Results for: Naturopathy versus science
Answering Our Critics, Part 2 of 2: What’s the Harm?
Last week I posted a list of 30 rebuttals to many of the recurrent criticisms that are made by people who don’t like what we say on SBM. I thought #30 deserved its own post; this is it. At the end, I’ve added a few items to the original list. What’s the harm in people trying CAM? Science-based medicine has been criticized...
The facts of the alternative medicine industry
People have been living on earth for about 250,000 years. For the past 5,000 healers have been trying to heal the sick. For all but the past 200, they haven’t been very good at it. – Dr. Paul Offit Twenty years is a long time in medicine. I celebrated my 20th pharmacy class reunion last weekend. Of course reunions are time to...
A very special issue of Medical Acupuncture
Every so often, our “friends” on the other side of the science aisle (i.e., the supporters of “complementary and alternative medicine”—otherwise known as CAM or “integrative medicine”) give me a present when I’m looking for a topic for my weekly bit of brain droppings about medicine, science, and/or why CAM is neither. It’s also been a while since I’ve written about this...
Chiropractic and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
As a pediatrician caring for hospitalized children, I deal with fear on a daily basis. My day is saturated with it. I encounter fear in a variety of presentations, with parental fear the most obvious but probably least impactful on my management decisions. I do spend a lot of time and mental energy calming the fears of others but more managing my...
Here we go again: A bill licensing naturopaths rears its ugly head in Michigan
The goal of organized naturopathy is to achieve licensure for naturopaths in all 50 states. Unfortunately, that means they have to come through Michigan, which is my state. This means the naturopaths, having failed to pass a licensure bill last year, are back to try again. They're a lot like the Terminator that way. They never, ever give up.
Epigenetics: It doesn’t mean what quacks think it means
Epigenetics. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. I realize I overuse that little joke, but I can’t help but think that virtually every time I see advocates of so-called “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM) or, as it’s known more commonly now, “integrative medicine” discussing epigenetics. All you have to do to view...
Getting NCCAM’s money’s worth: Some results of NCCAM-funded studies of homeopathy
As hard as it is to believe, the Science-Based Medicine blog that you’re so eagerly reading is fast approaching its fifth anniversary of existence. The very first post here was a statement of purpose by Steve Novella on January 1, 2008, and my very first post was a somewhat rambling introduction that in retrospect is mildly embarrassing to me. It is what...
Don’t call CAM “cost-effective” unless it’s actually effective
Before deciding CAM is cost-effective, it is important to determine if is just effective. That low bar has not been surmounted.
Rejecting cancer treatment: What are the consequences?
There have been several studies of people who have refused scientific treatments for cancer. The results have not been good.
The “central dogma” of alternative/complementary/integrative medicine
There is something in molecular biology and genetics known as the “central dogma.” I must admit, I’ve always hated the use of the word “dogma” associated with science, but no less a luminary than Francis Crick first stated it in 1958, and it has been restated over the years in various ways. Perhaps my favorite version of the central dogma was succinctly...