Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

Alternative Medicines

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Jesus Christ, I've just spent what seems forever trying to find a news website carrying this story that will actually open on this piece of shit excuse for a computer. Anyway:

Story

What are your opinions?

On the one hand, I agree that any form of care should be thoroughly tested before money is spend on it. But I am also well aware of the amount of power the pharmaceutical companys seem to have in what we spend our money on.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the biggy for me is painkillers.
    surely having used cannabis for pleasure for thirty six years ...and more recently for pain relief ...no one should be telling me there may be some unforseen risks.
    my choice over industrial drugs is a simpole plant that can be grown on my windowsill. theres the problem ...how do the drug companies make money out of that?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They don't...
    :)
    I am not a fan of homeopathy or any treatments that haven't got a proven effect.
    And I don't do pills either.

    I am a firm believer of healthy mind-healthy body principle, and vice versa of course....
    Spending £20m on that hospital seems extravagant.

    It's just someone of "importance" using their influence to propagate his beliefs without conclusive scientific evdience.
    But what do I know...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't see a difference between GlaxoSmithKline and Holland&Barratt but some do, clearly.

    If it works, fine but if investment in Herceptin plays second fiddle to investment in Reiki crystal therapy then I doubt there would be such passionate defence of complementary therapy.

    And for the record I disagree that chiropracty and osteopathy are alternative therapies.

    ETA: "Medical apartheid" :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I find it amazing that so many people will pander to this hippy bullshit.

    If it isn't proven to work (even through some sort of placebo effect) then it should not be provided by the NHS.....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If homeopathy works, doesnt that mean we have to totally revise everything we understand about chemistry and physics?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    If homeopathy works, doesnt that mean we have to totally revise everything we understand about chemistry and physics?

    yup

    the concentrations involved in homeopathy, are like that of 1 atom in the whole solar system, if you can call that a concentration so you can see why i'm sceptical

    by the way certain conventional medicines have never been proven for what they are prescribed for, in particular drugs for bipolar disorder "mood stablisers" are not proven to reduce chances of manic episodes when taken as a preventative measure - why in my opinion they shouldnt be prescribed for that

    and the pharmaceutical firms do exhaserbate natural human states and call them problems, as much as the many quacks out there do

    im not defending alternative medicine, im saying ALL forms of possible treatment should be given rigorous testing to see if they work before becoming available on NHS

    from what i've read of medical trials:
    - homeopathy doesn't work, case studies do not show whether a treatment works, like this crap here i read in evening standard where some untrained lady was using logic argument to defend it, when her arguments were utter nonsense really (i'd link but it isnt on their site strangely despite having a 2 page spread on it)
    - acupunture seems to work for pain killing purposes only, nothing else, but for pain killing purposes it passed in quite a few controlled placebo tests so that's enough ground for it, and it's cheap as well really, but things like pain have a big mental control factor also as i am quite good at ignoring 'pain' until i forget it's there
    - certain herbs work, like st johns wort for mild depression, however st johns wort contains weakly active anti-depressants

    i could go on for days about this but im too busy getting pissed :p


    if you are unaware, some guy hate's homeopathy so much more than i do, that he will give £1million to anyone who can do a scientifically controlled test that's repeatable on random groups and show it works

    and whenever you read "homeopathy uses things that are poisonous in large enough quanities" you should remember in terms of injestion almost anything is poisonous at high enough quantities, like salt, sugar etc apart from water (unless you're drowning which is different)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    If homeopathy works, doesnt that mean we have to totally revise everything we understand about chemistry and physics?
    If it did work then the pharmacutical companies would go bust. That is why we will never know the full effect of alternative medicine and holistic therapies. They wouldn't tell us if they worked... Thus I reserve any judements.

    I would actually rather use herbs than conventional medicine... I don't take paracetamol, I use peppermint or ginger if I have a bad tummy, never Rennies. Chamomile works just as well as any other medicine to calm mild anxiety. Meditation helps with stress.

    I don't think that holistics are as bullshit as people say, there are some charlatons out there however... Always will be. But like I say, phamacutical companies have too much power to ever let us find out the truth.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If it did work then the pharmacutical companies would go bust. That is why we will never know the full effect of alternative medicine and holistic therapies. They wouldn't tell us if they worked... Thus I reserve any judements.

    I would actually rather use herbs than conventional medicine... I don't take paracetamol, I use peppermint or ginger if I have a bad tummy, never Rennies. Chamomile works just as well as any other medicine to calm mild anxiety. Meditation helps with stress.

    I don't think that holistics are as bullshit as people say, there are some charlatons out there however... Always will be. But like I say, phamacutical companies have too much power to ever let us find out the truth.

    i dont take anything for my headaches, theres no point its not going to kill you and theyll go away of their own accord

    if you can find me a study thats systematic and shows all the random alterantive thigns work, until then id reserve judgement for a couple and pass most off as crooks, drug companies in general are crooks, but they do technically sell proper treatments, even if half the time what they're treating isnt something severe

    the creator of homeopathy is as much a crook as ron hubbard :lol: the guy seriously just made it up as a scientific theory, thats failed in all well controlled experiments since but people believe it still, its as much a matter of faith than anything, but faith isnt what you sell medicine on, its trust in knowing what youre taking or whatever has an effect

    running up behind homeopathy is magnetic bracelets which dont help at all either

    in fact acupunture is only one i can think of thats been shown to work, probavly not cause of 'energy lines' or whatever, but because parts of the body no matter how seperate have feelings in same part of brain, the explanation for phantom limbs
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    I think money should be spent on what WORKS, and is KNOWN to work.

    Until alternative methods are proven to give BETTER results CONSISTENTLY, I think we should stick to what we know.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i dont take anything for my headaches, theres no point its not going to kill you and theyll go away of their own accord

    if you can find me a study thats systematic and shows all the random alterantive thigns work, until then id reserve judgement for a couple and pass most off as crooks, drug companies in general are crooks, but they do technically sell proper treatments, even if half the time what they're treating isnt something severe

    the creator of homeopathy is as much a crook as ron hubbard :lol: the guy seriously just made it up as a scientific theory, thats failed in all well controlled experiments since but people believe it still, its as much a matter of faith than anything, but faith isnt what you sell medicine on, its trust in knowing what youre taking or whatever has an effect

    running up behind homeopathy is magnetic bracelets which dont help at all either

    in fact acupunture is only one i can think of thats been shown to work, probavly not cause of 'energy lines' or whatever, but because parts of the body no matter how seperate have feelings in same part of brain, the explanation for phantom limbs

    Where did I mention homeopathy?

    And like I say, I genuinely don't believe that studies would be done on something such as herbalism, or holistic treatment, if they were they wouldn't be released, hence reserving judgement.

    Yes drugs companies do have some good treatments, in some cases people need things like chemotherapy, sometimes people need treatment for serious illness... I've never met a holistic practitioner who has claimed they can cure cancer. But a lot of people believe that some things have greater benefits than any drug they've used,as you've mentioned before acupuncture, shiatsu and herbal treatments... Some people swear by them and even if the result is psychosomatic I'm sure a lot of people would be happier and healthier using certain natural remedies and therapies to help rather than drugs that have side effects.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Where did I mention homeopathy?

    And like I say, I genuinely don't believe that studies would be done on something such as herbalism, or holistic treatment, if they were they wouldn't be released, hence reserving judgement.

    Yes drugs companies do have some good treatments, in some cases people need things like chemotherapy, sometimes people need treatment for serious illness... I've never met a holistic practitioner who has claimed they can cure cancer. But a lot of people believe that some things have greater benefits than any drug they've used,as you've mentioned before acupuncture, shiatsu and herbal treatments... Some people swear by them and even if the result is psychosomatic I'm sure a lot of people would be happier and healthier using certain natural remedies and therapies to help rather than drugs that have side effects.


    oooh sorry misread your post earlier then, most of this is generally good with me :thumb:

    it does help making people just feel better sometimes, but im generally just skeptical under the sense of you shouldnt have to lie to people to make the treatment work which is what a placebo effect requires
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This whole story is based on the premise that these treatments are available to all, on a whim. That simply isn't the case. In fact in 99% of all cases a referral from a doctor is required, much the same as pretty much any other treatment on the NHS.

    These treatments work for some, but not for others. Some see them as an alternative to conventional medicine - which we will fund and which is often more expensive.

    The question for me is one of evidence and it's hard to get that if we don't allow treatment...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If it did work then the pharmacutical companies would go bust. That is why we will never know the full effect of alternative medicine and holistic therapies. They wouldn't tell us if they worked... Thus I reserve any judements.

    I don't think that holistics are as bullshit as people say, there are some charlatons out there however... Always will be. But like I say, phamacutical companies have too much power to ever let us find out the truth.

    It has little to do with the drug companies are far more to do with the fact that virtually no 'alternative' therapy has been proven consistantly to work well in double blind tests.

    There is certainly some things to learn, and it maybe that large chunks of the alternative therapies are really good and effective, but they just arent really tested properly.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This whole story is based on the premise that these treatments are available to all, on a whim. That simply isn't the case. In fact in 99% of all cases a referral from a doctor is required, much the same as pretty much any other treatment on the NHS.

    These treatments work for some, but not for others. Some see them as an alternative to conventional medicine - which we will fund and which is often more expensive.

    The question for me is one of evidence and it's hard to get that if we don't allow treatment...


    the testing process is a big part of things, and does need to be kept seperate from general treatment, as can shown by fact people in some poor countries are told they're taking proper treatment when in fact it's medical trials
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whenever a new treatment start, it's a medical trial. It;s the same with early stage 'use of Herceptin at the moment, but I don't hear many quibbles about that even though the evidence of it's effectiveness is "shaky" for early stage use.

    What you highlight at the end isn't an issue with testing of alternative therapies, but of the ethical standing of the pharma industry.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whenever a new treatment start, it's a medical trial. It;s the same with early stage 'use of Herceptin at the moment, but I don't hear many quibbles about that even though the evidence of it's effectiveness is "shaky" for early stage use.


    yes the thing with herceptin annoys me also, as i reckon the due process needs to occur in working out whether its a viable treatment or not


    people fail to see why these thigns are important, and then moan when things like what happened with vioxx occur
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why on earth would the pharmaceuticals comapnies want to bury evidence of the effectiveness of alternative therapies?

    Much more likely they would want to exploit it to make money.

    Why is that people are more trusting of people peddling complete mystic bollocks than of proper scientifically tested drugs just because it is a big company rather than some little hippy business?

    If it was the little hippy business providing the proper drugs and some giant company providing homeopathy etc then I think most of the latters supporters feelings would be reversed........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    It has little to do with the drug companies are far more to do with the fact that virtually no 'alternative' therapy has been proven consistantly to work well in double blind tests.

    There is certainly some things to learn, and it maybe that large chunks of the alternative therapies are really good and effective, but they just arent really tested properly.
    But their argument has always been that you cannot test alternative therapies in the traditional medical model - how do you double blind acupuncture? How do you double blind hypnotherapy? Essential oils?

    I lot of people blindly go in search of any cure, and if a herbal pill from Holland and Barratt is advertised (without even the slightest bit of evidence) to cure or "help treat" their symptoms then they buy it. And because the placebo effect is so strong, people carry on recommending these things. It started with vitamin supplements, which most people don't need, and now the whole industry is worth billions - not quite as much as big pharma makes, but still significant.

    I wonder if anyone could explain why Holland and Barratt is allowed to make enormous profits from alternative therapies without evidence, whilst big pharma is criticised for producing and profitting from medicines that do actually work?

    For all its faults, we are a lot healthier these days thanks largely to improved conventional medicine.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    people fail to see why these thigns are important, and then moan when things like what happened with vioxx occur
    Indeed. But let's not forget that the woman at the centre of the Herceptin court case was a pawn in a carefully orchestrated plan by Herceptin's manufacturer to get the NHS to pay for all the treatment courses.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    It has little to do with the drug companies are far more to do with the fact that virtually no 'alternative' therapy has been proven consistantly to work well in double blind tests.

    There is certainly some things to learn, and it maybe that large chunks of the alternative therapies are really good and effective, but they just arent really tested properly.
    What I am saying is that how do we know they don't work? They might work... There might be loads of tests supporting them that aren't released to the public. Think of the Catholic Church and the Nag hammadi scriptures, but on scientific terms.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Which is another way of saying that you will believe anything.........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What I am saying is that how do we know they don't work? They might work... There might be loads of tests supporting them that aren't released to the public. Think of the Catholic Church and the Nag hammadi scriptures, but on scientific terms.
    Hang on a minute. If you can prove that homeopathy works beyond the possibility of a placebo effect, there is nothing that a large pharmaceutical company can do to stop you releasing your results. The truth is that the alternative medicine industry (and it is an industry) makes no effort to release evidence of effectiveness, or any data whatsoever.

    When the scientists quoted in The Times say that the published reviews of trials show no benefit, they mean exactly that. There is nothing sinister about requiring proof before investing public funds into treatments that don't work, or are poor value for money.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    I wonder if anyone could explain why Holland and Barratt is allowed to make enormous profits from alternative therapies without evidence, whilst big pharma is criticised for producing and profitting from medicines that do actually work?
    Probably the same way the drugs companies can claim that Tunes and Strepsils cure your cough, or cosmetic companies can claim that Oil of Olay makes you look younger based on "8 out of 10 women agree".
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Probably the same way the drugs companies can claim that Tunes and Strepsils cure your cough, or cosmetic companies can claim that Oil of Olay makes you look younger based on "8 out of 10 women agree".
    And are they paid for by the NHS?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    And are they paid for by the NHS?
    Wouldn't surprise me. I thought Holland and Barrett was a high street shop. Do they supply the NHS with stuff as well?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think the point is that drugs used by the NHS recieve a little more stringent testing than '3 out 4 people thought it might have made a difference' whereas on the high street it's all just marketing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Wouldn't surprise me. I thought Holland and Barrett was a high street shop. Do they supply the NHS with stuff as well?
    Eh?

    The thread is about the NHS funding treatments for which there is no evidence, i.e. which do not work.

    I countered the pro-alternatives argument that the drug companies are covering up the results of alternative medicine trials by suggesting that, perhaps, Holland and Barratt's profiteering was no better than that of 'big pharma'.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jim V wrote:
    I think the point is that drugs used by the NHS recieve a little more stringent testing than '3 out 4 people thought it might have made a difference' whereas on the high street it's all just marketing.
    Yeah I know that, but I was wondering whether Holland and Barratt supply the NHS with anything. Because if they don't, then surely them selling alternative therapies on the high street with no proof and making huge profits, is no different to Oil of Olay (or Ulay) doing the same thing?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah I know that, but I was wondering whether Holland and Barratt supply the NHS with anything. Because if they don't, then surely them selling alternative therapies on the high street with no proof and making huge profits, is no different to Oil of Olay (or Ulay) doing the same thing?
    :banghead:

    They've hoodwinked the public just in the same way that the homeopathy/hypnotherapy/Reiki practitioners have conned the NHS into paying for those treatments.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    :banghead:

    They've hoodwinked the public just in the same way that the homeopathy/hypnotherapy/Reiki practitioners have conned the NHS into paying for those treatments.
    I just don't get why you brought Holland and Barrett into this. They haven't conned the NHS into buying anything that isn't proven. And their sales on the high street are no different to the stuff the pharmaceutical companys sell with promises of soothing your throat and curing your cough. In both cases, it's only those buying them that have to pay, unlike when the NHS has to pay for anything.

    On the main point, I agree with you. Nothing that's unproven should be payed for.
Sign In or Register to comment.