Do You Know What They Call Western Medicine That Works? Medicine

"Do You Know What They Call Western Medicine That Works? Medicine"

Jesus I hate that slogan. People just repeat it believing it makes them clever for some reason. I see it repeated on MAP a lot. It seems to be most popular with people who have little to no medical training what-so-ever. Here is why it is BS:

Specialist Bias:
Specialists tend to over-diagnose within their own specialty. Surgeons often see cause for surgery, even when unnecessary or hazardous, psychologists for counseling, physical therapists for physical therapy, etc etc. This tendency is not unique to medicine. It is human nature. A veteran cop might see danger everywhere he/she goes, a botanist might observe plants in a waiting room the rest of us ignore, and a lawyer might notice the violation of minor laws that society usually disregards.

So what specialist's brand of medicine does this broad label of "medicine" apply to? You'll probably get a radically different diagnosis depending on the specialist you visit, regardless of the fact that your underlying condition is static. But, I guess it's all just medicine.

Misdiagnoses:
Misdiagnoses are very common in medicine. A proper diagnosis can save your life, and a misdiagnosis frequently kills patients who would have otherwise lived. Those medical procedures still "work" for some people, they just happen to kill a lot of people who receive them needlessly every day in countries around the world. Evidently, it's still "medicine" even if it kills you and you didn't need it to begin with.

And before anyone cries bad source, I was taught in my biology program that unnecessary surgery kills more people every year in the US than auto accidents. The professor who taught me this was a brilliant young researcher from a family of scientists who was academically well-published before he was employed as a professor.

There Are Several Paradigms of Medicine in Each Specialty:

Every GP knows that each prescription drug they prescribe increases a patients chance of developing a disease as a side-effect of the medicine. The more prescriptions drugs one takes, the greater the risk of developing an acute disease later in life becomes. There is no scientific debate about this subject. This is common knowledge. Yet some GPs chronically overprescribe, while others exercise more caution and recommend patients alter their habits first (this is very rare in the US, most MDs never even suggest it).

This is due partly to our instant gratification cultures as modern humans. We expect results immediately, and prescription drugs tend to create them. Sure, those results have a host of side-effects many patients are never informed about before being given their drugs, but whose fault is that? Is there an ethical responsibility to inform patients about the side-effects of medicines they are given? I believe so. Most MAPers probably feel their GP does a great job at explaining the potential side-effects of every drug they have been given, meanwhile they probably didn't bother reading the 5 page printout they received from the pharmacy. Unless your MD took half an hour just discussing the side-effects of a single prescription you were given, you were probably grossly under-informed.

The various paradigms within each specific speciality of medicine don't just include the topic of how conservative or liberal an MD is with their prescription pad either. But, are all these various approaches just under some nebulous title of "medicine?" Again, it all works for somebody. It might eventually kill you and you might not even need it to begin with, but hey, that drug saved someone's life. Don't worry, it's all just medicine.

Herbs And Modern Medicine:
Many modern prescription drugs are manufactured from mechanisms derived by studying the science of botany. The synthetic form of these drugs are often more focused and potent at targeting specific chemical pathways, but the research/manufacturing process frequently creates a broad range of new problems, interfering with other physiological functions as an unintended consequence. Often the original plants still perform many therapeutic functions (many in a weaker form though) and don't have the same long-term, devastating side-effects. There is a mountain of academic literature supporting the efficacy of botany-based therapies, yet few First World MDs are even aware of the literature. Many have some vague idea that the literature exists, and a few also realize that some therapies work but recognize that they just aren't trained to properly understand and recommend them. It is certainly not because of a lack of academic research though. It is merely because they have not been trained in the methods to employ that research. Many MAPers seem to naively believe that if it worked, we'd all be using it, completely disregarding how financially influential pharmaceutical corporations are on their medical systems.

I attempted to find a proper meta-analysis of a broad range of effective herbal therapies, but unfortunately I could not find a satisfactory one. It tends to be a subject that one has to read a lot of literature on a very narrow criteria to develop an informed view about. So much research yields no results that a broad meta analysis gives the illusion that none if it functions therapeutically. The truth though is that some of it functions quite well under targeted circumstances. Reading through the literature on a specific criteria can and does illustrate these results, but drawing a broad conclusion about the entire topic will and usually does fail to deliver. On this case-by-case basis, some herbal therapies deliver, and others are absolute crap. However, most First World MDs never recommend any of the established effective herbal treatments.

So, by this nebulous definition of "medicine," some herbs absolutely are medicine, however depending on where you live you'll only know about which herbs work for which conditions if you research them on your own. Your doctor won't tell you. It's too far outside his/her paradigm of training. It's that wonderful secret medicine that requires you to have studied science for many years to be able locate and understand it. Secret medicine is the best variety.


Gene Therapy: Where Is It?
Geneticists are pioneering cures for numerous diseases that kill millions of people every year globally. There are many MAPers who have diseases that science can presently offer stem cell therapy cures for. At least we think they're cures. The science is still in it's relative infancy, but numerous common "incurable" terminal and debilitating diseases have seemingly been reversed in scientific studies around the world. Meanwhile, most of the patients with those diseases in First World countries are completely ignorant of this data. Why? Because their MDs haven't told them. In many cases, the MDs themselves are not even familiar with the studies. These are specialists who have specialized in treating the many diseases of an organ system and they don't even know about the emerging research on the subject of those organ systems, let alone the fact that geneticists in foreign countries have been reversing the symptoms they have been ineffectively treating for half-a-decade.

But hey, it's all just medicine. Don't worry about it. Many people in YOUR country have died needless and painful deaths and they were never even given the opportunity to explore gene therapy alternatives to conservatively effective pharmaceuticals and surgeries with tremendous risk. Apparently it would be irresponsible of us as a society to not properly approve of each treatment on a case-by-case basis over a 15-20 year period because horrible side-effects might manifest. Patients might grow extra limbs and make Godless babies. It makes much more sense to spend 10x as much over an extended period of time knowing many of those patients are virtually certain to die from their diseases while we wait.

Don't worry though, if you happen to die it's still just medicine, not Western medicine, and it all simply works.

 

I'm happy to attempt a response to this. However, before I do can I clear up one thing? The slogan normally reads "Do You Know What They Call Alternative (not 'Western') Medicine That Works? Medicine". Is that what you meant to say?

 

If research wasn't ahead of practice it would have failed as research. Of course the majority of practitioners aren't familiar with the majority of research, you know full well just how much research is out there, there's no way any one person could familiarise themself with it all. So far as GP's go I have a rather different approach to what you reckon most MAPers do, in that I've absolutely no faith in them whatsoever, but they are quite handy when you need to get certain things signed.
You made quite a point about the risks of medical treatment, but presented no data on how many people would have died without medical intervention. It's quite possible that data would be impossible to obtain, certainly getting objective data on the subject would be impossible, and as you rightly said there may well be side effects in future. However I think it's probable that modern medicine does more good then harm. My other objection is that you used exclusively American data, I know you're from the states, but most of us are not, and statistics from a country where medics have no financial incentive to provide unnecessary treatment might be more relevant to our lives. Of course even here the patient themself often applies a lot of pressure which results in needless treatment, as I've heard is the case in the states, and you did touch on that, so what treatment is provided often depends on the confidence and indeed beligerance of the practitioner.

I need to read up on the current stem cell research, it's actually quite relevant to my practice, as we transplant marrow, including certain stem cells, on my ward, however as things stand I'm just trying to keep up with where we're at, I'll look at where we're going once I'm able (and once the damn hospital organises my Athens access, it really shouldn't be this slow).

 

GP's I find them completely useless, but then again I don't ever remember being ill. I visit the GP for general check ups, sleep "problems" and when I initially wanted to quit smoking, also a weird injury/pain I had on the ball of my foot. I find them quite rude, I also get the feeling they don't like their jobs.

Not sure if this counts as alternative medicine, but I have supplemented with Tribulus, Ginseng, Ginko Bilboa, Horny Goats Weed, I've also introduced simple garlic/ginger/lemon and honey for friends/family who were sick with much better responses than general medicine like "Lemsip". I also have an out there theory, that some of these vaccines and inoculations we take as kids are useless, and cause more problems than solve. I never for example had a BCR jab, and a couple of other inoculations as a kid. Call me paranoid, but I don't trust them, and don't think it's natural.

 

So far as the cold remedies go, unless you've actually got a fever then yeah, anything that offer symptomatic relief is much as good as anything else, paracetamol derivatives can be effective, especially if gargled, but basically it's whatever makes your throat feel less sore

So far as the vaccines go, because of the methods involved in herd immunity, the problem is that by refusing them you're actually putting other people at risk, rather then just yourself. So long as the number of people refusing remains small, it's not a significant issue, but if everyone decides not to get them (as nearly happened a few years ago) then we'd be in real problems.

Re: not natural, I can't think of any medical intervention more natural then one which encourages the body to solve it's own problems. Vaccines more or less stimulate the immune system. It's effectively the same as someone who's been exposed to a virus recovering and being immune thereafter, except that vaccines are safer.

 

the first issue is using american based data - they pay for health care and doctors get paid per treatment - that messes up the system as people will be over diagnosed and trested for no reason.

also

i wouldnt say the sugery is unneccesary - if you need a valve replacing - you need and valve replace. no amount of herbs can cure that. but prevention is clearly not looked after in the US we're people eat dirt and suffer obesity.

it's not the medicine or the science (theres no such thing as eastern science as in an eastern scientific method, am i correct?) its the system that surronds it.

The modern medical system treats problems it doesnt prevent them.
vaccinations and healthy diet and exercise prevent them

 

Hardly, health promotion and prophylactic treatment are mainstays of the approach to healthcare in this country.

 

i was talking largely about the US. socialsed medicine tends to care more for prevention than those capitalist swine! (my inner comy coming out there)

 

Can someone distill the original post down to its base argument, because I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be arguing against, I just know he's wrong.

 

How would resorting to the armada of quacks, idiots and zealots that comprise alternative 'medicine' cure any of the problems you have listed with real medicine?

 

Actually he's not entirely, much of the criticism he levelled at modern healthcare is legit, or at least, not baseless. He just hasn't proposed anything much as a reasonable alternative.

 

So am I right in thinking that the thread title has nothing to do with the thread itself?

 

I've seen some nonsense posted on MAP over the years but that is right up there. I mean this line basically invalidates everything thereafter "GP's I find them completely useless, but then again I don't ever remember being ill". In the same way I find the AA quite useless even though I haven't ever had my car break down? That sort of never actually used them kind of useless?

How many individual Doctor's have you seen and what percentage were rude?
In what way were they rude?
I've seen maybe 10-20 over the years and only ever had one bad one (which was more a case of bad bedside manner rather than out and out rudeness).
Are you really judging all Doctors?

Ah yes that corner-stone of modern medicine "Lemsip". Jesus.

So says a person that has NEVER had to live in a world where potentially fatal infectious disease run rampant.
If it wasn't so nasty I'd recommend Doctors stop giving vaccines for a couple of years. See how many idiots still think vaccines are useless when baby and toddler mortaility rates starts to rise towards the pre-vaccine days.
People would be beating their doors down to get some when they see the neighbourhood kids dying around them.
I think Roald Dahl's daughter Olivia had something very interesting to say about the efficacy of vaccines. Oh no she didn't actually...she died of measles complications before a measles vaccine was available.

Thanks for compromising the herd immunity that is protecting our new born children and immuno-supressed people.

Doctors like their jobs. What they probably hate are people that call the wonder that are vaccines useless while smoking themselves into an early grave.

I have to admit that's not the first word that springs to mind when I read that post.

 

Not only that but quite a bit of the criticism applies equally well to practitioners of medicine outside the effective mainstream.

 

Come on Zaad...you can do better than that.
Vaccines and healthy lifestyle guidance are BY FAR the most common medical advice and treatment offered by western GP's (at least in the UK).
In what way does that mean the modern medical system isn't preventing problems!?!

 

Yeah, the billions of pounds the NHS spends on publicity and awareness efforts is them doing their best not to prevent illness.

God, people in developing countries can be so stoopid sometimes.

 

I would normally apply entirely different criticisms to them, which may or may not violate the ToS depending on how much I've had to drink and what stupidity I've had foisted on me recently.

 

I used at slogan today in a thread you responded in, thus I assume this is directed at least partially at me.

Whilst the reasons you selectively posted to fit your argument are valid, people need to rely medicine that has been approved through clinical trials, albeit with documented side effects which can be managed, rather than relying on hearsay with no statistical basis.

Thankfully this slogan is widespread as despite the drawbacks of modern medicine it's still better than dancing druids.

 

Being ill isn't the only reason why someone might go see their GP, I mentioned why I went to see them, I have also gone with my nan, with my gfs and so on to see what they had to say. I've been to see GP's in East, Central and North London, Bradford, Sheffield and Leeds. I went to see the Dr, when I had sleep problems, when they at first failed to diagnose or realise I have a brain tumour, when they failed to realise one of my exes had a problem with her ovaries, when they literally gave my nan a bag full of medicine she hardly needed and not actually listen to her, I went through some of her medicine and asked her what she is taking them for and went to the GP with her, she is now taking a third of what she was taking before after I spoke to the GP.

Most of the time I have spoke to them about my sleep problems, they reccomend drinking hot milk, when I spoke about some issues I had with my headaches they thought I was making things up. GPs in general in my experience, all they do is listen to symptoms and offer you a prescription based on that, anything out of that they send you to a specialist.

I said I find GP's useless not Doctors, stop assuming, GP's are useless. They tell you what you know, prescribe you medicine based on symptoms, or send you to a specialist. I've dealt with the same amount of Drs as you and in less years, I have visted Drs with family and GFs. They are rude in the "I'm a Dr, listen to me, you are wrong". Even when it turns out later THEY WERE WRONG. My aunts neice was misdiagnosed with something when she was 12, she ended up dying and I remember a case in the papers about Drs being idiotic, and not caring misdiagnosing.

GP's, I have a problem with Lemsip, Paracetamol and Aspirin for EVERYTHING. Oh I feel a headache coming on take a paracetamol. I know people addictied to the stuff, when I have a headache, I have a cold shower, drink more water, relax a little not answer every little pain with painkillers, my mum was addicted to depression and sleeping pills, according to her Drs now, she should NEVER have been diagnosed that in the first place. Yes I have a problem with GPs.

I do not have a problem with Doctors, at all.

Where did I say that? I have a problem with GP's, not all GP's are doctors. I find GP's useless not doctors. I have friends who are doctors, family members, some are training in medicine to become Drs. Not GPs.

Call me whatever makes you feel better, but you assumed I have a problem with DOCTORS, when I said GP, I think you need to learn to differentiate, your GP might be a great person, and I love what Drs are doing in general, but GPs in my experience are quite useless, I would rather not discuss a lot of experiences I have had with them,

I was burnt at the age of 2 by a hot boiling kettle, where I had my skin melt off my arm and some parts of my legs, it is a big skin graph and scar now. I've been to a hospital many a times over the years with this, they also failed to correctly diagnose or look into my suspicions or have me beg for more tests when I had a brain tumour. They were really rude, and complete off the bat when my ex had a problem with her ovaries. I haven't had a good experience with GPs. What exactly do they do for you? Other than read symptoms, enter it into a computer, prescribe medicine, failing that reccomend you to another Doctor, who know's what they are doing?

EDIT: It seems I said not all GP's are doctors, this was a typo I meant not all Doctors are GP's, but I thought that would be clear.

 

I'd like to think that western medicine is like the JKD of medicine and incorporates what's good and discards what is not. Unfortunately you have political agendas, stigmatism, financial interests of large corporations, lobbyists, etc. Take the example of water fluoridation. If was essentially a ploy to give more status to dentistry and remains in effect in some regions even though it has no, or almost no effect on teeth since it is being ingested and there are indications that it may fool mental development in children.

In many ways it is far preferable to the alternatives but unfortunately for a system which is very commercialized and run by corporate interest there is far more money in band-aid-ing the problems than fixing them.