General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
If you don't believe in "woo"...
ignore "woo".
Why would you give a flying fuck?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)There are sites that consider DemocraticUnderground to be no more reliable than WorldNetDaily due to the conspiracy theories promoted on this site.
KT2000
(20,576 posts)that the disagreements on this topic are considered a conspiracy?
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Disagreement with the science .... or despite the science ....YES
Iggo
(47,549 posts)Thanks.
alp227
(32,018 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)who cares.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Especially idiot parents who don't vaccinate their kids.
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)in treating patients for pain. Are you saying they're hurting people?
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Acupuncture is worthless!
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)because they must have very poor judgment, offering such a "worthless" treatment.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Chemotherapy, or acupuncture?
840high
(17,196 posts)
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)pnwmom
(108,976 posts)Doctors don't use acupuncture to get rid of cancer, but to treat pain and other side effects of treatment.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)In your last post, you posted that it was used as a cancer treatment.
You never mentioned it was used to relieve pain and nausea associated with chemotherapy.
tigervalentine
(137 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)... the "problem" with acupuncture is the sheer difficulty (if not impossibility) in designing a true double blind study. I withhold judgement on something like this as the scientific evidence is very limited, though there have been a multitude of studies, the reputable ones all seem to come to the conclusion that there is a possibility that it works. You will find that the centers offering this use terms such as "may" help.
http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/PIIS0025619613005132/related?article_id=S0025-6196%2813%2900513-2
Absolutely no reputable health centers treat cancer with acupuncture ... many have incorporated some "alternative" therapies (such as acupuncture) to complement traditional therapy ... it is used along with chemotherapy, radiation, surgery and pain relievers (be they narcotics, NSAIDS, etc), anti-emetics. The complimentary (alternative) services are used as adjunct therapies and are largely consumer driven.
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)and neither do any of the hospitals and cancer centers that I've mentioned.
It can be used in the relief of pain and nausea connected to cancer treatment.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)"Then you better avoid most top hospitals for any cancer treatment,
because they must have very poor judgment, offering such a "worthless" treatment" ... ?
At all of these centers the the use of acupuncture is as an adjunct and is consumer driven. I have no issue with this ... in a sense, I view it as attempting to meet the needs of the patient and the person as a whole.
I posted a link to some great studies compiled by the Mayo Clinic. Their compilation is wonderfully comprehensive. Obviously the studies are very dry reading but provide very interesting results. If you get time I would read a few; there is some validation of your viewpoint and certainly many challenges to it ... as a consumer and advocate of a treatment or therapy it is wonderful information.
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)And when acupuncture works, it does so without the side effects of other commonly used methods of pain treatment, like N-saids and opioids.
Major medical centers use acupuncture as an adjunct therapy. especially in the treatment of cancer (the topic we are discussing)Any therapy that can reduce the use of medications such as opiates and synthetic opiates, NSAIDs, salicylates should be employed to minimize the potential/ severity of untoward effects.
Acupuncture does not have side effects, but none of the major medical institutions are claiming that there is a likelihood of acupuncture alone relieving severe and/or intractable pain, if it can be part of the reduction in cancer pain that alone is a wonderful thing.
http://www.painjournalonline.com/article/S0304-3959%2813%2900231-5/abstract
It is well known that acupuncture has pain-relieving effects, but the contribution of specific and especially nonspecific factors to acupuncture analgesia is less clear. One hundred one patients who developed pain of 3 on a visual analog scale (VAS, 0 to 10) after third molar surgery were randomized to receive active acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, or no treatment for 30min with acupuncture needles with potential for double-blinding. Patients’ perception of the treatment (active or placebo) and expected pain levels (VAS) were assessed before and halfway through the treatment. Looking at actual treatment allocation, there was no specific effect of active acupuncture (P=.240), but there was a large and significant nonspecific effect of placebo acupuncture (P<.001), which increased over time. Interestingly, however, looking at perceived treatment allocation, there was a significant effect of acupuncture (P<.001), indicating that patients who believed they received active acupuncture had significantly lower pain levels than those who believed they received placebo acupuncture. Expected pain levels accounted for significant and progressively larger amounts of the variance in pain ratings after both active and placebo acupuncture (up to 69.8%). This is the first study to show that under optimized blinding conditions, nonspecific factors such as patients’ perception of and expectations toward treatment are central to the efficacy of acupuncture analgesia and that these factors may contribute to self-reinforcing effects in acupuncture treatment. To obtain an effect of acupuncture in clinical practice, it may therefore be important to incorporate and optimize these factors.
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)Yes, it is useful as an adjunct therapy, and that is a good thing. Anything that can reduce the amount of opioids or N-SAIDS that are used, that has no side effects on its own, is a useful treatment.
"As a treatment for PAIN and other symptoms. They need to be "treated" too.
And when acupuncture works, it does so without the side effects of other commonly used methods of pain treatment, like N-saids and opioids."
I am sorry, from the conversation I understood your statement to imply that acupuncture (side effect free) would replace treatments like opiates and NSAIDs the use of which is fraught with potential side effects.
There are a number of good arguments to support further research into the efficacy of acupuncture, I do not feel that your posts make them. Here are some links alternating between pro and con :
http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/acupuncture
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/reference/acupuncture/
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/35387/title/The-Science-of-Acupuncture/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/sciencebiz/2010/02/15/battlefield-acupuncture-pseudoscience-for-wounded-troops/
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)as many other pain relievers do.
If you can give a lower dose of a drug like an NSAID, that can cause internal bleeding, or an opioid, that is addictive, the patient is better off.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)Are you saying rocket scientists are terrorists?
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)who use acupuncture to terrorists.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)People with a legitimate distrust of Big Pharma are grasping at straws to make anything that isn't Big Pharma seem more legitimate than it actually is. What's wrong with this is that it's apples and oranges; they're taking what should be an issue of policy and economics, the profit-driven corners cutting of Big Pharma which leads to insufficiently-tested drugs making it out to market, and turning it into a condemnation of evidence-based medicine in general.
Yes, Big Pharma behaves badly, but that doesn't make acupuncture or homeopathy any more legitimate.
Iggo
(47,549 posts)On second thought, Keep making sense!!!
LeftishBrit
(41,205 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Legal drug dealing has harmed untold numbers of people. My friend has suffered from what she thought was a debilitating illness causing her to be disabled, for several years now. Due to what I learned after the death of my MIl, who I loved, I asked her about what drugs she was taking. Amazingly, she was on the exact same drugs, a totally different reason, as my MIL.
She has stopped taking them and within weeks has lost all the symptoms she thought were a permanent condition. They were nothing more than side affects from the legal drugs she was being given.
Why was she on legal drugs in the first place? She was grieving the loss of a loved one and was given a drug to 'calm' her down. Reaction to that was interpreted as something that needed MORE DRUGS. Six years later her doctor did NOT take her off the drugs, just kept on refilling the prescription, then prescribing more to deal with the side effects and more to deal with THOSE side effects.
I am happy to say she was out in her garden today, free of the 'woo' that had she continued to take would have crippled her.
I otoh, have never taken prescription drugs for any reason. Unlike my friend and MIL so far, I have been perfectly healthy. I have suffered devastating losses, but chose to go through the natural process of grieving without drugs.
Woo, I wonder if that came from Big Pharma in order to try to discredit people who don't need their drugs?
I am not, btw, saying that there are not legitimate uses for some prescription drugs. But the huge problem of how they are being so freely dispensed to people WHO DON'T NEED THEM, considering the terrible side effects, THAT for me meets the definition of WOO.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Pharmaceuticals are not woo. There's an actual definition for pseudoscience; it's not just an epithet people can attach as a "NO U" directed at people defending actual evidence-based medicine.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)more dangerous drugs for the side effects of the first round of dangerous drugs. Nothing could be more 'pseudo' than that. And it is a widespread practice I discovered over the past few years.
Woo, catchy word, but not confined to only what they would like to confine it to. I didn't know what to call what I have witnessed, but now I do.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)What you described is an ethical and economic issue, not a scientific issue. Bad drugs making it to market and being pushed on people who don't need them is greed, not pseudoscience.
Pseudoscience is claiming something works through untestable means, like qi or water memory. Pharmaceuticals follow a valid scientific method; they work biochemically.
You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own definitions and facts. Pseudoscience has a definition.
Iggo
(47,549 posts)Malpractice.
Woo is reserved for magical cures, like homeopathy and prayer.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)adj. of or relating to illness caused by medical examination or treatment.
In the United States an estimated 225,000 deaths per year have iatrogenic causes, with only heart disease and cancer causing more deaths.{1}
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Statistically, that's not significant at all.
You do know how scientific studies are performed, right?
BTW, prescription drugs are not "woo".
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)just an aberration. It has shocked me how many people have died or been crippled and disabled by prescription drugs. It's a big business, lots of push back to try to defend the industry.
Personally I don't care what anyone says, I will never take a drug without thoroughly researching the side effects, or the REASON why it is being prescribed. Spent several years taking elderly relatives to their various hospital appointments and was thoroughly SHOCKED by the free dispensation of dangerous drugs from NY to Az to Ca and the debilitating effects they have had on people who never needed them in the first place. It's a HUGE problem.
But I get that Big Pharma will be out there working hard to push their drugs and to try to shut down anyone who dares to try to warn others to be very, very careful of their woo.
Which is why I just do what I know is the right thing to do for those I love. No one needs to be drugged for six years after suffering the loss of a loved one. Forever if SHE had not finally stopped herself. Woo! No doubt about it.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I have seen too many people squander precious resources (resources= time, money, emotional/physical energy) on quackery (or woo, if that is your preferred term.
Desperate people do desperate things (even intelligent people) ... I have no tolerance for "snake-oil salesmen" or those that perpetuate the ignorance. Preying on folk that are desperate or simply stupid is not acceptable to me.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)Maybe because there are people who will be swayed if none of the people who see it as "woo" speak up. If everyone who doesn't believe the "woo" just ignores it, only the "woo" perpetrators will be heard.
Ohio Joe
(21,752 posts)Why the continual breaking of a clear rule of the board, especially when there is a Group set up just for it?
Pathwalker
(6,598 posts)where they can discuss it ad nauseum.
Submariner
(12,503 posts)Iggo
(47,549 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Topics that at are controversia or unconventionall need to be marginalized and or ridiculed.
A good example is the ridiculing of the so called truthers.
Those that engage in that meme by extension are loudly proclaiming that they believe the swill fed to us by the Bush administration. They are the ones who look forward and never stop to wonder what the heck happened to the American dream and the middle class or our long lost peace dividend.
Jgarrick
(521 posts)
MADem
(135,425 posts)
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Just because some guy who smells of patchouli named "Free" sells the shit to you does not make it any different from the antiscience, antireality shit from the other side of the spectrum.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,868 posts)Bummer man.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Does anybody here really believe that Science has conquered all?
That there is nothing left to learn?
The Scientific Process begins with "woo".
As a small scale Beekeeper,
I plan on investigating Bee Sting Therapy for arthritis this Summer.
I have heard too much "woo" testimony from other Beekeepers to ignore it any longer.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Science does not begin as woo. Science and pseudoscience are two different entities. What you said is so ridiculous I don't even know where to start.
The scientific process begins with observation, then testing, then independent testing, then more independent testing, then falsification, then more independent testing.
Pseudoscience begins with observation, then a claim, then confirmation bias, then a refusal of independent testing, then claims of conspiracy.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)You mean like observing that when one eats Willow bark, the headache goes away,
or when one is stung by bees that the arthritis pain goes away.
Observations like THAT?
Yes, Science does go on to testing,
but it does begin with someone noticing an as yet unexplained correlation.
The Scientific method is good at explaining the observation.
Galileo's observations were considered "woo" for a LONG time too.
There are many observations that remain untested.
Do you really believe EVERYTHING has been tested?
that Science knows ALL there is to know?
You should go read Scientific American from the early 1900s.
I challenge you to do so, and try to see yourself.
They were as arrogant as you are today in their belief that their Science had conquered and explained near everything, but were laughably ignorant by today's standards... and wrong about so much.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Cute strawman.
No, we don't know everything yet, and despite that stupid ad hominem of yours, I have never claimed so.
Galileo's observations and claims were never "woo." Pseudoscience is making a claim that something works through means that cannot be tested in the natural world or through a scientific process, like qi, water memory, or creationism.
Galileo's claims were absolutely testable through the scientific method. They were never "woo." Woo is not just a term you get to apply to non-mainstream ideas that claim to be "persecuted" by the evil, arrogant scientific establishment. You don't get to make up your own definitions of pseudoscience to fit your own ends.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...by the established Scientific Community of that era.
He was almost killed for HIS Observations.
It was centuries later that his observations were tested and became Scientific Fact.
I see you ignored my challenge to go read Scientific American from the early 1900s,
and see yourself.
I believe we nee to further define our terms.
I don't consider the continued belief in things that Science has disproven is "woo".
That is just plain stupidity,
though they are usually thrown into the same pot as those who are still curious enough about our planet and ourselves to explore possibilities.
I mentioned above that I will be experimenting with Bee Sting Therapy for arthritis this Summer.
That is considered "woo" by many,
but I believe there is some substance to that observation.
THAT has NOT been proven by Science yet.
I am aware of the immense difficulty of designing a double blind experiment to test the theory.
What do you think about Bee Sting Therapy?
Woo....or not woo?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You're talking about advances in science before the dawn of modern science as we know it. Galileo followed valid scientific processes for proposing heliocentrism. The church cited the Bible and bullied anyone who deviated from classical geocentrism.
That you cite that in the context of defending apitherapy is ridiculous. There's no conclusive evidence that shows apitherapy is effective at treating what it claims it treats, other than the usual anecdotal evidence and faulty cause-effect assumptions that dominates alternative medicine circles.
And for the record, science doesn't "prove" anything. Proof as a concept only exists in math, law, and philosophy, and it's absolute and binary. Science deals in evidence, which is tentative and provisional, and can be supplanted by better evidence.
"Scientifically-proven" is a common trope in pseudoscience circles though, mostly used to prey on the less scientifically-literate. If you want to start using a rudimentary treatment with no real oversight, knock yourself out, it's your funeral. Which it very well could be if you're depending on bees to treat what ails you instead of evidence-based medicine.
Bee Sting Therapy?
Woo..... or NOT woo.
I'm really glad there are brilliant Scientific Minds searching the Amazon and collecting tales of "Woo" among the natives there, and then collecting samples (including snake venom) for testing and processing into the medicines of our future.
These are the minds who will produce the advancements over the next generation.
The Iron Asses will be forever locked in the past.
I see you have still avoided my challenge to you to go read the Scientific American from the 1900s,
and look for yourself among the smug, arrogant We know almost everything crowd.
A professor in my Physics class at the Engineering College I attended in 1968 suggested that I do that,
and it certainly changed my outlook.
Keep us posted.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)And the fact you have to go back to the 1900s to construct that strawman makes it even more ridiculous.
From all I've read of apitherapy, it's not pseudoscience, but it's also not sufficiently tested to be considered an effective treatment.
Pseudoscience, for the hundredth time, is claiming something works through untestable means. If a venom or leech is demonstrated to be beneficial because of a protein or compound it secretes, then it's not pseudoscience. Claiming the venom or leech works because it's draining your humors is pseudoscience.
And you can drop that ridiculous Scientific American strawman now. All it shows now is that you're able to copy/paste. It also shows that you're not willing to address any points I raise in response to yours.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)but you are still willing to write it off as "Woo".
SEE?
THAT is exactly what I'm talking about.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Right there, plain as day! How does "it's not woo" translate into "writing it off as woo?"
I said given the tests done so far, it doesn't seem to be an effective treatment, the same case with insufficiently-tested pharmaceuticals.
My God!
Look, if you're not willing to read what I post, fine, then just don't respond as if you had. bvar22
(39,909 posts)Did you NOT say this?
That sounds dismissive.
At any rate, you have been forced to admit to the possibility of occasions where "Woo" is EFFECTIVE.
I STAND by original statement:
[font]Everything is "Woo", until it isn't.[/font]
THAT is the history of Science,
and thankfully, it is an ongoing relationship TODAY.
We have barely begun to Understand our universe.
Our Science is at the INFANT stage.
There is much more that we don't understand that what we have deciphered.
To close a mind to that which we don't yet understand
is to close a mind to the as yet undiscovered and untested possibilities of our Universe.
Sad, really.
I'm glad that the best and the brightest in our Scientific Community are STILL searching for "Woo",
and still testing it for the endless possibilities.
THEY will give us gifts in the future.
The others who are stuck in a very narrow understanding of Science's relationship to "Woo",
well..... there is a need for the test tube washers.
840high
(17,196 posts)woo. Now accepted in medicine.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)
Archae
(46,318 posts)If not, then why not just ignore it?
Obviously, there are too many people in positions of real power (like congressman Paul Broun of Georgia) who believe in creationism fervently.
There are people also in positions to influence public opinions for the worse, like Jenny McCarthy and her "vaccines cause autism" woo.
A few (not all) hospitals are trying out acupuncture, and reporting the good results.
I just wonder how many have no results, those are not reported, naturally.
Raksha
(7,167 posts)I detest the word "woo" and refuse to take anyone seriously who uses it. The only time I ever open a thread containing the word "woo" in the subject line is to say that to the OP.
brooklynite
(94,502 posts)Just as realistic, just as effective.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)is beyond irritating.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)I completely dismiss anyone who uses the term allopathic.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)See: anti-vaxxers and climate change denialism.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)and don't like grifters and charlatans.
I have no stomach for con artists or people that claim 1+1=3. I will not stand by and let people dumb down other people with nonsensical pseudo-science.
Iggo
(47,549 posts) LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)and told her to improve her attitude, and suggested castor oil packs because she was really into Edgar Cayce at the time and he prescribed them for everything.
Mom went to the ER instead. Turned out she had endocarditis, was septic, and the infection was starting to spread to other organs. Her doctors were surprised that she made it. More than three months of hospitalization later she walked out a healthy woman.
If she'd delayed treatment even slightly by indulging my crazy woo besotted cousin cousin she'd have died. No question.
That's why.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)One persons "woo" is another persons belief. There are certain issues where science clearly is better like vaccination for polio/measles/tetanus etc but positive thought which could be put in the "woo" colum can also have enormous benefit. The mind is a powerful thing and we clearly do not understand its full capabilities. Passing judgement on its potential is unadvised.
On this subject I would highly recommend the movie "What The Bleep Do We Know" and the second one "What The Bleep Do We Know- Down The Rabbit Hole"It will change the way you view life.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)1) No, not "to each his own." There is one way reality functions, and always a best explanation for how as demonstrated by the evidence. Science isn't a democracy; you don't pick and choose which explanations "work for you." You get the explanation that is best supported by the evidence, and believing otherwise without damn good reason is irrational.
"To each his own" and "health freedom" are just terms pushed by Koch-league fraudsters and crooks to trick people into supporting poor oversight and examination of their bogus miracle cures.
2) That movie is pseudoscience incarnate, particularly of the quantum woo variety. Should absolutely NOT be taken seriously at all.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)I stated that science clearly beats "woo" in many areas as fact over fiction. I agree with you that science is not a democracy. But there also areas where science does not have the answers at least not yet and until it does nothing should be dismissed.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)A good example would be homeopathy which is one of the purest forms of bullshit woo. Basic LAWS of science can be used to utterly demolish every tenet and concept of Homeopathy. How much longer to we have to continue to have an "open mind" about that nonsense.
I am all for exploring all possibilities for things that are unknown but doing so with math and science. Those who push most CAM therapies and other woo rely on pseudoscience and pure bullshit. There is no keeping an "open mind" when someone is feeding you nonsense.
Archae
(46,318 posts)To put it mildly.
Pain, nausea, etc.
Some guy tells them, "This'll make you feel better," and they get knitted and pearled.
They do feel better.
This is the placebo effect.
alp227
(32,018 posts)I will not be apathetic and let "anything go" in public discourses about science & humanities. NEVER!!!!!!
Democracyinkind
(4,015 posts)If you'd follow the woo advice of some people on DU, you could be risking your life, depending on your condition.
Plus, it's obvious that the woo peddlers on DU are scientific illiterates. Taking medical advice from such people is dangerous even if they aren't pushing woo. Most of them don't even know what the definitions of their pseudosciences are. We have a poster on DU recommending homeopathy without even knowing what the word means. Then there's a poster pushing acupuncture and pretending that the theory behind acupuncture isn't complete woo. Azt least there's no danger in that - it's just magical thinking. But generally, it's dangerous and makes DU look stupid.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Nailed it. Great post.
Sid
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)LeftishBrit
(41,205 posts)I have no problem with individuals making their own choices, even if it's something that I might think is superstitious or whatever. Some people might think that some of my choices are silly. Live and let live.
Where it becomes problematic, is when people don't live and let live; but promote 'quack' medicines in ways that prevent people from having access to genuine ones. In the USA, it is people like Mercola representing any government-supported medical care as dangerous, and campaigning for 'health freedom' against government funding of medical care. (Ironically, in this respect, the Mercola types are acting similarly to the worst Pharma companies, and no doubt a profit motive is involved in both cases.) In the UK, it is homeopaths insisting on being funded by the NHS, and thus drawing funds away from where they could be of real use. Everywhere, it can involve lies and deception, and misrepresenting useless treatments as cures, or treatments that are useful for specific purposes as cure-alls. The latter can be a problem in 'conventional' medicine too; but generally speaking, regulation is stricter.
Also, the anti-vaccination movement is very dangerous; it can lead to the resurgence of preventable diseases.
intaglio
(8,170 posts)Consider Jenny McCarthy and the anti-vaxers; the actions of this selfish few (based on fraudulent research, fear and anecdote) has damaged the herd immunity that protects those not yet vaccinated or unable to be vaccinated.
Consider the harm done by chiropractors who, following mainstream chiropractic theory, claim to do more than treat back pain; check Chiropractic Subluxation.
Consider the harm done by homeopathic practitioners and medicines which causes people to ignore treatments that could aid them and instead use fantasies that are more than sugar pills and water.
Consider the damage done by dubious psychics who claim to help families when in practise all they are doing is lining their pockets or indulging in self promotion that will line their pockets in future.
Think about "alternative" medicines or faith healing or dowsing
You want rational people to ignore the promotion of such harmful frauds in a public arena not dedicated to them - sorry, no.
scheming daemons
(25,487 posts)They are teaching our children.
They are impacting public policy.
They are dangerous to themselves and others.