What is the difference between Allopathy, Homeopathy and Ayurvedic medicens?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by plakhapate, Feb 6, 2008.

  1. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    As someone who has personally benefited from homeopathy when many alopathic treatments failed, I am of the school of "just because we don't understand it, does not make it redundant". Honestly, while I do not know how it works, it has worked for me. After 6 years of taking daily iron supplements, I have spent the last 20 years without any. If that is a placebo effect, its really something.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Raithere plagued by infinities Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,343
    It may be time to shift it back again.


    Your statement is misleading. There are some studies that indicate that acupuncture has an effect on a very limited number of conditions. But even when beneficial effects can be found the causal mechanism has nothing to do with the underlying theory of acupuncture making the theory incidental to the results.

    In analogy, waving a magic wand about may help assuage the pain of my carpel-tunnel syndrome but it has nothing to do with the wand and everything to do with physical action of wand waving. Wand waving may therefore be dismissed as a medical practice, its results merely the result of physical therapy.

    Likewise, the limited benefits of acupuncture (if/where existent) are the result of casual mechanisms that have nothing to do with acupuncture.

    A decent MD can/should also take a look at or suggest diet change, nutraceutical supplementation, weight loss (if a factor), activity/exercise, physical therapy, and stress reduction therapies. They are not limited to medications or surgery and if your doctor only offers these two alternatives without specific reason I would suggest seeking another doctor.

    All three of these practices (homeopathy, acupuncture, chiropracty) share the same deficiencies. The primary being that their underlying hypotheses are devoid of evidential support of their causal mechanisms. Thus, even where cases can be made towards efficacy of a treatment the result (as with the magic wand) has nothing to do with the theory.

    ~Raithere
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Evidentiary support of causal mechanisms?

    Allopathy is based on alleviation of symptoms, not cure of a functional or structural defect. There is very little evidence how much of it is placebo effect too.

    In fact, doctors have a term for stuff they don't understand, they call it idiopathic.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiopathic.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Raithere plagued by infinities Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,343
    Correlation does not imply causation.

    A few questions may help clarify. No need to answer publicly, simply consider them.

    1. Was a medical condition ever established for your enema or was it idiopathic?
    2. If a condition was determined, does it remain?
    2A.If not, what are the statistics on spontaneous remission or natural regeneration?
    3. All else being equal, if you discontinue homeopathic treatment or miss a dose does your anemia return?
    3A. If you discontinue homeopathic treatment for an extended time does your anemia progress or continue or is it cyclic, waxing and waning on its own?

    In explanation, that one's health improves is not necessarily indicative that any specific treatment actually caused the improvement. This is as true of evidence based medicine as it is of alternative practices. The difference is that evidence-based medicine takes this fact into account. The alternative is mere superstition.

    ~Raithere
     
  8. Raithere plagued by infinities Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,343
    Generally speaking this is untrue. While research often lags behind the development of new treatments understanding the biological mechanisms behind the treatments is an essential component of scientific medicine. Why else would doctors bother studying biochemistry and other such topics? Additionally, as modern medicine continues to develop, research into new treatment often begins with an understanding of the cause and tailors new drugs to specifically address them.

    Indeed. And I'm much more comfortable with someone telling me they don't know than pretending they do. Alternative practitioners are prone to telling their clients they can cure anything.

    ~Raithere
     
  9. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    SA
    your confusing a doctor with a physio. Its PHYSIO's who dispise chiropractors.

    My sister (and she is the expert not me in this) has said repeatedly that a chiropractor does no more than a pain killer does and has alot of risks asociated with it (if they do it SLIGHTLY wrong they can cause permident paralisis)

    A physio on the other hand works to cure the problem. Take back pain as an example, a chiropractor will just crack the back and then you go back to acting exactly the same as you did before and your back there in a week in the same degree of pain. A physio on the other hand will work with you to strengthen the mussles which hold the spin in its correct alinement and so fix the problem for good (as long as you follow there directions). Basically its a choice between the quick fix, and long term cure.

    Yes a physio might suggest pain relife in the mean time while they fix the problem but in the long term a physio will give you a permident solution. A chiropractor wont
     
  10. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    Raithere i agree that acupuncher wont fix a bacterial infection or a punomothorax (well except by acident) but there have been studies showing good results for pain management and a few other things. This is why its becoming an option for doctors.

    However if you use it on the wrong things its no more useful than perscribing antibotics to someone with a viral infection, or doing CPR on someone with a broken leg.

    The difference between homopathics and acupuncher is that there is NOT ONE randomised controled double blind trial in cohraine which says homopathics work better than a placibo. Acupuncher on the other hand DOES have evidence backing it up
     
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Hah, don't know many doctors, do you?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    You must be speaking of prescription dispensing doctors. Most "alternative" practitioners will tell you that treatment depends on your ability to control your diet and exercise. Its the pill poppers who give you a happy pill in lieu of therapy. Like I said, I took various iron supplements for 6 years [all the way from gluconate to sulphate] and all I got was acidity. A homeopath told me I needed a more holistic approach to my mineral deficiencies and prescribed a balanced mineral dose along with his homeopathy medicine. I still don't know how it works but I have not needed an iron supplement ever since [my hemoglobin used to be 9 and has since the treatment held steady at above 13]
     
  12. kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,757
    Backpains are hard to fix and there are no chemicals, homeopathic, Ayrvedic or so called allopathic can fix that. This is because of compressed discs that touch the nerves. However, the logic is that Physical therapy where you strech your spine by hanging on a contraption over time can fix that.

    The only other chemical you can use and sometimes works a little is using gabapentin (or similar ), where the chemial palliates or attenuates the pain signal to certain extent. But after a while when the feedback tells the nerve that the pain level did not reach its desired effect...the raw signal level goes up.
     
  13. Simon Anders Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,535
    This would be a decent MD who has been directly or indirectly influenced by the alternative community who have known about the importance of these things for a long time including the rather long period where they were being spat on by the mainstream doctors for mentioning it.

    Have a chiropractor. Have a naturpath. Etc.
    Well as long as lightning keeps striking me and everyone I know twice, no, three times, no....etc. I will keep going to my chiropractor when I have back or neck pain.

    And amazingly enough this does not mean I would not also consider going to a doctor. Nor, even more amazingly - well, not to me, but perhaps to you - a while ago I had a problem that my chiropractor suggested, if it did not improve soon, I should see an MD about, and then mentioned a couple of possible conditions that chiropractors cannot improve, but allopathic interventions had some success with. Fortunately for my body and wallet, the condition improved via his intervention.

    You clearly know very little about back pain or chiropracty.
     
  14. Raithere plagued by infinities Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,343
    The evidence is actually still very sparse but there are indeed some studies that show efficacy in pain and blood pressure management. Even so, I would argue that acupuncture actually does nothing. There is no evidence that Ch'i exists much less that acupuncture can somehow improve its distribution. There isn't even a standard for which acupuncture points do what as opinions vary between practitioners.

    However, in some cases, sticking needles into the skin at certain locations can have some beneficial effects possibly due to endorphin release in response to being stabbed with a needle or simple diversion.

    http://www.ncahf.org/pp/acu.html
    http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/acu.html

    What does this have to do with anything? However, I know quite a few.

    There are quacks on all sides. All one needs do is cruise the internet for a few minutes or turn on late night TV to find a plethora of outrageous claims by alternative practitioners who will happily sell you their snake oil in exchange for the shirt off your back. The solution is to find a reputable MD who is willing to work with you, discuss options and alternatives, and who explains things. Self-education is also invaluable.

    I agree with a holistic approach and am pleased to see it become more prevalent in the medical community. In part, I would say that alternative practices have helped to bring this about. Although holism is not exclusive to alternative practitioners it is fairly pervasive there and patients are demanding a broader view. Something I fully espouse.

    However it is far more likely that your improvement was either incidental to this treatment or a result of the "balanced mineral dose" (vitamins, supplements, dietary suggestions?) and has nothing at all to do with the homeopathic remedy. It is likely you could get the same or better results by consulting a nutritionist.

    I agree there has been a tendency in the past for mainstream medicine to focus solely upon the ailment and to ignore the rest of the person. And as I state above I agree that alternative practices has help to regenerate an interest in holism. However, a good MD has always been more rounded in their approach; it is not something that has ever been exclusive and one can still easily find alternative practitioners who will sell you whatever is on their counter with no additional consideration.

    Certainly do. Chiropracty is something of a mixed bag. Practitioners often have physical therapy training in addition to their chiropractic training. Additionally some of their techniques have a basis in PT and massage therapy. A good chiropractor can help... of course a bad one can fuck you up so be wary... particularly of some of those spinal "adjustments" which have no basis in fact and are quite dangerous.

    However, it remains that there is no evidence to support the chiropractic model of disease. The benefits one gains through chiropracty can likely be better realized through PT or massage therapy.

    It sounds like you found a talented and honest chiropractor. Excellent.

    Actually, I have quite a bit of personal experience with both. I've seen it succeed and I've seen it put someone in the hospital.

    My argument stands unless you can provide some unaccounted for evidence. There is no factual basis for chiropracty... those results which can be demonstrated are the result of standard medical physiological mechanisms and have nothing to do with the underlying hypothesis, "vertebral subluxation leads to interference with an Innate intelligence within the human nervous system and is a primary underlying risk factor for almost any disease. *"

    ~Raithere

    * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiropractic
     
  15. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231
    animals and infants also benefit form homeopathic treatment and it is unlikely that they will react psychologically to a medicine they often do not know they are being given
    Infants: Homeopathic remedies and treatments are successfully used by parents for common infant ailments such as colic, teething pain and some infections.

    Animals: There are many veterinarians using homeopathic medicines to treat domestic pets such as cats, dogs and birds, as well as barnyard animals like goats, horses and cows. Is it possible to have a placebo effect with animals?
     
  16. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    in 7 pages you have not posted one clincial trial to back up your aguments though the rest of us have posted NUMIOUS to prove that homopathic's is a fraud

    With that in mind i will now request this thread be placed in puedoscience
     
  17. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231
    an average paptient did not know precisely how it works. But the point I am trying to make is that even if one don't know how something works but we know that it works will that stop us from using it ? the fact that it had been shown to work, it will help us heal when we need it. The problem is the low level of research/research funding/grants/budgets. Unlike the funding in CM (the billions of dollars poured in by the pharmaceutical industry), we got peanuts.
     
  18. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231
    Let's talk in a very basic sense, a common sense point of view.

    What do you mean by evidence?

    The biggest evidence is the improvement in health of a patient. This is precisely found in patients of homeopathy.

    Homeopathy is an evidence based medicine.
     
  19. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231
    In allopathy, new medicines (sources are mostly chemical/synthetic) are constantly being created, tested in test-tubes, sick persons, or animals (rats), and going in and out of market every few years/decades once their side effects (typical examples are of steroids, antibiotics, hormones) become obvious to the general public
     
  20. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231
    The concept of disease in homoeopathy is that disease is a total affection of mind and body, the disturbance of the whole organism. The parts of the body do not independently get sick. It is the whole person who gets sick
     
  21. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231
  22. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    not one journal artical huh?

    i surpose the BBC one is worth reading so i will if only to TRY to find there source but the rest are crap

    To add:
    Ok read and able to dismiss quite easerly lets see the flaws in that

    "The Swiss-UK review of 110 trials found no convincing evidence the treatment worked any better than a placebo. "

    "Professor Matthias Egger, of the University of Berne, who worked on The Lancet study said the study was weakened by the lack of a comparison group.

    He also questioned the validity of the way the study recorded improvements in patients' conditions.

    "Patients were simply asked by their homoeopathic doctor whether they felt better, and it is well known that in this situation many patients will come up with the answer the doctor wants to hear." "

    No control group, no impartiality in practice and all designed to head off a MASSIVE science grade study proving that you might as well swollow sugar

    As i said: FIND A JOURNAL ARTICAL OR COCHRANE REVIEW, A REAL PIECE OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
     
  23. Dr. Nancy Malik Medical Doctor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    231

Share This Page