Skeptical?

[Former castleva]

At first,I´m not looking to challenge anyone...still reading? It seems that many people here have feelings for TCM (so to speak).This may not be directly tcm related then,but I just thought whether you do apply skepticism/are skeptical of alternative medicine (or as I say,alternative-to-medicine) in general or in particular (outside of tcm perhaps)? You might want to vote,but I´d really appreciate mature replies too.

Thanks a bunch.

Alternative medicine being;
acupuncture/tcm ( http://www.skepdic.com/acupunc.html ) (Additional,fascinating article on TCM http://www.csicop.org/si/2003-03/acupuncture.html )
Iridology ( http://www.skepdic.com/iridol.html )
Ayuervedic medicine ( http://www.skepdic.com/ayurvedic.html )
Homeopathy ( http://www.skepdic.com/homeo.html )
(These are only some examples,the list would have been way too long for me to write.)

[Former castleva]

Not exactly the kind of reply that I have been waiting for.

Excuse me?

[chen zhen]

Dumber than a post?! wtf

anyway, voted for "looking for scientific proof, but not a strong sceptic."

[Former castleva]

So do you think it takes faith then? Reading your post,one could think so.

[Former castleva]

Majority of our voters,so far,do not seem to practice critical thinking.

[Former castleva]

" Not trying something because you don't understand it is not critical thinking. It's arrogance to believe that if you don't understand something it can't be true. It's also tiresome doing others homework. If I can figure out principles of TCM and how they interelate with western thought (they do), anyone else of average intelligence should be able to. If you don't understand something, you put it away until you have the knowledge to deal with it. If you ask someone for help or information you do so because you have faith that they perhaps know more about the subject than you. If that's the case to not take the advice would be foolish."

OK...We have been trough this before.I did not find myself asking for this.
I agree that to not try something because one does not understand it,is not critical thinking.I also agree that it can be considered arrogant to diss something without knowing about it.
That however,does NOT mean that should a person be critical of something,it must be because the person is simply arrogant or/and ignorant.It is not quite that black&white.
It is,however,the easy way out.

"If I can figure out principles of TCM and how they interelate with western thought (they do), anyone else of average intelligence should be able to. "

Let´s see...
I cannot agree.You conclude that the principles of TCM relate to what you consider western thought.
You say that you can figure out the principles of TCM (which itself is not the problem) but I do not think that what follows is that "anyone else of average intelligence should be able to".
This includes two conclusions by now.
You have concluded that TCM and "western thought" relate (while it was not necessarily the case in the first place) You also conclude that anyone with average intelligence should be able to,thus you are linking qualities "intelligence" to support your conclusion (disagreement would be linked to failure) This has to do with the fallacy of "appeal to force" ("you may think that tcm is bunk,but you are not too wise to say so"--unpleasant consequences are linked) and especially "prejudicial language" ("A person of average intelligence would agree that..."--emotive,or related words are used to attach value to the argument).

"Again with the lightbulb. When I was three I had no idea of how electricity works, yet my parents showed me that when I flipped the lightswitch it went on or off. I have a reasonably good understanding of electricity today, yet the lightswitch still worked when I didn't understand it at all. This is faith."

I will not comment on this,yet at least.

[Former castleva]

"If I've stymied you with the lightbulb analogy good!"

?

"Not emotion, fact. I am of slightly below average intelligence and if I can figure this out so should anyone of comparable or superior intellegence. "

Hmmm.You´re just repeating the same thing again,stating it is a fact even.This is argument ad nauseum.

[Former castleva]

"When you point a finger there are three pointing back at yourself."

?

"P.S. I'm the other person that voted for looking for theoretical/scientific proof, not a strong sceptic."

Good.Theoretically,that is.

[chen zhen]

U like to stirr up trouble, dont u Paleo;)

Keep on fighting

[Former castleva]

"U like to stirr up trouble, dont u Paleo"

Blah,shut up. ;) ;)
No,seriously.I do not.But I think that sometimes it may follow my moves ("trouble" being relative)

"Keep on fighting"

Always!

[method man]

http://www.quackwatch.org

[Former castleva]

A good one by method man.

One of the classic quackbusting sites,have used that for a time or two.

[Former castleva]

The skeptical ancestor (skeptic who predates me,for one)

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2829

[yenhoi]

I picked option #2.

I trust personal (my own) expierence more then most other sources of info.

There are some methods I have witnessed that I would call usefull, but not for myself or my goals.

:eek:

[Former castleva]

"There are some methods I have witnessed that I would call usefull, but not for myself or my goals."

Am I wrong,assuming that those goals have to do with the interest of those providing you with the methods in question?

[yenhoi]

You are not wrong.

;)

[yenhoi]

Its my expierence that even if I deem a method not-useful for myself, that I have gained great knowledge, or at least perspective - which is useful in envaluating pretty much everything else that I might come accross. To me, this means that most people should be at least open minded and critical enough to "give things a chance" before dismissing them entirely.

Just knowing that there are real, effective Iron Body methods out there is useful, even if you dont practice any sort of Iron Body method yourself.

:confused:

[Former castleva]

"You are not wrong."

Great. ;)

"Its my expierence that even if I deem a method not-useful for myself, that I have gained great knowledge, or at least perspective - which is useful in envaluating pretty much everything else that I might come accross. To me, this means that most people should be at least open minded and critical enough to "give things a chance" before dismissing them entirely.

Just knowing that there are real, effective Iron Body methods out there is useful, even if you dont practice any sort of Iron Body method yourself."

I see.Those are good thoughts.

[Vash]

I am open to most forms of healing, mainly since the beginning of the year.

I thought I knew it all The pain in my back was just a pulled muscle. No reason to see a chiropractor. Turns out I had a massive subluxation. Several pinched nerves. Heck, my kneck looked backwards on the xray. Don't even get me started on my tilted pelvis . . .

So yes, I am willing to look into TCM, or holistic health as a whole, without a whole lot of scientific backing. Just so long as it doesn't "spit in the face" of common sense.

Well, maybe a little spittle. ;)

[Former castleva]

"So yes, I am willing to look into TCM, or holistic health as a whole, without a whole lot of scientific backing. Just so long as it doesn't "spit in the face" of common sense."

So,when does something start "spitting in the face" as far as common sense goes? (in your books)

[Vash]

I'd say something along the lines of those "coral calcium" ads, to start with.

After that, a claim which is based almost entirely upon nothing. I love chiropractics, for example. But, if one told me it worked for the singular reason that it freed up my chi pathways, then I'd be throwing another name to quacksearch.

My massage therapist does Reiki. Haven't had her perform this on me, yet, but she is one hell of a massues.

[Former castleva]

"I'd say something along the lines of those "coral calcium" ads, to start with. "

Ah,yes.I get it.That´s nutrition related quackery.Exaggerated or unfounded claims.

"After that, a claim which is based almost entirely upon nothing. I love chiropractics, for example. But, if one told me it worked for the singular reason that it freed up my chi pathways, then I'd be throwing another name to quacksearch."

Hmmm.I understand.You´ve already made clear that you accept some alternative/complementary methods,so I´m not going to go to that.I can´t help but comment that chiropractics also make claims that are seemingly unfounded.I also think that their methods can be dangerous,and they are found guilty of causing harm because of apparently pseudoscientific beliefs&acts (not a generalization).

"My massage therapist does Reiki. Haven't had her perform this on me, yet, but she is one hell of a massues."

OK.I hear that my massage therapist practices cupping.I have doubts about it´s validity,but as far as strange statements&/or promises about massage are not made,I´m fairly fine with it.

[Vash]

For the community as a whole, I'd say they kind of oversell the treatment. But, as in every profession, there's this guy that does it right and don't blow smoke up your aorta.

"Cures headaches, leg pains . . ."

Yeah. Did for me. I have always gotten shooting pain in my legs if I sat in a car for an hour or more. That was murder on those 6 hour bus rides to track meets. Also, my leg used to get a catch in it, so it felt like it should move in reverse. Left leg, inner thigh used to cramp up bad. Since I started treatment, this has all but disappeared. Used to get some bad-ass headaches. Cracks my neck occasionally, they go by-by. Course, they do that when I workout and when I drink Gatorade.

As for the other, more dubious claims, the chiropractor I work with hasn't really made any. So I can't really comment on those.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Science tends to discount that which it can't measure and quantify, and.. for its model of the universe, it is appropriate..

What science fails to accept is that there are other workable models, that prior to the formalization of the "scientific method" people simply adopted that which worked (pragmatism).. a simple example might be the use of the bark of the Yew tree to relieve pain.. now that science has measured and quantified the active agents in that bark, we have Aspirin.. the point is, that the absence of "proof" did not diminish the popular understanding that the "magic bark" relieved pain..

The only point i would assert is that it is lacking in theory to dismiss "claims of efficacy" due to unmeasureable conditions.. perhaps it is simply that we haven't yet developed the technology or understanding of modalities to make a definitive analysis..

Regarding the radioactive tracing of meridians/channels, that is a poorly thought-out experiment.. at the onset, it was known that the tracing agent would perform as described.. that there was no indication that an intangible energy path would transport tangible tracing agents through tangible substances.. the more appropriate search might be to focus on measuring devices that can filter various aspects of energy to isolate or indicate patterns that coincide with the expectations asserted through acupuncture, Tui Na, etc..

Be well..

[Former castleva]

"Regarding the radioactive tracing of meridians/channels, that is a poorly thought-out experiment.. at the onset, it was known that the tracing agent would perform as described.. that there was no indication that an intangible energy path would transport tangible tracing agents through tangible substances.. the more appropriate search might be to focus on measuring devices that can filter various aspects of energy to isolate or indicate patterns that coincide with the expectations asserted through acupuncture, Tui Na, etc..
"

TCB,we did not discuss that here.

So,what is your stance/did you vote?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

FC: I did vote.. I support Holistic medicine, yet.. i am also skeptical.. the long and short of it is that skeptics have long been stumbling blocks for advances in "potential" new modalities.. mostly it is their repressive concepts that "if it can't be measured it ain't so" attitude.. it is their attacks with alleged "unbiased" scientific findings that cause otherwise foreward thinking folks to question or abandon exploration of alternative health options..

As A. Einstein asserted and i concur, "imagination is more important than knowledge".. no one can quantify imagination nor measure it.. yet, it is the foundation of knowledge.. Surely, i am skeptical of claims of miracles, more surely though.. unless i perceive harm, i am open to a new experience or repeated old experiences that offer me hands-on chance to determine for myself the value of such experiences.. my own direct experiences afford me data that and value that no treatise can offer.. regardless of credentials, publications are second hand explanations of biased observations ( some more or less than others, but biased none-the-less)..

Yes, i scoff at the purely sterile existence of the puritanical Scientist.. they try to solve problems with the same thinking that caused the problem.. (stuck inside a box of their own creation).. i approve of and appreciate people that challenge me to defend my beliefs, however.. those with an agenda to save the world from itself and its beliefs with "hard scientific data", miss the whole point.. they fail to accept that science is limited to its ability to perceive.. beyond that, it's wide open..

Be well..

[yenhoi]

If we find a creature living in a small area we should not be surprized when we look around and find the surrounding environment provides the perfect conditions for the creature to live.

Just a thought.

:cool:

[Former castleva]

"FC: I did vote.. I support Holistic medicine, yet.. i am also skeptical.. "

TCB,thank you.
That was all I asked for.It appears that you´re repeating your opinions about how science works,according to you,various times again&again.No offense meant. :)

"If we find a creature living in a small area we should not be surprized when we look around and find the surrounding environment provides the perfect conditions for the creature to live."

Do you want to discuss zoology or ecology? :)
What´s the point?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

FC.. Indeed, i am repeating my opinions.. as are you.. The opinions take different subjects but remain the same.. you insist that science "proves" or "disproves" the validity of opinions.. i insist that science is too limited in its procedure to account for intangibles.. and, therefore, where there is opinion that evades the tangible criteria, science should reserve judgment until it has the methodology to definitively quantify its assertions..

An example might be.. i insist that there is a cosmic life-force inherent in all things called Chi.. science can't quantify it, so dismisses it as invalid.. much like when popular scientific thought held that the Earth was the center of the universe, then upon better equipment and more cognitive reasoning that "truth" was modified to a better explanation..

I find more comfort in open-minded belief in possibility than the closed scientific system that relies on methodology that has inherent limitations.. We simply differ in our approach to life, yet neither belief-system invalidates the experience.. they only explain it differently..

[Former castleva]

"An example might be.. i insist that there is a cosmic life-force inherent in all things called Chi.. science can't quantify it, so dismisses it as invalid.. much like when popular scientific thought held that the Earth was the center of the universe, then upon better equipment and more cognitive reasoning that "truth" was modified to a better explanation..
"

So basically you´re saying that there really is a separate,existing energy unknown to physics?
It´s interesting that you should mention the earth in this context.A while ago I was watching a discussion on alternative medicine in which a proponent of- responded (to critics) by indicating that it used to be thought that the earth is flat...you get the idea.Well,I think that´s a bit of a funny statement to make as a defense,considering that the ideas/methods/- they were defending can pre-date even those obsolote explanations that they´re referring to.The earth gained shape,their ideas apparently did not.Indeed it is possible that I,for example,am dead wrong.Certain probabilities of possible outcomes can form,however.

[yenhoi]

Im not sure why I wrote that here. Long hours at work that day?

:D

At any rate, I dont think anyone can use science to "prove" anything, just as pointing out that the earth was once thought of as flat doesnt "prove" anything except people can be wrong.

:eek:

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..


So basically you´re saying that there really is a separate,existing energy unknown to physics?

Not really, what i am asserting is that there is a single basic force/energy (Tao, if you choose.. or God, or Great Spirit, etc...).. that manifests itself in a "universe" of ways.. we discect it into many categories, many labels, but it has no concern for our contrivances.. (Lord, i just know there's a lecture about to unfold regarding the difference between force and energy.. just let it go..) What we debate here is the differing perspectives from which we experience this force/energy, some believing it must be measured to be valid.. others relying on direct experience..

Here, i might refer to Heisenberg's observations.. that the experience responds to the observer's beliefs.. further, that response corresponds to the sincerity and depth of the beliefs.. and, so it is, that we each will live out our lives content in our beliefs, creating our experiences consistant with our beliefs and we will likely not change the world.. (unless science finds another, even better, way to end life as we know it.. )..

Be well..

[Former castleva]

TCB,I can see your point now.That´s another realm you´re taking us to at this point,should this be your main point,it is correct IMO to posit that it goes beyond "measurement".

"Im not sure why I wrote that here. Long hours at work that day?"



:cool:

[GeneChing]

So this'll do...


Homeopathy effective for 0 out of 68 illnesses, study finds (http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/homeopathy-therapeutic-dead-end-systematic-review-no-evidence-it-works-a6884356.html)
Treatment has 'no discernible convincing effects beyond placebo'
Siobhan Fenton @siobhanfenton Friday 19 February 2016775 comments

http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2014/03/26/16/homeopathy-getty.jpg
Homeopathy was described by the professor as a 'therapeutic dead-end' Getty Images

A leading scientist has declared homeopathy a "therapeutic dead-end" after a systematic review concluded the controversial treatment was no more effective than placebo drugs.

Professor Paul Glasziou, a leading academic in evidence based medicine at Bond University, was the chair of a working party by the National Health and Medical Research Council which was tasked with reviewing the evidence of 176 trials of homeopathy to establish if the treatment is valid.

A total of 57 systematic reviews, containing the 176 individual studies, focused on 68 different health conditions - and found there to be no evidence homeopathy was more effective than placebo on any.

Homeopathy is an alternative medicine based on the idea of diluting a substance in water. According to the NHS: “Practitioners believe that the more a substance is diluted in this way, the greater its power to treat symptoms. Many homeopathic remedies consist of substances that have been diluted many times in water until there is none or almost none of the original substance left.”

The review found “no discernible convincing effects beyond placebo” and concluded “there was no reliable evidence from research in humans that homeopathy was effective for treating the range of health conditions considered".

Writing in a blog for the British Medical Journal, Professor Glasziou states: “As chair of the working party which produced the report I was simply relieved that the arduous journey of sifting and synthesising the evidence was at an end. I had begun the journey with an ‘I don’t know attitude’, curious about whether this unlikely treatment could ever work… but I lost interest after looking at the 57 systematic reviews which contained 176 individual studies and finding no discernible convincing effects beyond placebo.”

He continues: “I can well understand why Samuel Hahnemann- the founder of homeopathy- was dissatisfied with the state of 18th century medicine’s practices, such as blood-letting and purging and tried to find a better alternative.

“But I would guess he would be disappointed by the collective failure of homeopathy to carry on his innovative investigations, but instead continue to pursue a therapeutic dead-end.”

In the UK, two NHS hospitals provide homeopathy, as well as a number of GP practices.

[SimonM]

Here, i might refer to Heisenberg's observations.. that the experience responds to the observer's beliefs.. further, that response corresponds to the sincerity and depth of the beliefs.. and, so it is, that we each will live out our lives content in our beliefs, creating our experiences consistant with our beliefs and we will likely not change the world.. (unless science finds another, even better, way to end life as we know it.. )..

Be well..

Just putting it out there that Heisenberg's uncertainty work had more to do with measurement than belief. IE: when you measure the location of a sub-atomic particle it affects its speed, when you measure the speed it affects its location. That's different than assuming reality to be consensual at a fundamental, cosmological level.

[Cataphract]

I don't think Bob was talking about the uncertainty principle. He just says that our beliefs shape the way we look at the world and how we draw conclusions.. I can only agree to that.

[GeneChing]

I'm disappointed that we don't have a thread dedicated to homeopathy here yet. Maybe I'll cobble one together if there's more news soon.


WHAT IS HOMEOPATHY? FDA MAY CRACK DOWN ON HIGH-RISK PRODUCTS (http://www.newsweek.com/what-homeopathy-fda-may-crack-down-potentially-dangerous-products-751499)
BY KATE SHERIDAN ON 12/18/17 AT 3:58 PM

Updated | The Food and Drug Administration released a new draft of guidelines on Monday for the agency's approach to enforcing regulations for some alternative medicine products.

The new guidelines appear to signal a shift toward more stringent regulations of high-risk products, including those with reported safety issues, items for children and the elderly and products that claim to treat serious conditions such as cancer. While homeopathic products are already subject to FDA regulations, the feds haven't approved any homeopathic drugs, suggesting the agency hasn't tested to see if data shows they are safe and effective.

In theory, homeopathy works based on the idea that disease can be treated with a substance that produces the same symptoms that a person is experiencing, known as "like cures like," according to the National Institute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine. Another key principle is that if a substance is diluted, it is actually more potent. However, there’s little scientific evidence that homeopathic drugs work.

A group that assesses evidence behind medical treatments found that there wasn't enough evidence to show that homeopathic remedies could treat asthma, dementia, ADHD or could induce labor. Some extremely limited evidence showed it might treat irritable bowel syndrome and that one homeopathic treatment might help relieve the side effects of cancer treatments.

This lack of evidence is one reason Britain's NHS no longer covers homeopathic treatments; The Guardian reported the health service's chief executive in England said that homeopathy is “at best a placebo and a misuse of scarce NHS funds.” An Australian government panel also couldn't find any evidence that homeopathy worked better than a placebo.

Nevertheless, these remedies have become exceedingly popular. Homeopathy is now a $3 billion a year business, according to the FDA’s press release. A national survey estimated that six million Americans, including more than one million children, may have used homeopathy in the past year.

http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/full/public/2017/12/18/homeopathic-products-2.jpg
Staff at Ainsworth Pharmacy make up homeopathic remedies on August 26, 2005, in London.
PETER MACDIARMID/GETTY IMAGES

“In recent years, we’ve seen a large uptick in products labeled as homeopathic that are being marketed for a wide array of diseases and conditions, from the common cold to cancer,” FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb stated in a press release announcing the proposed guidelines. “In many cases, people may be placing their trust and money in therapies that may bring little to no benefit in combating serious ailments, or worse—that may cause significant and even irreparable harm because the products are poorly manufactured, or contain active ingredients that aren’t adequately tested or disclosed to patients.”

This isn’t just a theoretical concern. A homeopathic teething remedy may have killed eight children because it was contaminated with a deadly plant called belladonna, STAT reported. Those teething tablets were specifically mentioned in Monday's announcement, along with other products.

The company that manufactured the tablets, Hyland’s, discontinued the product in October 2016 after an FDA warning about safety that impacted retailers' willingness to carry the tablets. “We are confident that any available Hyland’s teething products, including those you already have, are safe for use,” the company stated. “We are proud of our heritage and expertise in the manufacture and distribution of quality FDA-regulated homeopathic medicines. As such, we look forward to the future of homeopathic medicines as we work in partnership with the FDA.”

According to a statement from the American Association of Homeopathic Pharmacists, the organization "applauds the Agency’s plan to take quick action against illegal or unsafe homeopathic medicines." The statement noted "the draft guidance would not materially affect the vast majority of homeopathic drug products available in the United States." Hyland's spokesperson Mary Borneman told Newsweek the company did not have additional comments to add to the AAHP statement.

This article has been updated to include additional comments from Hyland's and the AAHP.