Who are the OUTSIDERS in Medicine?

[Guest guest]

Hi All, & Hi Emmanuel

 

wrote: > Without confirmatory evidence THAT IS

ACCEPTABLE TO WM/conventional scientists, CAM practitioners -

whatever their modalities and clinical expertise - will remain

OUTSIDERS on the fringes of mainstream medicine.

 

Emmanuel Segmen wrote:

> ... Your comment above is precisely the idea I wish to dispute.

> ...Those whom we now call Western medicine doctors were fringe

> element outsiders until the early 1900s.

 

Agreed, but that has changed radically today!

 

Emmanuel:

> Their method of overcoming homeopaths and all other comers had

> little to do with double blind studies. They astounded their

> audience with successful surgeries. They pulled out their little

> trick called antiseptic technique. Dr. Brodman probed the human

> brain for centers of function and so on. They also made profoundly

> astute political moves while the audience was awed by their

> surgeries.

 

Agreed. Let us return to the POLITICAL aspects later. They are all-

important in my definition of medical OUTSIDERS.

 

Emmanuel:

> They took over the professional body called the AMA and turned it

> into a powerful politcal action committee.

 

Allopaths became the power-group not just in USA, but all over the

developed world!

 

Emmanuel:

> They then transformed the medical school curriculums and their

> credentialing, and then establised the FDA.

 

Again, all over the developed world, not just in the USA.

 

Emmanuel:

> The rest, as they say, is history.

 

YOU said it, and I agree!

 

Emmanuel:

> The allopaths did not ever present anything acceptable to the

> homeopaths or other conventional [i.e. non-allopathic]

> practitioners of their time.

 

Again, YOU said it! And that is why I said that I will not hold my

breath for meaningful conciliatory compromise, or mutually agreed

research protocols, between allopathic and CAM practitioners now.

I would like to see that dialogue/respect, but I do not expect it to

happen.

 

Emmanuel:

> I recommend that CM practitioners figure out that their actions must in

> fact proceed along a much more monied and political vein if they

> want a more central part the stage. Paradigms become dominant

> because of economic and political interests.

 

NOW we are talking! Power-play is all about political clout. Politics

is often a very dirty game, and political clout is all about money,

pulling strings, calling in favours owed, greasing appropriate palms,

or eliminating [demonising/destroying the credibility of] opponents,

especially leaders in the opposing side(s). The " Dirty Tricks "

brigadesare never without projects to discredit/cripple the power of

their perceived opponents.

 

Emmanuel:

> It also helps if the paradigm works and creates a bit of a stir in

> the audience. Also read Kuhn. One of the most important things

> Kuhn notes is that we scientists do research only on things that we

> already know about. All of the research chiefs at UC Berkeley, UC

> San Francisco, Stanford or San Francisco State University would

> scold the hell out of the graduate students if the graduate

> students even slightly imagined anything for which there were no

> established materials and methods. Double blind studies done

> perfectly on behalf of CM will convince no one in Western medicine

> of anything. It might scare them, but it won't win them over

> because it's not in their economic nor political interest.

 

Earlier tonight, I wrote to LIKEMList on a similar thread [re

isopathic research]: " ]Roger], Please raise the issue of isopathy

research if you wish [with our Research Director]. I predict that

your suggestions, even if detailed and with an in-depth literature

review, will go down like a lead balloon! ...IMO, there are very few

" lateral thinkers " at senior level in the area of research planning in

most national bodies. They keep their eyes on the BIG money, and

the BIG money for [our] research is ploughed into Biotech and

convenience pre-cooked foods - the very areas that you (and many

of us!) reckon may bring disasterous longterm effects to humanity.

IMO, the main reason why open-minded scientists shun research

in.complementary medicine is lack of good research reported in the

international peer-reviewed science journals. It is a classical Catch-

22; serious research demands serious money, but the usual

agencies (the multinationals) will not provide the funding because

they perceive such research as being against their commercial

(profit-based, monopoly) interests! IMO, governments will not fund

much research in the area either, because their research advisers

are often (a) heavily committed to EBM, or (b) have financial

interests in the multinationals " .

 

Emmanuel:

> It might convince a few insurance company administrators or

> congressmen, and therein will lie the path to success at the

> center stage. More likely research studies will do no such thing.

> I'm recalling a 1999 Journal of the American Medical Association

> article proclaiming that in 1998 Americans spent 40% of their

> health related dollars on alternative medical treatment and over

> the counter alternative remedies. In 1999 the New England Journal

> of Medicine unleased a torrent of editorials lashing chiropratic

> medicine and CM. I believe WM will respond badly to any success

> that CM has. I also believe that CM will have success as more

> practitioners are trained in CM and Americans spend their money on

> CM rather than on WM for treatments that CM does well. ...

> Emmanuel Segmen

 

Agreed. The allopathic establishment is running very scared now;

they see the amounts of money " diverted " to CAM worldwide.

Already, the FDA has been " nobbled " to regulate any herbs,

vitamins, or other supplements that have any complaints of adverse

reactions against them. [NOTE: They are much less severe on

allopathic drugs, even those for which there is ample evidence of

severe side-effects. After all, doesn't everyone know that many

allopathic drugs carry high risk, but that the patient must accept

that risk? ;-) Seriously, if we could persuade the FDA and like

agencies in other countries to be as tough with modern drugs as

they are with CAM remedies, we might be on the road to better

parity of the two systems].

 

IMO, the war (and it IS a WAR over power, status amd money] is

just beginning in earnest. It is going to be a dirtier war than ever in

the past, because there is much more money at stake today than

before. Meanwhile, whether we like it or not, allopathy IS the

leading power in terms of national and international political clout.

In that sense, IT is the real mainstream of medicine. It has powerful

friends in the pharmaceutical industry, in Government, in the

funding agencies, in the National Drugs Boards. It controls the

Hospital industry, public health policy, etc, etc. Allopathy, if only

by its key role (if not TOTAL control) of intensive care, cancer

treatment, Obs/Gyn, etc, but most importantly, mainstream

university education, IS IN THE SADDLE, and will not be unhorsed

easily!

 

Also consider the average salary structure of allopaths versus CAM

practitioners [as discussed on the Lists recently]. Some of our

allopathic " specialists " turn over 4-6 unfortunate patients/hour at

fees of 100+ EU/session. (1 EU = 1.19 US$). That is 400-600+

EU/hour. What CAM professional, no matter how successful, can

earn even a small fraction of that income?

 

How many CAM practitioners sit on National decision-making

boards in medicine? Very few, I suspect, relative to their numbers

on the ground.

 

Maybe Emmanuel is right that even the BEST CAM research will

not convince committed allopaths to cooperate fully (and on an

equal basis of respect) with CAM practitioners. But, IMO, without

that research, we will get nowhere near the centre of mainstream

medicine; we will always be outsiders.

 

Good research that proves the benefits of CAM may not convince

committed allopaths, but it MAY convince the Health Insurance

Companies, and senior politicians, especially Ministers of Finance

and others in key spending roles, to divert much more funding and

resources OFFICIALLY in the direction of CAM.

 

Phil wrote:

> IMO, the advent of a truly Integrated Medicine could be hundreds,

> if not thousands, of years away.

 

Emmanuel:

> Phil, This is the precise opinion of my own mentors both in CM

> and in Western science. It took billions of people in China

> thousands of years to develop and literally evolve the traditions

> of CM. Several of my mentors (PhDs) have looked at me quizzically

> and asked, " Why do you think that Western scientists can do it any

> faster? " Emmanuel Segmen

 

Emmanuel, we agree again!

 

Thank you for provoking depth in this discussion. Any other

comments from Listers out there? Or is the topic just too

depressing?

 

 

 

Best regards,

 

 

WORK : Teagasc Staff Development Unit, Sandymount Ave., Dublin 4, Ireland

WWW :

Email: <

Tel : 353-; [in the Republic: 0]

 

HOME : 1 Esker Lawns, Lucan, Dublin, Ireland

WWW : http://homepage.eircom.net/~progers/searchap.htm

Email: <

Tel : 353-; [in the Republic: 0]