Gaia Health - Latest Comments

Re: How Perfectly Healthy People Are Turned into Patients

Anne C Woodlen — Tue, 15 May 2012 07:48:08 -0000

A physican assistant had a "routine" colonoscopy, followed by a year of abdominal pain and fevers, which nobody could diagnose. Then she was hospitalized, had major testing, and the diagosis that during the colonoscopy the doctor had knicked her bowel. She had a chronic internal infection, which would be resolved by a little surgery. The surgery ended up taking an ovary, her appendix and a foot of bowel.

"Routine" colonoscopy, my ass.

Re: The Green Polka Dot Box Is Not Truly Organic. They’re an Astroturfed Walmart.

Wolfhunter_60 — Mon, 14 May 2012 20:59:29 -0000

also peppers with preservatives and FD & C Yellow #5
How organic is that?

Re: Anecdotal Evidence: The Basis of All Knowledge

TomSparc — Mon, 14 May 2012 20:05:28 -0000

Sorry, I don't provide free lessons on the basics of how science works. Google will help you!

The fact that you cannot understand why the peer reviewed papers have been introduced suggests your reading comprehension is also deficient. It's becoming clear why you are struggling to understand seemingly every subject you offer opinion on!

Re: Back & Knee Pain Sufferers: Beware a New Class of Drugs

John — Mon, 14 May 2012 14:41:04 -0000

Thank you for this. I've always had a hard time explaining pain to my family , friends and my doctor. This has really helped "label" the pain. I've been able to pinpoint the location.

Re: Major Yeast Infection Drug Causes Birth Defects: Natural Remedies Better

HeidiStevenson — Mon, 14 May 2012 13:20:44 -0000

I do agree, Sylvia. My concern is that applying the appropriate homeopathic treatment is a bit trickier than matching a diagnosis with a homeopathic medicine. I do support homeopathy - quite strongly - but hesitate to suggest specific treatments, especially in situations like this, when the cause is unknown and even the area of the body affected can vary.

Re: Another Fraudulent Study Claims High Dose Vitamin D Is Useless.

Thomas Babington Macaulay — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:15:35 -0000

Absolutely right, I do agree with your
post. By the way recently I joined a newspaper as a correspondent. I need to
write a review about
Susan Lim . As far as I got to know she performed the
first successful liver transplant in Asia. Dr Susan Lim chaired a session
entitled, Organ-Specific Stem Cells. Lecturer, teacher, researcher, director,
consultant and surgeon, this talented woman wears many hats. Do you guys have
any idea or point to any resources about her.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

Rein Jeelof — Mon, 14 May 2012 08:55:02 -0000

Dear Martin,
Did you ask your SELF how placebo's/nocebo's do work?
Is n't ilness the reaction of the body on disharmony in the psyche? Is n't ilness the way a person has to go through to connect again on harmony? Don't allopaticmedicins work by "hiding" the illnes for a while? Is there a medicin that realy can cure a "sick" person? Isn't your health the result of your thoughts and feelings?!

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

John — Mon, 14 May 2012 07:34:32 -0000

Seriously, you're quoting Burzynski as a good news story?

You REALLY need to do better research. The man is a well documented fraud who preys on desperately sick people and leaves them just as sick, if not more so, but also a whole lot poorer. .

He has been touting his antineoplastin treatment for over 30 years without publishing any results in a peer reviewed journal. He has been conducting "clinical trials" on his treatment for over 30 years, but not moved beyond that stage. The FDA has not licensed his treatment because he has not produced any evidence that would allow them to do so.

In addition he charges huge sums of money for patients to enter his "clinical trials" an immoral action if there ever was one, to say nothing of corrupting the integrity of his so called trials.

His organisation has also tried to silence critics with legal threats. He does not do good or effective science, not is there any evidence of him "curing" hundreds of people. If you got that information from his website and took it at face value you have failed to think critically.

The claim to have "cured cancer" is an extraordinary one and would require extraordinary evidence. Burzynski has produced none.

I could go on, but you have again only looked at the evidence that you want to see.

I doubt you'll do this but try and look wider, do better research.

Your hypothesis seems to be that drugs are bad and that conventional medicine has failed..

You should try looking for evidence to falsify your hypothesis, not just evidence that reinforces your world view. There is plenty of evidence to falsify your beliefs, you just have to have the courage and integrity to look.

And whilst you are looking try Googling Burzynski fraud and see what you get. You could also have a look at the Wikipedia page on Dr Burzynski, you would find it helpful.

I doubt you will do any of this though, it strikes me that you are too close minded to even consider the possibility that you are wrong.

It does occur to me though that we need a new version of Godwin's law in that now anyone who cites Stanislaw Burzynski as a good news story immediately loses the debate. If there is one thing Burzynski is not, it is a good news story, nor is it a success story, unless your name is Stanislaw Burzynski.

Re: Major Yeast Infection Drug Causes Birth Defects: Natural Remedies Better

Sylvia Hicks — Mon, 14 May 2012 07:29:28 -0000

There are great homeopathic remedies for candida such as Borax and the nosode Candida. These are even safer and more effective.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

John — Mon, 14 May 2012 04:19:51 -0000

Hi there RA

Firstly, not that I see it as being relevant to the discussion of science of homeopathy, but I have never had a flu jab, so no "Post Purchase Rationalisation" here.

Thank you for the concise list.

No-one ever said that science was perfect, and as long as we use fallible humans to conduct it it is unlikely ever to be perfect. The point here is that it is always possible to pick example of things that are less than optimal or where they have gone wrong.

One can also play this game with homeopathy, try searching Google for Penelope Dingle and her homeopath Francine Scrayen.

But to address your list.

1) Flu shots. To bring you up to date, this drug was approved by the FDA under the accelerated approval regulations, but the FDA wrote to GlaxoSmith Kline on the 9th June 2011 requiring completion of further studies under threat of withdrawing approval for the drug. See here

2) AZT. Well as many of 20% to 40% of human cancers are caused by a virus, so it was not unreasonable to develop an antiretroviral such as AZT to try and fight cancer. AZT is however very effective in combating AIDS. Just out of interest why do you suggest that it may now be failing?

3) Asprin - So 3% of people suffer intestinal bleeding from a single dose? This is a rather unhelpful statistic, what is your source? But even this bare statistic that does mean that 97% of people do not suffer this symptom. But you don't mention at what doseage this problem occurs, or the age range of the patients, whether this is in patients with a history of gastrointestinal bleeding, or how recent your figure is.

4) Peter Duesberg. Is this the same Peter Duesberg who claimed that HIV was harmless and that the anti AID's drugs were actually causing AIDS? If so then to call him a quack and withdraw his funding seems like a wise decision. Whilst there is no single study that conclusively connects HIV with AIDS, when one considers ALL the evidence the case for such a connection is overwhelming.

5) Vioxx, Accutane etc. Yes there have been problems, as I said science is not perfect, but, you need to balance risk against benefit. If you only look at the problems with science based medicine you will naturally form a negative view. But that is being selective with your evidence, cherry picking. Consider the whole picture, look at the lives saved, the conditions successfully treated and so on. The massive increase in life expectancy over the last 100 years is testament to the benefits of science based medicine. Of course homeopathic medicines have no recorded direct adverse side effects, that is because they are just water! They have no recorded positive effects either. And when weighing up risk verses benefit of a treatment with no benefit the result is a divide by zero error. But the biggest risk of homeopathic medicine is the risk of someone forgoing effective treatment in favour of something that does not work and cannot work. That is what happened to Penelope Dingle and as a result she died of a cancer that was potentially survivable.

6) Overuse of antibiotics. No argument from me her about the dangers of over use of these, and this is not just linked to human medicine, it is also a problem in veterinary science. In part though this is driven by demand from human patients for the doctor to "do something". Part of the solution is better education of both patients and doctors. But that is not to say that antibiotics don't work, when properly prescribed, because they do.

To summarise, it seems to me that you are only looking for evidence that supports your anti drug position, that is not thinking critically and is no way to do science.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Mon, 14 May 2012 03:15:04 -0000

http://www.burzynskiclinic.com...

If you don't already know who this man is, John, check him out. Here is perhaps on of "medicines" victories.

The short version of his story: He has cured 100s of cancer patients that "conventional medicine" sent home to die with nothing else to offer. The FDA tried to shut him down for curing cancer with his own medicine, but he appealed and took it to high courts and 100s of people that would have long ago died if not for Burzynski's "illegal medicine" testified on his behalf.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Mon, 14 May 2012 02:55:32 -0000

Six examples of conventional medicine's failures:1. Flu Shots ~ "there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL" ~ right from their own package insert.

2. AZT ~ failed cancer drug, now becoming a failed HIV drug perhaps?

3. Aspirin ~ 3% of people suffer intestinal bleeding from a single dose.

4. Peter Duesberg ~ one of the world's leading experts on retrovirus (like HIV) has funding pulled and called a quack: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/....

5. Vioxx, Accutane ~ two of many. Even Alka Seltzer Cold medicine was pulled years ago because it was killing people.

6. Antibiotics routinely prescribed for colds (approx 20 mil / year)

There ~ that should make it easier to read.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Mon, 14 May 2012 02:53:11 -0000

Sorry about the post blending together ~ not how I wrote it ~ when I posted it went from individual paragraphs to a big cluster.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Mon, 14 May 2012 02:50:50 -0000

It wasn't too much trouble John... A half hour or so ~ and probably why I wrote Bohr where I meant to write Dalton ~ I'm actually surprised that you didn't specifically point that out.

I never said that I thought Quantum Theory was wrong and I never said I was a scientist. I don't have to be an expert on Quantum Theory to know that it hasn't been unified with the Theory of Relativity or to find people that ARE experts in QM that disagree on many aspects of the theory. One could get that information by simply watching the Science Channel for a week.I'm not at all anti-science John. I AM, for the most part, anti-drug. The six examples that I had provided are quite general and are NOT cherry picked, individual anecdotes. You know as well as I do that one doesn't get a headache because of an aspirin deficiency. 1. Flu Shots ~ "there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL" ~ right from their own package insert.2. AZT ~ failed cancer drug, now becoming a failed HIV drug perhaps?3. Aspirin ~ 3% of people suffer intestinal bleeding from a single dose.4. Peter Duesberg ~ one of the world's leading experts on retrovirus (like HIV) has funding pulled and called a quack: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/.... Vioxx, Accutane ~ two of many. Even Alka Seltzer Cold medicine was pulled years ago because it was killing people.6. Antibiotics routinely prescribed for colds (approx 20 mil / year)You asked for facts and I provided them. They are NOT, as you said, individual anecdotes ~ unless you want to count all of the individuals who got a flu shot or an antibiotic for a cold ~ then I have given you hundreds of millions of individual anecdotes.You never did answer my first question though, John: Have you gotten a flu shot lately? I think I know the answer already and you are likely now suffering from what our Psychologist friend below would call "Post-Purchase Rationalization".

Over and out for good this time.
RA

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

AnonyMLA — Sun, 13 May 2012 19:45:26 -0000

"It's not completely clear..." is not the same as "it is so confounding that for it to be true it literally has to do away with the last 200 years of scientific understanding." And while exact mechanisms may not be known, the fact is that we can observe in double-blinded situations that general anaesthesia will knock a person unconscious. You cannot say the same thing about homeopathy, where the effects disappear when the trials are double blinded and where not only do we do not understand how it works we cannot understand how it could possibly work. Big difference.

And generally when anaesthesiologists say we don't understand how it works, what they mean is which specific nerve receptors are affected in what order (and thus why one person may react differently to another under the same regime). It's not pure speculation such as what homeopaths present like "memory of water" or clathrates.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

AnonyMLA — Sun, 13 May 2012 19:15:26 -0000

First, I laughed. Very good response! I'm going to have to borrow that in the future :D

Now the pendant in me: this is true only if we assume that the patient doesn't need electrolytes as part of the solution for dehydration. Homeopathic dilutions, in that case, would result in water intoxification. So homeopathy isn't even better than conventional medicine for something that literally requires nearly pure water.

Re: The Green Polka Dot Box Is Not Truly Organic. They’re an Astroturfed Walmart.

Wolfhunter_60 — Sun, 13 May 2012 18:23:24 -0000

selling sodas now---with caramel coloring

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

John — Sun, 13 May 2012 17:30:36 -0000

That's an awful lot of effort you have put in there RA! For someone who says they don't support homeopathy you do seem pretty closed minded about the benefits of science and evidence based medicine.

From a careful reading of your comments it does seem that you are very much in the anti science camp. Your examples are all very anti medicine and I will not be drawn into a lengthy discussion about the merits or otherwise of all your examples.

I will say though that your first hyper link gives a 404 page not found error so it is hard to say how well written, or not, the site you suggested is.

I will say though that you seem to have misunderstood the scientific method, for example the reason why we have randomised placebo controlled trials of drugs, it is to see if they are better than the existing treatment and whether they have any measurable benefit

You clearly haven't understood quantum mechanics, not surprising really, it is very complex and often anti-intuitive. However this is a highly successful scientific theory that is supported by a huge amount of empirical data. But just because you don't understand it doesn't mean that the theory is wrong.

Incidentally, your use of the word "theory" seems to display a further lack of understanding of the meaning of that word in a scientific context. A scientific theory is not a "best guess" of how something works.

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. For example the United States National Academy of Sciences defines a Theory as follows:-

"It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence."

For example the "theory" of evolution is not "just a theory" and the "theory" of quantum mechanics is not "just a theory".

Your point about the article arguing that "it is difficult to prove homeopathy in a controlled study" just highlights what is a case of special pleading, a common logical fallacy. Homeopath's often claim this along these lines "your science doesn't give us the answers we want, so we want different rules applied to us."

And your point about controlled experiments in Astronomy or Palaeontology is also highlights your ignorance of science, both disciplines have protocols to ensure that data they gather is not contaminated thereby corrupting their results. But what they are not doing is comparing one medical treatment to another. Controls such as randomisation, blinding and so on are needed here to eliminate bias, whether conscious or unconscious.

You are also wrong to say that science has "no clue" how aesthetics work, in some cases we do have good models for this. But as Martin and others have pointed even if we don't know the precise mechanism for how an aesthetic works we can demonstrate that it does work. Something that you simply cannot demonstrate in any robust way for homeopathy.

I note that you have spoken at some length about your own good health, and I am happy that you enjoy such robust good health.

But whilst you put down your good health to your healthy diet, you cannot prove that this is the reason for your good health. Other factors may be at work, you may have a good set of genes, you may just be lucky enough not to live in sub-Saharan Africa and so on..

I'm not saying that a healthy lifestyle isn't important but we can only demonstrate that this is very likely to be so by doing proper controlled trials.

For example for many years there was a lot of controversy about the connection between smoking and cancer. The tobacco manufacturers for many years denied any such link. Whilst individuals could make a decision that smoking probably wasn't a good idea, there was not sufficient evidence to make a positive connection between smoking and cancer. But the British Doctors Survey, that ran from 1951 to 2001 produced, in 1956, convincing statistical evidence that smoking increased the risk of lung cancer.

You should look it up, it makes very interesting reading.

But individual stories, anecdotes, do not make for good evidence. We have no way of knowing what really happened because we were not there to observe and measure at the time, there are just too many variables to draw any sensible conclusions from any anecdote. And as has been said many times, the plural of anecdote is not data.

And you can always find individual stories that support your world view, or examples of individual adverse reactions to a particular drug. But that is just cherry picking data and looking for data that reinforces your world view is a clear form of confirmation bias.

What is important is a view of all the evidence, not just carefully selected evidence, and following the evidence to its logical conclusion, whether we like the conclusion or not.

Sadly for Heidi Stevenson when you look at all the trial data, not just the ones "she would like" we find that there is no evidence to support the idea that homeopathy works. She may not like that conclusion, but that just too bad, that is the what the evidence tells us. To continue to believe in something despite all evidence demonstrating that it is false is not being "open minded" it is being truly closed minded.

This is not about being pro or anti homeopathy. It is about what can be evidenced and what cannot. Sometimes there just aren't two sides to every story. The fact is that all the evidence shows homeopathy has no benefit other than as a placebo. Homeopaths may not like that conclusion, but that doesn't give them the right to distort facts in order to get the answer they were looking for. That is certainly no way to do science.

Finally, if you are really interested in facts and the truth can I recommend that you read the excellent blog about the article above by Orac. Just Google Respectful Insolence "Once again: Plausibility does not mean knowing the mechanism".

Re: Junk Science Promotes the Agenda of Psychiatry and Big Pharma

Becky — Sun, 13 May 2012 15:55:02 -0000

The fact is the drugs cause the brain to become dysfunctional----and that's only part of what they do. The drugs have a negative effect on the parasympathetic nervous system--which is why the drugs cause such a broad range of iatrogenic disease. These are not side effects, they are the well known drug effects that the profession has determined are 'tolerable' on behalf their victims. The parasympathetic nervous system sort of keeps all of the major physiological processes in sync. The fact that the drugs cause iatrogenic injury and disease to the metabolic, neurological, cardio-vascular, hormonal, and digestive systems---and these are ignored by all medical professionals, almost universally. Yet this 'treatment' is trumpeted in Courts of Law as necessary 'medically treatment' even though this is not even close to any scientific, medical, or ethical claim, let alone meet any burden of proof Courts of Law evidence standards require. The fact that it is legal means NOTHING, other than human society has once again allowed vulnerable people to be stripped of their Human Rights 'legally' for their own good and the good of society. The propaganda is the same only more subtle and pervasive due being disseminated in so many different types of media. Exactly how is poisoning human beings for their own good 'medical treatment' for 'mental illness'? These animals won't stop---children, the elderly, traumatized veterans the most vulnerable become captive then coerced, or otherwise compelled to take the drugs regardless of their toxicity, therapeutic efficacy (AS IF neuroleptics ever were 'efficacious' in any therapeutic sense!) Let's not forget, in the US where the vast majority of the drugs are used, Dr.s and other medical professionals are not required to report ANY adverse events, even death. There is no way in hell this is not intentional and irresponsible. It is a policy that protects everybody but the patients.

Re: Major Yeast Infection Drug Causes Birth Defects: Natural Remedies Better

Sbartholomew — Sun, 13 May 2012 15:50:27 -0000

When and how much Diflucon should be noted. the studies show in large quantities and for a larger duration of time.

Re: Conventional Medicine: A Legal Monopoly, Not a Healthcare System

Gregorywhite — Sun, 13 May 2012 15:26:11 -0000

The more one looks at conventional medicine with an open mind the more this scenario rings true. Was it not Goethe Faust, that forecast that if pathology=profit, we can only become more sick. Co-dependent doctors/goverment/big pharma is a contemporary motif of the Gorgon, which as such somehow, needs to slain at one fell blow.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Sun, 13 May 2012 10:01:21 -0000

One last thought... in case you did get that flu shot...

If you read the package insert ~ like the one I provided ~ (don't think that one is valid? Get one from Walgreens and compare... plus the same package insert is available on dozens of websites ~ you don't think there is a conspiracy against Flulaval do you? Did someone mention tinfoil hats earlier?)

Anyway, read on and you will learn that the flu shot has NEVER been tested for its carcinogenic properties. You see, if they don't "know" it causes cancer, they don't have to disclose that it does, just that they don't know. Aluminum, Formaldehyde... Both carcinogens. Both ingredients in flu shots.

For your sake, I hope you passed on the flu shot.

Happy Mothers Day!

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Sun, 13 May 2012 09:47:40 -0000

More failures of conventional medicine:

Antibiotics prescribed annually for colds: Approx 20 million

Info on false-positives in cancer screenings is as high as 45% ~ the question here is does the Cancer Industry take credit for that too?

AZT ~ failed cancer drug now an HIV drug?

Are you aware of Peter Duesberg ~ professor of molecular biology, Duesberg is one of the world's leading experts on retroviruses
~http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/...
Is he right? IDK ~ I won't test it by purposely contracting HIV, but read the article. He WAS

"Up to now we have said-and we still say-that HIV causes a majority of AIDS cases," said Chuck Fallis, a press officer. "The jury is still out on the new virus-whether it actually causes the other AIDS cases.""Nothing specifically on Duesberg?" "No."What was once "all" has now become "a majority.""You don't ever have polio without polio virus," Duesberg says. "A hundred cases can support a theory, but it only takes one to destroy it."So when the leading scientists disagrees with the status quo... you cut his funding to shut him up? Why? So the failed cancer drug can become the HIV drug?I could keep finding these failures all day.

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

RA — Sun, 13 May 2012 09:09:09 -0000

Read my response to Martin's comment John ~ it is co-addressed to you. It contains indisputable proof provided by the maker of the flu shot ~ here it is again:

http://us.gsk.com/products/ass...

"There have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL"

I've provided another for aspirin in the aforementioned response. I have provided what I have to offer. Take it for what it's worth. Your health is up to you, not me or some doctor. I am done arguing / providing facts here and need to move on. If what I have shared hasn't opened your mind, then nothing I share will. Peace!

Re: If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

John — Sun, 13 May 2012 08:52:55 -0000

Martin, I agree with what you say and of course science doesn't know all the answers, but RA's comment was that he couldn't imagine anything "failing" MORE than conventional medicine.

I suppose it could depend on your definition of "failure". Are we to classify the fact that no "cure for cancer" has yet been discovered as a failure?

If so that seems a little harsh as to use the examples that you give the treatment of AIDS and Cancer has improved hugely in the last few decades.

We may not have found "cures" for these conditions but antiretrovirals have stopped AIDS from being the death sentence that it once was and cancer is a much more treatable and survivable condition. Science doesn't stop, it constantly moves on as our knowledge and understanding improves, unlike homeopathy which hasn't progressed since Samuel Hahnemann first invented it over 200 years ago.