Re: A question for you + an interesting website

"dbble [sic] blind can be done on any substance !"
--This is exactly my point from the previous post. I'm not sure if you're trying to disagree with me or if we are in agreement, but this would seem to be my point exactly...randomized, controlled, double blind studies are effective whether they be testing drug or herb.

"Go for it big shot !"
--I'm not sure why advocating responsibility in medicine (high standards for drug or herb) and having integrity about what I (or you, or anyone) puts in their body makes me a "big shot." Being fully aware of what you're using (again, drug or herb) I believe is the duty of every responsible consumer. If calling for a high level of knowledge and safety about what I put in my body (Remember Curezone's slogan is "Educating...")makes me a big shot, then I'd hope you'd call yourself a "big shot" too.


"...if you are happy with pharmaceuticals and dont [sic] trust herbs do all the pills you want who cares!"
--The only reason I'm "happy" with pharmaceuticals (in reality, the only meds I've been on in the past 5 or 10 years have been opiates actually...funny you should mention that. Overall I'm a young and very healthy person, but happened to get in an accident and break my hip. It was nice to have a strong painkiller on board after emergency surgery! :)) is precisely for the reason that good, quality, studies have been published. Within seconds (with a good search engine), if you named a particular drug, I could tell you accurate dosage, side effects, how often the side effects occur, mode of action of the drug, metabolism of the drug, etc. Pretty much anything you'd want to know! The reason I don't "trust" herbs is that for the overwhelming majority of herbs, that information isn't known! That's not to say it can't be known...I think it can! That's why I'm advocating studies. I don't have some *inherent* happiness with pharmaceuticals nor an *inherent* distrust of all things herbal...it's just that one has been studied more than the other, more is known, and thus there's a much higher level of accountability. I would be very "happy" with an herb that underwent years of testing, safety and efficacy trials, and was shown to have good effect, low risk:benfit ratio, etc. Drugs undergo that very process now, and you still don't trust them. Who's the one with the closed mind?

"...phony data and bought and paid for whore scientist !"
--I'm not denying the fact that there are bad scientists out there, just like there are dishonest mechanics (don't take your car to them!) poory skilled hairdressers (you'll have to wear a hat for a month after they cut your hair!) and cheating contractors (your house starts to lose its foundation within 10 years of being built). That being said, that doesn't disqualify the vast majority of dedicated, honest, skilled, professional scientist/doctors from being trusted. The authors of all published papers must disclose their funding source for their project...no conflict of interest is allowed. The medical community frowns on studies published by a drug company without having outside, unbiased review. Doctors could lose their license for owning stock in a drug company. I could go on. There are barriers in place to prevent the bad apples (don't tell me there are none in alternative health) from harming people, just as there is for any other profession. The allopath "establishment" isn't out to get you if you have a bad experience with a doc, any more than the Autoworkers Brotherhood of America (or whatever the mechanics union is called) is out to get you if the guy at the Exxon down the street cracks an air hose while repairing your car. Mistakes and bad apples (very regrettably) happen, in all walks of life, in both allo and alternative medicine. You're deluded if you think otherwise.

"And the brainwashed univerities of this country who continue to look like fools to the rest of the world!"
--Foolishness would be advocating a treatment without full knowledge of its potential side effects, risks, benefits, etc, whether it be drugs or herbs. I hardly think calling for higher standards for what we put in our body should be called foolish.

"...stay stuck inside your silly box who cares!"
--I believe I have shown in my posts an openness to further testing. From my very first post on this thread...
"As someone associated with the health field (not a doctor), I can say with confidence that I would have no problem with you doing that[conducting further studies]. Why? Because I would have confidence that those studies would show the truth, whatever the consequences."

Earlier in this post, I stated outright that I would be "happy" (using your words) with an herb that had undergone rigorous testing and had been shown to be effective, etc. You, on the other hand, say, "I personally would never trust...", a dogmatic statement that communicates a blind committment to alternative medicine *no matter what the evidence shows*. Sir, one of the two of us is "stuck inside a silly box" and I have ample evidence that proves it is not me.

Again, I ask: Who has the closed mind?