From: lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady)
Subject: Re: On pre-scientific traditions of medicine (was: Use of term
Followup-To: sci.med
Summary: I'd like to determine my own level of risk.  
Organization: University of Hawaii (Mathematics Dept)
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 00:59:48 GMT

In article <16103@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.220859.9259@news.Hawaii.Edu> lady@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Lee Lady) writes:
>> ...
>>The attitude expressed by so many on sci.med is "We're justified in just
>>ignoring these approaches since the type of research we believe in hasn't
>>been done."  This attitude doesn't benefit anyone.  
>
>From a scientific standpoint, it is the only proper attitude.  To
>subject one's body to any nostrum that anyone claims would be
>of benefit regardless of whether it has been tested or not
>is pretty crazy, in my view.  

Your statement would have been more precise if it had read:  
  "To subject one's body to any nostrum ... whether or not it has been 
  tested in a double blind study which has been found acceptable by
  established medical authorities ... is pretty crazy."   

Notice how speaking more precisely and saying what you really mean makes
your assertion seem a lot more arguable, although obviously many would
still agree.  (Not me!)  

>is pretty crazy, in my view.  You may miss out on the benefit
>of some wild thing, but you will also miss out on the harm of
>the vast majority of useless or dangerous ones.

I think that people should have the right to make their own judgement on
the level of risk they are willing to undergo in this respect, except
where there is a clear doubt about safety.  (I think it is
also correct to be cautious about things like cancer cures, where the
availability of quack remedies might interfere with a person seeking
proper medical treatment.)

I started taking zinc lozenges last winter to suppress cold symptoms on
the basis of articles posted on the net and the recommendation of a
couple of personal friends.  Maybe in five or ten years there will be a
scientific study proving their effectiveness, but in the meantime
you'll be having colds and I won't.  They work fantastically well.

Getting rolfed didn't offer me all the benefits I'd hoped for but I have
no regrets about having given it a try.  Besides, everybody I knew
started telling me that I looked a whole lot better and my posture had
improved.  

A couple of years ago when my energy level was at a real low point, I
bought a bottle of tablets called Extra Energy Enzymes.  They are
allegedly made from sprouts and increase the body's supply of super-oxide
dismutase and catalase.  (I think they may be sold only in Hawaii, to
avoid problems with the FDA.)  It cost $20 for enough for two weeks and
if you read the package insert really carefully you got the idea that
there really wasn't any need to continue beyond that two weeks.
Anyway, they didn't make me feel wonderful but they did restore me to the
point where I was functional again.  Maybe it was just a placebo, but it
was a lot more effective than going to a physician and being given all
sorts of expensive tests and then told there was nothing he could do for
me because there was nothing wrong.  I've had 0% success with that route.

You wouldn't have done any of these things, since you (according to what
you say) place a high value on playing it safe.  I can't say you're wrong,
but I think I should be allowed to make up my own mind on my own values.

--

Imagination is more important than knowledge.  -- Einstein 

lady@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu         lady@uhunix.bitnet