Guest guest Report post Posted November 14, 2001 Thanx for your reply (Ian) re:being a nurse. It has helped,as have other people's contributions. I hope to steer away from the conventional side of nursing in a few years, using alternative/complementary therapies which have not been tested on animals. I would like to know what other people in the group think about being vegan and working as a nurse, Alex. Medical research is, on the whole and in my judgement, indiscriminate, > loosely regulated, unpoliced, and done without compassion for the > animals concerned. Having said that ... > > The vegan society definition includes the qualification " as far as is > practical " . Few of us would eschew modern medicine if we were seriously > ill. (Tested on animals or not, I would probably be dead without my > inhaler.) In my personal judgement, eschewing modern medicine falls > under the heading of " not practical " . > > Unless no vegans are ever ever going to go into a hospital, we will need > someone to nurse us. And if it's okay to get nursed, it's got to be okay > to *be* a nurse. > > I'm sure some of the list would disagree. But that's my opinion. > > twinklepurplefairy wrote: > > > > I am about to qualify as a nurse and have a mixed up head about being > > vegan and using products which have been tested on animals to save > > human lives. When I started my training almost 3years ago I was > > veggie and quite naive about how much of conventional medicine > > involved animals. My goal is to practice complementary therapies > > using my nursing knowledge in a few years time, but for now I feel > > the need to gain some nursing experience. I would like to chat to > > someone to bounce ideas off. alex :-) > > > > To send an email to - > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 15, 2001 Hi Alex, Good for you, for training to be a nurse - it's quite a vocation, and understandably you are concerned with animal testing, but 'you have to be in it, to change it' and having somebody with your ideals and ideas will hopefully steer other people (colleagues and patients) into looking into alternative approaches to our modern day medicine. At the moment 80% of people in lesser developed countries depend on natural herbs and plants for their health care, and something like 50% of the drugs we use today, have active ingredients extracted from wild organisms. But it does appear that as a whole, the public are now quite willing to look at alternatives and that's exactly where you will come in, because you will bridge the gap between the traditional and the alternative (even though really its the ancient). A lot of people are still wary and just need a bit of encouragment, and thats exactly what you will do! take care, Joeann --- twinklepurplefairy wrote: <HR> <html><body> <tt> Thanx for your reply (Ian) re:being a nurse. It has helped,as have <BR> other people's contributions. I hope to steer away from the <BR> conventional side of nursing in a few years, using <BR> alternative/complementary therapies which have not been tested on <BR> animals. I would like to know what other people in the group think <BR> about being vegan and working as a nurse, Alex.<BR> <BR> Medical research is, on the whole and in my judgement, <BR> indiscriminate,<BR> & gt; loosely regulated, unpoliced, and done without compassion for the<BR> & gt; animals concerned. Having said that ...<BR> & gt; <BR> & gt; The vegan society definition includes the qualification & quot;as far as <BR> is<BR> & gt; practical & quot;. Few of us would eschew modern medicine if we were <BR> seriously<BR> & gt; ill. (Tested on animals or not, I would probably be dead without my<BR> & gt; inhaler.) In my personal judgement, eschewing modern medicine falls<BR> & gt; under the heading of & quot;not practical & quot;.<BR> & gt; <BR> & gt; Unless no vegans are ever ever going to go into a hospital, we will <BR> need<BR> & gt; someone to nurse us. And if it's okay to get nursed, it's got to be <BR> okay<BR> & gt; to *be* a nurse.<BR> & gt; <BR> & gt; I'm sure some of the list would disagree. But that's my opinion.<BR> & gt; <BR> & gt; twinklepurplefairy wrote:<BR> & gt; & gt; <BR> & gt; & gt; I am about to qualify as a nurse and have a mixed up head about <BR> being<BR> & gt; & gt; vegan and using products which have been tested on animals to save<BR> & gt; & gt; human lives. When I started my training almost 3years ago I was<BR> & gt; & gt; veggie and quite naive about how much of conventional medicine<BR> & gt; & gt; involved animals. My goal is to practice complementary therapies<BR> & gt; & gt; using my nursing knowledge in a few years time, but for now I feel<BR> & gt; & gt; the need to gain some nursing experience. I would like to chat to<BR> & gt; & gt; someone to bounce ideas off. alex :-)<BR> & gt; & gt; <BR> & gt; & gt; To send an email to -<BR> & gt; & gt; <BR> & gt; & gt; Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 15, 2001 My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. Because " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant quackery. As an example of the latter, there was a rather dangerous person with dodgy credentials who spoke at London Vegans, who claimed that toxins (never ever bacteria or viruses) were the cause of all disease, that chemotherapy never ever worked, that HIV did not cause AIDS, but if you wanted to find out what foods to eat you should go buy her book and get a private consultation. I guess she got an invitation because she happened to be vegan. Obviously, the classic vegan problem with conventional medicine is that the usual method of finding out whether something is safe is to feed it, in humungous quantities, to lab animals. But I get the impression that veganism generally goes hand-to-hand with broad objections to conventional medicine. Am I right? Alex: do you want to do alternative medicine because you want to avoid animal testing, or because you have lots of problems with conventional medicine? joeann cantillon wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Good for you, for training to be a nurse - it's quite > a vocation, and understandably you are concerned with > animal testing, but 'you have to be in it, to change > it' and having somebody with your ideals and ideas > will hopefully steer other people (colleagues and > patients) into looking into alternative approaches to > our modern day medicine. At the moment 80% of people > in lesser developed countries depend on natural herbs > and plants for their health care, and something like > 50% of the drugs we use today, have active ingredients > extracted from wild organisms. But it does appear that > as a whole, the public are now quite willing to look > at alternatives and that's exactly where you will come > in, because you will bridge the gap between the > traditional and the alternative (even though really > its the ancient). A lot of people are still wary and > just need a bit of encouragment, and thats exactly > what you will do! > take care, > Joeann > > --- twinklepurplefairy wrote: > <HR> > <html><body> > <tt> > Thanx for your reply (Ian) re:being a nurse. It has > helped,as have <BR> > other people's contributions. I hope to steer away > from the <BR> > conventional side of nursing in a few years, using > <BR> > alternative/complementary therapies which have not > been tested on <BR> > animals. I would like to know what other people in the > group think <BR> > about being vegan and working as a nurse, Alex.<BR> > <BR> > Medical research is, on the whole and in my > judgement, <BR> > indiscriminate,<BR> > & gt; loosely regulated, unpoliced, and done without > compassion for the<BR> > & gt; animals concerned. Having said that ...<BR> > & gt; <BR> > & gt; The vegan society definition includes the > qualification & quot;as far as <BR> > is<BR> > & gt; practical & quot;. Few of us would eschew modern > medicine if we were <BR> > seriously<BR> > & gt; ill. (Tested on animals or not, I would probably > be dead without my<BR> > & gt; inhaler.) In my personal judgement, eschewing > modern medicine falls<BR> > & gt; under the heading of & quot;not > practical & quot;.<BR> > & gt; <BR> > & gt; Unless no vegans are ever ever going to go into a > hospital, we will <BR> > need<BR> > & gt; someone to nurse us. And if it's okay to get > nursed, it's got to be <BR> > okay<BR> > & gt; to *be* a nurse.<BR> > & gt; <BR> > & gt; I'm sure some of the list would disagree. But > that's my opinion.<BR> > & gt; <BR> > & gt; twinklepurplefairy wrote:<BR> > & gt; & gt; <BR> > & gt; & gt; I am about to qualify as a nurse and have a > mixed up head about <BR> > being<BR> > & gt; & gt; vegan and using products which have been > tested on animals to save<BR> > & gt; & gt; human lives. When I started my training > almost 3years ago I was<BR> > & gt; & gt; veggie and quite naive about how much of > conventional medicine<BR> > & gt; & gt; involved animals. My goal is to practice > complementary therapies<BR> > & gt; & gt; using my nursing knowledge in a few years > time, but for now I feel<BR> > & gt; & gt; the need to gain some nursing experience. I > would like to chat to<BR> > & gt; & gt; someone to bounce ideas off. alex :-)<BR> > & gt; & gt; <BR> > & gt; & gt; To send an email to > -<BR> > & gt; & gt; <BR> > & gt; & gt; Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 i agre with some points, some alt. medicine all seems to be about whether you are running hot or cold, or wot the moon phase is, and seems a bit crackers.. but, some obviously has its merit...and conventional(read western) medicine always seems to be all about who many different chemicals they can shove in you they never look for root causes... fraggle Dr Ian McDonald <ian.mcdonald wrote: >My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't >really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. Because > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it >is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active >ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses >manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant >quackery. > >As an example of the latter, there was a rather dangerous person with >dodgy credentials who spoke at London Vegans, who claimed that toxins >(never ever bacteria or viruses) were the cause of all disease, that >chemotherapy never ever worked, that HIV did not cause AIDS, but if you >wanted to find out what foods to eat you should go buy her book and get >a private consultation. I guess she got an invitation because she >happened to be vegan. > >Obviously, the classic vegan problem with conventional medicine is that >the usual method of finding out whether something is safe is to feed it, >in humungous quantities, to lab animals. But I get the impression that >veganism generally goes hand-to-hand with broad objections to >conventional medicine. Am I right? > >Alex: do you want to do alternative medicine because you want to avoid >animal testing, or because you have lots of problems with conventional >medicine? > >joeann cantillon wrote: >> >> Hi Alex, >> Good for you, for training to be a nurse - it's quite >> a vocation, and understandably you are concerned with >> animal testing, but 'you have to be in it, to change >> it' and having somebody with your ideals and ideas >> will hopefully steer other people (colleagues and >> patients) into looking into alternative approaches to >> our modern day medicine. At the moment 80% of people >> in lesser developed countries depend on natural herbs >> and plants for their health care, and something like >> 50% of the drugs we use today, have active ingredients >> extracted from wild organisms. But it does appear that >> as a whole, the public are now quite willing to look >> at alternatives and that's exactly where you will come >> in, because you will bridge the gap between the >> traditional and the alternative (even though really >> its the ancient). A lot of people are still wary and >> just need a bit of encouragment, and thats exactly >> what you will do! >> take care, >> Joeann >> >> --- twinklepurplefairy wrote: >> <HR> >> <html><body> >> <tt> >> Thanx for your reply (Ian) re:being a nurse. It has >> helped,as have <BR> >> other people's contributions. I hope to steer away >> from the <BR> >> conventional side of nursing in a few years, using >> <BR> >> alternative/complementary therapies which have not >> been tested on <BR> >> animals. I would like to know what other people in the >> group think <BR> >> about being vegan and working as a nurse, Alex.<BR> >> <BR> >> Medical research is, on the whole and in my >> judgement, <BR> >> indiscriminate,<BR> >> > loosely regulated, unpoliced, and done without >> compassion for the<BR> >> > animals concerned. Having said that ...<BR> >> > <BR> >> > The vegan society definition includes the >> qualification & quot;as far as <BR> >> is<BR> >> > practical & quot;. Few of us would eschew modern >> medicine if we were <BR> >> seriously<BR> >> > ill. (Tested on animals or not, I would probably >> be dead without my<BR> >> > inhaler.) In my personal judgement, eschewing >> modern medicine falls<BR> >> > under the heading of & quot;not >> practical & quot;.<BR> >> > <BR> >> > Unless no vegans are ever ever going to go into a >> hospital, we will <BR> >> need<BR> >> > someone to nurse us. And if it's okay to get >> nursed, it's got to be <BR> >> okay<BR> >> > to *be* a nurse.<BR> >> > <BR> >> > I'm sure some of the list would disagree. But >> that's my opinion.<BR> >> > <BR> >> > twinklepurplefairy wrote:<BR> >> > > <BR> >> > > I am about to qualify as a nurse and have a >> mixed up head about <BR> >> being<BR> >> > > vegan and using products which have been >> tested on animals to save<BR> >> > > human lives. When I started my training >> almost 3years ago I was<BR> >> > > veggie and quite naive about how much of >> conventional medicine<BR> >> > > involved animals. My goal is to practice >> complementary therapies<BR> >> > > using my nursing knowledge in a few years >> time, but for now I feel<BR> >> > > the need to gain some nursing experience. I >> would like to chat to<BR> >> > > someone to bounce ideas off. alex :-)<BR> >> > > <BR> >> > > To send an email to >> -<BR> >> > > <BR> >> > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 EBbrewpunx wrote: > > i agre with some points, some alt. medicine all seems to be about whether you are running hot or cold, or wot the moon phase is, and seems a bit crackers.. > but, some obviously has its merit...and conventional(read western) medicine always seems to be all about who many different chemicals they can shove in you GPs tend to want to shove pills down you. I understand that that's because they've learnt that patients generally feel happier if they go away with some pill or otherwise - it's an easy way of pleasing most patients. > they never look for root causes... I do not understand why you say this. Admittedly basic research into root causes tends to be the purview of scientists rather than medics, but I thought that basic scientific research was usually thrown in with the practitioners under the heading of " conventional medicine " . Conventional medicine tells us exactly what cancer, heart disease, strokes, and other killers are. Epidemiological studies tell us what makes them more likely. More basic research tries to find out exactly how those causes - and the therapies - are mediated. On the other hand, I do not know of any examples of alternative medicine trying to look for root causes in any serious way. > fraggle > -- Ian McDonald http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~type40/alternative.html http://travel.to/startrekcolony - Star Trek: Colony site & .mov http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~type40/who-rpg.html - Dr. Who RPGs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Hi Ian > My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't > really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. I'm sure this is the case with some " alternative medicines " , but none I've ever heard of! Generally they are based on methods which have been used for many centuries, if not millenia, and pre-date " modern " medicine by some considerable time (I always wonder why it is the " traditional " ones which are called " alternative " ). I always have a good laugh when the " scientists " suddenly pronounce that it has been " discovered " that a particular herb has a particular effect, when any " alternative " practitioners have known these facts for centuries! > Because > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it > is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > quackery. Of course, the same could be said for modern medicine. The difficulty I have with modern medicine is that it tends to deal with symptoms, not causes - if you have a headache, take a pain killer - all this does is make you think you're not in pain, while whatever is causing the pain can go about its merry way without any interference from your body. > As an example of the latter, there was a rather dangerous person with > dodgy credentials who spoke at London Vegans, who claimed that toxins > (never ever bacteria or viruses) were the cause of all disease, I wasn't there, so obviously do not know what was said, but my guess would be that it was that toxins lower the body's natural defences, and thereby make it more likely for people to have difficulty fighting off germs - this is a well known fact - approved of, in recent years, by scientists. > that HIV did not cause AIDS, Again, making assumptions - are you sure that he didn't say that HIV does not always lead to AIDS? There have been instances of people living for decades with HIV without ever developing AIDS. Likewise, there have been a few examples of people developing AIDS with no trace of HIV. > Obviously, the classic vegan problem with conventional medicine is that > the usual method of finding out whether something is safe is to feed it, > in humungous quantities, to lab animals. But I get the impression that > veganism generally goes hand-to-hand with broad objections to > conventional medicine. Am I right? I don't think it is something intrinsic to veganism - probably just me :-) BB Peter --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Hi Ian > Conventional medicine tells us exactly what cancer, heart disease, > strokes, and other killers are. But it does not worry about the *causes* - only what they actually are. It also does not tell us how to do anything about them. Cancer we still kill by poisoning the patient and hoping that the cancer dies first. Heart disease is still only helped by invasive surgery. Strokes are still largely a mystery. > On the other hand, I do not know of any examples of alternative medicine > trying to look for root causes in any serious way. " Alternative " medicine is based on what works - it is based on an understanding of what works well with the body and makes it healthy - it generally treats the body as a whole organism (which, surprisingly, it is) - while a modern medicine will concentrate only on the organ with the symptom. BB Peter --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Peter wrote: > > Hi Ian > > > My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't > > really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. > > I'm sure this is the case with some " alternative medicines " , but none I've > ever heard of! Tobacco. Folk wisdom merrily puffed away for centuries - thinking it was good for you! What about the practice of leaving babies out in the cold for a day or two? I've heard an early twentieth century account of that killing some poor child. And let's not forget leeches. > Generally they are based on methods which have been used for > many centuries, if not millenia, and pre-date " modern " medicine by some > considerable time (I always wonder why it is the " traditional " ones which > are called " alternative " ). Because conventional medicine represents a cohesive belief system that dominates healthcare. ( " Check it works rigorously, with lots of cases instead of mere anecdotes. " ) The traditional ones are usually only traditional for one particular tradition - there is no " received wisdom " in alternative medicine, only hundreds of alternatives. > I always have a good laugh when the " scientists " > suddenly pronounce that it has been " discovered " that a particular herb has > a particular effect, when any " alternative " practitioners have known these > facts for centuries! It only takes a tradition to believe - but it takes a proper check of what's actually going on to know. > > Because > > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it > > is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > > quackery. > > Of course, the same could be said for modern medicine. I have absolutely no idea why you're saying that. Modern medicine usually purifies out everything but the pharmacollogically active ingredient from the herb, and often fails to be holistic. But anyone practising rampant quackary or using endangered species (ozone therapy, anyone?) is quickly condemned by other medics, and ends up being, by definition, alternative. > The difficulty I have > with modern medicine is that it tends to deal with symptoms, not causes - if > you have a headache, take a pain killer - all this does is make you think > you're not in pain, while whatever is causing the pain can go about its > merry way without any interference from your body. Well, that's a problem I have with my GP. But they do that because they know from experience that patients are more likely to go away happy if they do that. > > As an example of the latter, there was a rather dangerous person with > > dodgy credentials who spoke at London Vegans, who claimed that toxins > > (never ever bacteria or viruses) were the cause of all disease, > > I wasn't there, so obviously do not know what was said, but my guess would > be that it was that toxins lower the body's natural defences, and thereby > make it more likely for people to have difficulty fighting off germs - this > is a well known fact - approved of, in recent years, by scientists. I'm surprised. Why would you guess that she said something quite different from what I reported she said? When have I ever misled the list? She didn't say that toxins are immuno-inhibitors, she rejected the germ theory of disease outright. She claimed that toxins (never ever ever bacteria or viruses) were the *cause* of *all* disease, not merely a factor. > > that HIV did not cause AIDS, > > Again, making assumptions - are you sure that he didn't say that HIV does > not always lead to AIDS? You're making an assumption she's a he, as well . She said (when I asked) that she would be happy to inject herself with HIV. > There have been instances of people living for > decades with HIV without ever developing AIDS. Likewise, there have been a > few examples of people developing AIDS with no trace of HIV. Yes, and not that I know have been verified. > > Obviously, the classic vegan problem with conventional medicine is that > > the usual method of finding out whether something is safe is to feed it, > > in humungous quantities, to lab animals. But I get the impression that > > veganism generally goes hand-to-hand with broad objections to > > conventional medicine. Am I right? > > I don't think it is something intrinsic to veganism - probably just me :-) > > BB > Peter > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 > > To send an email to - > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 If it makes you feel better it works !!!! I was prescribed Ibuprofen for a pain in the knee . I did not take it and the pain went after 2/3 weeks so why did the doctor suggest the drug when nothing (but time ) would also work and cost less ! ----and also not " poison " my system ? I have no proof that Ibruprofen works since my knee got better with out it ???? Do you have proof that vaccinations prevent illnesses ? I'm still waiting to get measles/ mumps. so for me nothing worked well enough Angie - " Dr Ian McDonald " <ian.mcdonald Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:26 PM Re: Re: vegan nurse replies > My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't > really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. Because > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it > is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > quackery. > >/D=egroupweb/S=1705129295:HM/A=847665/R=2 " > > alt= " " width= " 300 " height= " 250 " > > border= " 0 " ></a></td></tr></table></td> > > </tr> > > <tr><td><img alt= " " width=1 height=1 > > src= " http://us.adserver./l?M=215002.1711356.3237013.1261774/D=egrou pmail/S=1705129295:HM/A=847665/rand=659091103 " ></td></tr> > > </table> > > > > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --> > > > > <br> > > <tt> > > To send an email to > > - </tt> > > <br> > > > > <br> > > <tt> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 To see if its safe you can either study the people who take it voluntarily ___doubt if anyone bothers to do that no money in it or you can test on animals ???Wheres the sense in that ---wrong species and you dont get much feed back as to how the " patient " feels!!! - " Dr Ian McDonald " <ian.mcdonald Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:26 PM Re: Re: vegan nurse replies > My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't > really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. Because > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it > is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > quackery. > >BR> > > <> > & gt; I'm sure some of the list would disagree. But > > > & gt; <a > > href= " http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~type40/alternative.html " >http://www.tardis ..ed.ac.uk/~type40/alternative.html</a><BR> > > & gt; <a > > href= " http://travel.to/startrekcolony " >http://travel.to/startrekcolony</a> > > - Star Trek: Colony site & amp; .mov<BR> > > & gt; <a > > href= " http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~type40/who-rpg.html " >http://www.tardis.ed. ac.uk/~type40/who-rpg.html</a> > > - Dr. Who RPGs<BR> > > <BR> > > </tt> > > > > <br> > > > > <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| --> > > > > <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2> > > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC> > > <td align=center><font size= " -1 " > > color=#003399><b> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 I don't see how you can find cures when the experiments are flawed they are not fair ---too many variables being altered at once instead of one at a time. eg wrong species and artificially induced disease injecting chemicals into a dog's joints to make them swell doesn't make it human arthritis ! Angie - " Dr Ian McDonald " <ian.mcdonald Friday, November 16, 2001 8:41 AM Re: Re: vegan nurse replies > > > EBbrewpunx wrote: > > > > i agre with some points, some alt. medicine all seems to be about whether you are running hot or cold, or wot the moon phase is, and seems a bit crackers.. > > but, some obviously has its merit...and conventional(read western) medicine always seems to be all about who many different chemicals they can shove in you > > GPs tend to want to shove pills down you. I understand that that's > because they've learnt that patients generally feel happier if they go > away with some pill or otherwise - it's an easy way of pleasing most > patients. > > > they never look for root causes... > > I do not understand why you say this. Admittedly basic research into > root causes tends to be the purview of scientists rather than medics, > but I thought that basic scientific research was usually thrown in with > the practitioners under the heading of " conventional medicine " . > > Conventional medicine tells us exactly what cancer, heart disease, > strokes, and other killers are. Epidemiological studies tell us what > makes them more likely. More basic research tries to find out exactly > how those causes - and the therapies - are mediated. > > On the other hand, I do not know of any examples of alternative medicine > trying to look for root causes in any serious way. > > > fraggle > > > > -- > Ian McDonald > > http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~type40/alternative.html > http://travel.to/startrekcolony - Star Trek: Colony site & .mov > http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~type40/who-rpg.html - Dr. Who RPGs > > > To send an email to - > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Angie Wright wrote: > > If it makes you feel better it works !!!! Remember for a couple of paragraphs time that you set that test, and not one that was about removing the underlying condition. > I was prescribed Ibuprofen for a pain in the knee . I did not take it and > the pain went after 2/3 weeks > so why did the doctor suggest the drug when nothing (but time ) would also > work and cost less ! ----and also not " poison " my system ? You're prejudiced. Spefically, you are pre-judging that (i) Ibuprofen poisons your system at the prescribed levels, (ii) it wouldn't have made you feel better a great deal quicker. The available evidence - that Ibuprofen dulls pain for most people, has side effects but is sometimes worth them - suggests that you would probably (individuals vary) feel better after 2/3 *hours* if you took Ibuprofen. > I have > no proof that Ibruprofen works since my knee got better with out it ???? > Do you have proof that vaccinations prevent illnesses ? I'm still waiting > to get measles/ mumps. so for me nothing worked well enough Angie Massive epidemiological studies comparing populations of people with and without vaccinations. I can't quote studies for every single piece of modern medicine, but I'm pretty sure I've heard about them. In centuries past massive numbers died of childhood disease. In the developed world, they still do. Actually vaccines probably *did* work well enough for Angie - by making sure that few if any people she met had the virii. > - > " Dr Ian McDonald " <ian.mcdonald > > Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:26 PM > Re: Re: vegan nurse replies > > > My problem with " alternative medicine " is that in many cases we don't > > really know whether it works - or even whether it's safe. Because > > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it > > is, it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > > quackery. > > > >/D=egroupweb/S=1705129295:HM/A=847665/R=2 " > > > alt= " " width= " 300 " height= " 250 " > > > border= " 0 " ></a></td></tr></table></td> > > > </tr> > > > <tr><td><img alt= " " width=1 height=1 > > > > src= " http://us.adserver./l?M=215002.1711356.3237013.1261774/D=egrou > pmail/S=1705129295:HM/A=847665/rand=659091103 " ></td></tr> > > > </table> > > > > > > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --> > > > > > > <br> > > > <tt> > > > To send an email to > > > - </tt> > > > <br> > > > > > > <br> > > > <tt> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Peter wrote: > > Hi Ian > > > Conventional medicine tells us exactly what cancer, heart disease, > > strokes, and other killers are. > > But it does not worry about the *causes* - only what they actually are. Have you ever heard of epidemiology? (It's the study of patterns of disease - which populations get ill, and what it correlates with. The aim is to find out the causes.) How do we know that tobacco causes cancer? It's because of conventional medicine. Traditional medicine told us that smoking was good for you. > It > also does not tell us how to do anything about them. Cancer we still kill by > poisoning the patient and hoping that the cancer dies first. That counts as doing something in my book. Medicine is also trying to develop therapies using monoclonal antibodies and other technlogies that attack the cancer cells. > Heart disease > is still only helped by invasive surgery. And with drugs - many of them derived from herbs - to thin the blood. Because they are taken as drugs, and not as herbal remedies, it is much easier to control the dose. > Strokes are still largely a > mystery. A vessel in the brain blocks or bursts. What's mysterious about that? > > On the other hand, I do not know of any examples of alternative medicine > > trying to look for root causes in any serious way. > > " Alternative " medicine is based on what works - it is based on an > understanding of what works well with the body and makes it healthy - Again, I'm staggered. You are saying that precise opposite of the truth. Actually trying to work out what works has, since the beginning of the twentieth century, been the hallmark of modern medicine, the central fact that separates it from alternative medicine. Before then, there wasn't any great advantage in going to a medic. Alternative medicine " is too broad a range of options to say " it is based on what works " . But once alternative medicine makes a serious, and not merely anecdotal, attempt to work out what works, it crosses over into conventional medicine. > it > generally treats the body as a whole organism (which, surprisingly, it is) - > while a modern medicine will concentrate only on the organ with the symptom. Some alternative medicine does try to be holistic, I'll grant you. Modern medicine will try to convince people to lead a healthy lifestyle for the whole body - and has been saying broadly the same things on that score since the 1950s - but most of its individual practitioners have given up trying! Your average oncologist might want their patients to live a healthy lifestyle, but won't automatically make a point of driving the point home. > BB > Peter > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 > > > To send an email to - > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Hi Ian > > I'm sure this is the case with some " alternative medicines " , but none I've > > ever heard of! > Tobacco. Folk wisdom merrily puffed away for centuries - thinking it was > good for you! Tobacco has never been considered a medicine - just a passtime. > What about the practice of leaving babies out in the cold for a day or > two? I've heard an early twentieth century account of that killing some > poor child. I have no idea of what you are talking about, but this has never been considered medicine as far as I have ever heard! > And let's not forget leeches. Something which is currently undergoing clinical trials under the auspices of modern medicinal bodies! > Because conventional medicine represents a cohesive belief system that > dominates healthcare. ( " Check it works rigorously, with lots of cases > instead of mere anecdotes. " ) The traditional ones are usually only > traditional for one particular tradition - there is no " received wisdom " > in alternative medicine, only hundreds of alternatives. Not at all - you'll find that most traditional medicines are the same the world over - many different cultures have come to the same conclusions independently. Incidentally, around 50% of hospital patients are there *because* of modern medicines prescribed by their doctors. > It only takes a tradition to believe - but it takes a proper check of > what's actually going on to know. How many millenia would you say it takes for a proper case study? > I have absolutely no idea why you're saying that. Modern medicine > usually purifies out everything but the pharmacollogically active > ingredient from the herb, and often fails to be holistic. But anyone > practising rampant quackary or using endangered species (ozone therapy, > anyone?) is quickly condemned by other medics, and ends up being, by > definition, alternative. Funny - I thought I had to be careful when buying cough medicines etc. because of all the animal bits in them!! Not to mention the fact that you have to read the side of every box of " modern " medicine to find out what side effects it is going to have, what you can't consume while taking it, and what other medicines will kill you if you take them at the same time. > Well, that's a problem I have with my GP. But they do that because they > know from experience that patients are more likely to go away happy if > they do that. Ah - so modern medicine is based on the idea of making the patient happy, rather than making them well? BB Peter --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Peter wrote: > > Hi Ian > > > > I'm sure this is the case with some " alternative medicines " , but none > I've > > > ever heard of! > > Tobacco. Folk wisdom merrily puffed away for centuries - thinking it was > > good for you! > > Tobacco has never been considered a medicine - just a passtime. A pastime that was good for you. > > What about the practice of leaving babies out in the cold for a day or > > two? I've heard an early twentieth century account of that killing some > > poor child. > > I have no idea of what you are talking about, but this has never been > considered medicine as far as I have ever heard! It was a folk healthcare tradition. In this case, a wrong one. > > And let's not forget leeches. > > Something which is currently undergoing clinical trials under the auspices > of modern medicinal bodies! Which don't agree with the way it was previously used, to make a patient better by bleeding them to balance the humours. > > Because conventional medicine represents a cohesive belief system that > > dominates healthcare. ( " Check it works rigorously, with lots of cases > > instead of mere anecdotes. " ) The traditional ones are usually only > > traditional for one particular tradition - there is no " received wisdom " > > in alternative medicine, only hundreds of alternatives. > > Not at all - you'll find that most traditional medicines are the same the > world over - many different cultures have come to the same conclusions > independently. I think there's a need here to distinguish between traditional herbal remedies, new age fads, and holistic ways of making people feel better. You seem to be talking about traditional herbal remedies. Can you substantiate this? I don't know of anyone other than the Chinese who did acupuncture, or anyone other than the Europeans who did bleeding. I wouldn't be surprised if some medicinal herbs were so strong and so useful that they were discovered and verified independantly ... but I haven't heard of your claim before. > Incidentally, around 50% of hospital patients are there > *because* of modern medicines prescribed by their doctors. Can you substantiate this? > > It only takes a tradition to believe - but it takes a proper check of > > what's actually going on to know. > > How many millenia would you say it takes for a proper case study? However many millenia it takes to get round to doing one. I don't know of any case studies before the late nineteenth century (when some bright spark compared death rates and worked out that the best way of recovering from pneumonia was bedrest. Now we regard that as common sense). > > I have absolutely no idea why you're saying that. Modern medicine > > usually purifies out everything but the pharmacollogically active > > ingredient from the herb, and often fails to be holistic. But anyone > > practising rampant quackary or using endangered species (ozone therapy, > > anyone?) is quickly condemned by other medics, and ends up being, by > > definition, alternative. > > Funny - I thought I had to be careful when buying cough medicines etc. > because of all the animal bits in them!! If you buy conventional cough medicines, that's because you don't want to eat animal bits, not because the cough medicine is based off chinese bear gall bladders or something. > Not to mention the fact that you > have to read the side of every box of " modern " medicine to find out what > side effects it is going to have, what you can't consume while taking it, > and what other medicines will kill you if you take them at the same time. You don't have to. But it would be a good idea. Would be that herbal medicines carried the same information. > > Well, that's a problem I have with my GP. But they do that because they > > know from experience that patients are more likely to go away happy if > > they do that. > > Ah - so modern medicine is based on the idea of making the patient happy, > rather than making them well? No, but many pressured professionals let the former creep in. > BB > Peter > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 > > > To send an email to - > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Ian I don't know about all alternative medicines, but use herbs quite readily. I would much rather use herbs than medicine from a doctor. Whatever you use, I think you should read up about it fairly extensively, and err on the side of caution. Personally, I don't take painkillers at all. > As an example of the latter, there was a rather dangerous person with > dodgy credentials who spoke at London Vegans, who claimed that toxins > (never ever bacteria or viruses) were the cause of all disease, I don't think this is necessarily a dangerous viewpoint. Obviously some diseases are caused by pollution (tobacco, asbestos, coal dust, lead, etc) but I can see the sense in the statement. When I visited a naturopathic nutritionist, he advised me extensively on diet, the idea being to have such a clean diet that there is a very low level of mucus in the body. He said that for viruses/bacteria to live they had to have a supply of mucus at a cellular level. While following that diet I have not had a cold, or any other illness. When I had a few small lapses I cought a cold. I am back on the diet now! There have also been clinics where extreme cleansing diets have been shown to help cancer patients. There has also been some success with halting arthritis by diet, and as we all know, you can control gout by omitting foods containing high levels of oxalic acid. I wish my mother had tried altering her diet instead of taking several types of tablets for her rheumatoid arthritis. She died of cancer, and two of the tablets have been withdrawn from use. I wonder if there was a connection. Whether there was or not, the tablets didn't help much. I had a neck problem for thirty years. If I went to the doctor, I was offered painkillers! which I never accepted. I went to a chiropractic(?) who did some Bowen therapy, and after five treatments, costing £150, I have no neck trouble at all. > chemotherapy never ever worked, that HIV did not cause AIDS, I have always had a hunch that HIV does not cause AIDS - just that they co-exist, but obviously this is just a feeling. > but if you > wanted to find out what foods to eat you should go buy her book and get > a private consultation. I guess she got an invitation because she > happened to be vegan. but it is still possible that she has helped a lot of people to lead a healthier life. Were there any 'normal' doctors there who were willing to talk on veganism? if indeed they could find one who knew much about it. > Obviously, the classic vegan problem with conventional medicine is that > the usual method of finding out whether something is safe is to feed it, > in humungous quantities, to lab animals. But I get the impression that > veganism generally goes hand-to-hand with broad objections to > conventional medicine. Am I right? As far as I am concerned - yes, you are right. When you think deeply about what you eat, you start being more discerning about medicines, as well. Why take commercial antacids if peppermint tea works, tranquilisers if chamomile or limeblossom tea helps, cold remedies if elderflower tea works - and if you don't like the taste of tea you can use tincture. .... but I must point out that if it was totally necessary, I would take prescribed drugs - maybe inhalers for asthma, or cancer treatment. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Hi Fraggle > i agre with some points, some alt. medicine all seems to be about whether you are running hot or cold, or wot the moon phase is, and seems a bit crackers.. Actually ..... I think there's a lot to be said for Moon power, it's just a matter of noticing trends. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Ian > GPs tend to want to shove pills down you. I understand that that's > because they've learnt that patients generally feel happier if they go > away with some pill or otherwise - it's an easy way of pleasing most > patients. That's probably true - and they do have a lot of patients to see. Personally I find I get much better advice and treatment from the Naturopathic clinic, but of course, I have to pay for it. The GP's do not help much. > On the other hand, I do not know of any examples of alternative medicine > trying to look for root causes in any serious way. I think with alternative health practitioners they do know the root causes, conventional medicine will just not admit it. You don't have to know exactly what each cell does, to know what causes something and how to remedy it. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Ian > Because conventional medicine represents a cohesive belief system that > dominates healthcare. ( " Check it works rigorously, with lots of cases > instead of mere anecdotes. " ) But who writes up the cases? The medical establishment, because they are supplied with money to do research and write up reports. I remember a couple of years ago when they 'researched' garlic - they came to the conclusion that it was good for your heart and blood vessels - well who would have thought it! I read that in a health book thirty odd years ago. > It only takes a tradition to believe - but it takes a proper check of > what's actually going on to know. If you have used a traditional remedy and it works - then you, personally, 'know' that it works. It doesn't follow that it doesn't work, just because a GP or scientist hasn't proved it. It just means that they are ignorant of the fact that it works. > > > Because > > > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what it > > > is, I'm not sure what you are saying here, Ian - could you expand? > it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > > > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > > > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > > > quackery. Unfortunately a lot of people don't do their own researching. Really it is a personal responsibility to judge which remedy will work best for you, whether alternative or established. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Angie > Do you have proof that vaccinations prevent illnesses ? I'm still waiting > to get measles/ mumps. so for me nothing worked well enough Angie When a TB vaccine was introduced I didn't have it for some reason I can't remember (I was fairly young). Now I understand that they don't last anyway - so what is the point of putting some foreign substance in your body for very limited protection? I read somewhere that the decline of TB was due more to good diet and lifestyle than to medicines. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Angie > I don't see how you can find cures when the experiments are flawed they > are not fair ---too many variables being altered at once instead of one at a > time. eg wrong species and artificially induced disease injecting > chemicals into a dog's joints to make them swell doesn't make it human > arthritis ! Angie I see the EU is going ahead with new toxicology tests - another 50 million animals are going to suffer :-( Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Ian > You're prejudiced. I suppose you could call it that - but I would call it an opinion based on personal research :-) > > Spefically, you are pre-judging that (i) Ibuprofen poisons your system > at the prescribed levels, (ii) it wouldn't have made you feel better a > great deal quicker. Unless you have asthma - it could give you an attack. Of course, you could then take medicines for your asthma as well as the ibuprofen - mind you it might upset your stomach - and then you could take some antacids ....... Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Ian > Have you ever heard of epidemiology? (It's the study of patterns of > disease - which populations get ill, and what it correlates with. The > aim is to find out the causes.) I have heard of it - and they seem to have various groups of researchers being paid money to research the same subjects over and over again - don't they trust the conclusions the first half dozen research projects came to? > > How do we know that tobacco causes cancer? It's because of conventional > medicine. Traditional medicine told us that smoking was good for you. I'm not sure we are talking about the same traditional medicine. I have never heard that tobacco was supposed to be good for - or of anybody being 'treated' with tobacco. Can you go into more detail about how conventional medicine found out that smoking is bad for us? > And with drugs - many of them derived from herbs - to thin the blood. > Because they are taken as drugs, and not as herbal remedies, it is much > easier to control the dose. It may be easier to control the dose - but it does have to be adjusted constantly because it is either too strong or too weak. Maybe it would be better to take vitamin E, evening primrose oil or some other combination of 'natural' remedies. If the same amount of publicly funded research was put into this it might prove to be a better remedy. > A vessel in the brain blocks or bursts. What's mysterious about that? How does conventional medicine treat this? Would it not be better to spend money on educating people to lower their salt intake, exercise more, lose weight etc. > Again, I'm staggered. You are saying that precise opposite of the truth. > Actually trying to work out what works has, since the beginning of the > twentieth century, been the hallmark of modern medicine, the central > fact that separates it from alternative medicine. Before then, there > wasn't any great advantage in going to a medic. I think that it's the 'trying' to work out the truth that's the problem. There is a basic knowledge that is overlooked by the researchers. As I said previously, I think for most 'normal' complaints you can't beat herbs, and a diet that is balanced properly for an individual person is an excellent way to good health. I have not tried homeopathy, but I know lots of people who swear by it. Do you think there are any good alternative medicines/treatments? - do you use any? Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Ian > Which don't agree with the way it was previously used, to make a patient > better by bleeding them to balance the humours. What has it proved - does it do the same thing, just given a different name. After all we have different names for all the illnesses mentioned in Culpepper, but it doesn't mean they have changed - just the wording. > I think there's a need here to distinguish between traditional herbal > remedies, new age fads, and holistic ways of making people feel better. > You seem to be talking about traditional herbal remedies. I wish you would not say 'new age fads' in such a derogatory way. They may be something you have just not come to understand yet! > Can you substantiate this? I personally cannot remember where I read this, but can you disprove it? > However many millenia it takes to get round to doing one. I don't know > of any case studies before the late nineteenth century (when some bright > spark compared death rates and worked out that the best way of > recovering from pneumonia was bedrest. Now we regard that as common > sense). Do you think it is possible that people were taking bed rest for pneumonia before their 'doctor' told them it was the right thing to do? > Would be that herbal medicines carried the same information. There are unfortunate laws on what herbal remedies can and cannot say. They are not allowed to give any idea of what they could be good for - because 'modern science' has not yet confirmed it. I do agree that all medicines, should have full ingredient lists on them. Jo --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 10/10/01 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 16, 2001 Jo wrote: > > Ian > > > Because conventional medicine represents a cohesive belief system that > > dominates healthcare. ( " Check it works rigorously, with lots of cases > > instead of mere anecdotes. " ) > > But who writes up the cases? The medical establishment, because they are > supplied with money to do research and write up reports. I remember a > couple of years ago when they 'researched' garlic - they came to the > conclusion that it was good for your heart and blood vessels - well who > would have thought it! I read that in a health book thirty odd years ago. What evidence did the health book go on? > > It only takes a tradition to believe - but it takes a proper check of > > what's actually going on to know. > > If you have used a traditional remedy and it works - then you, personally, > 'know' that it works. It doesn't follow that it doesn't work, just because > a GP or scientist hasn't proved it. It just means that they are ignorant of > the fact that it works. True. Of course, you don't actually know whether you recovered because of the remedy or despite it, unless you've tried to get better in a few times, some with and some without the remedy, and managed to keep other stuff constant, and controlled for the placebo effect. There's no way to prove that garlic helps through personal experience without putting your life on the line. > > > > Because > > > > " alternative medicine " is defined by what it is not, rather than what > it > > > > is, > > I'm not sure what you are saying here, Ian - could you expand? It's an alternative to conventional medicine. Conventional medicine is the stuff that, according to peer-reviewed academic papers, works. Alternative medicine is everything else. Hence " alternative " . Or do you disagree? > > it covers everything from herbs with pharmacologically active > > > > ingredients and holistic ways of helping people with serious illnesses > > > > manage their pain through to powdered endangered species and rampant > > > > quackery. > > Unfortunately a lot of people don't do their own researching. Really it is > a personal responsibility to judge which remedy will work best for you, > whether alternative or established. Yes ... but life is too short to replicate all the epidemiological work, case studies, and theories about how it all works. IMHO, you can be more confident of someone's claim if they have to say exactly how they arrived at the results, get experts in the field to check their workings, and publish it so that other people can repeat the work and see if they arrive at the same results. You can be much more confident if the other people *do* reproduce it. > Jo > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.286 / Virus Database: 152 - Release 09/10/01 > > > To send an email to - > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
