1 of 6
1
Questions re Barbara Loe Fisher and Hurd Immunity
Posted: 30 May 2015 10:41 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15
peacegirl - 30 May 2015 01:58 PM

Interesting video about vaccine induced herd immunity versus natural immunity and why the former doesn’t work.
Dr. Mercola and Barbara Loe Fisher - Herd Immunity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=11&v=TFWBelim1Hw

OK.  I know very little about this topic, and don’t even have any particular interest in it, so I thought it would make an interesting exercise. 
I went to that interview.  The Dr. moderator gave me bad vibs, too many red flags, Fisher came across as rational enough and I followed her arguments as far as they went - but she makes a lot of big claims.  I would sure look to get independent verification of her claims before putting much stock in it. 

Also that undercurrent of paranoia towards the CDC and WHO as bad guys is way the hell out of line.  Not that they are always perfect, but they are good people doing the best they can given the world as it is.  It’s a cheap shot, that’s downright malicious when lacking justification, claims are easy - supporting evidence not so much

Making an enemy out of who one doesn’t like is a great way to avoid coming up with rational explanations for why one believes what they believe.

Here are notes from the first 15 minutes of that interview, along with questions for whoever cares to offer some thoughts:

An observation, “Herd Immunity Effect - is that something like evolution?

4:00 Biologically active vaccinations?
Really?  How do you mean “Biologically active”?

5:20 Fisher:  “I could give you one study” -
Well, why not mention the name of study, researcher(s), year.

6:30 {this concept of practicing “Hurd Immunity, lost me and I don’t feel like taking time to transcribe it, but I was left wondering…}
Sounds like they are suggesting allowing the disease to “run it’s course” through a society?
Don’t sound like such a great idea to me.

8:00 -  12:30 -  RE: Whopping Cough outbreaks
 
13:20 Fisher: - How many cases of Whopping Cough had been “culturally” confirmed?
{good question - Fisher implies almost none, this is the point where a good expert second opinion would come in handy}

Second is - “florescent antibody test.
Third type of category epidemiologically linked. 
What does “Epidemiologically Linked” mean…

13:30 - Fisher: “Now, what does “Epidemiologically Linked” mean? 
It means the person had cough and they probably came in contact with someone who had whopping cough,
and they just sort of assumed they had whopping cough, that’s epidemiological linked.”


13:50 Interviewer - “Somewhat similar to the definitions that the CDC and World Health Organization used in the swine flu epidemic,
where they classified people having Swine Flu” as anyone who had a cough or a cold.

Fisher: “Respirator Infection, that’s right.”

Interviewer - (Theatric exasperation) No serologic confirmation, blood test just to confirm, just this epidemiological association.

Fisher: “That’s right.”
Hmmmm ?  Is that really a fact?

Fisher’s report to the CDC?
What report to the CDC?  What’s the title, date, Where do I find it?

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 03:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7846
Joined  2009-02-26

13:50 Interviewer - “Somewhat similar to the definitions that the CDC and World Health Organization used in the swine flu epidemic,  where they classified people having Swine Flu” as anyone who had a cough or a cold.

That sounds like an intentional misrepresentation. Swine Flu is a serious communicable disease and is spread by coughing. Therefore, anyone with a cough during a flu epidemic MUST be suspected of having the flu and tested. That does NOT mean a person with a cough is classified as having the flu, but must be tested nevertheless.

How severe is swine flu?
The severity of cases in the current swine flu outbreak has varied widely, from mild cases to fatalities. Most U.S. cases have been mild, but there have been a number of tragic deaths and hundreds of hospitalizations—mostly in young people aged 5 to 24. Pregnant women have been particularly vulnerable to severe flu and death.

I cannot imagine any organization which deals with scientific facts would prematurely classify anyone as having a specific disease without having been tested for the disease.

[ Edited: 31 May 2015 03:27 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 09:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2901
Joined  2007-04-26

I am not going to take the time to look at this entire interview. I have already spent far too much time looking at the “research” and propaganda from antivaxxers. Dr Mercola is a well known antivaxxer and has a history of flagrantly altering some facts and exaggerating others.

Let me clarify one comment the two of you have been discussing. When counting victims of an outbreak the methods may vary depending on the disease, the available tests, and resources. Often times the diagnosis is indeed what we call a “clinical diagnosis”. In other words if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its most likely a duck and so we call it a duck without taking it to the lab and genetically sequencing it.

When I see a patient in the office who who has a high fever, cough, and body aches I usually dont do a flu test for several reasons. They are expensive, they are not always accurate ( there can be false negatives and occasionally false positives), my clinical judgement after 25 years is pretty accurate, many times the test results are going to come back too late to guide treatment, and the test results will not always change the treatment (most adults just need conservative management and should not be given Tamiflu).

You also have to remember that some studies are based on data from clinical practice and the clinic is not a court of law. We are not trying to prove things beyond any reasonable doubt. Antivaxxers and their infantile insistence on absolute proof are not our concern. We need to take a practical approach that keeps the cost of health care down and provides patients with the best treatment.

The people in this interview are trying to imply that because these diagnosis weren’t verified with a lab test the diagnosis is therefor suspect. I disagree. With the advent of shows like CSI and TV medical shows the public has come to believe that diagnostic technology has been the great advancement in medicine without which modern medicine would be back in the dark ages. It gives the public the incorrect impression that every diagnosis should be confirmed with a lab test and also that lab tests are infallible. Nothing could be further from the truth. As we try to teach our medical students, 95% of the diagnoses we make can and should be made with a tool that has been around for thousands of years. Its called the history. Its the knowing the right questions to ask and how to listen to the answers that are given. The physical exam augments that. If you dont know what is wrong with the patient after the history and physical the odds that any testing will reveal the problem go down dramatically. A good physician uses tests to confirm what he already knows or to narrow down the possibilities and only rarely finds something he didn’t already suspect.

Every communicable disease for which we have a vaccine was originally identified, defined, and diagnosed by doctors who did not have any lab tests to diagnose the illness because in most cases the only test you need is your eyes, ears, and hands.

This argument they are making in this interview is entirely a strawman argument.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 09:16 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2901
Joined  2007-04-26

Sorry couldnt help myself so I looked at the video:

The comment that vaccines only offer temporary immunity is true for the most part but for some vaccines temporary means many decades while for others it may be much shorter. The comment that “natural immunity” protects life long is incorrect though. Chicken pox protects you from chicken pox but makes you vulnerable to shingles when the immunity ebbs over time and on occasion someone who has had chicken pox can get it again later in life. “natural” flu immunity offers little benefit at all since the flu mutates each year so the only way to gain natural immunity to the flu would be to keep getting the flu on a regular basis.

Essentially their argument is that if you get the illness you will become immune and over time if enough people get the infection and develop immunity this will protect those who are not infected.  This is true but a large number of people have to get infected and in the case of polio, measles, rubella, chicken pox, and diphtheria that will mean many deaths will occur. Moreover the immunity is not truly permanent because as we get further out form the outbreak there will be more young people born after the outbreak who are not immune and as that number grows herd immunity will wane and there will be another epidemic and so life will go on with periodic mass epidemics resulting in many dead and disabled individuals as had been our history for millennia before vaccines were invented.

While vaccines may not offer permanent immunity they offer protection from death and disability the only cost of which is an occasional booster shot. HArdly an excuse for all the Ooos and Ooohs in this propaganda piece.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 10:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1380
Joined  2015-03-09
macgyver - 31 May 2015 09:00 AM

I am not going to take the time to look at this entire interview. I have already spent far too much time looking at the “research” and propaganda from antivaxxers. Dr Mercola is a well known antivaxxer and has a history of flagrantly altering some facts and exaggerating others.

Let me clarify one comment the two of you have been discussing. When counting victims of an outbreak the methods may vary depending on the disease, the available tests, and resources. Often times the diagnosis is indeed what we call a “clinical diagnosis”. In other words if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its most likely a duck and so we call it a duck without taking it to the lab and genetically sequencing it.

When I see a patient in the office who who has a high fever, cough, and body aches I usually dont do a flu test for several reasons. They are expensive, they are not always accurate ( there can be false negatives and occasionally false positives), my clinical judgement after 25 years is pretty accurate, many times the test results are going to come back too late to guide treatment, and the test results will not always change the treatment (most adults just need conservative management and should not be given Tamiflu).

You also have to remember that some studies are based on data from clinical practice and the clinic is not a court of law. We are not trying to prove things beyond any reasonable doubt. Antivaxxers and their infantile insistence on absolute proof are not our concern. We need to take a practical approach that keeps the cost of health care down and provides patients with the best treatment.

The people in this interview are trying to imply that because these diagnosis weren’t verified with a lab test the diagnosis is therefor suspect. I disagree. With the advent of shows like CSI and TV medical shows the public has come to believe that diagnostic technology has been the great advancement in medicine without which modern medicine would be back in the dark ages. It gives the public the incorrect impression that every diagnosis should be confirmed with a lab test and also that lab tests are infallible. Nothing could be further from the truth. As we try to teach our medical students, 95% of the diagnoses we make can and should be made with a tool that has been around for thousands of years. Its called the history. Its the knowing the right questions to ask and how to listen to the answers that are given. The physical exam augments that. If you dont know what is wrong with the patient after the history and physical the odds that any testing will reveal the problem go down dramatically. A good physician uses tests to confirm what he already knows or to narrow down the possibilities and only rarely finds something he didn’t already suspect.

Every communicable disease for which we have a vaccine was originally identified, defined, and diagnosed by doctors who did not have any lab tests to diagnose the illness because in most cases the only test you need is your eyes, ears, and hands.

This argument they are making in this interview is entirely a strawman argument.

What you are saying is misleading.  The bottom line is that this is a game of Russian Roulette.  No one knows which child will have a vulnerability to the vaccine, yet you are callously telling all parents to get the vaccine.  A parent based on your advice will give her child the vaccine and that child may have a serious reaction (a causal relationship to the shot).  I hope you feel good about this.  You, as a doctor, are placing yourself in a position of God.  I am shocked that you feel comfortable doing this.  The question as to whether vaccines eliminated smallpox and polio is also being refuted.  The vaccines may do what they were intended to do.  They may succeed in causing a certain immune reaction, but there much more to the story and you refuse to acknowledge it.  That is putting your head in the proverbial sand.  You, as someone who has researched vaccines, cannot put all children into a one size fits all category.  Every child has a unique imprint, and for you to say that vaccines work for all children is despicable and against what the Hippocratic Oath stands for.

[ Edited: 31 May 2015 10:49 AM by peacegirl ]
 Signature 

I think, therefore I don’t vaccinate.

“Vaccination is a barbarous practice and one of the most fatal of all the delusions current in our time.”  Mahatma Gandhi

Ever heard of the Golden Rule?... He who has the gold makes the rules!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 10:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  468
Joined  2015-03-31
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

What you are saying is misleading.  The bottom line is that this is a game of Russian Roulette.  No one knows which child will have a vulnerability to the vaccine, yet you are callously telling all parents to get the vaccine.

LOL

I am pretty sure he is not saying that. But truth matters not a whit to the likes of you.

All 50 states allow exemptions to vaccines for medical reasons. Some states allow exemptions to vaccines for religious or personal belief reasons. These laws cater to morons like you.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 12:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15
Pec of Uliar - 31 May 2015 10:59 AM
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

What you are saying is misleading.  The bottom line is that this is a game of Russian Roulette.  No one knows which child will have a vulnerability to the vaccine, yet you are callously telling all parents to get the vaccine.

LOL

I am pretty sure he is not saying that. But truth matters not a whit to the likes of you.

All 50 states allow exemptions to vaccines for medical reasons. Some states allow exemptions to vaccines for religious or personal belief reasons. These laws cater to morons like you.

My first impression to that comment was that living life is Russian Roulette, so what’s the point here?
Demanding guarantees???    smirk

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 01:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

Every child has a unique imprint, and for you to say that vaccines work for all children is despicable and against what the Hippocratic Oath stands for.

Where did he say?  Heck where has any medical doctor made that claim?

You talk about expectations of high ethical standards - here’s a chance to show that you live by those standards -
show us where macgyver said that.

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 01:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15

Peacegirl, why you needing to personalize it with those nasty innuendos. 
Sounds like a religious/political trick, by labeling him as a bad uncaring person (though you know nothing about him), - makes it so much easier to dismiss what he’s trying to explain. 

yeah, yeah, ok, so all sides play that game.
Though there’s a big difference between insults of tactical advantage and insults born of pure exasperation.

peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

You, as a doctor, are placing yourself in a position of God.

Isn’t that the plight of doctor’s, in a way they do play God when they are instrumental in saving lives (especially if it’s your own),
or putting a human under, operating on them, waking them up usually much much better than when that patient was put under.

Aura of god-like powers goes with the territory so to speak.
The real question is, does your doctor believe it, or is he/she grown up enough to have a realistic appreciation for their power and limitations and the role they play in people’s lives.

I myself hate the all knowing doctor who treat patients as incidentals - to me a good doctor appreciates the patient doctor team and sees him/herself more as guide and … (er. mechanic)  experienced fixer upper…  {ok that sentence still need some work   tongue rolleye }

But you get the idea, or not.

[ Edited: 31 May 2015 01:35 PM by citizenschallenge.pm ]
 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 02:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1380
Joined  2015-03-09
citizenschallenge.pm - 31 May 2015 01:05 PM
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

Every child has a unique imprint, and for you to say that vaccines work for all children is despicable and against what the Hippocratic Oath stands for.

Where did he say?  Heck where has any medical doctor made that claim?

You talk about expectations of high ethical standards - here’s a chance to show that you live by those standards -
show us where macgyver said that.

He said in so many words that it is the obligation for parents to vaccinate because of herd immunity.

 Signature 

I think, therefore I don’t vaccinate.

“Vaccination is a barbarous practice and one of the most fatal of all the delusions current in our time.”  Mahatma Gandhi

Ever heard of the Golden Rule?... He who has the gold makes the rules!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2015 02:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1380
Joined  2015-03-09
citizenschallenge.pm - 31 May 2015 01:24 PM

Peacegirl, why you needing to personalize it with those nasty innuendos. 
Sounds like a religious/political trick, by labeling him as a bad uncaring person (though you know nothing about him), - makes it so much easier to dismiss what he’s trying to explain.

I don’t know him personally but he doesn’t know me either.  I have been labeled and made fun of because of my anti-vaccine stance.  I am reacting to the things he and others have posted which for the most part have been derogatory because this forum is pro-vaccine.  His authoritative attitude (which I sense in his posts) implies that because he is a doctor, his opinion is sacred.  Well I’m here to tell you that it’s not.  That’s what doctors do.  They use their status as doctor to indicate that what they say holds more weight than anyone else not by what they are certain about but only because they are “the doctor.”  How dare anyone challenge him?  hmmm

citizenschallenge.pm - 31 May 2015 01:24 PM

yeah, yeah, ok, so all sides play that game.
Though there’s a big difference between insults of tactical advantage and insults born of pure exasperation.

peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

You, as a doctor, are placing yourself in a position of God.

Isn’t that the plight of doctor’s, in a way they do play God when they are instrumental in saving lives (especially if it’s your own),
or putting a human under, operating on them, waking them up usually much much better than when that patient was put under.

It is admirable that doctors save lives but by the same token they can also take lives.  They need to know their limitations and admit when they don’t know what is the best course of action. 

citizenschallenge.pm - 31 May 2015 01:24 PM

Aura of god-like powers goes with the territory so to speak.
The real question is, does your doctor believe it, or is he/she grown up enough to have a realistic appreciation for their power and limitations and the role they play in people’s lives.

I myself hate the all knowing doctor who treat patients as incidentals - to me a good doctor appreciates the patient doctor team and sees him/herself more as guide and … (er. mechanic)  experienced fixer upper…  {ok that sentence still need some work   tongue rolleye }

But you get the idea, or not.

I get the idea.  I prefer naturopaths as they use natural methods of healing as a first line of defense but unfortunately insurance does not cover a lot of their therapies.  The vaccine debacle has gotten me exasperated because children are being injured and for anyone to deny that is ignorant.  I am researching this issue for the sake of my own grandchildren and the things I am finding out are unsettling.

[ Edited: 31 May 2015 04:24 PM by peacegirl ]
 Signature 

I think, therefore I don’t vaccinate.

“Vaccination is a barbarous practice and one of the most fatal of all the delusions current in our time.”  Mahatma Gandhi

Ever heard of the Golden Rule?... He who has the gold makes the rules!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2015 11:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2901
Joined  2007-04-26
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 02:37 PM

I prefer naturopaths as they use natural methods of healing as a first line of defense

That says everything right there. Naturopaths do not use “natural methods of healing”. They use pseudoscience to pretend to heal. In most states naturopaths are not required to go through any training, they have no science background, and the treatments they give are generally not well studied or are not studied at all. The only reason more of their clients don’t suffer from the treatment itself is because most of the treatments have no effect at all, good or bad. That’s not to say they don;t do harm. Naturopaths often delay the time it takes for their patients to get real treatment which can lead to worse outcomes and even death.

The very fact that you patronize a naturopath shows your inability to understand what the scientific method is and why its the only way to determine what really works and what doesn’t.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2015 04:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 02:32 PM
citizenschallenge.pm - 31 May 2015 01:05 PM
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 10:39 AM

Every child has a unique imprint, and for you to say that vaccines work for all children is despicable and against what the Hippocratic Oath stands for.

Where did he say?  Heck where has any medical doctor made that claim?

You talk about expectations of high ethical standards - here’s a chance to show that you live by those standards -
show us where macgyver said that.

He said in so many words that it is the obligation for parents to vaccinate because of herd immunity.

Ahhhh, so you are busy listening to what you want to hear, rather than listening to what he’s actually saying.

Easy to do, for sure, guilty of it myself now and then,  but doesn’t make it ok.

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2015 04:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 02:37 PM

It is admirable that doctors save lives but by the same token they can also take lives.  They need to know their limitations and admit when they don’t know what is the best course of action. 

By coincidence I listened to a Fresh Air interview last week - it doesn’t speak this actually thread…

But, I can’t think of any more “god like” doctor than a neurosurgeon,
so it’s quite interesting listening to one speaking for himself
and what it’s like to wrestle with the reality that he has made mistakes, and those mistakes have killed or maimed people…
And that’s where I’m imagining you stopping your interest.

When in actually there is so much more to being a neurosurgeon than playing God and occasionally killing someone,
(someone, who was well on the way to death anyways, incidentally.)

A Neurosurgeon Reflects On The ‘Awe And Mystery’ Of The Brain
http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/2015/05/26/409724627/fresh-air-for-may-26-2015?showDate=2015-05-26

Neurosurgeon Henry Marsh has opened heads, cut into brains and performed the most delicate and risky surgeries on the part of the body that controls everything — including breathing, movement, memory and consciousness.

“What is, I think, peculiar about brain surgery is it’s so dangerous,” Marsh tells Fresh Air’s Terry Gross. “A very small area of damage to the brain can cause catastrophic disability for the patient.”

Over the course of his career, Marsh, a consulting neurosurgeon at Atkinson Morley’s/St. George’s Hospital in London since 1987, has learned firsthand about the damage that his profession can cause. While many of the surgeries he has performed have been triumphs, there is always a risk of leaving the patient severely disabled.

In the memoir Do No Harm, Marsh confesses to the fears and uncertainties he’s dealt with as a surgeon, revisits his triumphs and failures and reflects on the enigmas of the brain and consciousness. Despite his decades on the job — or perhaps because of them — Marsh says that much of the brain remains beyond his grasp.

Peacegirl, as for your sense of hurt feelings,
I think perhaps you should look in the mirror at some of the thing you say to, and imply about, other people.
Once you start mud wrestling don’t be surprised if you get sucked into the mud pit.

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2015 04:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 02:37 PM
citizenschallenge.pm - 31 May 2015 01:24 PM

Aura of god-like powers goes with the territory so to speak.
The real question is, does your doctor believe it, or is he/she grown up enough to have a realistic appreciation for their power and limitations and the role they play in people’s lives.

I myself hate the all knowing doctor who treat patients as incidentals - to me a good doctor appreciates the patient doctor team and sees him/herself more as guide and … (er. mechanic)  experienced fixer upper…  {ok that sentence still need some work   tongue rolleye }

But you get the idea, or not.

I get the idea.  I prefer naturopaths as they use natural methods of healing as a first line of defense but unfortunately insurance does not cover a lot of their therapies.  The vaccine debacle has gotten me exasperated because children are being injured and for anyone to deny that is ignorant.  I am researching this issue for the sake of my own grandchildren and the things I am finding out are unsettling.

Well I prefer my “guidance counselors” to at least be educated in the ways of the body and what learning modern medicine (the scientific process) has to offer, while acknowledging that they don’t have all the answers and that some mysteries remain as strong as ever and that mistakes will be made by everyone, even naturopaths.

Although I want to finish this engagement, not with my rambling, but with the thoughts of MacGyver - a gent who’s on the front line of dealing with sick people in need of help.

macgyver - 01 June 2015 11:02 AM
peacegirl - 31 May 2015 02:37 PM

I prefer naturopaths as they use natural methods of healing as a first line of defense

That says everything right there. Naturopaths do not use “natural methods of healing”. They use pseudoscience to pretend to heal. In most states naturopaths are not required to go through any training, they have no science background, and the treatments they give are generally not well studied or are not studied at all. The only reason more of their clients don’t suffer from the treatment itself is because most of the treatments have no effect at all, good or bad. That’s not to say they don;t do harm. Naturopaths often delay the time it takes for their patients to get real treatment which can lead to worse outcomes and even death.

The very fact that you patronize a naturopath shows your inability to understand what the scientific method is and why its the only way to determine what really works and what doesn’t.

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2015 04:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6516
Joined  2010-08-15

Peacegirl, backing out this thread I saw Lois’ thread “Faith Healing Kills Children” - what do you think about stuff like that?
Does that sort of unnecessary suffering and deaths caused by frauds bother you?

LoisL - 21 May 2015 06:02 PM

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/05/religious_exemptions_from_medical_care_faith_healing_kills_children.html

Faith Healing Kills Children

It’s time to eliminate religious exemptions from medical care.

By Jerry A. Coyne{/quote]

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 6
1