Peter Moran said:<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:[email hidden] wrote:
[below this reply]
Any discussion as to inadequacies within "alt health" can only be
understood in the context of that which they are "alternative" to.
I see your logic. If doctors practising in a much more complex and
dangerous environment can make serious mistakes, and don't always
practice to a high standard, and some of their treatments for serious or
disabling illnesses can have serious side effects, then it is quite OK
for naturopathic medicine to be ridiculous.
No, that is not what I was saying. Rather, that if one "system" (although
it is most certainly not a cohesive system) is to be ridiculed, then the
question needs to be asked as to how and why the situation arose.
Quoted message said:I suggest it is only OK when they are treating patients for conditions
that don't exist with methods that don't do anything much, as is amply
demonstrated here.
If you were citing a study to that effect, then it could be worth
considering. Heresay, via a magazine article, is hardly "ample
demonstration". Or if it is, there are many such which paint an entirely
different picture.
Quoted message said:The only thing that makes naturopathic and other alt medicine safe, to
the extent that it is safe, is that there are proper doctors doing
diagnostic work on exactly the same folk (nearly all those who use alt
also use normal doctors) and who are constantly weeding out and accepting
responsibility for treating the more seriously ill in the same population
of individuals.
I agree that where there is a possibility that the person seeking specific
"alt" health advice is actually presenting with symptoms of a more serious
illness, then a certified medical diagnosis should be the place to begin.
And also, that for serious, critical and advanced conditions which are
treatable, then the person should be referred to a physician in the first
instance. (However the choice to follow through with such treatment, in
most cases, remains the right and responsibility of the patient.)
I also agree that the presence of the Medical System, with its professional
standards of care and accountability, does "take the weight" from NDs and
others, allowing them to work in a much lighter environment than would be
the case if there were no Med System.
Conversely, however, some of the cases that NDs pick up and work with
are casualties from weaknesses within that system.
Quoted message said:Naturopaths and other alt practitioners NEVER acknowledge
the extent to which they are practicising in a very highly selected and
protected environment.
You might be surprised if you went around your own home town,
for example, and talked to some of them - to those who were fully trained,
qualified and registered Naturopathic Practitioners, Herbalists, or
practitioners within TCM. If you were to discuss the matter with them, I
think that at least some would agree with you.
Quoted message said:They never even have to get out of bed in the
middle of the night.
Not exactly true. Some do remain on call when needed. And in cases such
as home-birth midwives, they may have to schedule their own "sleeping
hours" just to catch up when they can.
Quoted message said:They also have the luxury of not having to take responsibility for
anything they do. It was a naturopath, I think, that got away with
missing a diagnosis leading to death because naturopaths are not regarded
as having the expertise needed to make such diagnoses.
If we are talking avoiding responsibility, then I would ask, what are your
thoughts regarding the nurses who lost their jobs and in some cases their
career when trying to speak out against ongoing abuses within Sutherland
(?) Hospital in Sydney not too long ago?
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB