2 of 2
2
Alternative Medicine and secularism
Posted: 17 July 2017 09:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4267
Joined  2014-06-20
Write4U - 25 June 2017 05:55 PM
LoisL - 27 April 2017 09:15 PM

There is only one kind of medicine. “Alternative” medicine is fake medicine. Anything that hasn’t been tested and validated as effective is not medicine.

While I agree with you that alternative medicine proponents tend to exaggerate the benefits of natural medicinal benefits in many cases, I disagree with your assessment that only laboratory tests can prove the general benefits of natural medicines.

Thousands of years of practical application do count as a long term tests of the effectiveness of herbal medicines and salves. Today we put medicines on the market which prove to be disastrous in the long term. A clear example is the marketing of Thalidomide, without sufficient long term testing. The use of DDT for pest control turned out to be more harmful to humans than for pest control.

Some ~60% of all currently used artificially manipulated medicines are or were based on purified plant extracts. Plants with medicinal properties do exist in nature and not all “medicine men” were charlatans, but possessed great knowledge of the medicinal properties of plants and their effective uses for many diseases and they did so for free. Some of them studied and tested plants for decades and had apprentices, who would study with them so that they could pass on the age-old knowledge of natural medicines.

In those days, the title medicine man was held in high esteem.  Why does China, now a modern country, still use natural medicines. Are they stupid or snake-oil salesmen?

The modern “snake-oil” salesmen came much later, when you had to start paying for medicines and the concept of greed became part of the equation in health care.

Comes to mind the current opioid addiction, which is actually acquired from the carelessly applied prescription.  IMO, the extraction and purification of naturally occurring “medicines” has caused more harm than any medicine man from 2000 years ago ever did in many cases.

To dismiss the knowledge acquired from millenia of effective uses of naturally occurring medicines is hasty and somewhat prejudicial, IMO.

All they have to do is prove their remedies work under laboratory conditions. If they can’t do that the remedy does not deserve to be considered legitimate medicine. Period. End of discussion.


[Spam Nazi line] Spam Nazi line] Spam Nazi line]Spam Nazi line]

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 July 2017 10:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7756
Joined  2009-02-26

LoisL said,
All they have to do is prove their remedies work under laboratory conditions. If they can’t do that the remedy does not deserve to be considered legitimate medicine. Period. End of discussion.

Not end of discussion.

If the government forbids laboratory testing, it cannot be considered medicine? Note I left out the word “legitimate”, because that is meaningless except for patent and taxation purposes.

And what does “under laboratory conditions” mean anyway?  Is nature not the greatest laboratory which can test medicinal or poisonous properties over millennia?  Did a laboratory come up with the terms “Deadly Nightshade”, “Bushman’s Poison”,
“Bishop’s weed”?

Who labeled these poisonous plants? Laboratories?  Are the Chinese people stupid? They still use lots of medicinal herbs. Are African bushmen stupid. They have no laboratories or fancy Latin names for beneficial or harmful chemicals contained in plants, barks, roots, seeds, flowers. But they know what not to eat!  And that is sufficient in itself.

Should the early Egyptians not have used Garlic to ward of “bad spirits”. They knew it was “good medicine”.
In fact, the earliest recorded labor strike was over a cut-back of garlic rations during the period of Pyramid building.

In the US, Garlic was once classified as a legitimate medicine. But you can grow it yourself, so there were no taxes to be gained.

I make no claim that all the reputed medicinal properties of Garlic are true, but thousands of years of use for its beneficial properties cannot be denied.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3249897/

[ Edited: 18 July 2017 04:02 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: 18 July 2017 05:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4267
Joined  2014-06-20
Write4U - 17 July 2017 10:20 PM

LoisL said,
All they have to do is prove their remedies work under laboratory conditions. If they can’t do that the remedy does not deserve to be considered legitimate medicine. Period. End of discussion.

Not end of discussion.

If the government forbids laboratory testing, it cannot be considered medicine? Note I left out the word “legitimate”, because that is meaningless except for patent and taxation purposes.

And what does “under laboratory conditions” mean anyway?  Is nature not the greatest laboratory which can test medicinal or poisonous properties over millennia?  Did a laboratory come up with the terms “Deadly Nightshade”, “Bushman’s Poison”,
“Bishop’s weed”?

Who labeled these poisonous plants? Laboratories?  Are the Chinese people stupid? They still use lots of medicinal herbs. Are African bushmen stupid. They have no laboratories or fancy Latin names for beneficial or harmful chemicals contained in plants, barks, roots, seeds, flowers. But they know what not to eat!  And that is sufficient in itself.

Should the early Egyptians not have used Garlic to ward of “bad spirits”. They knew it was “good medicine”.
In fact, the earliest recorded labor strike was over a cut-back of garlic rations during the period of Pyramid building.

In the US, Garlic was once classified as a legitimate medicine. But you can grow it yourself, so there were no taxes to be gained.

I make no claim that all the reputed medicinal properties of Garlic are true, but thousands of years of use for its beneficial properties cannot be denied.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3249897/

It can be denied if it can’t be shown by testing under laboratory conditions to be beneficial, no matter how many people proclaim it.

When has a Westen government ever forbidden laboratory testing? Name an instance.

Since you asked, and apparently don’t know, “under laboratory conditions” means by critical thinking standards that have resulted in a system of proving claims to be effective or ineffective by following the rule oif logic, rational thought and the scientific method. If you don’t understand these things we can’t help you. Take some basic courses in logic and critical thinking.

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 July 2017 09:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7756
Joined  2009-02-26
LoisL - 18 July 2017 05:25 PM
Write4U - 17 July 2017 10:20 PM

LoisL said,
All they have to do is prove their remedies work under laboratory conditions. If they can’t do that the remedy does not deserve to be considered legitimate medicine. Period. End of discussion.

Not end of discussion.

If the government forbids laboratory testing, it cannot be considered medicine? Note I left out the word “legitimate”, because that is meaningless except for patent and taxation purposes.

And what does “under laboratory conditions” mean anyway?  Is nature not the greatest laboratory which can test medicinal or poisonous properties over millennia?  Did a laboratory come up with the terms “Deadly Nightshade”, “Bushman’s Poison”,
“Bishop’s weed”?

Who labeled these poisonous plants? Laboratories?  Are the Chinese people stupid? They still use lots of medicinal herbs. Are African bushmen stupid. They have no laboratories or fancy Latin names for beneficial or harmful chemicals contained in plants, barks, roots, seeds, flowers. But they know what not to eat!  And that is sufficient in itself.

Should the early Egyptians not have used Garlic to ward of “bad spirits”. They knew it was “good medicine”.
In fact, the earliest recorded labor strike was over a cut-back of garlic rations during the period of Pyramid building.

In the US, Garlic was once classified as a legitimate medicine. But you can grow it yourself, so there were no taxes to be gained.

I make no claim that all the reputed medicinal properties of Garlic are true, but thousands of years of use for its beneficial properties cannot be denied.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3249897/

It can be denied if it can’t be shown by testing under laboratory conditions to be beneficial, no matter how many people proclaim it.

When has a Westen government ever forbidden laboratory testing? Name an instance.

Since you asked, and apparently don’t know, “under laboratory conditions” means by critical thinking standards that have resulted in a system of proving claims to be effective or ineffective by following the rule oif logic, rational thought and the scientific method. If you don’t understand these things we can’t help you. Take some basic courses in logic and critical thinking.

  As I said before, I have no objection to manufactured medicines, which can then be precisely controlled for dosage etc. It’s a good thing. My wife is a nurse and have worked In medical billing, so I am somewhat familiar with the subject.

As to garlic, it has been tested and it does have real medicinal values for a variety of treatments. This is why it was once a recognized medicine. But people can grow it in their gardens for their own use as a spice or a healthy member of the onion family.

But such is not the case for the medicinal properties of marijuana, which has been conveniently lumped in with Heroin and other highly addictive opioid drugs. Even laboratory testing is still forbidden, as far as I know.

THC is not an opioid, in fact

Medical marijuana offers a unique treatment opportunity for patients who are suffering from opiate dependence.

https://www.marijuanadoctors.com/content/ailments/view/50/opiate-dependence

And several states have recognized that Jane does have medicinal properties and there are medical records from individual physicians not for its THC content but several other chemicals which are effective in combating epilepsy, autism and the effects of chemotherapy.

There are several strains of medicinal marijuana which has been bred for very low THC content but high in those other proven effective medicinal chemicals.  It is useless for recreational purposes. 

Similar to industrial Hemp, which is one of the most ecofriendly crops with many industrial uses. Many countries allow growing it and use it effectively for many purposes, but is useless as a drug.

Some models of BMW use hemp as the main ingredient for panels. It has extremely long fibers and make it ideal for high stress industrial use. President Washington had a thriving hemp crop and the first draft of the Constitution was written on hemp paper. There is an ironic twist in that.

As to high THC recreational use of the sativa plant, several states such as Colorado, Washington, California, and recently Nevada have come to realize that it is a high value crop, and not physically addictive, such as prescription opioids.  Thus, instead of spending millions dollars of tax moneys to combat marijuana, they now have substantial tax revenues from the strictly controlled sale of recreational pot.  Nevada ran out of supplies in a few weeks and had to buy additional supplies from Colorado, which has now a thriving sativa industry that is less harmful, but just as profitable as tobacco and alcohol.

But still the Feds have forbidden official FDA testing of marijuana for all its beneficial properties and possible dangers associated with chronic use. But it has been testing it secretly in one of the southern States for years.

I am sure this is why the Feds are not enforcing the prohibition of Marijuana in those states which have legalized it.

Once you actually do some real research of available medical (sparse as it may be) records, you will come to recognize that its benefits far outweigh its potential harms, such as nicotine and alcohol addiction.  I am sure that within the next ten years marijuana will be reclassified and made a legal recreational drug. It will become a great source of tax revenue and save millions of dollars of taxes to combat its unstoppable use.

And the kicker is that marijuana use does NOT lead to using more dangerous drugs.  And there has never been a case that someone died from a purely marijuana overdose. Another beneficial side-effect is that it tends to mellow rather than stimulate as with cocaine.

I mentioned before that Holland makes marijuana available to elderly people in long term care facilities, to help combat depression and rheumatic pains. In fact Holland has a yearly fair by marijuana growers to offer testing for its many interesting but harmless side-effects. In Amsterdam there are several bistros where instead o a beer or wine, you can order a Jay.

Its reputation as a bad drug (reefer madness) is highly exaggerated and can be compared to Trumpian truths.

I have no axe to grind here, and of course I strongly oppose driving under the influence of any drug, including marijuana.

 Signature 

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

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2