Why do people believe in alternative medicine?

[naz]

With regards to those who prefer alternative medicine, I'll just say this. Before modern medicine, people didn't live very long. They died and they died in terrible ways and what would be considered a middle aged man would have been an elderly man just 150 years ago.

This is statistically inaccurate. For the most part, people did not die in their 40s or 50s in the "old days" as often as people think. Life expectancy was lower because there were many more deaths during childhood or childbirth, skewing the statistics dramatically downward. For the last 2,000 years or so, if you managed to make it into adulthood, you were almost as likely to reach 70 or 80 as you are now.

A better argument would be that modern medicine has improved the infant mortality rate, which is a valid and proven statement.

[peterbound]

Hercampuri, for instance. Helps reduce fat, sugar and cholesterol. It's suppose to be taken as a complement, though. Pasuchaca and Cuti Cuti also helps to control sugar low. There are few more http://www.schuler.com.pe/ingles/estudios.html

Why the fuck wouldn't they just reduce fat, sugar, and cholesterol (although what fat and cholesterol have to do with Diabetes is beyond me), and watch their diet?

Seems a bit fishy, at it's most basic level, Diabetes is a fairly easy disease to control (type I at least), through diet. Most type II probably aren't the best in terms of self control, so they might have more of an issue, but it seems like if someone is going to go out of their way to eat some herbal bullshit, they might take a little time and dedicate some of that energy to eating better.

[Darzin]

Well if they can be shown to work through studies I don't think the practitioners of western medicine would be Stygian these herbs, in fact as has already been pointed out western medicine uses plenty of herbal based compounds, what I don't understand is why people wouldn't want to isolate what works in these and make sure they get a uniform dosage.

Also without testing most of it is bullshit homeopathy most people know but this new pyramid scheme doTerra is taking my town by storm they sell these overpriced scented oils that they claim to cure basically everything peppermint for headaches, lavender for sunburn ect. people like them because they see the two options as equal "I could take an aspirin or I could rub some peppermint on my head," except there's no evidence at all the latter helps, but it seems equal and doTerra medicine comes in a cedar box with all kinds of sweet smelling exotic oils while real medicine just comes in boring plastic bottles. Despite this you think people would have more sense but no this shit is really popular it seems like half the houses I go to have something from doTerra. This is all innocent enough but I have flipped through some of the doTerra textbooks and they claim they can help heal spleen problems and cure cancer all through the application of sweet smelling topical oils. Which is what you get when you let people just make stuff up about medicine with no evidence. If alternative medicine worked it would just be called medicine.

[peterbound]

This is statistically inaccurate. For the most part, people did not die in their 40s or 50s in the "old days" as often as people think. Life expectancy was lower because there were many more deaths during childhood or childbirth, skewing the statistics dramatically downward. For the last 2,000 years or so, if you managed to make it into adulthood, you were almost as likely to reach 70 or 80 as you are now.

A better argument would be that modern medicine has improved the infant mortality rate, which is a valid and proven statement.

Ya, I've never understood the whole, dying at an increased rate argument. Most of the time, if you could make it to 21, you would expect to live at least till your 60's (as long as the plague isn't running through your country)

[Glaurung]

This is statistically inaccurate. For the most part, people did not die in their 40s or 50s in the "old days" as often as people think. Life expectancy was lower because there were many more deaths during childhood or childbirth, skewing the statistics dramatically downward. For the last 2,000 years or so, if you managed to make it into adulthood, you were almost as likely to reach 70 or 80 as you are now.

A better argument would be that modern medicine has improved the infant mortality rate, which is a valid and proven statement.

Not entirely true. People may have stood a good chance of reaching their 70s or so if they made it to adulthood, but people still died in their 30s, 40s, 50s, etc. They just died less often than women and children. Modern medicine also improved on more than just the infant mortality rate though, since as you stated, less women are dying in childbirth and fewer children are dying.

[peterbound]

Not entirely true. People may have stood a good chance of reaching their 70s or so if they made it to adulthood, but people still died in their 30s, 40s, 50s, etc. They just died less often than women and children. Modern medicine also improved on more than just the infant mortality rate though, since as you stated, less women are dying in childbirth and fewer children are dying.

So, what your position should really be, is that the field of /pediatrics/ has improved.

Also, people die in their 30's, 40's and 50's now. How is that relevant to your argument?

[naz]

Dude. Google "life expectancy myth".

[Aemon Stark]

Certain chronic conditions such as say lupus, eczema, hepatitis B, or even depression may be better served by Chinese, Ayurvedic (traditional Indian) or Naturopathic medicine.

Herbs vs pills aside, though, a glaring weakness of the training of Western physicians is nutrition, a subject in which most M.D.s have an appalling lack of knowledge. Again we could look at the amount of money being made in drugs for high blood pressure or to treat Type 2 diabetes, conditions which are entirely preventable through a change in diet. All of the above "alternative" medicines put a strong emphasis on the role of food in shaping our over-all health.

Your first statement suggests that you don't know much about lupus. Second, hypertension and type 2 diabetes are in no way "entirely preventable" by diet alone. Everyone's vessels stiffen over time, and the influence of heredity often overwhelms whatever dietary choices we make.

As for nutrition, this is just an annoying canard. I'm by no means a nutrition expert, but the notion that somehow training is lacking is just the kind of claim that a naturopath or "alternative medicine" advocate would make.

Many prescription medicines are terrible on your liver and the side effects of which are worse than the problem being treated.

My mother in law owns a natural foods store (alternative medicine) and I have seen the solution to many problems that people get treated with traditional medicine are treatable through dietary supplements and proper diet. You could take some Prilosec for your heartburn, take it every day, or you could take a papaya enzyme instead. The Papaya enzyme wont dissolve your liver. Of course, you could always stop eating the processed shit that is giving you heartburn, but that is another argument.

Proton pump inhibitors like Prilosec do not "dissolve your liver" and liver injury is not a significant risk at all.

A lot of "actual medicine" have many side effects that are not widely publicised. For example, paracetamol, a common pain killer and fever reducer, can damage the liver. It also stays in your liver for up to 3 months, long after taking it. It takes the body so long to get rid of it. And I used to pop it every after week as it's so convenient and it works for headaches. I changed my methods to stop triggering the pain and using other methods like using cold pack rather than to wait for it to happen and then pop a pill. I'd rather avoid accumulating drugs in my body.

One more thing is that such drugs often only treats the symptoms, they don't solve the root of the problem. They only help temporarily. So it makes sense to go deeper and seek alternative methods.

Paracetamol/Acetaminophen has a half life of about 2 hours in healthy adults and most certainly does not "stay in the liver". That is completely without foundation. It also doesn't damage the liver unless taken in excess, and can be taken safely even in the presence of cirrhosis.

I'm on call tonight, but if I have time I'll reply more.

[Glaurung]

So, what your position should really be, is that the field of /pediatrics/ has improved.

Also, people die in their 30's, 40's and 50's now. How is that relevant to your argument?

Not as often. Yes people may not have died as often during their 30s, 40s, & 50s as during other periods of life but they still died during those periods at higher rates than they do now. Just go to any old cemetary and see for yourself. The modern headstones will usually read 1910-2004 or something with that range. The further back you go the more 1815-1869 type ranges you will see. Hell, I'm 31 and I would have died 2 years ago without modern medicine.

[Sci-2]

Many times the western medicine can make things worse. Have you listened to any commercial lately trying to sell you the newest drug? I'd rather be sick than have those side effects.

It does seem this sort of thing has gotten out of hand. My Dad and I were discussing one of those commercials and we couldn't decide if it was a medicine you take or a poison you give your enemies.

[Galactus]

Ya, I've never understood the whole, dying at an increased rate argument. Most of the time, if you could make it to 21, you would expect to live at least till your 60's (as long as the plague isn't running through your country)

Well, part of the issue is that the plague *isn't* running through our countries anymore.

That said, for the massive effects on population, medecine isn't *that* important, true, it has probably added a few years to our life-expectancy, but the major difference is due to sanitation, nutrition, etc. (for all our cardiovascular problems we're FAR less likely to die of various defiiencies and deficiency-related diseases than a hundred years ago)

There is one HUGE exception to this though: Vaccines. Vaccines have a huge effect on lifespan, both the usual childhood disease vaccines (measles, mumps, etc.)

Generally, if you want to increase lifespan, the thing you want to do is:

A) Give everyone clean water, and a good sewage system

B) Provide a basic caloric intake for everyone

C) Vaccination

That said, our *average* lifespan is now in the 70's, that includes child mortality, accidents in youth, etc. That's a pretty huge difference from the "If you survive to the age of 15 you have a greater than 50% chance of reaching 60" kind of statements we have for pre-modern demographics.

You were NOT as likely to reach 80 a hundred years ago as you are now, even if you managed to survive 'till 15. That too is a myth. You'd probably reach 60 though.

[Galactus]

Western pharmaceutical companies have been trying to patent the medicinal properties of the afformentioned Ashwagandha, as well as the herb Turmeric but were apparently effectively blocked by India (by what legal means I'm not sure - diplomatic pressure?) who called the encroachment on their traditional medicine an act of "biopiracy".

http://1degreebio.org/blog/?bid=254

A patent was later allowed for the use of an active component of Ashwagandha to be used to enhance the effectiveness of vaccines, apparently because it is an application not described by Ayurvedic medicine.

http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/264682/Patent/The+Indian+Gensing+Ashwagandha+Gets+US+Patent+For+Vaccine+Adjuvant

ETA: so this is at least one case where the maxim "anything that actually works would already be synthesized as a pharmaceutical" does not hold.

So, in this case it's not being synthezised because they're not allowed to do so.

[Summah]

One issue with herbals is that if they work, they are medications, they do have side effects and they do interact with other medications. But without clinical trials it's unclear what exactly those side effects and interactions might be, as well as effective dose, safe dose etc. Consider St Johns Wort.

And I'm saying this as someone with chronic illnesses that are currently not helped at all by western medicine, who has experienced some nasty side effects of pharmaceuticals. So I'm really no friend to the pharmaceutical industry, but a not insignicant portion of the alternative medicine industry is, IMO, irresponsible with their products and claims.

[aceluby]

So, in this case it's not being synthezised because they're not allowed to do so.

Just one of many reasons why science doesn't always rule. It should, but we don't allow it to because of laws, lack of profit, competition with pharmaceuticals, etc...

I just think there's a place for both. I'm not going to go anywhere but my doctor when I break my arm, but I wouldn't touch a doctor with a 10 foot pole for tendonitis, since they'll just suggest surgery that won't heal it and will most likely make it worse in the end.

[Galactus]

Just one of many reasons why science doesn't always rule. It should, but we don't allow it to because of laws, lack of profit, competition with pharmaceuticals, etc...

I just think there's a place for both. I'm not going to go anywhere but my doctor when I break my arm, but I wouldn't touch a doctor with a 10 foot pole for tendonitis, since they'll just suggest surgery that won't heal it and will most likely make it worse in the end.

As said, alternative medecine thrives on the inability of people to accept the limits of medecine: The fact that we cannot cure every ailment.

[Weeping Sore]

Your first statement suggests that you don't know much about lupus. Second, hypertension and type 2 diabetes are in no way "entirely preventable" by diet alone. Everyone's vessels stiffen over time, and the influence of heredity often overwhelms whatever dietary choices we make.

As for nutrition, this is just an annoying canard. I'm by no means a nutrition expert, but the notion that somehow training is lacking is just the kind of claim that a naturopath or "alternative medicine" advocate would make.

RE: Lupus - I know that the use of corticosteroids has a diminishing margin of return for the cutaneous form, and the Western treatment of other affected systems is a kind of symptom by symptom whack-a-mole. Since you're so comfortable dismissing alternate approaches out of hand, sounds perfect!

RE: hypertension & type 2 diabetes - ok, replace "entirely" with "largely". And certainly medication is warranted if the condition is already acute.

I actually think naturopathy contains quite a bit of quackery and false assumptions. RE: Nutrition - I'm talking about required study for an M.D. What did you need, three credit hours of nutrition total? That certainly doesn't prevent an M.D. from independently becoming an expert in nutrition. There's also the problem that a patient's interface with their doctor is not particularly conducive to helping the former change their diet, without regular check-ins to keep them on track. I'm sure it's hard enough to get them to take their pills regularly.

Personally, I trust the Western medical establishment to handle what it handles best - acute conditions.

[TerraPrime]

I still take Chinese medicines. And I will continue to do so in cases where I know it will be more helpful than western medicine. I don't think ALL of Chinese medicine works, just like I don't think ALL of Western medicine works.

I will not, however, start to take herbal supplements on my own. One of the foundational principles of TCM is that the herbs each have side effects and you must not take a single herb alone. All medicines are prescribed as a mixture of different components, some to treat the illness and some to alleviate the side effects at the same time. I also don't trust too much the manufacturing processes of making these herbal supplements en mass.

I also think that the attitude of seeing non-Western medicines as mostly placebos is a bit odd and it smells of cultural imperialism. But to each his/her own. TCM doesn't work for all illnesses and it doesn't work for all bodies; but then, neither does Western medicine.

Sadly, some of the traditional medicine practices are often contaminated by cultural appropriation and this has a poisoned well effect. For instance, the use of mahuang as a weight loss drug that caused heart problems in some people. It astonished me that anyone will just take plain mahuang in a pill. Like, nobody ever does that in TCM. But in people's minds Chinese herbal medicine is now associated with causing people heart problems.

[Galactus]

I also think that the attitude of seeing non-Western medicines as mostly placebos is a bit odd and it smells of cultural imperialism.

It's not that traditional medecine is mostly placebos, it's just at once it's been studied and the effects figured out, it's now scientific medecine, that leaves the placebos.

EDIT: Furthermore, the efficacy of any particular treatment is different from the system behind it. Ayurvedic medecine, traditional chinese medicine, etc. is bunk *as a system*. That does not mean they haven't developed effective treatments for various problems.

[TerraPrime]

It's not that traditional medecine is mostly placebos, it's just at once it's been studied and the effects figured out, it's now scientific medecine, that leaves the placebos.

EDIT: Furthermore, the efficacy of any particular treatment is different from the system behind it. Ayurvedic medecine, traditional chinese medicine, etc. is bunk *as a system*. That does not mean they haven't developed effective treatments for various problems.

Fair points, both.

To the first point, though, are there many cases where the credit is given back to the originating culture after the effective components have been successfully isolated and marketed? In fact, what are some samples of this at all?

To the second point, I quite agree on TCM. I don't believe in the existence of chi, for instance. However, I think sometimes the wrongness of the explanation eclipses the efficacy of the treatment. Just because chi isn't real it doesn't mean that the strategic stimulation of acupuncture points is useless.

[Summah]

Terra,

I think TCM and other traditional medical practices that have been used for hundreds to thousands of years are quite a bit different than some of the quackery going on in the alternative medicine movement; a not insignificant portion of which seems to exist largely to make money of off sick & desperate people, telling people for example that their magic green vegetarian capsule with wheatgrass extract and special blend of herbs will 100% cure that person's ME, but only if they take it every day--only $99.99 for a 30 day supply. Or selling things without a significant amount of the active ingredient on the bottle, which is easy to get away with due to lack of regulation. It might perhaps be beneficial to separate the two. However I still think clinical trials would be useful, because unless someone is going to do TCM only it's important to know about interactions with pharmaceuticals, however if TCM works as groups of herbs together rather than individual it should be studied that way, because sometimes the whole works differently than the individual components.

I agree that it's not good to view these things as placebos, in fact it can be dangerous because of interactions between different pharmaceuticals and herbs and between different herbs. I've told by people that herbs don't have side effects or interactions, which is not my experience personally. I've never had as terrible a reaction as I have to some pharmaceuticals, but I am extremely careful with herbs because of the general lack of information about interactions etc.