Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Conversation >

Alternative medicine

Page: (1)2 3

12:35 / 19.08.05

This (from Smoothly's "Doctor Who" thread) got me curious:

Ariadne: I've always been very pro alternative medicine, but in both those health problems I had spent loads of money on alternative remedies (acupuncture, half the local health food store's products...) and got nowhere. Then I turned to the GP, and was sorted out in days.

It made me wonder what experiences - positve or negative - people have had of alternative medicine. I was wondering because it's the sort of thing I'd be inclined to believe in a relatively unquestioning way, being a closet hippy, without having much evidence for. Had anyone had any experiences that settle it for them, one way or t'other?

One of the few unresevedly positive experiences I can offer up is using New Era's homepathic hayfever remedy. It defintely reduces my symptons and has a very odd effect that suggests it's not just a placebo - when the pollen count is really high it only works for half an hour and then I have to take more.

Anyone else?

13:05 / 19.08.05

Well, certain things definitely work -- herbal throat lozenges.

And my sister's done some acupuncture on me that's definitely had an effect. I did recently read a skeptic column in, um, Scientific American I think, in which the guy mentioned a study into acupuncture's efficacy in pain relief. There were three groups: a control group (no needles), an acupuncted group (precise needling) and a placebo group (needles inserted at random points).
The group that reported the greatest pain relief was the placebo group -- indicating that it might all be about endorphin release (even though the needles don't hurt, you're definitely aware they're there and the body will no doubt react).

My experience was different -- for one treatment, halfway through the insertions, one side of body went numb, which is way more targeted than endorphins could account for.

I also think there's a MAJOR problem with standardization of herbal (and even homeopathic) remedies. By their nature, these things rely on ingredients that vary in potency -- how old they are, how well-dried they may have been, how much rain the plants got as seedlings, how fertile the soil was, how many flowers/fruits/leaves that specific plant produced, and on and on. And then add that there's no real mandatory regulatory bodies overseeing the production & manufacture of capsules, many bottles tend not to have expiration dates, that kind of thing. Hard to know how much is enough.

Unrelated to that, I have a sneaking suspicion about a lot of alternative medicine that it may work, but not based on the rationale the practioners use. Like, I dunno, that old saw about cloves being good for toothache because they look like teeth. The qi that gets manipulated in acupuncture (and, moreso, the organ meridians along which it moves) might be a good model for practitioners, but I have a strong feeling that model is not a literal truth but an allegorical representation of some other set of physical processes. I don't think, for instance, that my liver is literally warmer than most people's, even though I do "tend to retain liver heat" or whatever.

13:14 / 19.08.05

The qi that gets manipulated in acupuncture (and, moreso, the organ meridians along which it moves) might be a good model for practitioners, but I have a strong feeling that model is not a literal truth but an allegorical representation of some other set of physical processes.

I train with a couple of acupuncerists and they've said similar things to me. A lot of the models they are told about are semi-contradcitory, according to one guy, and you kind of intuit a way through it.. I sometimes have similar feelings about Wilhelm Reich's stuff - something happens when you follow his therapeutic procedures but that doesn't mean his explanations is 100% true. Actually, I'm shifting more and more to taking his explanations seriously but that's another story...

I've never had a treatment myself so it doens't carry the same "power" for me, and I guess I have my skeptic head on today. Something certainly impacts on something
This kind of parallels my experience of playing with Reich's stuff. I can say that something

13:15 / 19.08.05

Arguably this ought to be over in the Lab, maybe Temple. But hey nonny nonny, and away I go.

Firstly, I'd question the point of using a drug (homeopathic or not) that only provides half an hour of usefulness when you need it the most. Secondly, the fact that it's less effective when the pollen count is high does not necessarily mean that it's effect aren't due to a placebo effect.

I'm extremely sceptical of the effectiveness of homeopathy as providing anything more than placebo relief anyway. I've heard all the cod science explanations for why it works, and yet you are effectively taking a drug which has none of the chemical in it which is supposed to aid you. Homeopathy dilutes solutions to the extent that there are, at best, only a few molecules left.

I don't have a problem with people using homeopathic cures. Whatever gets you through really. The human body is capable of marvellous self-healing abilities when the mind is properly directed. However, I dislike the school of thought that some espouse that it's somehow more "natural" than taking, for instance, aspirin.

13:22 / 19.08.05

I'd like this thread to stay here because I'd like to quiz people on personal opinions and experience. Though if others think it would be better served elsewhere... ?

I'd question the point of using a drug (homeopathic or not) that only provides half an hour of usefulness when you need it the most.

It's not really like a drug, more like a compressed salt. It comes in little tablets (very small - 2 or 3 mm in diameter) that dissolve on the tounge. So it's quite easy to carry the container they come in your pocket and take them when you feel the need. This is totally subjectve, it feels like it's having "less impact" on my body than taking anti-histamines, which dope me up a bit.

I have no idea how it works,or is supposed to work or if it's even "homopathic" or not. I'm reasonable skeptical towards homeopathy myself, as well.

Tryphena Absent

13:54 / 19.08.05

I think that there are some ailments, like hayfever, that alternative medicine could work for... after all most modern medicine doesn't really stop hayfever symptoms properly. There are other illnesses- infections- that I would always go to a Doctor about because medicines were invented primarily to target them and other illnesses- eczema- that none of the prescribed treatments work for (personally) but a little face cream (almond kisses) from Lush gets rid of in half an hour. So basically I just think you never know.

13:55 / 19.08.05

I’d like to come back to this, if I may (from ‘Doctor who?’)

I generally assume that ‘alternative’ medicines quickly become part of the mainstream if they prove to be effective. I just don’t imagine the men in white coats turning their noses up at an effective treatment for something, just because it’s found in bark or crystals or whatever.

I think there might be huge resistance to more "touchy feely" modes of healing, but that's another topic.

Since we have another topic, can you say more about what this resistance is and where it comes from?
I’d love to believe that alternative medicine was effective, but can’t escape the suspicion that if it were, I’d be plain ol’ medicine. Treatments that were once deemed ‘alternative’ have now become mainstream, haven’t they? Wasn’t aspirin refined from a traditional herbal remedy? Can’t you now get acupuncture and hypnosis on the NHS in certain circumstances?

Also,
However, I dislike the school of thought that some espouse that it's somehow more "natural" than taking, for instance, aspirin.

I’m always puzzled by this too. Someone once tried to convince me that the vitamin C you get in oranges is better than the ascorbic acid you get in tablets, because the latter is 'chemical vitamin C'.
Isn’t ‘natural’ one of those magic words that the Advertising Standards Authority lets you attach to absolutely anything you like? What’s not natural?

Tryphena Absent

14:01 / 19.08.05

So you don't have a tendency towards organic food then?

14:15 / 19.08.05

The excellent "Bad Science" column in the Guardian on Thursdays is good at debunking the more out there claims of alternative medicine. Gillian McKeith is a particular enemy of the column.
I personally am rather cynical about the benefits of "alternative" medicine, because as Smoothly says if it really works doctors would use it. There seems to be an awful lot of woolly thinking at best and down right foolishness at worst in the area which makes me rather suspicious, especially the the amount of money the alternative medicine sector is worth now.

14:26 / 19.08.05

So you don't have a tendency towards organic food then?

To be honest with you, Nina, no I don't. I can't taste any difference, and I think I'd rather eat broccoli with some pesticide on it than with pests on it. And I'm not really sure what 'organic' means.
I tend towards organic meat, but more for confused welfare reasons than anything else.

14:35 / 19.08.05

I’d love to believe that alternative medicine was effective, but can’t escape the suspicion that if it were, I’d be plain ol’ medicine Smoothly Weaving

If you can't prove how it works, it stays alternative. To be approved by the medical authorites takes fairly rigourous research I think, and rightly so.

Some things work, but we don't know how. I find Rescue Remedy to be a dramatic example of an effective alternative remedy, I've found no better cure for shock, stress or anxiety, symptoms traditional medicine has trouble treating (especially on a minor level). I can't say I've found the rest of the Bach flower remedies to have as drastic an effect, but Rescue Remedy I swear by. I understand people discounting anecdotal evidence, but first hand experience is pretty convincing. I was shocked, I had some, I felt markedly better. It's not just the brandy or the placebo, because 1) it's only a few drops and 2) I was sceptical of it, not expecting it to work (the first time at least). If it works when I slip it into someone's tea without telling them, it's not a placebo, right?

Here's an interesting point- some farmers and vets use flower remedies or homeopathy on animals. How does the placebo effect apply to a cow? You could say they are deluding themselves, but if there's any effect (as has been indicated and reported) it requires a more complex explanation than gullibility.

14:49 / 19.08.05

If you can't prove how it works, it stays alternative.

Is that strictly accurate, Quantum? Aren't lots of medicines used without a proper understanding of how they works? I'm prescribed medicine which was developed as a heart medication but which just happened to be really effective in another, totally unrelated disorder. I thought there was still a great deal of uncertaintly *how* ECT works, and lots of other things besides.

Don't you just have to prove *that* they work?

15:08 / 19.08.05

I agree on the Rescue Remedy - it's astounding, especially the first time when you don't expect it to work.
The first time I had any I was in a bit of a hysterical state - relationship breaking up, my whole emigration plan - and therefore life plan - crumbling (this was years and years ago, in case anyone's feeling worried) and I felt on the verge of breaking down completely, or screaming or jumping out a window. Some rescue remedy and bam ... I was fine. calm. all the panic gone. I couldn't get over it.
So now I usually have some to hand. It's useful at that point of insomnia where you start to panic about how much you need to sleep - it doesn't actually make you sleep but it lessens the freaking out, so you've more chance of getting to sleep.

Goodness Gracious Meme

01:16 / 20.08.05

And, the thing with things like Rescue Remedy is, I think, that practioners/mnaufacturers have found a way to partially translate what's effective in a bespoke rememdy to something that can be mass-produced to a degree unparalleled by other medications. As other people have said, alot of non-allopathic rememedies are very specific/rely on a lengthy consultation in a way that isn't very amenable to modern western society.

I personally have a big problem with the whole concept of 'alternative medicine', as opposed to 'traditional medicine' as I tend to assume that as soon as the qualifier 'alternative' is added to 'medicine', it begs questions/critiques that aren't applied to 'medicine'.

I suspect in this I'm hugely a product of my upbringing (bear with me) in this respect, as I grew up with very mainstream/conservative parents but ones who gave me notions of homeopathy,allopathy and ayruveda as branches of medicine, rather than a system based on 'medicine' and 'alternative' medicine.

For example, it's not uncommon for doctors in India to have trained in a couple of traditions, and utilise them to best advantage, picking and choosing.

09:26 / 20.08.05

Aren't lots of medicines used without a proper understanding of how they works Smoothly

I don't think so- rigorous clinical trials are the norm, or at least that's what the medical establishment aims at. Testing pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, cosmetics, food and feed additives and contaminants, novel foods and biocides before they're released is mandatory, and the criteria for acceptance is primarily 'not harmful' and secondarily effective. I've got a friend who works in Pharm trials, I'll ask her for the lowdown.

It's difficult to test 'alternative' therapies because the explanation appended to the medicine ('good energy' or whatever) is unscientific, so the tests are for efficacy in the same way they'd test a new allopathic drug (love that word) which isn't necessarily the best way to go about it.
If the test was just that they work, there would be more alternative medicines surely. With an allopathic painkiller you can say 'it inhibits neuronal firing in this area of the brain', with Flower remedies you can't.

I studied some fascinating Psychology stuff at Uni on guided visualisation cures for Cancer compared to chemo and 'normal' treatments (especially with Helen Graham) analysing the studies on the subject. A comparative study showed those who had only traditional treatment gradually passed away over time, (graphed x=number of survivors y=time it would be a downward pointing straight line) compared to those who had just guided visualisation treatment, more of whom passed away at first but some survived indefinitely (so graphed it was a log curve).
The implication is that the 'magic' remedy only worked better than traditional for some people, but those people beat their cancer using only their minds, and are still alive today. None of the traditional group survived past about 3 years.

I'm trying to track the study down online to show Evil Scientist (and put in the 'Talk to the Cynic' thread as evidence of magic) but my web fu is poor and I can't do PDF here at work. Can anyone find more details of comparative studies of alternative and traditional medicine? Otherwise I'll have to buy her book..

09:44 / 20.08.05

I dislike the school of thought that some espouse that it's somehow more "natural" than taking, for instance, aspirin. Evil Scientist

Me too. In fact every time someone says something is 'unnatural' I feel like saying 'Well go and live naked up a tree surviving using only your teeth and nails then, and while you're at it destroy all human culture since the advent of language 'cos that's not natural either'.

Having said that, Aspirin is basically mashed up willow bark in a sugar pill.

ONLY NICE THINGS

10:33 / 20.08.05

Rescue remedy also, lest we forget, contains a quite startling amount of alcohol. At one point I was getting through bottles of the stuff and finding it very calming...

Less searchable M0rd4nt

11:07 / 20.08.05

Dude, you're supposed to put 3 drops of it in a glass of water. Even I couldn't get pissed on that.

17:00 / 20.08.05

Aren't lots of medicines used without a proper understanding of how they works.....Don't you just have to prove *that* they work? - Smoothly

I don't think so- rigorous clinical trials are the norm, or at least that's what the medical establishment aims at. Testing pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, cosmetics, food and feed additives and contaminants, novel foods and biocides before they're released is mandatory, and the criteria for acceptance is primarily 'not harmful' and secondarily effective. - Quantum

But you aren't you dodging Smoothly's point, Quantum? A mechanism - *how* something works - isn't needed, rather a reasonable demonstration *that* it works. Clinical trials address the latter, rather than the former, surely.

For myself, I am reasonably convinced on anecdotal evidence, that alternative medicine has been (in my perhaps limited experience) a fashion statement. Its "natural", less "western" and more "holistic". But, of course, that doesn't mean it is in its entirety ineffective. In fact, I'm rather sceptical of the label "alternative medicine", used as if there is a single entity in question.

BTW, my own little rule of thumb is that if it can't kill me or get me high, at least, I don't believe in it. Herbal does fine by that account but homeopathic stuff has never had an effect on me.

13:11 / 22.08.05

Coming back a bit late to this. I found a more elaborate version of what you seem to be saying, Smoothly. This is paraphrased from John Diamond:

...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.

I've got a bit of skepticism here, not only towards "alternative" medicine, but towards the idea of completely value-free testing, and that something is going to receive it when it comes from a very different paradigm. One event that sticks in my mind is James Randi's famous test in Jacques Beneviste's laboratory where he stuck some test result on the celling. There seems to be an implict superiority complex on the part of Randi here which implies it's okay to rattle and put pressure on researchers. Now, I know that not all tests of "alternatives" are going to work like this, but I can't help but feel there's an enormous amount of resistance they'd have to overcome, coming from outside of orthodoxy, which would not in any way match, say, the lobbying power of the pharmaceutical industry.

Found another excellent review: The Whole Story by Toby MurcottThe line that particulary interested me was this: the quality of the therapeutic relationship between practitioner and patient concretely influences the outcome.

This is purely an impression, but I wonder if the majority of people who go to alternative practiconers, go because they are seeking this kind of "quality" relationship applied to their healthcare, one that's going to take into account their emotions, look to build good rapport etc. ? "Holistic" in terms of seeing their illness as part of the whole of them, rather than a disfunctioning mechanism.

ONLY NICE THINGS

13:14 / 22.08.05

~Dude, you're supposed to put 3 drops of it in a glass of water.

Really? I missed that. I just squirted it down my throat with the pipette.

14:34 / 22.08.05

BTW, my own little rule of thumb is that if it can't kill me or get me high, at least, I don't believe in it.

I think this is what Nietzsche wrote in his first draft but his editor got hold of the manuscript and toned it down.

Goodness Gracious Meme

14:55 / 22.08.05

This is purely an impression, but I wonder if the majority of people who go to alternative practiconers, go because they are seeking this kind of "quality" relationship applied to their healthcare, one that's going to take into account their emotions, look to build good rapport etc. ? "Holistic" in terms of seeing their illness as part of the whole of them, rather than a disfunctioning mechanism.

You could well be right about this. Also, that many of the practices above involve lengthy consultation, which is something that can be lacking (often for very understandable reasons) in NHS encounters.

This, I think can be particularly useful/important when seeking remedies for anxiety/stress-related symptoms.

I know that when going to see my Bach flower therapist (whose bespoke rememdies for me have been the only thing to ever hit my insomnia effectively and not leave me a groggy zombie. As someone who has suffered with sleeping problems for as long as I can remember and tried everthing going, this is *huge* for me.), just spending half and hour/40mins in her presence/talking over my symptoms/experiencing her holistic questioning/her presence does me a whole lot of good.

Goodness Gracious Meme

14:56 / 22.08.05

Really? I missed that. I just squirted it down my throat with the pipette.

Yeesh, are you serious?

ONLY NICE THINGS

15:07 / 22.08.05

Um. Yes. Is that bad?

17:09 / 22.08.05

Haus, for someone so clever you're very silly. Didn't you read the bottle?
It won't do you any harm, I'm sure - or no more than regularly squirting brandy down your neck.

ONLY NICE THINGS

17:13 / 22.08.05

Well, this was five years ago or so, and I have so far had no ill effects. At least, I don't think I have. Let me ask the spiders. They've been watching me pretty much ever since...

GGM - how does one go about a Bach flower therapy session?

17:42 / 22.08.05

Yes, every insomniac on the board wants to know.

17:54 / 22.08.05

Another Bach fan here, who would have thought there would be so many. Someone suggested it to help with the panic attacks awhile back and I think it's helped Rescue Remedy spray. I also have (checks shelf) Aspen/Crab apple/Larch and Hornbeam and with that info you can check their website and find out about my many many issues.

Bit put off by the lack of any research but I'm quite into Alternative means of fixing me.

Have also had acupuncture that really helped neck problems and quite a bit of Alexander technique which I'm sure was moving me in the right direction but distance and funds put a stop to that one.

Goodness Gracious Meme

18:22 / 22.08.05

Well, I was fortunate in that I know my therapist through work, but I can ask her if there's a reliable UK register, if people are seriously interested.

Haus, it's not going to do you any harm, it's probably not doing any good either. 'Sjust, as Ariadne says, the smart:silly ratio on that one.

18:33 / 22.08.05

I don't think so- rigorous clinical trials are the norm, or at least that's what the medical establishment aims at.

"Rigorous clinical trials" (and we'll leave aside, for a moment, the part played by the pharmaceutical companies in "rigorous clinical trials") tell us whether something works, to what extent, and to what cost (in terms of unwanted side-effects) but they don't necessarily tell us how drugs work. The mechanism of action of antidepressants and antipsychotics is speculative at best, and, as Smoothly says, no-one's sure how ECT works...

21:01 / 22.08.05

Aren't lots of medicines used without a proper understanding of how they works.....Don't you just have to prove *that* they work?

Yes, and yes.

I worked for five years in pharmaceutical R&D and I have to tell you that the exact mechanisms that a drug relies on are frequently utterly mysterious. Oh, sure, they do try things based on previous research and theories - you can't just mix chemicals together and hope you come up with a magic potion, that's not going to happen - but the whole thing is so fantastically complex and poorly understood that you're lucky if you just scrape the boundaries of explanation for a new drug.

I worked on SSRIs for three years; exactly how they work is still a mystery. I'm not even sure that the current pharmaceutical paradigm even has the potential of expressing how such a drug does what it does. The major research in SSRIs these days is in how to minimise side-effects.

Having a drug approved depends on you proving through trials that it works better than placebo. It doesn't matter how it works. If you appear to just be trying something based on guesswork it may not ever get to the stage where you can try it on people; you have to have some believable rationale and have at least tried to show that it doesn't have horrible side effects, which is where animal testing comes in, as limited as that is. But it's quite possible for an "alternative" remedy to pass official tests and be classified as a prescription medicine.

I have to say that my experiences have left me laughing at the conspiracy theories about pharms companies manufacturing the AIDS virus and so on. If they could do that, would they fuck about killing Africans? Where's the money there? Far more money in cardiovascular drugs and obesity remedies. And you have to remember that the scientists doing the real work are mostly leftie scum who would be definitely inclined to blow the whistle. (We had regular emails from a political advocacy division exhorting us to write to our Congressman to vote for bills that would fuck poor people and make the management richer. Everybody hated them.)

23:58 / 22.08.05

I'm slightly suspicious of all medicines - orthodox or otherwise. Can't beat a bit of the old trying to stay healthy. I think having a child makes me far more wary and conscious(it's not just me I'm fucking about with it's my heir) about what I choose for relief. The trials specific antidotes go through are very worrying, perhaps I do not have a full grasp of the current process, but how the hell can a treatment be deemed safe for use after only a few months or even years of trials.
Not to stand in the way of modern scientific progress but surely the only way to deem a drug/therapy safe is to administer it and observe the effects over at least two generations, otherwise we may end up with another miracle
drug as effective as thalidomide.

This said anyone wishing to try drugs which may help them should be allowed to do so.
I just feel the word "safe" when used in a medicinal sense a little suspicious - akin to MP's
feeding thier own spawn burgers. Honesty "this seems to be safe" as opposed to "this is safe" would be a welcome change.

00:38 / 23.08.05

The demands of bambino prevent me from reading this thread all the way through, I'm just gonna drop in and recommend the homeopathic remedy arnica in either cream or pill form. Any sceptic of homeopathy ought to give it a try on their next bruise- it is astonishingly effective stuff. I've had a couple of huge bruises (hairline fracture on my finger and ripped ligaments in my foot) that have healed up much quicker than I would normally expect because of an application of arnica ointment. More recently arnica pills at 200c strength have helped the postnatal bruising (if you know what I mean) heal up nicely.

11:00 / 23.08.05

I've got a bit of skepticism here, not only towards "alternative" medicine, but towards the idea of completely value-free testing, and that something is going to receive it when it comes from a very different paradigm. - illmatic

I have some sympathy for this point of view, but a whole lot more suspucion since in practice it seems to be deployed as a way of avoiding any kind of justification beyond the anecdotal. Given that I'd be extremely unhappy to see this kind of standard extended to the drugs pushed by the big, bad pharm companies, I'm not sure that it amounts to much more than special pleading.

Page: (1)2 3