have risen here in the western most countries, although people are living longer with cancer on average now. A newer field of study researches environmental effects on our genetic makeup, epigenetics.  Mum's the word on industrial pollution still though. Like they say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

I think it's possible that humans may have produced our own vitamin C at one time, like many animals do. Goats produce somwhere around 13000 mg of vitamin C every day when healthy, and a lot more when theyre under stress. And I think it's more lucrative for big pharma to provide the treatments instead of focussing on blockbuster drug discoveries to actually cure disease. I really think prevention is where it's at, but that runs counter to the big business model for capitalism. And for all their multibillion dollar profiteering and extended patent protections handed to them in Reagan and Mulroney's time in the sun, big pharma has not produced anything as life-saving as the polio vaccines, or insulin - two miracle drugs discovered and developed on shoestring budgets a long time ago.

We're short of doctors in Canada. The ones we do have are in a hurry all the time.

My GP is easily distracted. I sometimes have to interrupt him and say something like, Enough about you, doc. Let's talk about me. And then he checks his computer screen and pulls up a file belonging someone with the same last name but no relation. It's a good thing one of us is on the ball some days.

Government rulings make it hard for professionals and medical practitioners from other countries to come here and work. In Ontario, Bob Rae was going to bring in initiatives to speed them through.

Has anything been done? The clerk at my corner store used to be a physician at NASA.

hey, where'd sagan and specter and snert and sineed and the rest of them go? - this is deteriorating intoa rational, polite discussion! (and why do all their nom de plumes start with s? Is this a plot I haven't heard about yet? I like to be up on the latest whacko conspiracy theories, y'know ..

(Seriously, nice words, ElizaQ, and others - mostly my philosophy too, keeping healthy is mostly about decent diet (mine includes barley pop) and exercise and moderation, but it's nice to know there are some tested and true medical science things out there to fall back on when bad stuff happens. But you still gotta think for yourself and be skeptical when they start spouting new miracle drugs, or politics gets into it - remember thalidomide is my motto...

siamdave wrote:

hey, where'd sagan and specter and snert and sineed and the rest of them go? 

I have a life.

Siamdave stop ridiculing and attacking other babblers.