Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ranakuchiki" data-source="post: 3056358" data-attributes="member: 91463">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&#039;re concerned, it is written by a medical professional!)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ranakuchiki, post: 3056358, member: 91463"] 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!) [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…