Poll: Belief in pseudoscience/paranormal phenomena

C

cadydid523

New member
Topher, I don't know what anyone can say to make you understand why a number of us take issue with organizations such as "New England Skeptics Association" or webcasts like "Enemies of Reason". They're plainly biased, have a specific agenda, and a blatant anti-folk medicine agenda. Peeps like me and wry perfer our research with a bit more objectivity. I fail to see why that's a problem. I posted JAMA articles (or at least abstracts) which were both pro and con in regards to acupuncture AND chiropractic medicine, and am a staunch critic of all that mystic mumbo jumbo associated with CMAs. It's not like I'm using the Bible as my marker for good research. I simply don't care for the lunatic fringe on either side.
 
P

Patsy

Member
I don't disagree. However, if an alternative treatment is based on, and promoted on claim X, but appears to 'work' via Y (the placebo effect), then this doesn't validate the basis on which the treatment is promoted on. In fact, it doesn't event validate the medication itself since the medication given may even have been entirely irrelevant to the healing (which is exactly how homeopathy sometimes appears to work). I think it is dishonest to promote as anything otherwise.

The next question to ask is whether we should justify a treatment purely on the placebo effect alone. I don’t think we should. I think a treatment should have a demonstrable and confirmed effect in alleviating an illness/condition before it can be offered as a treatment for that condition. This is partly the reason why I am against alternative medicine, because such demonstration and confirmation is generally lacking.

On a side note, here's an article which discusses alternative medicine which I agree with: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/altwary.html
 
R

ranakuchiki

New member
I simply asked you to explain exactly why the people in the podcast were bias and had an agenda. So far you have failed to demonstrate this. You have just repeated your naked assertion that it is so. So again, how and why are they “plainly bias” and exactly what is their “specific agenda.”

You said you preferred medical professionals, well, I’ve shown you that host of the show is in fact a medical professional, a neurologist in fact, who is more than well aware of the research being carried out, particularly with Chiropractic considering he is a professional neurologist. So I can only conclude that your holding them to be “plainly bias” and with a “specific agenda” (both of which you’ve failed to justify) is purely down to the fact that they tend to disagree with many claims of alternative medicine which you just happen to be rather fond of.

As for research into alternative medicine. I agree, there are some positive studies for many alternative medicines, however, we cannot form a conclusion based on a few studies, instead, we must refer to all the studies carried out and when you do this you will find that the majority tend to be negative.

You might find this article interesting (the one I linked Wry to): http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/altwary.html (And in case you're concerned, it is written by a medical professional!)
 
T

TheBookThief

New member
Spoken like someone who doesn't have the first clue about treating patients. Tell me, if you were sick, in pain, without much sleep and scared (the majority of our patients) and someone walked in and stated you can't have treatments you are familiar with and believe in, how would you feel?

Forget it, why am I bothering to debate nursing practice with someone who obviously doesn't know a thing about medicine or nursing. The placebo effect DOES justify participating and allowing modalities despite what you may personally feel about them. By allowing patients these procedures, you are assisting the healing process through many different means- not the least of which is stress reduction. You, sir, would make a terrible doctor and an even worse nurse.
 
C

ClaudiaD

Member
I don't disagree that a placebo may be what is taking place, in fact, it probably is. However the issue is whether it is justified to promoted a medication on unproven grounds... To claim it can cure X when this has not been established. That is what I disagree with. My main problem with alternative medicine is that is available on the NHS at the expense of tax payers. If you wish you personally seek such treatment from a private practitioner, fine, but don’t make tax payers fund unproven treatments, especially at the expense of drugs that are proven to work. Are you aware that the NHS recently spent £10 million refurbishing the London Homeopathic Hospital, while at the same time cancer drugs are not being provided to patients, and nurses are loosing jobs, both due to a lack of funding! That is not even funny.
 
N

nishandx

New member
Uhm, how can I make it any clearer that an organization calling itself the "New England Skeptics Association" has an agenda? Fireworks in the sky? I listened, it's biased, contrived, and I prefer more objectivity. JAMA gives me much more objective research and is just as willing to call "foul" on quackery. Their pseudointellectualism disguising itself as objectivity bores me. *shrug*
 
W

WWEChick22

New member
Well the treatment I would want is the treatment that has been scientifically proven to be effective, which would in fact be available to be.

My point is simply this: if a patient wishes to pay for this alternative treatment, they are more than welcome to do so, but it should not be provided at the existence of tax payers, and this is exactly what is happening.

At please drop the ad hominem attacks and just deal with my arguments.
 
X

XiongPaoM

New member
The London Homeopathic Hospital is about a lot more than homeopathic treatments... you might not think they're valid, but if we're complaining about the NHS spending 'unnecessary' money, I personally resent paying for treating heart disease in people who can't lay off the bacon and pies - if anything the complementary therapies are often designed to address such problems before they occur through general lifestyle changes.
 
Azazel

Azazel

Member
But we do have some echolocation capability. Much more learned and developed in blind people.


http://cognews.com/1063609093/index_html


http://joybringer.zaadz.com/blog/2006/8/the_boy_who_sees_with_sound_-_human_echolocation
 
S

Serene

Member
Well I can't disagree with your issue with treatment for people who significantly bring on medical problems for themselves. However that your point? The matter I am discussing is whether the treatment has scientifically proven to work. Alternative medicines may be “intended” for a lot of things, but the very point under contention is they've not been demonstrated to be effective; hence, they should be kept private practices.
 
A

AshleyO

Member
I think medi is saying complimentary not alternative!!

Complimenatry therapy has been shown to be more effective than only the standard therapy on its own eg. alongside cancer treatments. Which is why some areas in the NHS have adopted complimentary therapies. They conducted trials before they did so. I would assume they were positive results.
 
S

steelercity36

New member
A simple statement of fact is not an attack. With your current attitude towards medicine you would make a terrible doctor and a worse nurse. Treating people is about more then slopping medicine at them (and your blind trust in western medicine doesn't do you any favors in this account either). That you refuse to see this would alienate your patients, piss off your nurses and make you very ineffectual. I see it every time I step in the hospital for clinicals- some idiot doctor who thinks they know more about their patient's condition then the patient prescribing treatments that will never work because they don't fit the patient.

Its not my fault that you typify this attitude.
 
2

2Cute2B4Got

New member
Some haven't been conclusively demonstrated to be effective - some (such as things as simple as massage therapy) have proven to be very effective. So claiming a refurbished Hospital for complementary therapies is a waste of money is a poor logical leap.

When you see a close relative in agonizing pain the issue of whether a treatment is entirely or partially placebo is irrelevant, you take anything that works.


Another quite from Derren Brown:


Obviously anti-depressants are available paid for by the NHS.
 
Y

yoran

New member
lol... I can't think of anything that would make a person trying to recover from terminal illness want to off themselves faster than if some clown rocked up and said...

'oh we're prescribing you a dose of never-ending-logic-drone mixed with obnoxious-atheist-babble'

Hahaha... people would be offing themselves left, right and center.
 
A

AlexisInfectious®

Active member
No, as I clearly stated, it's an attack on pseudointellectualism. Despite your claims, stating that an organization has an agenda with which I disagree, comments that said organization is not as objective as another (in this case JAMA), and disagreeing with its positions because I find extreme bias in them is not an "ad hominem" attack.
 
I

intelligentdesign

Member
”Spoken like someone who doesn't have the first clue about treating patients.” is an ad hominem.


No. It isn’t. Even if there is some demonstrated use for the hospital, is it a greater priority than cancer drugs or providing nurses?

That said, I can recall no CAM treatments which have been scientifically demonstrated to work under repeatable testing conditions. (A few positive studies is not a verification of validity). That said, while there may be a few more valid treatments (such as scientific Chiropractic) why are they not just provided in regular hospitals? Why have an entire hospital dedicated to CAM which then allows the pseudoscience into door?

I am not saying the placebo effect doesn’t work or even shouldn’t necessarily be used given the right conditions and situation. I am saying should a medical treatment be promoted on false or unproven claims?


z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z
 
A

AlexisInfectious®

Active member
OK, you need to stop throwing that term around. Whether you like it or not, wry is a NURSE, and you're a twenty-something year old sitting behind a computer. She has every right to comment on the fact that when it comes to real world experience, you've got nothing on her.

That is NOT an ad hominem attack, it is a perfectly good explanation of where her opinion is coming from and an evaluation of your credentials, which are non-existant when it comes to medicine.
 
Top