Skeptics' ultimate hypocrisy regarding alternative medicine

[NormanD]

[Arouet]

Wow, shocker! No offence, but when you come into a forum make two short posts each with the same link in it, the presumption is that you are one of the endless stream of spammers who come in make one comment with a link to try and drive traffic to their site. Ninja clearly thought the same since your first two posts were deleted!

Ok, to answer your question: it is indeed true that sometimes conventional medications cause unforeseen consequences, and even cause harm. No doubt about it: when medications work, it's because they have an effect on your body. That's why we have a system in place designed to ensure that medications and treatments are safe. It's hardly perfect.

But I don't see how the fact that sometimes conventional medicine causes harm means that alternative medicine should not be tested? Why would we conclude that?

Re: big business: let me ask you: that site you linked to (it's gone now): was it for a for-profit site? I always find it funny to here alt-med proponents talk about big business. Hate to break it to you, but alt-med is also big business.

Re: the law: over prescribing as an effective avoider of lawsuits? Overprescribing causes overdoses. Not exactly desirable.

I have no conceptual problem with any alternative medicine: I only ask that it be put through the same kind of testing as conventional medicine. Of course, then it's no longer alternative - it's just medicine.

[craig weiler]

The objective of regulation of medicines is safety. Since many, if not most prescription medications have a lot of side effects, some of them very bad, they require testing to show that the positives outweigh the negatives. There is a substantial risk in using many of them.

Alternative medicines do not carry the same health risks and therefore do not require the same testing.

Alternative medicine spending per year: $34 billion, prescription medication: $227 billion. One market is almost seven times larger than the other. And prescription meds margins are higher. So they are making more money off of the drugs that they sell. That should put that argument in perspective.

[Arouet]

$34 billion a year and you don't consider that big business? You know its often the same companies produces both types of treatments right?

The reason many alternative medicines are not harmful is because they don't actually do anything in the body. Medications can be harmful because they are doing something. But the thing is, unless something is properly tested, you can't properly evaluate whether it is harmful or not. Herbal remedies can have interactions with conventional medications. Some people take alternative medications thinking they are effective and therefore neglect conventional medications - resulting in harm. Further: whether or not they are harmful, alternative medicines are often packaged in official looking trappings, and they make certain claims - without proper testing one has no idea whether those claims are justified.


I find it hard to believe you wouldn't advocate proper testing for alt med.

[NinjaPuppy]

[craig weiler]

Arouet,
Regarding the size of the businesses: I believe that I pointed out that the prescription business is disproportionately larger and that the profit margins are higher. Drug companies will defend their most profitable businesses while hedging their bets. Duh?

You are making a claim that alternative medicines do no good. You cannot possibly prove your claim. Because you cannot prove that, the rest of your argument falls apart.

If you want to make an accurate statement it will go something like this: "Alternative medicines, by and large, have not undergone extensive testing and therefore their effectiveness has not been scientifically proven to my satisfaction."

I never said I don't advocate testing, I merely said that regulations are for safety. Since most alternative meds are safe, they do not need to be regulated. The harm you're describing is so infrequent as to be irrelevant. You can just about count the number of documented cases on one hand.

[ProfWag]

[Arouet]

[craig weiler]

[Arouet]

You missed the word "many", and ignored my other posts saying that I had no problem with alternative medicines so long as they were properly tested. You reduced my comments to writing off any alternative medicine a priori.

[craig weiler]

Prove that many alternative medicines don't do anything.

[Arouet]

Actually, the trick is to demonstrate that they actually DO something!

[craig weiler]

No. You are claiming that many alternative medicines don't do anything. That is a claim. That's why I reject it. It's my opinion that you're not paying enough attention to the inaccuracy of your statement.

[Arouet]

Yes: the entire wall of homeopathic "medicines" at my local pharmacy don't do anything - well at least not anything that they claim, the homeopathic cough medicine my wife bought would probably have some hydrating effect I imagine. The reason being that there is not enough active ingredient in them to affect the body. Along with the fact that these treatments have not passed scientific scrutiny we can assume that they are ineffective.

Now, of course there is a possibility that there is something about them that is actually effective. I'd say we should get into this topic but I know how you don't like discussing issues in depth.

[craig weiler]

You cannot possibly substantiate your claim that homeopathic medicine doesn't do anything. You are blowing smoke.

You are making statements that are purely opinion. This is why I don't discuss anything with you at length. What's the point if you can't tell the difference between your opinions and actual facts?