Did any of you get a chance to read this op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal?

Ahh yes, this piece was BRILLIANT. Salerno doesn't usually write for OpinionJournal, which is probably why this article was so different from the other scientifically-questionable "science" op-eds. Bear in mind, I often read OpinionJournal (and have so for long enough that I refuse to call it anything else).

I am dismayed by the general distrust for pharmaceutical companies. I don't think they're trustworthy, but I think the attitude is not merely distrust, but outright spite. That people will reject medications and vaccinations that have shown true and tangible benefits to human and public health out of animosity towards drug companies only harms HUMANS, and barely makes a dent in the pockets of "Big Pharma."

With that said, sCAM is a lucrative industry whose practices are far less scrupulous than the worst of the drug companies. Last night, I was watching Discovery Health Channel, and I saw 5 adverts for supplements and ZERO adverts for actual, regulated medications.

SkepDoc, have you read Orac's commentary on Salerno's editorial? It's a real doozy http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/01/the_woom...

Anyway, before I go, I think we in the American scientific and medical communities (though concerned Canadians are welcome to lobby with us) need to send a clear and strong signal to the Obama administration that any health care policies that he makes should have the backing of evidence and should be evaluable by standard research methods. Anything less would be a waste of taxpayer money in the least, and a harm to the public's health at worst.

Things really come down to two major factors here.

First, we should all be operating within our levels of training, which hopefully are in line with our licenses, and referring out when someone else is likely to be better trained to deal with a client's (or patient's) issues or complaints. Even if it's just a consult.

Second, our clients/patients vote with their dollars as to which therapy they find to be most effective for them.

I realize that some Reiki Practitioners, Massage Therapists, Acupuncturists, Chiropractic Physicians, etc push the limits on what kinds of medical issues they are willing to deal with in their practice. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not easily scared away from a client just because they have some medical condition I've never heard of or some really big medical condition (Cancer, Fibromyalgia) that will send many LMTs running the other way. That is why I have a shelf full of Anatomy, Physiology, and Pathology reference books. I'll ask to talk with all of their attending medical professionals, including Allopaths (since I'm being told that MD's haven't agreed on another name, no disrespect intended) and everything from Acupuncture to Zen. I will at least ask the client if their doctor(s) know they are coming to see me and if they expressed concern.

I have also seen MDs prescribe muscle relaxers when massage and ice would have been so much more effective and when it would be legally and voluntarily covered by insurance (I still have the unopened bottle) following a car accident. They also said that the neck was fine, the Chiropractor showed an obvious military neck. They also were pissed and dismissive when I was naming the muscles that I could feel causing pain (I wasn't diagnosing, but I was feeling levator scapulae tighten up, as well as a number of multifidi and quadratus lumborum).

Yes, there are some poorly trained practitioners on both sides, as well as some therapies that have no real explanation as to why they work and minimal research showing they work. There are also some terrific professionals who will work with anyone offering therapy that is effective in some way. If people find it to be truely effective, and session notes are showing improvement, then it is helpful.

Even if it is just the placebo effect.

this textual content isn't about atheists. The study talks about the irreligious (those who do not stick to or believe in any known faith( who typically in simple terms take bits and peices they prefer from each and each of the religions plus their own immagination and characteristic their own beliefe gadget) and liberal protestants and individuals of different free and liberal denominations. Oh, and self proclaimed atheists, who prey and believe in a larger being, they'd call themselves atheists, yet they don't seem to be, they are perplexed. in case you had to do a study of polar bears, and rather studied some those who were self proclaimed polar bears, you does no longer get precise effects about polar bears, you should get effects about perplexed human beings. Evangelicles and proper wing religious denominations do no longer believe in astrology and fortune telling, because they are instructed no longer to, that's adverse to their faith, authentic atheists and those with their heads screwed on the right way don't think is that guff, because they have considered what evidence or lack of, that there is and characteristic come to the end that it is nonsence in accordance to their own idea proccesses. because this study has truly basically taken under consideration those those who're perplexed or who've made up their own beliefe gadget, and not in any respect perfect atheists, and when you consider that it has basically studied American society, the whims and fashions of a society can actually have an result on the popularity of the supernatural, this study falls aside, information are basically as precise because the questions that are requested, and the decision of human beings(subsequently) who get requested the question, and through this social gathering the study is fatally improper:)

I just read it, and with a few exceptions, I generally agree. Surprised? I'm an acupuncurist, but I'm primarily an MD. While I obviously believe that Chinese medicine works, I can't say the same for a lot of other garbage (yes,I said it, garbage) out there.

I will simply say that Chinese medicine is difficult to study using blind clinical trials because by the very nature of treatment selection, the practitioner cannot give a generic treatment to all patients with similar symptoms. For example dyspepsia - I would treat a patient with dyspepsia caused by mental stress differently than one who likes eating spicy foods and skipping meals. Kinda hard to make a double blind study there... but enough of that.

There are indeed quacks out there and gosh darned it, they're making people like me, who are sincerely trying to study CAM using WHO research guidelines, look as bad as them.

You mean another pathetic hit piece?

See, the fact that MDs are the 3rd leading cause of death due to the DRUGS they cram down everyone's throats seems to elude the writers of this article. The desperation and push for Codex is palpable. The best part is there are MDs who practice complimentary medicine with such skill they are making the kind of MDs who are killing everyone OBSOLETE.

Check out the track record of Gabriel Cousens MD and you'll start to see quite clearly through the propaganda. Remember folks, always investigate the sources of the studies on vitamins and supplements, most of these studies use SYNTHETIC vitamins which are toxic. Only live source, non synthetic supplements are truly safe and effective.

Herbs and complimentary medicines like Reishi mushrooms have been clinically proven and studied extensively in China and Japan. The Japanese govt. has even made it an official cancer treatment. The American propaganda and egotistical medical community ignores this.

EDIT: that's ok Skep Doc, you can insult my intelligence all you wish, as it's laughable. I've seen you on here being highly abusive and petty before so it doesn't surprise me.

What's sad is that your animosity against alternative medicine is clearly the result of the competition you face. The fact that so many people are using it is a big sign of the times.

MDs like Cousens put you guys to shame. They are trying things like acupuncture and fasting to deal with diabetes and having tremendous success. There are natural therapies that if used correctly are far more effective than pharma, esp. the anti infectives like allicin, olive leaf and wild oregano oil. Even major universities like Georgetown are experimenting with this stuff:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/10/01101...

The very fact that you scoff at this stuff is laughable. You can't debunk people like Candice Pert (also from Georgetown).

The "spite" against the pharma companies isn't going anywhere. Since IG Farben they have robbed people of their health and caused all kinds of side effects. I predict pretty soon the big pharma companies will ask for a bailout! LOL What ARE you people gonna do in the coming depression?

I just did. Thanks for the link. It's no surprise that supplementary, complimentary and alternative medicine (SCAM) doesn't work. That won't stop millions of suckers from shelling out for it anyway.

On a side note, have you seen this new website? It's sort of in the same arena.

http://www.whatstheharm.net/

The ideological harpies will never put up with evidence-based medicine. Ideological-based "treatment" is so much more effective. The numbers speak for themselves.

Thanks for the link. I can vouch for it too. When I was working in Nevada (which has a state board for alternative health), I could earn CEU's (continuing education units) for my nursing license by taking such BS classes as "Tuning Fork Therapy", "Therapeutic Touch" and "Aromatherapy".