Posted by Larry Hoover on March 26, 2007, at 8:52:26
In reply to Re: correction, posted by Squiggles on March 26, 2007, at 8:04:59
> I hope you won't consider this, my last
> post on the matter, abrupt or rude. I
> don't think much can come of further argument
> ,at least from my part.I think the debate has been enlightening. If only you had provided supporting arguments for your many assertions, it may not have appeared as argumentative to you.
> My last word on this is: prove it first and then sell it.
>
> SquigglesIf that was the way it worked, there would be no medical system as we know it. There would be no pharmaceuticals at all.
I wonder at your pejorative view of alternative medicine, really I do. It harkens back to home remedies and wisdom from the elders. That's why the lawyers cannot get at it. It belongs to us all, already. You can't patent anything already in the public domain. Doctors can't prevent anyone from employing this knowledge. It is only because that is so that medical science has vilified the practises.
The very idea of "proving it first, then sell it" has only evolved within the last four to five decades, as applied to medicine. There are numerous drugs and practises which were grandfathered into the current system, having been subject to none of this scrutiny. As madhatter pointed out, your sacred lithium is one of those. I can guarantee you, that if lithium had been newly discovered, it would never get past Phase 1 clinical trials, due to its now well-known toxicity. Neither would aspirin, by the way.
With respect to your assertions vis a vis morbidities associated with the two realms, standard and alternative medicines, there is no comparison at all. I know of no deaths attributed to anything but intentional overdose associated with any alternative product, except those cases associated with contaminants arising from the greed of fast-buck operators (e.g. kava kava products with hepatic toxins, the contaminated tryptophan from the early 90's). Contrast the latter with Internet drug sellers, if you want a valid comparison. A woman just died in B.C. from Internet anxiety meds. Mainstream alternative medicine is safer than mainstream medical science, IMHO, and by a great margin. Consider the withdrawal of Serzone due to fulminant liver failure. Yet, that is still listed as a side effect, rather than a toxic effect. Semantics influence the comprehension and interpretation of the event. We allow pharmaceutical drugs to have side effects, yet we assert toxic effects to nutrients. That's bias, plain and simple.
All I hear in your intent to go silent is the sound of a closed mind.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:744072
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/alter/20070320/msgs/744297.html