Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 10:00am

The peers who would be qualified to review Doctor D'Adamo's research don't belong to the AMA. They would be Naturopathic Doctors who don't treat their patients with radiation, surgery or drugs. Medical Journals are controlled by members of the AMA. The AMA are not in any way arbiters over what naturopathic doctors do. It is a seperate accredited credential which is not an MD.

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 10:05am

This bad practice of conflating what alopaths and naturopaths are expected to do has only lead to pejoritization of everything and everyone not connected to the AMA. It needs to be recognized for what it is, a mistake. It needs to be corrected.

Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 10:08am

Why would the British Medical Journal and the Lancet (two of the world's most famous papers) be controlled by the American Medical Association?

That simply doesn't make any sense.

Naturopaths are quacks. Medicine is what works. A lot of our compounds ARE natural. Asprin? Natural. Curare? Natural. Various antibiotics? Natural.

It's just that we don't quote unbelievable amounts of nonsense we administer medication.

It's simple. If you wish I will explain why blood does not change with diet (holy moly! Do you realise how horrific a disadvantage that is? Our entire evolutionary strategy is based of being omnivores not selection of food on blood type).

Comment by Grace Fitzpatrick on August 10, 2011 at 10:12am

I wish more research would be done on marijuana. I understand that it can be a valuable pain suppressant with fewer side effects than other medications currently in use.  I understand morphine is highly addictive which may be fine for someone with terminal cancer, but certainly not so fine for a person who deals with chronic pain.  Living with someone who deals with chronic severe pain, I do wish there was some medication which did not cause liver damage or keep them out of it.  I don't want to get high, but it would be nice to get  the benefits marijuana supposedly has for MS patients without getting high.  For that, it is going to take refinement by traditional research. 

 

It's too bad that drug companies seem to do the bulk of medical research, because their way usually includes some expensive drug which has tons of side effects.  When universities or the VA do research they seem to find not only cheaper solutions, but also ones with fewer side effects.  Sadly, I think we can kiss this type of government funded research goodbye because it competes with private businesses which fund political campaigns.  And now that the Repubs are slashing away at everything worthwhile (considering they seem to hate science), we can probably expect scientific research to be hit hard during budget cuts even though it saves money and lives in the long term.

Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 10:32am

You mean

like the drug Marinol and Sativex? 

See the problem with the "legalise medical marijuana brigade" is that they are dumbasses.

No one wants to legalise it because then it becomes and uncontrolled self medication excuse (I am not a pothead, I just have chronic pain syndromes). I have met a suprisingly large number of "such chronic pain syndrome sufferers" and they generally seem like pot heads to me.

Smoking weed is bad for you. It's a big dose of carcinogens, and it's like smoking an unfiltered cigarette. The dose is also impossible to meter properly. Hence Marinol and Sativex whose dosages and pharmacokinetics are incredibly precise. 

However no body wants to take those instead opting for the plant. It's like rejecting morphine because you want to smoke opium... 

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 10:39am

Avicenna, The English language has different referents employed by specific
credentials. Example: Blacks and Balentine's law references contain specific
useages of words for the practice. of law. You will find to your dismay perhaps
that Webster's and Oxfords dictionaries don't cover the usage of their contents
with respect to law at all. For he legal useage of words you must go to a law
reference, not a word dictionary.
Thankfully I already had this discussion with a lawyer who said: "the useage of
terms employed by varied credentials can not be plotted in a Venn diagram".
What you're hoping and arguing is that the terms MD Physicians use can
arbitrate the terms Naturopathic Doctors use. You'd better check with a handy
PhD Ed. on this because different credentials have different referents employed
in the terms they use. You don't seem to understand or respect this reality. Are
you some kind of a quack?

Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 10:43am

No. I am arguing that they are bunch of amoral quacks who are conning money out of desperate idiots who don't understand medicine and encouraging frankly dangerous attitudes to healthcare and promoting superstition rather than hard science. 

It is simple. It is no better than a placebo effect. If I administered tap water alongside a homeopath's preparation it would have the same effect as the homeopaths work. Hell I could pretend to be a real accupuncturist, shove needles inside you willy nilly and still get the same effect as one by as long as I pretended sufficiently well. 

It's simple. If you showed up with an unknown chronic pain, your doctor would say "I don't know" because that is the truth. Your quack would make stuff up because he is seeing this as a way to mint money out of your gullibility. 

A PhD Ed. can say all he wants but it doesn't change the empirical fact that those guys are weapons grade bullshit merchants. 

It's simple. In your world you have enough doctors to fix their messes when it goes wrong. No one takes you to a "homeopathy hospital when you have a heart attack" they take you to see real doctors.

Where I live people ACTUALLY DIE from these moron's treatments. They con desperate people for money. I have even seen adverts for a natural "rabies cure" (It's a 100% mortal disease. In history only 15 people have survived Rabies and that is due to medical intervention of the most radical sort called the Miluwaukee protocol. That is not 15 people per year. It is 15 people in human history.

This isn't a debate, this is science. We work by hard proof. It is simple. If you have any naturopath willing to take our challenge (there is a million dollars available) then we will meet them and devise an honest scientific experiment.

There have been no takers because "alternative medicine cannot stand upto rigorous testing". It is smoke and mirrors.  

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 11:01am

Avicenna, Andrew Weill has an MD and an ND. He promotes integrative medicine. Ever heard of it?

You can't wrap your head around this concept. Everybody has to listen to you sing lyrics from the Rolling Stones song Satisfaction "...But he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke the same cigarettes as me".

You bore me with your clap trap harangue. It's such a black and white cookie cutter autocratic diatribe. Make a mess on your own time in your own blog.

Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 11:13am

Andrew Weill is so daft that half the stuff he sells can be disproved by medical students let alone actual doctors. He promotes integrative medicine because he can have all the benefits of real medicine but make you pay for extra drugs.

Of course I bore you. You won't bloody listen. It's not black and white, it's actually well thought out and researched.

It's simple. You are promoting superstition. You are no different from any other priest out there. Except you are a lot more dangerous because what you don't believe in is medicine. You are encouraging quacks.

Andrew Weil sells real medicine under the guise of natural medicine fluffing out his actual advice with baloney.

It's like saying "take these 3 pills daily 32 minutes and 30 seconds before your food after dancing the macarena". You assume it's the 32 min 30 seconds and the macarena that are important. Not the pills.

Sigh. So basically you want to surround yourself with people who say "Oh clarence! Your unrefuted comments swayed me to reject reality and substitute fantasy! Oh let's all take ecinacea and have spinal adjustments! It will be ever so quaint."

This boils down to one simple thing. You are encouraging quacks, which means you are actively destroying my hard work. You are no different from any other purveyor of idiocy out there.

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 11:28am

To Avicenna

You make this sound like barnfire of the vanities.

Your medical vocation is not under attack. What will not stand is your ignorance of the different referents employed by varied credentials using similarly spelled words.

That is real. Everything you say comes from a particular referent which by the way is NOT the only arbiter of science. Oh, there I've said it now. Do you think in your high and mighty plan of Fluoridation there is room for the likes of me? No,? I have to be threatened with disease, death and worse calumny. And all this because some of us forgot to put on our thinking caps this morning, hmmm?

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 11
• Next ›
• Page