General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 24 posts · 586 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
15 October 2004
Last activity
20 November 2004
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
24
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
586
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 24
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Here are some materials that appeared on the medscape web site, this site
    requires a one time free subscription and is well worth it. Any
    discussion of Complementary and Alternative Medicine must be at the level
    of rigor displayed in them if cam is to ever rise from the morass of
    belief systems in which it is currently mired. I have no problem in
    looking at every aspect of alternative approaches to medicine, any and all
    must however meet the criteria of being shown to work in controlled
    testing that can be independently confirmed as being valid:

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/465994?src=search

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/471156?src=search

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/474709?src=search

  2. Spaking of "controlled testing....":

    Presented by the author at the 2003 New England Seminar in Forensic Sciences, Colby
    College:

    Polypharmacy: What Cost in Morbidity and Mortality?©

    It is common practice in Medicine to put patients on combinations of drugs. The vast
    majority of these combinations of drugs (especially where 3 or more drugs are involved)
    have never been studied at all, let alone in double-blind trials ( with the exception of
    Oncology/AIDS treatment, where the toxicity of the drugs demands study); yet it is
    frequent practice to prescribe these multiple-drug combinations.

    It is well accepted in Pharmacology that it is scientifically impossible to accurately
    predict the side effects or clinical effects of a combination of drugs without studying
    that particular combination of drugs in test subjects. Knowledge of the pharmacologic
    profiles of the individual drugs in question does not in any way
    assure accurate prediction of the side effects of combinations of those drugs, especially
    when they have different mechanisms of action, which is very common because polypharmacy
    is most often prescribed to patients with "multiple illnesses". More than 100,000
    patients in this country die from identified adverse drug reactions (perhaps the 4th to
    6th leading cause of death in the U.S.)3 The number who die as a consequence of
    polypharmacy is, to my knowledge, unknown.

    The argument that the prescribing of drugs is the "Art" of Medicine is not valid in
    defending polypharmacy, because drugs are developed (indications, dose and administration,
    etc.) and approved through a "scientific" process (double-blind, placebo-controlled
    studies). The fact that the medicines are often prescribed for "different conditions" is
    irrelevant (especially to the patient's physiology). The idea that " we are doing the
    best we can ", a frequent defense of Polypharmacy, does not in any way uphold a scientific
    argument in favor of it. (We are, indeed, trying the best we can, with tools which do not
    improve at the rate we would wish!) The fact that "there is a limit to how much research
    can be done" in no way makes the research unnecessary in order to predict the side effects
    of specific combinations of drugs.

    It has been said in the past that <30% of medical practice was backed by controlled
    studies ¹ · ². Has this changed? How do we know? Are we looking closely enough at our
    way of practicing Medicine? Can the use of unstudied polypharmacy really be considered
    evidence-based, "scientific" Medicine? Can the Pathology community help initiate
    meaningful debate regarding this subject at a level that will produce more widespread
    awareness?

    Charles Sullivan, D.O.
    Waterville, ME

    "Science progresses, funeral by funeral." - Max Planck

    1.) Office of Technology Assessment: Assessing the efficacy and safety of
    medical technologies. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1978
    2.) Smith R: Where is the wisdom . . . ? the poverty of medical evidence.
    BMJ 1991;303:798
    3.) Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients. JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205

    Additional Refs:

    Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals 509 U.S. 579 (1993), 509,
    579.

    Goodstein, D. 2000. How Science Works. In U.S. Federal Judiciary
    Reference Manual on Evidence, pp. 66–72.

    Horrobin, D.F. 1990. The philosophical basis of peer review and the
    suppression of innovation. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 263:1438–1441.

    Horrobin, D.F. 1996. Peer review of grant applications: A harbinger
    for mediocrity in clinical research? Lancet 348:1293-1295.

    Horrobin, D.F. 1981-1982. Peer review: Is the good the enemy of the
    best? J. Res. Commun. Stud. 3:327–334.

    Rothwell, P.M. and Martyn, C.N. 2000. Reproducibility of peer
    review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any
    greater than would be expected by chance alone? Brain
    123:1964–1969.

    Horrobin, D.F. 2000. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. J.
    R. Soc. Med. 93:341–345.

    Abstracts

    David A. Flockhart, and Jose E. Tanus-Santos Implications of Cytochrome P450 Interactions
    When Prescribing Medication for Hypertension
    Archives of Internal Medicine 162: 405-412.

    Kathryn A. Phillips, David L. Veenstra, Eyal Oren, Jane K. Lee, and Wolfgang Sadee
    Potential Role of Pharmacogenomics in Reducing Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
    JAMA 286: 2270-2279.

    Just Ebbesen, Ingebjørg Buajordet, Jan Erikssen, Odd Brørs, Thor Hilberg, Helge Svaar, and
    Leiv Sandvik Drug-Related Deaths in a Department of Internal Medicine
    Archives of Internal Medicine 161: 2317-2323.

    Jeffrey M. Rothschild, Frank A. Federico, Tejal K. Gandhi, Rainu Kaushal, Deborah H.
    Williams, and David W. Bates Analysis of Medication-Related Malpractice Claims: Causes,
    Preventability, and Costs
    Archives of Internal Medicine 162: 2414-2420.

    Mark T. Holdsworth, Richard E. Fichtl, Maryam Behta, Dennis W. Raisch, Elena Mendez-Rico,
    Alexa Adams, Melanie Greifer, Susan Bostwick, and Bruce M. Greenwald Incidence and Impact
    of Adverse Drug Events in Pediatric Inpatients
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 157: 60-65.

    David N. Juurlink, Muhammad Mamdani, Alexander Kopp, Andreas Laupacis, and Donald A.
    Redelmeier Drug-Drug Interactions Among Elderly Patients Hospitalized for Drug Toxicity
    JAMA 289: 1652-1658.

    Jason Lazarou, Bruce H. Pomeranz, and Paul N. Corey Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in
    Hospitalized Patients: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies
    JAMA 279: 1200-1205.

    Karen E. Lasser, Paul D. Allen, Steffie J. Woolhandler, David U. Himmelstein, Sidney M.
    Wolfe, and David H. Bor Timing of New Black Box Warnings and Withdrawals for Prescription
    Medications
    JAMA 287: 2215-2220.

    Abstract 1 of 8
    Implications of Cytochrome P450 Interactions When Prescribing Medication for Hypertension
    David A. Flockhart, MD, PhD and Jose E. Tanus-Santos, MD, PhD

    Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:405-412.
    Many of the estimated 50 million Americans with high blood pressure receive medications
    for hypertension and for other conditions, placing them at risk for adverse drug
    interactions. The risk for hypertension and for adverse drug reactions is highest in the
    elderly, who have the greatest need for pharmacologic therapy. The most important class of
    drug interactions involves the cytochrome P450 microsomal enzyme system, which handles a
    variety of xenobiotic substances. A potential for interactions with these enzymes exists
    with calcium channel blockers, {beta}-adrenergic blocking agents, angiotensin-converting
    enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers but not with diuretic
    antihypertensives, which are renally eliminated and more vulnerable to drug interactions
    that occur in the kidney. This article reviews the cytochrome P450 enzyme system,
    identifies drugs and foods that have been implicated in metabolic interactions with
    antihypertensive agents, and suggests measures for reducing the risk of adverse events
    when drugs are coadministered.

    From the Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Indiana University School of Medicine,
    Indianapolis. Dr Flockhart is now with the Department of Medicine, Indiana University
    School of Medicine, Wishard Hospital, Indianapolis.

    Abstract 2 of 8
    Potential Role of Pharmacogenomics in Reducing Adverse Drug Reactions
    A Systematic Review
    Kathryn A. Phillips, PhD, David L. Veenstra, PhD, PharmD, Eyal Oren, BA, Jane K. Lee, BA
    and Wolfgang Sadee, PhD

    JAMA. 2001;286:2270-2279.
    Context Adverse drug reactions are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality.
    Although many adverse drug reactions are considered nonpreventable, recent developments
    suggest these reactions may be avoided through individualization of drug therapies based
    on genetic information, an application known as pharmacogenomics.

    Objective To evaluate the potential role of pharmacogenomics in reducing the incidence of
    adverse drug reactions.

    Data Sources MEDLINE English-language only searches for adverse drug reaction studies
    published between January 1995 and June 2000 and review articles of variant alleles of
    drug-metabolizing enzymes published between January 1997 and August 2000. We also used
    online resources, texts, and expert opinion.

    Study Selection Detailed inclusion criteria were used to select studies. We included 18
    of 333 adverse drug reaction studies and 22 of 61 variant allele review articles.

    Data Extraction All the investigators reviewed and coded articles using standardized
    abstracting forms.

    Data Synthesis We identified 27 drugs frequently cited in adverse drug reaction studies.
    Among these drugs, 59% are metabolized by at least 1 enzyme with a variant allele known to
    cause poor metabolism. Conversely, only 7% to 22% of randomly selected drugs are known to
    be metabolized by enzymes with this genetic variability (range, P = 006-P<.001).

    Conclusions Our results suggest that drug therapy based on individuals' genetic makeups
    may result in a clinically important reduction in adverse outcomes. Our findings serve as
    a foundation for further research on how pharmacogenomics can reduce the incidence of
    adverse reactions and on the resulting clinical, societal, and economic implications.

    Author Affiliations: Department of Clinical Pharmacy (Drs Phillips, Mr Oren, and Ms Lee)
    and Biopharmaceutics (Dr Sadee) University of California-San Francisco; Department of
    Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle (Dr Veenstra).

    Abstract 3 of 8
    Drug-Related Deaths in a Department of Internal Medicine
    Just Ebbesen, MD, Ingebjørg Buajordet, MSc, Jan Erikssen, MD, PhD, Odd Brørs, MD, PhD,
    Thor Hilberg, MD, PhD, Helge Svaar, MD and Leiv Sandvik, MSc, PhD

    Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:2317-2323.
    Background Drug therapy is associated with adverse effects, and fatal adverse drug events
    (ADEs) have become major hospital problems. Our study assesses the incidence of fatal ADEs
    in a major medical department and identifies possible patient characteristics signifying
    fatal ADE risk.

    Methods During a 2-year period, a multidisciplinary study group examined all 732 patients
    who died 5.2% of the 13 992 patients admitted to the Department of Internal Medicine,
    Central Hospital of Akershus, Nordbyhagen, Norway. Decisions about the presence or absence
    of fatal ADEs were based on aggregated clinical records, autopsy results, and findings
    from premortem and postmortem drug analyses.

    Results In 18.2% of the patients (133/732) (95% confidence interval, 15.4%-21.0%), deaths
    were classified as being directly (64 [48.1%] of 133) or indirectly (69 [51.9%] of 133)
    associated with 1 or more drugs (this equals 9.5 deaths per 1000 hospitalized patients).
    Those with fatal ADEs (cases) were older, had more diseases, and used more drugs than
    those without fatal ADEs (noncases). In 75 of the 133 patients with fatal ADEs, autopsy
    findings and/or drug analysis data were decisive for recognizing the ADEs; in 62 of the
    remaining 595 patients, similar data proved necessary to exclude the suspicion of a fatal
    ADE. Major culprit drugs were cardiovascular, antithrombotic, and sympathomimetic agents.

    Conclusions Fatal ADEs represent a major hospital problem, especially in elderly patients
    with multiple diseases. A higher number of drugs administered was associated with a higher
    frequency of fatal ADEs, but whether a high number of drugs is an independent risk factor
    for fatal ADEs is unsettled. Autopsy results and the findings of premortem and postmortem
    drug analyses were important for recognizing and excluding suspected fatal ADEs.

    From the Foundation for Health Services Research (Drs Ebbesen and Sandvik) and the
    Departments of Internal Medicine (Dr Erikssen) and Pathology (Dr Svaar), Central Hospital
    of Akershus, Nordbyhagen, Norway; and the Norwegian Medicines Control Authority (Ms
    Buajordet), the Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Clinical Chemistry
    Department, Ullevaal University Hospital (Dr Brørs), and the National Institute of
    Forensic Toxicology (Dr Hilberg), Oslo, Norway.

    Abstract 4 of 8
    Analysis of Medication-Related Malpractice Claims
    Causes, Preventability, and Costs
    Jeffrey M. Rothschild, MD,MPH, Frank A. Federico, RPh, Tejal K. Gandhi, MD,MPH, Rainu
    Kaushal, MD,MPH, Deborah H. Williams, MHA and David W. Bates, MD,MSc

    Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:2414-2420.
    Background Adverse drug events (ADEs) may lead to serious injury and may result in
    malpractice claims. While ADEs resulting in claims are not representative of all ADEs,
    such data provide a useful resource for studying ADEs. Therefore, we conducted a review of
    medication-related malpractice claims to study their frequency, nature, and costs and to
    assess the human factor failures associated with preventable ADEs. We also assessed the
    potential benefits of proved effective ADE prevention strategies on ADE claims prevention.

    Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of a New England malpractice insurance
    company claims records from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 1999. Cases were
    electronically screened for possible ADEs and followed up by independent review of
    abstracts by 2 physician reviewers (T.K.G. and R.K.). Additional in-depth claims file
    reviews identified potential human factor failures associated with ADEs.

    Results Adverse drug events represented 6.3% (129/2040) of claims. Adverse drug events
    were judged preventable in 73% (n = 94) of the cases and were nearly evenly divided
    between outpatient and inpatient settings. The most frequently involved medication classes
    were antibiotics, antidepressants or antipsychotics, cardiovascular drugs, and
    anticoagulants. Among these ADEs, 46% were life threatening or fatal. System deficiencies
    and performance errors were the most frequent cause of preventable ADEs. The mean costs of
    defending malpractice claims due to ADEs were comparable for nonpreventable inpatient and
    outpatient ADEs and preventable outpatient ADEs (mean, $64 700-74 200), but costs were
    considerably greater for preventable inpatient ADEs (mean, $376 500).

    Conclusions Adverse drug events associated with malpractice claims were often severe,
    costly, and preventable, and about half occurred in outpatients. Many interventions could
    potentially have prevented ADEs, with error proofing and process standardization covering
    the greatest proportion of events.

    From the Division of General Medicine, the Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's
    Hospital (Drs Rothschild, Gandhi, Kaushal, and Bates and Ms Williams), and the Risk
    Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions (Mr Federico), Boston, Mass.

    Abstract 5 of 8
    Incidence and Impact of Adverse Drug Events in Pediatric Inpatients
    Mark T. Holdsworth, PharmD, Richard E. Fichtl, PharmD, Maryam Behta, PharmD, Dennis W.
    Raisch, PhD, Elena Mendez-Rico, PharmD, Alexa Adams, MD, Melanie Greifer, MD, Susan
    Bostwick, MD and Bruce M. Greenwald, MD

    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157:60-65.
    Objectives To determine the incidence and causes of adverse drug events (ADEs) and
    potential ADEs in hospitalized children, and to examine the consequences of these events.

    Design Prospective review of medical records and staff interviews were performed. The
    ADEs were defined as injuries from medications or lack of an intended medication, and
    potential ADEs, as errors with the potential to result in injury.

    Setting A general pediatric unit and a pediatric intensive care unit in a metropolitan

  3. chucks(at)pivotdottnet said:

    Polypharmacy: What Cost in Morbidity and Mortality?©

    It is common practice in Medicine to put patients on combinations of
    drugs. The vast majority of these combinations of drugs (especially
    where 3 or more drugs are involved)have never been studied at all,
    let alone in double-blind trials ...

    Excellant point! I will add it to my website glossary.
    http://tutorials.naturalhealthperspective.com/glossary.html

    Biomedicine from its recent start at the turn of the 20th century has
    been known for Polypharmacy. And, the primary treatment method of
    medicine is of course prescription medication. Individual drugs are
    tested, but medicine is about Polypharmacy rather than prescribing
    single drugs. So, to say that medicine is scientific is total B/S.

    Just my opinion, but I am right as ususal.
    --
    John Gohde

  4. chucks(at)pivotdottnet said:

    Polypharmacy: What Cost in Morbidity and Mortality?©

    It is common practice in Medicine to put patients on combinations of
    drugs. The vast majority of these combinations of drugs (especially
    where 3 or more drugs are involved)have never been studied at all,
    let alone in double-blind trials ....

    Polypharmacy is the perfect counter to scientific medicine. 🙂
    --
    John Gohde

  5. Quoted message said:

    Any
    discussion of Complementary and Alternative Medicine must be at the level
    of rigor displayed in them if cam is to ever rise from the morass of
    belief systems in which it is currently mired. I have no problem in
    looking at every aspect of alternative approaches to medicine, any and all
    must however meet the criteria of being shown to work in controlled
    testing that can be independently confirmed as being valid:

    Excuse me, but there is a bigger issue here.

    Medicine suffers from the morass of polypharmacy. 🙂

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

    Medicine suffers from the morass of hard determinism.

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

    Just thought that you might want to know ... just how cooky you sound.
    --
    John Gohde

  6. "Excuse me, but there is a bigger issue here.

    Medicine suffers from the morass of polypharmacy. 🙂"

    Logically unrelated to the topic, but that is your now demonstrated
    inability to grasp the problem. Is polyquackery any better? For every
    "symptom" the quacks "discover" they have some porduct or service to fix
    it, some nostrums here and some spine cracking there and it all adds up
    quickly. You didn't read the links given, in the last he says his fellow
    doctors use cam because it brings in the money and he sees the
    polyquackery in the number of products and services his patients are doing
    when they come to him.

  7. Ah, because medicine has some problems, including the one mentioned and
    others, then cam should not have to demonstrate that it's drugs, devices,
    and proceedures work and are safe as does medicine now? Is there
    palyquackery in cam? For every "disease" and problem cam finds there is a
    drug, device, and proceedure; we don't know if most of them work and we
    don't know if they are safe and we are very very far from knowing of the
    dangers or not of their interactions. As the last link provided says, he
    finds folk coming to him loaded down with polycamery products and services
    and he says he knows why, it is a good source of income for those doing
    the polycamery.

  8. As suggested, Polypharmacy is not only a problem in scientific medicine
    but also in cam, as shown in this article:

    Herbal Therapy Can Interfere with Prescription Drugs

    Reuters Health
    By Alison McCook
    Monday, September 27, 2004

    NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A long-used herbal drug taken to lower
    cholesterol may interfere with nearly 60 percent of all prescription
    drugs, including the popular anti-cholesterol drugs called statins,
    new research reports.

    In a preliminary study, investigators found that the guggulsterone,
    the active ingredient in the herbal remedy gugulipid, causes changes
    in human and rodent cells that induce the body to break down many
    drugs, including cancer drugs and AIDS medications.

    These findings demonstrate how important it is to inform your doctor
    of any herbal medicines you are taking, study author Dr. Jeff L.
    Staudinger of the University of Kansas in Lawrence told Reuters
    Health.

    "People need to be careful about herbal medicines," he said. "Because,
    in fact, they are drugs."

    Resin from the guggul tree has been used for more than 3,000 years in
    India to treat a range of disorders. Previous research showed that
    guggulsterone lowers cholesterol by blocking a substance that keeps
    the body from getting rid of cholesterol.

    To investigate whether it is safe to take guggulsterone with
    prescription medicines, Staudinger and his colleagues examined the
    effects of guggulsterone on liver cells in laboratory experiments.
    Their findings appear in the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental
    Therapeutics.

    Staudinger suggested that guggulsterone likely affects other drugs
    because it binds to a protein known as pregnane X receptor (PXR).
    This, in turn, induces the body to "turn on" a gene that encodes
    another protein that breaks down many different types of drugs,
    thereby reducing their levels in the body, he noted.

    Staudinger added that some anticancer drugs, such as cyclophosphamide,
    need to be broken down by PXR to become active. Guggulsterone may
    interfere by augmenting that process, thereby raising levels of the
    drugs in the body.

    Moreover, guggulsterone appears to also turn some other drugs, such as
    acetaminophen, into toxic compounds.

    He noted that another herbal remedy, St. John's wort, also activates
    PXR, and can therefore interfere with other drugs. He recommends that
    all herbal extracts be screened to determine if they affect PXR.

    However, Staudinger noted that guggulsterone has been used for years,
    and is likely safe if people are not taking any prescription
    medications. However, guggulsterone should be used cautiously by
    people who take prescription drugs, he said.

    SOURCE: The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics,
    August 2004.

  9. Quoted message said:

    Ah, because medicine has some problems, ...

    Where there it is!

    Mark 'the Toad' says that medicine has some problems.

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

    You mean medicine has a lot of problems, don't you?
    --
    John Gohde

  10. Quoted message said:

    "Excuse me, but there is a bigger issue here.

    Medicine suffers from the morass of polypharmacy. 🙂"

    Logically unrelated to the topic, but...

    is the perfect counter to the scientific medicine argument.

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
    --
    John Gohde

  11. "is the perfect counter to the scientific medicine argument."

    As noted and example given, cam suffers from polycamery, both of which
    still do not address the scientific basis for medicene and the almost
    total lack of same in cam. The "poly" problem is one of proceedure and
    application in both areas and the solution will be to address the broblem
    on that basis, which doesn't in amy manner require even the slightest
    consideration of the underlying science.

  12. Quoted message said:

    "is the perfect counter to the scientific medicine argument."

    As noted and example given, cam suffers from polycamery, both of which
    still do not address the scientific basis for medicene and the almost
    total lack of same in cam. The "poly" problem is one of proceedure and
    application in both areas and the solution will be to address the broblem
    on that basis, which doesn't in amy manner require even the slightest
    consideration of the underlying science.

    I think you have to distinguish between clinical and empirical
    science. Much of indigenous medicine relies on empirical observations
    of the efficacy of single or multiple agents. It is foolish to ignore
    that empirical experience! The trick is to find the resources to
    undertake the clinical science, using appropriate methodology.

    As it turns out, there is a growing body of evidence ranging from in
    vitro analysis to animal and human studies that are being undertaken
    worldwide to evaluate the safety and efficacy of such empirical
    observations. Reviewing the literature shows that indeed many of these
    agents may have significant impact on a range of diseases and
    disorders of the human condition. In general, the side effect profiles
    are milder but not always.

    Most people in the world don't have access to pharmaceutical agents,
    so for them, it is not a matter of "alternative" or "complementary"
    but rather simply the treatments they have available.

    The notion that this is a polemic is driven as much by greed and
    enculturated bigotry as it is by scientific evaluation. Unfortunately,
    the pristine underpinning of science has been severely damaged by
    these other "diseases" of humanity, resulting in the production of
    fewer new drugs, often of a caliber no better than older, less costly
    agents (Nexium being a prime example).

    Of course, there are those who peddle "cures" and other nonsense based
    on weak data or misapplication of empiric observations. This is true
    in ANY kind of medicine. It doesn't intrinsically render the system
    from whence such scams derive invalid. It merely means that some
    people are selfish fools.

    Allopathic and traditional medicines have a great deal to offer. They
    have limitations. They have side effects. Mortality is our shared lot.

    But to perpetuate one system over the other is not instructive or
    helpful to humans facing serious diseases.

    George M. Carter

  13. My polypharmacy post is not about CAM, so lets stick to the subject of conventional
    medicine, changing the subject will not lessen the validity of my arguments.
    Chuck

    Quoted message said:

    Ah, because medicine has some problems, including the one mentioned and
    others, then cam should not have to demonstrate that it's drugs, devices,
    and proceedures work and are safe as does medicine now? Is there
    palyquackery in cam? For every "disease" and problem cam finds there is a
    drug, device, and proceedure; we don't know if most of them work and we
    don't know if they are safe and we are very very far from knowing of the
    dangers or not of their interactions. As the last link provided says, he
    finds folk coming to him loaded down with polycamery products and services
    and he says he knows why, it is a good source of income for those doing
    the polycamery.

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

  14. Compare if you will, but then u will have to look at the morbidity and mortality figures
    from CAM vs Conventional. That will be a hoot!
    Chuck

    Quoted message said:

    As suggested, Polypharmacy is not only a problem in scientific medicine
    but also in cam, as shown in this article:

    Herbal Therapy Can Interfere with Prescription Drugs

    Reuters Health
    By Alison McCook
    Monday, September 27, 2004

    NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A long-used herbal drug taken to lower
    cholesterol may interfere with nearly 60 percent of all prescription
    drugs, including the popular anti-cholesterol drugs called statins,
    new research reports.

    In a preliminary study, investigators found that the guggulsterone,
    the active ingredient in the herbal remedy gugulipid, causes changes
    in human and rodent cells that induce the body to break down many
    drugs, including cancer drugs and AIDS medications.

    These findings demonstrate how important it is to inform your doctor
    of any herbal medicines you are taking, study author Dr. Jeff L.
    Staudinger of the University of Kansas in Lawrence told Reuters
    Health.

    "People need to be careful about herbal medicines," he said. "Because,
    in fact, they are drugs."

    Resin from the guggul tree has been used for more than 3,000 years in
    India to treat a range of disorders. Previous research showed that
    guggulsterone lowers cholesterol by blocking a substance that keeps
    the body from getting rid of cholesterol.

    To investigate whether it is safe to take guggulsterone with
    prescription medicines, Staudinger and his colleagues examined the
    effects of guggulsterone on liver cells in laboratory experiments.
    Their findings appear in the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental
    Therapeutics.

    Staudinger suggested that guggulsterone likely affects other drugs
    because it binds to a protein known as pregnane X receptor (PXR).
    This, in turn, induces the body to "turn on" a gene that encodes
    another protein that breaks down many different types of drugs,
    thereby reducing their levels in the body, he noted.

    Staudinger added that some anticancer drugs, such as cyclophosphamide,
    need to be broken down by PXR to become active. Guggulsterone may
    interfere by augmenting that process, thereby raising levels of the
    drugs in the body.

    Moreover, guggulsterone appears to also turn some other drugs, such as
    acetaminophen, into toxic compounds.

    He noted that another herbal remedy, St. John's wort, also activates
    PXR, and can therefore interfere with other drugs. He recommends that
    all herbal extracts be screened to determine if they affect PXR.

    However, Staudinger noted that guggulsterone has been used for years,
    and is likely safe if people are not taking any prescription
    medications. However, guggulsterone should be used cautiously by
    people who take prescription drugs, he said.

    SOURCE: The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics,
    August 2004.

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

  15. "Compare if you will, but then u will have to look at the morbidity and
    mortali
    ty figures
    from CAM vs Conventional. That will be a hoot!"

    And how would one do that? How is cam required to report to which
    recording agency deaths caused by it? It is not even obliged to report
    when it's drugs have serious side effects, this is often found when the
    people using them start to have problems,ie. the users are the lab rats
    because the law allows side effects to be kept away from public knowledge
    by simply keeping the info to themselves. How many deaths from serious
    disease will be reported as using cam instead of using standard therapies?
    Is cam required to say what it's death rate is if used and standard
    thearpies withdrawn? How would a consumer know of the death rate by doing
    so before making the choice as cam drugs and devices and proceedures are
    not required to be tested and reported.

  16. "My polypharmacy post is not about CAM, so lets stick to the subject of
    conventi onal medicine, changing the subject will not lessen the validity
    of my arguments."

    You aren't in control of the groups nor in what manner people will
    respond. My response was, and remains, that cam has the exact problem and
    the term doesn't apply only to medicine. Worst, we will not know the
    dimensions of the same problem in cam because testing and reporting
    regulations are almost completely lacking.

  17. Quoted message said:

    "My polypharmacy post is not about CAM, so lets stick to the subject of
    conventi onal medicine, changing the subject will not lessen the validity
    of my arguments."

    You aren't in control of the groups nor in what manner people will
    respond. My response was, and remains, that cam has the exact problem and
    the term doesn't apply only to medicine.

    Having a bad day, Toad? I am part of the group and this thread is
    strictly about conventional medicine. Do you really think that CAM
    consists of Medieval polypharmacy? Boy are you confused? Why am I
    not surprised?
    --
    John Gohde

  18. "Sorry, wanted to talk about conventional medicine.

    Keep to the topic or it could be misconstrued as your having no
    substantial res
    ponse to
    the Polyphamacy post. I don't care, I can wait for someone without an axe
    to gr
    ind who can
    discuss the post line by line without changing the subject. As for
    attacking me
    that won'teven produce a response, I am fairly comfortable with myself,
    albeit open to in
    telligent
    suggestions. I am willing to throw the Polypharmacy piece in the
    woodstove whe
    n it can be
    demonstrated to be sufficiently flawed."

    Then perhaps you should change the subject line, the "poly" was added to
    another thread. As it stands, cam is being put along side the "poly"
    topic and thus a response involving cam is relevant as to it's "poly"
    problems, risks, and dangers equall well to any other approach. I did not
    attack you in any message, and the flow of threads is in no single
    individuals control; except as changing the subject might redirect it
    temperarly toward the "poly" theme in isolation. I don't deny "poly" as a
    concern, but it can not be applied to one segment and not to all others as
    well.

  19. Sorry, wanted to talk about conventional medicine.

    Keep to the topic or it could be misconstrued as your having no substantial response to
    the Polyphamacy post. I don't care, I can wait for someone without an axe to grind who can
    discuss the post line by line without changing the subject. As for attacking me that won't
    even produce a response, I am fairly comfortable with myself, albeit open to intelligent
    suggestions. I am willing to throw the Polypharmacy piece in the woodstove when it can be
    demonstrated to be sufficiently flawed.

    Thanks

    Quoted message said:

    "Compare if you will, but then u will have to look at the morbidity and
    mortali
    ty figures
    from CAM vs Conventional. That will be a hoot!"

    And how would one do that? How is cam required to report to which
    recording agency deaths caused by it? It is not even obliged to report
    when it's drugs have serious side effects, this is often found when the
    people using them start to have problems,ie. the users are the lab rats
    because the law allows side effects to be kept away from public knowledge
    by simply keeping the info to themselves. How many deaths from serious
    disease will be reported as using cam instead of using standard therapies?
    Is cam required to say what it's death rate is if used and standard
    thearpies withdrawn? How would a consumer know of the death rate by doing
    so before making the choice as cam drugs and devices and proceedures are
    not required to be tested and reported.

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

  20. You are right

    Quoted message said:

    "Sorry, wanted to talk about conventional medicine.

    Keep to the topic or it could be misconstrued as your having no
    substantial res
    ponse to
    the Polyphamacy post. I don't care, I can wait for someone without an axe
    to gr
    ind who can
    discuss the post line by line without changing the subject. As for
    attacking me
    that won'teven produce a response, I am fairly comfortable with myself,
    albeit open to in
    telligent
    suggestions. I am willing to throw the Polypharmacy piece in the
    woodstove whe
    n it can be
    demonstrated to be sufficiently flawed."

    Then perhaps you should change the subject line, the "poly" was added to
    another thread. As it stands, cam is being put along side the "poly"
    topic and thus a response involving cam is relevant as to it's "poly"
    problems, risks, and dangers equall well to any other approach. I did not
    attack you in any message, and the flow of threads is in no single
    individuals control; except as changing the subject might redirect it
    temperarly toward the "poly" theme in isolation. I don't deny "poly" as a
    concern, but it can not be applied to one segment and not to all others as
    well.

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.