|
So do I. With the caveat that the NIH has been congressionally mandated to promote alternative medicine.
Again, I am not saying that all alternative treatments are bunk. I am saying that very few have been subjected to rigorous examination and many that have show benefits that are difficult to discern from statistical noise. Unlike most FDA approved medications very few "altnerative treatments" show overwhelmingly positive results when subjected to objective study.
A doctor that says "some people say that herb X makes them feel better so you might try that is no different than the throwing pills at the problem and seeing what happens, an approach that was condemned earlier.
I'm sure many alternative treatments work, particularly "herbal medicines." I'm just arguing against excessive evidentiary claims. And double standards of evidence between so called alternative treatments and Western medicine. If Merck used the evidentiary standards and lax quality controls of the herbal supplement industry it would be driven bankrupt by lawsuits in a matter of weeks.
Hell, the current craze for hoodia (however that is spelled) seems to be based entirely on the scientific theory of "hey, I've never seen a fat bushman so it must work."
|