Which harms people more?

David said:

"Conventional" medicine, or Alternative Medicine?
Please post verified numbers.
Things like how many people die as a direct result of one or the other.

This is nonsense as the people in harmfull state are put into hospitals
(except for the case of the worst idiots who even then do not want
"conventional" medicine).

--

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Conventional" medicine, or Alternative Medicine?
Please post verified numbers.
Things like how many people die as a direct result of one or the other.

This kind of data is going to be very difficult to obtain and verify.

Kind of like the argument the pro mainstream use against pro alts, but on
the other side.
This time the alt's win.
Anth

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Conventional" medicine, or Alternative Medicine?
Please post verified numbers.
Things like how many people die as a direct result of one or the other.

.

Let us compare the alt treatment for atherosclerosis - oops I forgot it
doesn't work because there's no evidence.
Anth

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Anth said:

Kind of like the argument the pro mainstream use against pro alts, but on
the other side.
This time the alt's win.
Anth

You are comparing apples and oranges. Alternative medicine generally
treats people who don't have life threatening diseases.

Let us compare the conventional treatment for insulin dependent
diabetes with the alternative treatment for this illness.

Let us compare the conventional treatment for basal cell carcinoma
with the alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of Hodgkin's Lymphoma with
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of strep throat with the
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of bacterial meningitis with
the alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of thyrotoxicosis with the
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of acute granulocytic
leukemia with the alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of gonorrhea with the
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of syphilis with the
alternative treatment.

After you do the comparison of the above treatments (alt vs conv) in
the above diseases you will likely see that conventional treatment
saves lives and alternative treatment is tantamount to malignant
neglect.

Your assumption that the alts win is a flawed one IMO.

Alt treatment work really well with benign self limited conditions. Of
course it is the body that is doing the work and the alts taking the
credit.

Aloha,

Rich

Quoted message said:

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Conventional" medicine, or Alternative Medicine?
Please post verified numbers.
Things like how many people die as a direct result of one or the other.

.

------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance.

You can't compare alternative to mainstream because the vast majority of
alternative hasn't been through double blind clinical trials.
Anth

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Anth said:

Let us compare the alt treatment for atherosclerosis - oops I forgot it
doesn't work because there's no evidence.

No it must work better than conventional because so many people say it
does and we can believe them without objectively evaluating whether
the treatment really has an effect on the arteries as demonstrated by
angiography.

Anth's failure to address my challenge of comparing alternative
treatment to conventional with various serious disorders/illnesses
(see below) noted and expected. Anth's attempt to divert attention
away from lack of evidence that alternative medicine can effectively
treat the conditions that conventional medicine has demonstrated that
it can, noted and expected.

Aloha,

Rich

Quoted message said:

Anth

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:31:59 +0100, "Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>Kind of like the argument the pro mainstream use against pro alts, but

on

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>the other side.
>This time the alt's win.
>Anth

You are comparing apples and oranges. Alternative medicine generally
treats people who don't have life threatening diseases.

Let us compare the conventional treatment for insulin dependent
diabetes with the alternative treatment for this illness.

Let us compare the conventional treatment for basal cell carcinoma
with the alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of Hodgkin's Lymphoma with
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of strep throat with the
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of bacterial meningitis with
the alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of thyrotoxicosis with the
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of acute granulocytic
leukemia with the alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of gonorrhea with the
alternative treatment.

Let us compare the conventional treatment of syphilis with the
alternative treatment.

After you do the comparison of the above treatments (alt vs conv) in
the above diseases you will likely see that conventional treatment
saves lives and alternative treatment is tantamount to malignant
neglect.

Your assumption that the alts win is a flawed one IMO.

Alt treatment work really well with benign self limited conditions. Of
course it is the body that is doing the work and the alts taking the
credit.

Aloha,

Rich

>
>"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>news:[email hidden]...
>> "Conventional" medicine, or Alternative Medicine?
>> Please post verified numbers.
>> Things like how many people die as a direct result of one or the

other.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>

------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance.

------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance.

Too bad mainstream is so limited as to have such limited options.
"Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You can't compare alternative to mainstream because the vast majority of
alternative hasn't been through double blind clinical trials.
Anth

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Anth said:

Let us compare the alt treatment for atherosclerosis - oops I forgot it
doesn't work because there's no evidence.

No it must work better than conventional because so many people say it
does and we can believe them without objectively evaluating whether
the treatment really has an effect on the arteries as demonstrated by
angiography.

Anth's failure to address my challenge of comparing alternative
treatment to conventional with various serious disorders/illnesses
(see below) noted and expected. Anth's attempt to divert attention
away from lack of evidence that alternative medicine can effectively
treat the conditions that conventional medicine has demonstrated that
it can, noted and expected.

Aloha,

Rich

Quoted message said:

Anth

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:31:59 +0100, "Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >Kind of like the argument the pro mainstream use against pro alts,

but

Quoted message said:

on

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >the other side.
> >This time the alt's win.
> >Anth
>
> You are comparing apples and oranges. Alternative medicine generally
> treats people who don't have life threatening diseases.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment for insulin dependent
> diabetes with the alternative treatment for this illness.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment for basal cell carcinoma
> with the alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of Hodgkin's Lymphoma with
> alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of strep throat with the
> alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of bacterial meningitis

with

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> the alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of thyrotoxicosis with the
> alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of acute granulocytic
> leukemia with the alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of gonorrhea with the
> alternative treatment.
>
> Let us compare the conventional treatment of syphilis with the
> alternative treatment.
>
> After you do the comparison of the above treatments (alt vs conv) in
> the above diseases you will likely see that conventional treatment
> saves lives and alternative treatment is tantamount to malignant
> neglect.
>
> Your assumption that the alts win is a flawed one IMO.
>
> Alt treatment work really well with benign self limited conditions.

Of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> course it is the body that is doing the work and the alts taking the
> credit.
>
> Aloha,
>
> Rich
>
>
> >
> >"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> >news:[email hidden]...
> >> "Conventional" medicine, or Alternative Medicine?
> >> Please post verified numbers.
> >> Things like how many people die as a direct result of one or the

other.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>
> >>
> >> .
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> The best defense to logic is ignorance.

------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance.

Quoted message said:

From: "David" [email hidden]
Date: 8/28/2003 4:43 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

OMG!!!

Quoted message said:

"Rich" <,@.> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Anth's failure

Quoted message said:

Anth's attempt

Here we go,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Jan

The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil,
but because of the people who don't do anything about it."
Albert Einstein

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Let us compare the alt treatment for atherosclerosis - oops I forgot it
doesn't work because there's no evidence.

No. Actually, the reason alt treatment for atherosclerosis doesn't work
is not because there is no evidence. There is plenty evidence it doesn't
work. Chelation therapy doesn't work because every time it has been
tested in a well-designed randomized double-blind clinical trial against
placebo, patients treated with chelation therapy have been found to do
no better than those treated with placebo. Chelation therapy doesn't
work because no clinical study that has ever looked at the question has
been able to show any decrease in atherosclerotic plaque due to
treatment with chelation therapy.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>, Rich<,@.>

Quoted message said:

Anth said:

You can't compare alternative to mainstream because the vast majority of
alternative hasn't been through double blind clinical trials.
Anth

Kind of like the argument the pro mainstream use against pro alts, but
on
the other side.
This time the alt's win.
Anth

How do you reconcile your statement that "this time alt's win" with
your statement that you cannot compare alternative to mainstream
because of lack of studies??

Interesting question.

The logical fallacy Anth seems to be using is (drum roll, please):

Argumentum ad ignorantiam. Argumentum ad ignorantiam means "argument
from ignorance." The fallacy occurs when it's argued or implied that
something must be true, simply because it hasn't been proved false.

See also:

http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#ignorantiam
http://gncurtis.home.texas.net/ignorant.html
http://datanation.com/fallacies/distract/ig.htm

Alties use this argument all the time, stating or implying that their
remedies work simply because they haven't been shown not to work.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"