Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatments

These are extreme cases. There are quacks around, just as there are not-so-wonderful doctors. You know, the ones who got 49 1/2% in all their exams, just scraping through. They exist. But you can't judge all people by these victims of their own confusion, and you can't judge all doctors and alternative health professionals by a few unethical ones.

Alternative medicine has its place, and I like to think it's right alongside conventional medicine. The element that people tend to lack in seeking or using alternatives is Common Sense. It is a vital ingredient in any treatment, alternative or conventional, and should be used in lavish quantities. Going to extremes in anything is unwise.

Common sense dictates that one doesn't exclude allopathic treatments. Here's a little scenario: when cancer drugs react with diabetes drugs and cause madly elevated triglycerides for which the only offer is cholesterol drugs (but don;t eat grapefruit) which react with the blood pressure drugs (that became necessary because of the cancer drugs in the first place). Then you get a full on body rash to beat all lobsters in the 'whose got the sexiest crust' stakes; the solution to that is steroids! Yeah - you pull up sharpish and take stock.

Mother Nature was the first pharmacy and many of the drugs we have today mimic the effects of natural sources - genetic engineering puts it in the control of the drug brokers and their so called miracle cures. Generally speaking you have to have a hell of a lot of nature's produce before you get any ill-effects - in many cases its the combination with allopathic drugs that are the problem.

Nothing beats personal experience to be able to make decisions as to what to use. I had the standard 'tissue preserving' slash and burn solution to both breasts, followed by "take these wonderful drugs and you'll get at least 5 cancer free years". Side effects? Nah : you might just lose most of your hair, get very swollen and bloated, high blood pressure and diabetes, pancreatitis and spleen swelling, but what the hell, this in modern medicine. Well, 2 years down the track and here I am again , trying the natural therapies because the 'normal' solutions are off with her breasts and poison her to boot. Too barbaric. My hair went grey in three days. That wasn't the Turmeric that did it! ( mind you it did give me yellow teeth which my grandkids loved) .

Janus, you are completely right to draw attention to this, but also as Daisy points out these are extreme cases. Most people who decide to go the natural therapies way do so with as much common sense and research as they are able to muster. We have charge of our own destinies. There are highly toxic drugs out there that cause more damage. Unfortunately the reality is that doctors prescribing dangerous chemicals have 'credibility'.( and Insurance)
Sorry to rant on - must be the champers I had for lunch....

Cheers
Linda

I was shocked by the cases I read on that website hence the post. I'm an advocate of herbal medicine but I don't believe that it's any less dangerous or has less side effects because it's "natural". I can't help feeling there needs to be more accountability to prevent sloppy natropaths and herbologists from hurting people. You will know that many organic compounds found in plants are designed to be toxic, to protect plants from herbivorous animals, fungi, bacteria, or whatever. Most herbs are toxic if consumed in large enough quantities, even parsley. Many plants cause cancer, produce various kinds of toxicity in people, even in minute quantities. Many of these effects can be used positively for healing of course but why have less stringent testing than for mainstream medicine? It's crazy.

As for the natural therefor must be good argument, I've worked in plant science for the last 8 years and from what I've learned I've come to this conclusion. If someone presented me with two identical tablets and said, "one of these contains 1 gram of a compound from a plant, and the other contains an artifical synthesised compound, you MUST take one". I'd choose the inorganic non-natural one, every time. Plant metabolites are FAR more likely to effect our metabolism negatively than a random artificial compound. Afterall, they are "designed" to do things inside living cells.

common sense should prevale, and you should be very proactive in your medical treatments my experiences over the past 5 years or more tell me that even though i think i have the best medico's they like all others is only there to push legal drugs. he won't recognise a place for alternative treatments, he realy doesn't have any idea about interaction/conflicts between drugs, he goes soley on what the drug companies (money mongers) tell him and they don't know as no human trialing has been done.

my case on hypertension treatment and what they diagnosed as diabetese 2, no stability from any of the treatments everyhting is up and down and all over the place, so i asked my naturapath what could be wrong the suggest the wheat/gluten intolerance, ok i cut that out and ended up off of the diabetese 2 drugs (pretty powerful poisons there in the drugs) and hey presto the hypertension drops. at one time they said i had uric aacid i complained that i had no gout like symptoms no they said you don't understand the blood test says you have it so the gave me drugs and all tests kept coming back that i needed ongoing treatment. so i went off of the drugs and the doc got mad but hey guess what the blood test came back clean 1.. i never had it in the first place 2.. the drugs promoted symptoms of waht they are supposed to be treating.

i've had other things like that happen but to many to cite here. be proactive in your health treatment you may know more about your body that your doc', and drugs do conflict and are very dangerous for the body, research other ways.

tip: when the doc prescribes a drug for the first time, ask him for some freebies they all have them out the back you need to be sure the drug will work or suit you, before you start paying, oh the freebies are all part of the kickbacks that the medico's get for promoting dug co' drugs.

len

Thanks Jamus, you make a very good case for caution. I agree there needs to be some policing of sloppy practitioners but isn't that the case in any industry? I beleive naturopaths have their own accreditation structures and I for one wouldn't consult one unless he/she were recognisably accredited. Your comment on what you would do if confronted with a choice between plant based and pseudo is hypothetical and applies in the first instance. If you then find that the pseudo isn't doing what it claimed to do, you look at the 'alternative' unless you are brain dead! I was given that choice - and I opted for the 'guaranteed' conventional one. It hasn't worked.

Discrediting natural therapies when they have been effectively used for longer than the drug-brokers have existed seems to me like chucking the baby out with the bathwater. I am lucky that my GP listens to me and gives me options. He gets disappointed when I don't take his advice and that's human nature - we all want to be 'right'.

Len, I bake my own bread using Rye or Spelt flour and whole grains. The western diet of white bread and sprayed must be responsible for so many cases of diabetes its not funny. But it's accepted, conventional, easy to acquire, no experimentation needed, and everybody relies on it to support their vegemite! 2 sticks of celery through the juicer every morning brought my DB under control!

Good debate, no solution, to each his own. I always say, if you and I were the same one of us would be irrelevant.

Cheers - off to walk the dog while there's a lovely low tide and pick up a bag of kelp for the garden then 10 kg of cherries to pit!

Linda

It seems the main problem is money! not whether these things work or not. Would everyone agree? The pharmaceutical companies spend millions on researching and developing drugs and then have to aggressively market the drugs in order to finance their operations. So they become sales people trying to influence doctors to promote their products. A lot of the responsibility has to fall on doctors to be well informed about ALL options available and developments as they occur. My doctor is fantastic in this regard, I go to an expensive GP in a wealthy area and the doctors in the clinic there are very forward thinking and well versed in herbal treatments which are effective, or not. I'm sure a lot of people when they visit the doctor just sit and nod and wait for the prescription, but you really should communicate with your doctor and discuss alternatives, and if you're not happy go somewhere else. But remember, the humble western doctor, as much maligned as they seem to be these days, have a very rigorous education which should give them the best understanding possible about ALL the bodies inner workings, feedbacks, interactions, side effects etc etc. I think herbal medicine should be a course one can take AFTER completing medicine and becoming a GP. Extra to, not instead of. Afterall, it's peoples lives you're playing with and that's a huge responsibility of care.

An interesting debate indeed! I think many conventional doctors these days are becoming more knowledgeable about alternative treatments (herbs, in particular) and it's about time, too, after centuries of deriding the 'witch's potions'. I was gratified to be presented with a long list of herbs and supplements to avoid before surgery by 2 hospitals I attended in recent months. This is a step in the right direction, IMO, and supports what I said in my earlier post about alternative and conventional medicine working alongside each other.

In treating myself for minor ailments, I'll take the herbal alternative every time as a preference. Extracting a single component of a plant or synthesising it would seem to upset the balance of nature. I believe that a herb has a balance, and that's why there are fewer adverse side-effects with many herbal treatments that with conventional medications, or 'extracts'. But I have no problem at all in rushing to a doctor when my ailments are serious - being a coward to the core, when I'm in pain, the quick-fix methods are the ones for me, thank you!

I think a lot of the trouble with alternative practioners is, as a couple of people have reminded us, that they don't have the broader knowledge that conventional doctors do. They can say, with perfect truth, that X herb is good for Y condition, but diagnosing Y condition correctly is where they often fall down. This would appear to have been the case in the examples which began this discussion. I don't say that doctors get it right all the time, but they generally have a better chance of doing so than those who have no professional training. It's easy to get things wrong.

Take myself as an example. Recently I noticed an itchy spot on my hand. I scratched it, as one does. I put some aloe vera on it. The sore didn't heal, and I have faith in aloe vera's healing properties. After a week, I went to the doctor. It wasn't, as I'd thought, a mosquito bite that had become infected - it was a particularly nasty kind of skin cancer that was growing and spreading at a rate of knots, and which needed surgical excision as a matter of urgency. It wouldn't have mattered what herb I'd used on it - removal was the only solution. But I've used aloe vera on it (with doctor's approval) since then and the scar, after only a few weeks, is barely visible.

So you see, while I can advocate herbal treatments, I'm not tunnel-visioned about it. I follow my own advice and seek the advice of a medical professional when in doubt, and combine the two philosophies. Thus, I believe, I get the best of both worlds. It's impossible to say 'this method is better than that method' when both have validity. But the Common Sense factor is of vital importance. If I'd been of the exclusively, inflexible, 'all natural' sort of person, I'd have lost my hand by now, and the cancer would have mestastisised to other parts of my body. In which case, no amount of herbs or conventional treatments would have saved me.

I do agree that certain manufacturers of herbal products have an axe to grind. It's why I seldom rely on the information they provide when doing my research. I take it into account, of course, but I don't read it as gospel.

This has evolved into a good debate, as Daisy says. I see buckets of common sense in the responses here, which is great. Seems Most people interested in herbs are better educated and more open minded than your average Joe blow. It's everyoneТs responsibility to look out for those who are maybe less aware of the risks.

Jamus,
You make a good point here - money from pharmaceutical companies not only support research but political parties too! Money talks. I was interested on leaving the surgery once to see a 'rep' arrive with a 'prize' for one of the doctors. Not sure what it was won for, but obviously marketing specific drugs pays bonuses. It is a shame that the same amount isn't spent on alternatives.

I also suspect that there is a new breed of doctor needed -one that is expert in medication, because there are so many that anyone who questions the efficacy of them often have to sit while Dr. goes through his MIMS online! This is a dangerous situation when overprescribing or incompatible drugs can be fatal. I alerted my doctor to the grapefruit danger with Lipitor. Now the pharmacy put a warning label on it. But I know of someone ( now deceased) who drank several glasses of grapefruit juice with her morning medications.

The beat goes on, we've all got stories and like any judgment we have to apply the rules of Solomon- fair to both parties, but chiefly fair to ourselves and wellbeing. The sad part is that the AMA and powers that be control the doctors to the extent that this is a common scenario " You could drink nettle tea for lymphodema but I didn't say that, I am supposed to give you sulphur drugs". While 'control' is through such rigourous methods that gag doctors who even whiff of 'alternative' its a sad situation. Control needs to be open to change. I agree, there are many good GP's who will listen and don't patronise. So as Len said - one has to aks and be proactive. It is essential that anyone, ill or well, listens to their body, takes charge of one's own wellness and uses the services available to get the best out of life. I don't send my car to a bicycle mechanic. Apropos of something you said in an earlier post about herbs having toxic properties too - this is a point well taken and one of the reasons I prefer to ingest natures benefits through food, not pills. It would take a hell of a lot of parsley to kill me! I'm not up to eating those sorts of quantities despite having a healthy appetite!

One should be able to assume that the companies making alternative health products have the same controls and duty of care as drug companies, but unfortunately we saw that was not the case with Pan Pharmaceuticals. Vigilance is important.

Daisy, I too believe in balance ( in all parts of my life, not only medical) and this is why I am so fascinated by plants and their interface with human life. The 'spirit' of the plant is important without getting too esoteric. But I too dont hesitate to use my GP ( if I can get an appointment in the same month!) in emergencies and have my 'me week' every three months when I do Masseur/GP/Oncogist/Surgeon/Physiotherapist/Hairdresser/ and secret women's business.

I am really pleased you got a good outcome with your skin cancer. They can be very fast and aggressive and again, vigilance is called for it knowing one's own body. I don;t think any of us should be too tunnel visioned or fanatical in either direction. But we do have the freedom of choice. Some people don't have that.

I am much weller since I cut a couple of med's out and negotiated with my GP to halve the dose is one other. Sodding cancer drugs get you through the fear factor though, and I would never advise anyone not to take them unless they really interfere with quality of life.

OK - my two pennorth. Back to the grindstone.......
Linda

yes i do talk to my doc' he though not and old doc' just doesn't want to deal with any notions outside of the drug company drugs, he gets a little cynical when i update him on what dosages i am currently taking as i work my health to the stage where the alternatives are working and the problem is in control with minimal or no drugs.

i am winning big time with the db2 that was probably only wheat/gluten intolerance in the first place but as i said doc's just don't want to know about intollerances. i can't eat rye anymore than i can eat wheat my trial and errors have shown all i can tollerate is whole grain rice.

would be great if the gov' subsidised alternative methods like they subsidise the drug co's and their pushers, oh doc's get lots of little sweeteners from those money monger co's.

len

A friend of mine had heart fibrilations and was packed of to a cardiologist for tests. Blood thinners were prescribed so the heart could be zapped back into normal rythmm. Before the prescription was even filled the fibrilations righted themselves but the cardiologist prescribed heavy hitting medication that my friend would have to take for the rest of his life now the 'problem' had been diagnosed. The medication came with the warning that it would make my friend feel constantly tired and he must no longer undertake strenuous execise. Walking would be fine. Wait for this! The medication WOULDN'T stop the problem occurring again, it would just make it easier to zap the heart back into rythmm should it occur. This could happen next week, or not for another 20 years. My friend, age 45, was not ready to change his whole way of life for something that wasn't even a cure, so he pressured the doctor for alternatives. The doctor reluctantly agreed that there was another medication he could take. It was ...........1/4 strength ASPIRIN. My friend happily takes his aspirin, and has not had a re-occurance of the problem after 18 months.
My cynical reaction is that nobody makes money from aspirin any more, and newer dugs that are 10 times more expensive have to be prescribed to make the money back for the drug companies. But I don't know why doctors go along with this. Its not as if they have quotas.
Is it?
It would be interesting to hear a doctors view on the matter of alternatives. I rather like the idea of a doctor having compulsory further study of alternative medicine. That way we could have the best of both worlds.

You know where the original aspirin came from? Either White Willow bark, or Meadowsweet. Aspirin is simply salicylate, which is found in many plants, including many common fruits. Not everybody can tolerate salicylate, so here's a case where a doctor has prescribed a herbal medicine (of sorts), perhaps without realising it! A great many 'conventional' medications (possibly as high as 80% or so) are actually derivatives of, or synthesised copies of, herbal medications. Digitalin is a another prime example - it comes from foxgloves and is frequently used to treat heart problems.

Daisy that shouldn't even be a surprise! That's the funniest part, everyone should be aware that drug compounds are from plants. When was the link in peoples knowledge lost? Is it corporations claiming ownership of pure chemicals so purposely disguising the link to plant sources? I grow Meadowsweet purely for its historical interest :)

the medico's mightn't be on quotas as such but they sure as heck get rewarded for pushing the stuff.

len

Well to be fair they can't recommend any treatment that hasn't undergone the proper testing, double blind placebos, phytotoxicity studies, mutagenasis etc. Who will pay for those studies to be done for all herbal remedies, the ones that haven't been through the process already that is? By the time you'd invested the money on such studies you'd have to sell a lot of units to recover your investment.

Here is a link that might be useful: alternative medicine foundation

side effects from db2 drugs (poisons):

eye site started to fail neede new readers every 18 months for the first 2 weeks i was realy sick couldn't eat until the body got used the the poison, couldn't see the tv properly couldn't drive couldn't see road signs, was sent to an eye specialist who ordered general glasses not cheap.

now off of the poisons eye sight is back to a stage where the last optometrist said i could get away with a pair of these reading spec's chemists sell and got absolutely no need to the secilaist ordered spec's. hypertension has magically reduced becasue now no conlficting db2 drugs.

is that what they call fully tested?

fully tested is test tube testing a few lab rats well for me i'm neither of those, there has never been any full on human trialling we who get prescribed these drugs are the guinea pigs.

oh and when we found out about the wheat/gluten/corngluten factor blood sugar reading plummeted and i lost 7k in weight and ended up off the db2 tabs.

working on the hypertension now.

len

Len. I'm sure those side effects are considered preferable to death. Maybe you're not so sure.

ah jamus,

not when the side effects aren't necessary you see med' science came up with a set of test perameters (for the advantage of drug companies who paid for the end result remember money money money is what it is all about) for dignosing db2 but they didn't go any further to prove that the test was the ultimate and it would appear to me that those results also means that someone is wheat/gluten intollerant and i can tell you the doc's just don't want to know and following their diagnosis and treatment was leading to a death sentence.

you see it is all stacked against the patient most of whom with total oblivion do what the doc' says till they kark it.

all i can say jamus is do some research med' science is way off track the doc's don't even know what is compatable and what isn't.

you tell me how many db2 patients out there who they never (& db2 is supposed be reversable or curable did you know that one?)cure and they should db2 is not the same as db1 who actually have a food group intollernace i can tell you now heaps and i was one of them.

from my perspective death was going to be imminent with those side effects blind faith is nothing more than blind faith. so far i have a big plus with hypertension which could lead to death or stroke and i have saved my eye sight and blood clotting problems which can lead to amputations.

you do what you want i'm being proactive with my health and winning, the doc' not happy but hey lol. all i'm saying to folk is be proactive don't be a sheep being led to the slaughter if you want to be then at least know that is where you are going.

len

I had always followed doctors orders and gone with the drugs that were prescribed I mean they're the ones that KNOW, until I was facing the end then I thought I have nothing to lose, tried the alternatives ,kept an open mind and relaxed and that was 1986 a bit better than 3-6 months and now I ask Questions!!!And I have never felt better

The key is self education.

Back in the old days when doctors were considered "gods",people thought that they must know what they were talking about because they were "educated".
But it was biased education and one sided because what Doctors were taught,was only what was available at the time.

Now we have "alternative" medicine.
So because people see the mistakes of the mainstream doctors they(in general)run headlong in the opposite direction.
"Anything that comes from a plant must be OK"

Weather we go to a GP or Herbalist,we need to take responsability for what happens to our body and always do our own research.

In our body we have a brain that is designed to protect that body by it being educated and seeking all the facts.

If one person can be educated and learn facts...so can we.
"what one person can learn,so can another"

The most exciting thing learned in the last 100 years is that education is posssible for all,not just a lucky few.

If we just blindly follow any course of action,because that person seems to be educated,we will suffer the consequences of ignorance....and our body is far to precious for that to happen to.

The problem with alternative medicine is not that it can not work, it is that it has practitioners in the field that have no medical background or experience in medicine. The reason why the medical field often looks down on the field of alternative medicine is that there are claims without scientific proof. It is much harder to do. Furthermore, the education required to go into such a field is not as stringent. They had to go through a lot of hard work to treat others, but schools of naturopathy are often much simpler & easier. Those incorporated into medical schools are the exception. Having said this, that is changing Ц there are medical schools studying this field & trying to bring it into the realm of science, which is where treatment of others should be. There are also those with science backgrounds entering the field, & they will definitely advance it.
Another point Ц the medical field can not practice medicine without a license, yet I see forums all the time in which advice is given with little knowledge of the person requesting advice. ItТs so unsafe. There is no history of the medications the person is taking, a lack of understanding of the dynamics of the medications involved, the complete history, etc. Looking up interactions in a book helps but is so incredibly limited Ц without an understanding of the pharmacodynamics involved or the disease process involved.
There is another forum on this site for this, & that is where it is should be. I never go there; as I see so much quackery it upsets me.
I do believe in alternative medicine, & would like to see it used & studied more. It is no secret that many of our current drugs originated from plant material. Chemicals are often synthesized from these plants so a patent can be developed for it.
I was saddened to see the cases that you posted. I saw the victim was an RN, but I could not have judged her either way. She may have been too clouded with her disease or afraid to have chosen any other treatment. It was a very sad story, & I am left speechless, but without judgment. Obviously, the naturopathic treater should not have treated her. In the same vein, there are generalists that try & handle patients they have limited understanding of because of insurance purposes or their own egos Ц with disastorous results. Very sick people or those with complicated problems need to be punted to specialty areas. My brother was killed by such a generalist.
A friend of mine also had cancer, & went to a naturopathic clinic in another country. The insurance would no longer cover her problems, so there was no other option. They gave experimental naturopathic treatment, & they saved her hide. However, this was a clinic that has a world wide reputation for research & openly invites physicians from around the world to participate & observe their treatment. They were not quacks.

What an interesting thread. Being someone who needs certain medications to survive, I'm keenly interested in 'alternative' therapies.
There are quacks in every profession whether it be medicine (both conventional and 'alternative') or architecture. Unfortunately, quacks involved in medicine can be deadly.
I like to use both 'sides' of medicine. In many cases, neither side is willing to admit their limitations.
In my case, I take two meds that are necessary for my ongoing survival. Both have side effects. I take two other meds to manage two of those side effects, which they do admirably well. However, there are other side effcets that are not so easily treated by western medicine. The drugs they offer me certainly work, but it's like trying put in a thumb tack with a sledgehammer and they spark off all sorts of bodily reactions. The docs end up running around putting out fires!
I have found though that, depending on the side effect, that things like acupuncture, diet (food as medicine), herbalism or T'ai Chi provide very effective control, and sometimes complete relief, with no further side effects and the occasional benefit.
The specialist looking after me is occasionally dismayed by my seeking treatment elsewhere but is sensible enough to acknowledge the benefits, at least for me.
Just my experience.

g'day raymondo,

yes you should seek further opinions even in medical issues very many doc's nowadays just prescribe prescribe prescribe, with very little knowledge of any conflicts caused by multiple medication applications. i was on 8 at one time to treat 3 problems, and the problems they cause where very very noticable well to me but the doc's just couldn't believe it because the comanies say that all these poisons are compatable all this with no realtime testing.

i saught out a doc with md and naturopath qualifiactions (chinese origin) he is not a mass user of either therapies and uses things in a planned away often limiting the taking of therapies tor periods of time only.

i now take supplements (not a lot) and very much fewer med's that before, i have corrected on anomily, and gotten the other 2 in good management all on minimum med's and minimim strength med's.

i have changed my diet in the face of the dieticians/doc's all indoctrinated to think one way, basically gone of the grain/wheat/gluten/carb' idea of diet to a more natural eat all in moderation with some exclusions hi-protein diet. and now for the first time with heaps less weight adding med's and digestive incompatable (we evolved if you like as hunter/gathers not farmer/bakers) food products all promoted for the financial gain of those in those industries, i am now losing weight (in 6 months 25 kilo's and tht equates to around 5"s off the waist alone) from my experience there isn't a med' out ther that doesn't have weigh gaining qualities at the very least.

and of course with weight loss come less poisons and better health. i am very proactive with my health and treatments now the doc's do get used to it as they see very little of it my doc just updates his records from mine each time i need to visit mostly for a new script. reckon i can cut down or even cut out at least another of the 3 low dose med's i take.

len

just to add the latest, my regular gp has suggested that i could very well be off medication for diabetes type 2 over the next period he has suggested a reduction of the minimum dose i am already on, the way i see it and this has worked for me is from being very proactive that means not taking as carte blanche whatever the heavily scientist controlled medication industry says after all they don't do any real testing of their products outside of lab rats and test tubes and from my point of view we humans are neither of those 2 things.

so for me i am looking forward to 1 less poison in my system.

len

Reading the above has made me realise how valuable a health forum would be, with people telling us what has worked for them. My teenage son has been very ill with Proctitis for over 12 months. He has been to so many specialists and taken all sorts of drugs, to no avail. He reacted dreadfully to the sulpha? drugs and had to discontinue immediately. The infection in his bowel has now spread further (10% of patients suffer this) and he is very down. I'm at my wits end and am tempted to seek alternative therapies. It is an auto-immune condition, we are told and that it has nothing to do with diet! I would have felt more comfortable if the specialists recommended a healthy diet to bolster the immune system, as it is, my son feels he can eat rubbish because the doc says diet is of no importance! Ugh!! Does anyone know of foods which may help him?
Halina

g'day halina,

right now i have worked my way off of prescription treatment for my diabetese type 2, i take some alternatives but don't go over board. my advice to all is and this is not for those who simply want to go to a medico and let that person dictate you life through their support mechanism.

you need to take proactive charge of your own health issues or prospective health issues (don't wait for it to dump on you get in early this will take an in depth objective critical look at yor life style), the first rule is we are all different the system dumps us all into one basket and it doesn't work.

for me my main discovery was that most positive tests done by doctors for type 2 db are more related to wheat/gluten intollerance and for them i didn't fit their all in one basket diet routines of carbohydrates and excercise it just won't work, and naturally if you ahve an intollernace of wheat, rye, corn, barley well all except some whole grain rice then their ideas fall flat.

anyhow current stauts on a more normal protein grass fed beef, butter and milk straight from the cow i have lost 22 kilo's with not a big excercise regime, and gotten off weight cuasing poisons.

research all alternatives your online, for the main any groups related to help say in my case don't do a lot but they do have some ideas pop up there are news groups on the usenet.

len

Here is a link that might be useful: lens garden page

i do look for a general gp that doesn't want to dictate to me eg.,. one that will work with and for you, also do have a specialist gp on tap who is a naturapath as well and is of chinese origin he is my best asset as i can discuss alternatives and he will support or suggest a better course and he doesn't fill you household budget with non subsidised treatments he uses them in an exaxcting planned way so you may only ever take something for a period and never take it again.

my best testing tool is the hair sampling not cheap but it gives you the total picture, blood tests can leave a lot to be desired.

len

Thanks Len, I replied to your article in Cornucopia.
Halina

IF i see this post one more time im gonna break the teeth of the person who posted it its rehashed and rehashed now take it and shove it

If you don't like it, don't read it. Simple really. I personally found it quite interesting and informative.
Cheers,
Dee.

belladonna12 said "IF i see this post one more time im gonna break the teeth of the person who posted it its rehashed and rehashed now take it and shove it"

should calm down a bit mate - - you're the one posting asking how to use belladonna, how to extract the poisonous substances from wormwood - and undoubtedly others.

cool it or shove it :-)

The following is quoted directly from Richard Dawkins - for those who don't know who he is he is a biologist, author and holds the Chair of Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Scientific medicine is defined as the set of practices which submit themselves to the ordeal of being tested. Alternative medicine is defined as that set of practices which cannot be tested, refuse to be tested, or consistently fail tests. If a healing technique is demonstrated to have curative properties in properly controlled double-blind trials, it ceases to be alternative. It simply.....becomes medicine. Conversely, if a technique devised by the President of the Royal College of Physicians consistently fails in double-blind trials, it will cease to be a part of "orthodox" medicine. Whether it will then become "alternative" will depend upon whether it is adopted by a sufficiently ambitious quack (there are always sufficiently gullible patients)."

And again:

"There is no alternative medicine. There is only medicine that works and medicine that doesn't work."

I understand some people might find these views contraversial. What do people think?

Hi Jamus,

It's hard to find fault with your assertions but I feel that, due to financial constraints, etc. there are many household remedies that have never been tested yet seem to help many people. Institutions, like universities, rely heavily on funds for research (which limits their scope as most people want to see a quick profit), whereas drug companies, I would have thought, pursue only those avenues where they see potential profit. I sound a little cynical, but I would feel more confident if I knew studies were being carried out for the betterment of mankind rather than profit, as ethics can be compromised.
As you have probably gathered, I'm a bit biased towards natural remedies.
Halina

you aren't the only one halina,

if others want to rely on the for total profit scientific research that is up to them, for me my experiences tell me we rely too heavily on that sector to our detriment, to put it simply there simply isn't enough human trialling done on those medications prior to release into the retail network, and there is precious little or no research done into what may happen when multiple doses of multiple scripts are prescribed.

it comes down to the relyance on test tube testing and the use of lab rodents of which us humans are neither. and yes all institute research is paid for through donations and all concerned know who's toes no to stand on when they take the research on.

by using natural processes and returning to a more natural diet i have now gone from taking 8 prescribed doses of different applications to taking a low dose of only 2 medications and i now have no more need for diabetese 2 treatment and next to go will be hypertension, not bad for a 60 year old who was told by his medical doc that the rest of life would be run on ever increasing dosages of ever increasing doses.

i was very proactive in my treatments once i worked out what was realy happening and why. that one of my medical doc's was also a naturapath helped a lot the others just have no idea or don't want to know. like one stand over doc at a hospital said to me "if it worked we'd prescribe it" yeh as if, there is no profit in it for the chem' boys that is why they don't prescribe.

anyhow one of my favourite signature lines is "it works for me it may work for you", get proactive and do your own researching if you can read this then you are already on a pretty good network to find out things that you can make better decisions from. oh and my naturapath doc' doesn't load me up with lots and lots of yes dearer other treatments some i take all the time as routine (well that is what others do with prescribed things isn't it?) others i take for specific result over a specific time frame.

len

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

more: RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' t

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

RE: Warning to people considering 'alternative' treatme

Post a Follow-Up