Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Buddha13" data-source="post: 3056511" data-attributes="member: 157873">Wry if there is clinical evidence then I am not against it... I believe I have stated this clearly. To save you the bother of looking:&quot;I&#039;m not against alternative medicines existing nor am I against therapeutic treatments being offered on the NHS (this would include so called alternative treatments such as acupuncture were they are proven to have an effect beyond the placebo effect).&quot;&quot;I too agree that CAT&#039;s can be a very positive experience and help people. I don&#039;t argue that people shouldn&#039;t use them I simply suggest that hospitals should only be using ones that have been shown to offer a legitimate beneficial effect over and above the placebo effect.&quot;&quot;I&#039;m simply advocating that whatever treatment is used even things like massage or yoga or acupuncture should have some evidence that they help.&quot;I hope the quotes above make it clear I&#039;m only arguing agains things that DO NOT have convincing clinical evidence- I know that some alternative medicines have been shown to treat some things effectively, where that is the case I think it is fine for them to be advocated. I would however argue that the case FOR various alternative medicines is often grossly exaggerated- with preliminary poorly controlled studies being cited as irrefutable proof (when the studies themselves acknowledge they aren&#039;t!). I read the studies people link to and while some of them are indeed legitimate and provide real evidence for an effect the vast majority I, at least, have read are not the irrefutable proof people say they are. Basically I am arguing for evidence based medicine and I take the exact same position as George Lundberg former editor of JAMA who eloquently summed up:&quot;There is no alternative medicine. There is only scientifically proven, evidence-based medicine supported by solid data or unproven medicine, for which scientific evidence is lacking. Whether a therapeutic practice is &#039;Eastern&#039; or &#039;Western,&#039; is unconventional or mainstream, or involves mind-body techniques or molecular genetics is largely irrelevant except for historical purposes and cultural interest. As believers in science and evidence, we must focus on fundamental issues—namely, the patient, the target disease or condition, the proposed or practiced treatment, and the need for convincing data on safety and therapeutic efficacy.&quot;I would not seperate spiritual from the mental. What sort of spiritual treatments are you advocating?You misread... I suggested that any treatment offered in a hospital should have clinical evidence of effectiveness which would entail research.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Buddha13, post: 3056511, member: 157873"] Wry if there is clinical evidence then I am not against it... I believe I have stated this clearly. To save you the bother of looking: "I'm not against alternative medicines existing nor am I against therapeutic treatments being offered on the NHS (this would include so called alternative treatments such as acupuncture were they are proven to have an effect beyond the placebo effect)." "I too agree that CAT's can be a very positive experience and help people. I don't argue that people shouldn't use them I simply suggest that hospitals should only be using ones that have been shown to offer a legitimate beneficial effect over and above the placebo effect." "I'm simply advocating that whatever treatment is used even things like massage or yoga or acupuncture should have some evidence that they help." I hope the quotes above make it clear I'm only arguing agains things that DO NOT have convincing clinical evidence- I know that some alternative medicines have been shown to treat some things effectively, where that is the case I think it is fine for them to be advocated. I would however argue that the case FOR various alternative medicines is often grossly exaggerated- with preliminary poorly controlled studies being cited as irrefutable proof (when the studies themselves acknowledge they aren't!). I read the studies people link to and while some of them are indeed legitimate and provide real evidence for an effect the vast majority I, at least, have read are not the irrefutable proof people say they are. Basically I am arguing for evidence based medicine and I take the exact same position as George Lundberg former editor of JAMA who eloquently summed up: "There is no alternative medicine. There is only scientifically proven, evidence-based medicine supported by solid data or unproven medicine, for which scientific evidence is lacking. Whether a therapeutic practice is 'Eastern' or 'Western,' is unconventional or mainstream, or involves mind-body techniques or molecular genetics is largely irrelevant except for historical purposes and cultural interest. As believers in science and evidence, we must focus on fundamental issues—namely, the patient, the target disease or condition, the proposed or practiced treatment, and the need for convincing data on safety and therapeutic efficacy." I would not seperate spiritual from the mental. What sort of spiritual treatments are you advocating? You misread... I suggested that any treatment offered in a hospital should have clinical evidence of effectiveness which would entail research. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…