Kudos to Lindsay Beyerstein of Majikthise for coining a new phrase "Big Placebo." Big Placebo is the alternative health counterpart to Big Pharma. Both are special interest groups designed to promote their products, whether they are worthy of promotion or not. There is one big difference between them: Big Pharma makes products that usually work (though not always, and sometimes not safely). Big Placebo hawks books and products that never work.
Big Placebo is unsatisfied with the $40 billion it takes in every year on treatments that don't even work. They’re aiming for a much larger piece of the healthcare pie and to do so they are criticizing modern medicine. I have previously written about the disingenuous efforts to focus attention on preventing diseases in the "worried well" as opposed to curing diseases of the poor and medically underserved.
To hear Big Placebo tell it, virtually all illness can be prevented and anyone who gets sick deserves it because of poor lifestyle choices. If only that were so. Unfortunately, most illness and disease is caused by factors beyond people’s control, including infectious agents, genetic defects and inherited predispositions.
Another axiom in the Big Placebo armamentarium is the notion that contemporary American Medicine cures nothing and merely "manages" diseases. According to "Dr." John Neustadt (naturopathic doctor) writing in the Huffington Post:
The current system teaches disease management and symptom suppression, which is insufficient to meet our healthcare needs. A reformed system needs a new paradigm that stresses health promotion and treatments that attempt to correct the underlying causes of disease.Dr. Andrew Weill, of Weil Lifestyles LLC, licensing Weil Nutritional Supplements (vitamins and supplements), Dr. Andrew Weil for Origins (skin-care products), Pet Promise (premium pet food), Dr. Andrew Weil for Tea (premium teas), Lucini Italia Organics(organic extra virgin olive oil and whole, peeled tomatoes), Weil by Nature's Path (organic cereals and nutrition bars), Weil for Vital Choice, Weil Baby™ (baby feeding systems), Weil by Vita Foods, and Orthaheel™, claims:
By no stretch of the imagination does mainstream American "health care" move us closer to this vision of robust, resilient health. It is a fiscally unsustainable, technology-centric, symptom-focused disease-management system.To hear them tell it, American medicine cures nothing. It simply manages disease and suppresses symptoms. It is a measure of the astounding success of the American medical system that anyone could listen to that drivel and not fall to the floor laughing hysterically. American medicine cures so much disease, involving so many people, so reliably and so often that everyone takes it for granted.
Evidently American Medicine doesn't cure anything except ... tuberculosis, pneumonia, bacterial meningitis, gonorrhea, any bacterial illness you care to name. American medicine routinely cures previously deadly conditions like appendicitis, ectopic pregnancies and obstetric hemorrhage. Better yet, it can completely prevent many viral and bacterial scourges through vaccination. It's not a coincidence that American lifespan has increased from 48 years to 77.7 years in slightly more than a century. Much of what routinely killed Americans is now routinely cured.
In fact, cure is so routine that these illnesses rarely enter American consciousness. No one worries about dying from tertiary syphilis, diphtheria or rheumatic heart disease. Those diseases are routinely prevented or cured in their early stages.
And "disease management" is hardly a deficiency, either. Some diseases cannot yet be cured. Until the day that a cure is discovered, we manage those diseases. Juvenile (type I) diabetes was uniformly fatal until the discovery of insulin. Insulin doesn't cure diabetics; it merely allows them to live an addition 50 years or more. Instead of dying in childhood, type I diabetics routinely live to have and enjoy grandchildren. Such "disease management" is worthy of praise, not the contempt that Big Placebo attempts to heap on it.
Can we do better? Of course we can, particularly in the areas of diseases caused by smoking and alcohol abuse. However, that's a far cry from claiming that American Medicine doesn't cure disease. That cynical and disingenuous claim should be understood for what it is, Big Placebo's attempt to line its own pockets. Alternative health purveyors and practitioners are charlatans and quacks ... and liars, to boot.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
MissingK8
aliquot
Roger Fallihee
madcelt
Norwonk
John Moore
Salon.com
Comments
"In some cases however, could a combination (I know some combinations can be dangerous) of natural medications or practices be an adjunct to conventional medicine?"
Anything can be an adjunct if it works. The problem with alternative health treatments is that none of them work, not a single one.
Lots of them are harmless, of course. In fact many contain too little of the active ingredient to do anything, and some contain no active ingredient at all. They are all a waste of money, though.
I suspect that many people do not realize that Big Placebo is a multibillion dollar industry and growing. Their profit margin is huge because they don't have to demonstrate safety, efficacy or purity. The industry successfully lobbied Congress for exemptions to the requirements that apply to real medications.
Fortunately the FDA is now considering making Big Placebo meet the same requirements as Big Pharma. I expect a massive political battle since Big Placebo has a lot to lose as they could never meet safety or efficacy requirements.
My question to you is, are you saying that 100% of vitamin supplements have no value and are a waste of money or are you just saying that they don't cure any diseases?
Really? Not a single one? I'm not arguing the point because I don't have any evidence, but it surprises me that there aren't any "alternative" cures that work.
In your opinion should we all toss out our multi-vitamins, or am I misunderstanding your point?
"............none of them work, not a single one."
I beg to differ. I am one who has had outstanding results with supplements. Now, have they cured a disease for me? No. Have they
returned a quality of life that had been stolen d/t immune sensitivities? You bet!! I had been suffering with multiple sypmtoms for years. I was dx with lupus. The meds I recieved only made matters worse. My quality of life was poor. I quit taking meds and
started reading all I could about natural alternatives. I am sold. My MD incorporates the best of both worlds. She herself suffered with issues that were brought back to balance using alternative supplements. I am thankful for both fields, and I hope you will embrace this comment as you could bless your patients with renewed health.
"My question to you is, are you saying that 100% of vitamin supplements have no value and are a waste of money or are you just saying that they don't cure any diseases?"
Unless you have a documented vitamin deficiency, vitamin supplements are a waste of money. They don't cure or prevent any diseases.
"I beg to differ."
The beauty of science is that it doesn't rely on personal testimonials, it relies on massive amounts of data. There have been tens of thousands of scientific studies on vitamins and supplements and none of them do a thing.
Being an intelligent women I know you know that many supplements
greatly reduce inflammation. I know you know that inflammation is observed in every disease state. Why don't you have a little more compassion for others, and yourself? What are you really afraid of? Have your read any of Dr. Perricone's books? He along with others is paving the way!
your sloppy logic just kills me, too: neither the neustadt quote nor weil's supports the conclusion that American medicine cures nothing; "Big Placebo hawks books and products that never work" (my emphasis).
the fact is, there are people on both sides of the fence here who are only in it for the money, who will do and say whatever they need to "line their pockets." your insistence on framing in absolutes the debate over how our healthcare system might be reformed and improved is unhelpful in the extreme.
If vitamins and supplements prevent or cure disease the studies designed to show it would have done so. Instead, the existing scientific evidence is quite clear; vitamins and supplements do neither.
I realize that it would be wonderful if preventing and curing disease were that easy. But disease is far more complicated and much of it (genetic disease and predispositions) is beyond our current ability to treat. That's very scary. It is much more comforting to pretend that a bunch of pills can let you control your health. If only that were true.
The "alternative" crowd has a hell of a nerve claiming that science-based medicine ignores the "underlying causes" of illness - something the quacks never bother to research and know nothing about.
"Didn't they discover that Vitamin C prevented Scurvy?"
Scurvy is just the common name for Vitamin C deficiency.
Just like the body needs a certain amount of specific nutrients to operate properly, it needs a specific amount of vitamins and minerals to operate properly. For example, if a person does not get enough calories over time, he or she will sicken or die.
The idea that extra vitamins and minerals prevent and cure disease makes as much as saying that extra calories will prevent and cure disease. The fact that too little is harmful does not mean that extra is beneficial. The same principle applies to vitamins and supplements.
"do you not prescribe prenatal vitamins?"
As I've said several times already, vitamins prevent vitamins deficiencies. They don't prevent or cure anything else.
I'm not talking about the outrageous claims that people make that Japanese Coral calcium will make you live forever. I don't buy that either.
If vitamins and good food choices are so irrelevant to health, then why did the former dean of Yale medical school, David Kessler sit down with me for an hour to promote his new book The End of Overeating?
Another provocative, but basically empty post that ignores the complexities of the issue.
a disease?
For instance if you check Weil you'll find he's a graduate of Harvard medical school and believes in integrating mainstream and alternative medicine and CLEARLY believes that Western medicine is effective at curing disease and in dealing with crisis brought on by disease.
This seems like a fairly uncontroversial statement, hardly removed at all from "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," and indeed right in line with your fierce advocacy for vaccination as a preventative measure. Further, don't many doctors advocate a healthy diet, vitamin supplements, and other preventative measures for good health (Keeping blood pressure and heart rate under control through exercise, keeping weight down, and so on)?
I might also point out that in both the quotes you cite, neither doctor is saying that "American medicine cures nothing." I haven't read their articles and books, but according to your quotes, they are advocating prevention, rather than what they believe is an over-reliance on treatment. How is that controversial?
So my question is, why do you appear to be advocating against disease prevention?
"Can you please clarify what you consider "alternative medicine"?"
Alternative medicine is medical recommendations or treatments in the absence of scientific evidence to support them and often despite the fact that the existing scientific evidence shows that they don't work.
Alternative medicine is to medicine what alchemy is to chemistry or what astrology is to astronomy, a pseudo-scientific version that is nothing more than wishful thinking.
"BTW Amy you might be interested in this thing called Wikipedia"
No, I'm not interested in Wikipedia and you shouldn't be, either. Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia and the information is often false. If you want to know about medicine, you MUST read the scientific evidence. There is no substitute.
My Bio 101 teacher (A wise and kind man who ran Notre Dam’s Med School for just over a decade before “retiring” to teach intro biology at the small undergrad institution that got him started on the path of medicine) told me on my very first day of college “Beware word’s like every and all, they are a scientist’s enemy!”
The most recent issue of “Neuroscience Letters” is highlighting some great work on Gongjin-dan (a tradition Chinese herbal supplement) and it’s effects on cognition and memory in rats. Apparently, it has strong NGF (Nerve Growth Factor) mimetic activity, reduced neuronal cell death and increased long-term potentiation in the rat hippocampus. Dr. Kim (a friend of mine from grad school) is seeing some pretty impressive results with his in-vivo work and thinks Gongjin-dan has promise as part of a broader treatment regimen for recovering CVA patients.
While I STRONGLY agree with you that 99% of the “alternative” treatments out there are utter garbage, we should not forget that way back in 1785, Common Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea) was the first antiarrhythmic agent ever prescribed. Indeed, it’s so powerful that we still have a whole class of drugs (Digitalin) that are made from Foxglove extract.
Dismissing EVERYTHING that is labeled “alternetive” or “herbal” is a dangerous mistep, as any number of these could contain powerful bioactive chemicals. Rather than dismiss all of them as placebos, we need outspoken and well written doctors such as yourself to call for increased regulation of these products.
"we should not forget that way back in 1785, Common Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea) was the first antiarrhythmic agent ever prescribed."
Alternative medicine is not medicine derived from nature. Many medications, hallucinogens, psychoactive agents, etc. come from plants. Alternative medicine is "medicine" promoted in the absence of scientific evidence.
As MSNBC reported back in June:
" Ten years ago the government set out to test herbal and other alternative health remedies to find the ones that work. After spending $2.5 billion, the disappointing answer seems to be that almost none of them do.
Echinacea for colds. Ginkgo biloba for memory. Glucosamine and chondroitin for arthritis. Black cohosh for menopausal hot flashes. Saw palmetto for prostate problems. Shark cartilage for cancer. All proved no better than dummy pills in big studies funded by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine..."
Imagine how many people could have received real medical treatment with that money. Imagine how much real medical treatment we could buy with the tens of billions of dollars that American waste each year on alternative health mumbo jumbo.
"That's a very generic definition."
That's the best definition I know. What makes "alternative" medicine alternative is the absence of scientific proof. Anything that has been shown to actually work is, by definition, real medicine.
"why do you appear to be advocating against disease prevention?"
I'm not advocating against disease prevention. I'm advocating against methods that have never been shown to prevent disease or have only a minor preventive effect.
Vitamins and supplements do not prevent disease, period. Claims that they do are nothing more than quackery.
What a clownish, unnuanced statement. This from a woman who can't wait to tell however so smart she must be having gone to Harvard.
I watched my partner use an "alternative heath treatment," the selective carbohydrate diet, to successfully end her ten year battle with severe colitis. The standard medicinal approach had never done much except prevent it from worsening to severe ulcers. Now she has been fine for years with no medicine. She paid "Big Placebo" for a book, which cost a fraction of her annual pharmaceutical costs even on her nation's health care plan.
"To hear Big Placebo tell it, virtually all illness can be prevented and anyone who gets sick deserves it because of poor lifestyle choices. If only that were so. Unfortunately, most illness and disease is caused by factors beyond people’s control, including infectious agents, genetic defects and inherited predispositions."
Then why are stress levels, diet and exercise so critical to a vast number of conditions and ailments? Let's not even get started on meditation and the mind-body connection. Doctors like Tuteur want to sell people, in typical modern American fashion, a responsibility-free health programme which comes down to a crass economic transaction.
I remember Tuteur from when she was doing some cheerleading for infant circumcision. She got called out for various bombastic statements and strands of false reasoning by multiple non-MD posters (which must have been humiliating for her). I see that trend continuing here.
"I watched my partner use an "alternative heath treatment," the selective carbohydrate diet, to successfully end her ten year battle with severe colitis."
That doesn't mean it worked. As everyone knows, diseases like colitis wax and wane spontaneously.
If a treatment works, scientific study will show that it works. It's just that simple.
Sorry, but you don't have the authority to make blanket claims about the universal ineffectiveness of alternative medicine. You haven't been practicing for 15 years, and you're not currently affiliated with any research department. So if you're going to make wildly abstract global statements, I suggest you interview somebody with more credibility.
"They leave a little room for the possibility that something does work."
I can virtually guarantee that nothing you have paid money for does what it says it does. Indeed, most "alternative" medicine vitamins and supplements don't adhere to standards for purity. Many have no active ingredient at all.
I'm not sure why it should be the least bit controversial to suggest that before a company can charge money for its medical product there must be scientific evidence that it works.
So wait let me get this straight you are "advocating against methods that...have only a minor preventive effect".
But a "minor preventive effect" may prove just enough for many people, where lifestyle is balanced with innate biological factors. It seems a physician with patients' best interests at heart would welcome any preventative effect. I guess there isn't enough $$$ to be made in prevention.
"So are you disputing the fact that Weil is a Harvard educated M.D who believes that Western Medicine cures disease?"
I went to Harvard, too, trained at the Harvard hospitals and held an academic appointment at Harvard Medical School.
Andrew Weil is a money grubbing charlatan. He is a one man quackery industry. According to Weil Lifestyle LLC, the entity that reaps substantial licensing fees to slap his name on products:
"Current licensees are: Weil Nutritional Supplements (vitamins and supplements), Dr. Andrew Weil for Origins (skin-care products), Pet Promise (premium pet food), Dr. Andrew Weil for Tea (premium teas), Lucini Italia Organics(organic extra virgin olive oil and whole, peeled tomatoes), Weil by Nature's Path (organic cereals and nutrition bars), Weil for Vital Choice, Weil Baby™ (baby feeding systems), Weil by Vita Foods, and Orthaheel™."
You might trust a guy who is hawking tea, pet food, extra virgin olive oil and orthotics, but there is no reason why you should.
"But a "minor preventive effect" may prove just enough for many people, where lifestyle is balanced with innate biological factors."
No one needs to pay for lifestyle changes. Moderating intake of food, alcohol and tobacco are absolutely free.
Vitamins and supplements have no preventive effect at all.
"Where does acupuncture fall in your estimation? Message? Bio-feedback? Etc. "
All of these things have been studied. Acupuncture has been shown to be ineffective for virtually everything with the exception of some forms of pain relief and even then the evidence is equivocal. Massage is useless, although enjoyable. Bio-feedback is not alternative medicine.
It seems to me that you are issuing a blanket condemnation without full acknowledgement of current research.
The "alternative" health industry is a multibillion dollar effort to deprive gullible people of their hard earned money, and it seems to be succeeding in that effort.
A.M. is the "alternative" medicine having little more to show than amputation without anesthesia (western medicine is so painful and involves so many goddamned painful and humiliating treatments"!!!!) and "bleeding" only a 100 or so years ago. But TCM and herbal medicine are thousands of years old and still far more effective than anything "modern" medicine has ever provided. Just as midwives deliver most babies worldwide, in the USA, "modern" medicine performs countless unnecessary Casearean sections (but profitable!!!) and we rank 16th in the world for infant mortality.
Let's see you produce REAL statistics on cures, although why would I ever believe anything the American Medical Establishment says considering your entire profession is based on profit, lies, brainwashing of the American public while keeping them as ignorant as possible of all other treatment options, and outright deadly treatments and pharmaceuticals. And when chemotherapy, or battery acid as my husband calls it, kills your patient, do you tell the family the truth? That there was a 50-50 chance to begin with that the chemo would kill the patient before the cancer did? Did you? Or did you say the cancer prevailed? As I said, the American Medical Establishment lies!!!
"As I said, the American Medical Establishment lies!!!"
Let me guess. You have no scientific evidence to support your claim; you think your personal opinion is "evidence."
If you want to waste your money, go right ahead. The "alternative" health industry is banking on gullible people like you.
You might want to consider discussing some of those techniques, as well as others that I mentioned, with doctors in the pain management area; many of these doctors work with physical therapists, message therapists, chiropractors, acupuncturists, and others that you consider "alternative." (I am speaking here of pain management MDs, not nutritionists or whatever.) I suggest that some of your data may be out of date.
Also, I wonder: do you consider research from international areas relevant to the practice of medicine in the US? To take one small example, an IUD device is approved by the FDA for continuous use for 5 years, but is considered safe for use by the European medical establishment for 7. Do you consider decisions rendered by non-American medical practitioners and agencies to be valid?
What is your take on Eastern Medicine, Mountain Medicine and other medicine practices that gravitate towards homeopathy? Herbs roots, animal parts, the plants of The Amazon. I too loathe the Big Placebo concept, but I don't discount generations of non-traditional wisdom.
"To take one small example, an IUD device is approved by the FDA for continuous use for 5 years, but is considered safe for use by the European medical establishment for 7. Do you consider decisions rendered by non-American medical practitioners and agencies to be valid?"
As a general matter, the American standards are often stricter than the European standards. That has been true as far back as thalidomide which was approved in Europe, but never approved in the US because of the possibility of birth defects.
"What is your take on Eastern Medicine, Mountain Medicine and other medicine practices that gravitate towards homeopathy?"
I'm agnostic on where and when a treatment was developed. The only thing that interests me is whether there is scientific proof that it works. In the absence of scientific proof, people should not be profiting from it.
Yes, that's apparent, but it's not what I asked. If I may repeat: do you consider research from international areas relevant to the practice of medicine in the US?
I have to ask, do you take supplements?
"If I may repeat: do you consider research from international areas relevant to the practice of medicine in the US?"
There is no such thing as European research vs. American research. Everyone uses the same research to reach the decisions.
The effectiveness of certain IUDs declines over time. Toward the end of the effective period the risk of unintended pregnancy rises. The Europeans are willing to accept a higher risk of unintended pregnancy than the FDA is willing to accept. That's why the recommendations differ; the underlying research is exactly the same.
"I have to ask, do you take supplements?"
Why would I waste my money on something that doesn't work?
Please forget the IUDs. As I stated, that was an example.
Let me try again. My wife's OB read European medical journals as well as American medical journals. He based his opinions as to safe and effective practices not only on recommendations provided by in (say) the New England Journal of Medicine, but also on European sources. Some doctors don't do this; some do. My question is, when you state your opinion on a topic, is it based solely on what is approved by the American medical establishment only, or do you also take into consideration recommendations from non-American sources?
To cite another example--and let me be clear, this is an example I am not asking your opinion on this particular technique--laser eye surgery was used in other countries prior to it's acceptance in the U.S. In this example, would you consider advising a patient that perhaps they should consider having laser eye surgery outside of the U.S. (if that is an option for them)? Or would you consider anything not directly approved by a U.S. medical agency unsafe?
So again, the question is, do you take those non-American opinions into account, or do you disregard them?
"Some doctors don't do this; some do."
Everyone reads the American and British journals (or they are supposed to). There is a hierarchy of journals, some noted as being more rigorous than others. The American and British journals are considered to be the most rigorous.
You seem to think that there is some special research going on elsewhere in the world that American doctors ignore. That's simply not the case. All doctors, the world over, work with the exact same information.
"laser eye surgery was used in other countries prior to it's acceptance in the U.S. In this example, would you consider advising a patient that perhaps they should consider having laser eye surgery outside of the U.S. (if that is an option for them)? Or would you consider anything not directly approved by a U.S. medical agency unsafe?"
Again, it comes down to rigor. The FDA (which in my opinion is not stringent enough) is more rigorous in its requirements than other regulatory entities. In fact, that's why pharmaceutical companies and device makers often test their products overseas.
So to answer your question, I'd need to see the supporting evidence. Why isn't the product or procedure approved here? It certainly can't be because the manufacturer isn't interested in the American market. The American market is a bonanza, especially for drugs. If it hasn't yet been approved it's because the company hasn't yet provided the necessary safety data. I'd want to see that before I took any drug or underwent any procedure.
If vitamins like Folic Acid are useless, why are women ENCOURAGED to take it before and during pregnancy to help PREVENT birth defects?
This is so blatantly false it makes my stomach turn. I have had MRIs which proved my seizure disorder was cured using an alternative health method called NMT or the Feinberg Method.
The problem with this entire article is how you setup the dichotomy - one against the other. The truth is somewhere in the middle frankly. I use both Western and Alternative med and work with doctors who work with both quite effectively.
You are misleading people and it is unethical and frankly goes against your fiduciary responsibilities - I don't care if this is "just a blog." This blanket statement is irresponsible. If you are speaking only to supplements, than you need to be clear. If you are speaking to treatments, how could you have possibly researched them all? Does that include massage, acupuncture...?
Really Amy? I have tried to be supportive of this BLOG but you are spreading lies. It is horrible.
Good luck getting straight answers.
"Interesting. So how do you explain why the countries with the superior medical journals, England and the U.S. have higher mortality rates than the countries with slack, inferior medical journals like France and Canada."
It's it obvious? One thing has nothing to do with the other.
The American and British journals publish papers from every country in the world. They can be the most rigorous because they are the most prestigious.
The main point, though, is that there is no research indicating that "alternative" health remedies work, not in English language journals and not in any other journals.
"my seizure disorder was cured using an alternative health method called NMT or the Feinberg Method. "
You mean this method?
"The Feinberg Method is an energetic healing modality/therapy/technique"
And how much money did you have to shell out for that bit of complete quackery?
given me my life back, without nasty side effects. : )
Actually, that's not an accurate statement, and needs expansion. One needs you to show scientific research that you accept that demonstrates that it works. I have seen a number of times when you have been presented with data that you have rejected for one reason or another (because of it's source; because it wasn't published in the appropriate journal; because it was done in a manner you deem unscientific; etc). You've also been known to either ignore or brush off research that repudiates your claim.
Further, some people are put off by your tendency to make sweeping claims that can be easily disproved by a single example, and have you dismiss the example. Kate Bishop's statement is one example of this.
In all seriousness, you might want to consider ceasing use of words like "always" and "never." You use them an awful lot, and they're awfully easy to poke holes in.
Here's the claim:
http://www.shaklee.com/products.php?sku=20960
"This proprietary blend of natural plant extracts is derived from pumpkin seeds, safflower flowers, plantago seeds, and Japanese honeysuckle flower buds, which have been clinically proven to support and stimulate the natural immune response process at the cellular level.*"
Making such blatant generalizations like this seem to only further support the notion that allopathic medicine is a sham, and I assume you do understand the meaning of the term. Arguing that treating symptoms is not precisely an accurate characterization, would seem to put you out on a limb that even your contemporaries do not rush towards.
Perhaps I misread your intentions, but it seemed to me you are trying to paint NDs and anyone else promoting traditional and homepathic medicine as quacks who are selling junk merchandise. I will say from first-hand experience that you are fighting a losing battle if you intend to be successful creating that impression. Sit in on a class at your local university these days. Times have changed.
Interesting arguments, though. I did enjoy reading.
"it seemed to me you are trying to paint NDs and anyone else promoting traditional and homepathic medicine as quacks who are selling junk merchandise."
I will say it outright:
NDs and anyone else promoting traditional and homeopathic medicine are quacks who are selling junk merchandise! And anyone who buys it is incredibly gullible.
It's no different than alchemy, astrology, tarot cards, UFOs or creationism. They have nothing to do with science. The only people who believe in them don't know very much about science. And, most importantly, they reflect wishful thinking more than anything else.
"When has an herb taken the place for a cardiac cath or a gunshot wound to the chest? Just as there are no atheists in foxholes their are no herbalists in the operating room."
Excellent points.
I happen to be an RN as well as an Herbalife distributor. I also, not coincidentally, happen to be by far the healthiest member, albeit the oldest, in my family. My brother, an MD who is a year younger than I am, is routinely assumed to be older than me by several years. He's spent his adult life rejecting the idea of supplementation to aid in health.
I truly do not know anyone who believes that western medicine is unnecessary. But most of the healthiest people I know believe that it's excessively narrow in its focus. You, Dr. Tutuer, for example, mention a couple of lifestyle diseases, but fail to add Type II diabetes, which is arguably the most dangerous lifestyle disease of all, and is becoming epidemic in all countries that have adopted a western diet. You fail to note that children are developing Type II, unheard of even 20 years ago.
My suggestion is that you be a little less defensive about your profession, understand that you HAVE, as a profession, made enormous contributions to the human race. AND that acknowledging that other points of view can be valid and helpful for health does not diminish you in any way.
People, regular eaters, just do not take in enough nutritional goodness to stay well without supplements. As a non meat/fish eater, I need my B-12 and my purified DHA. We need B-12, we need omega 3s and I use supplements to meet my needs.
I also take supplements to stay well so I won't have to visit a narrow minded doctor like you who has forgotten everything they probably never learned in the one nutrition class they took in med school 20 years ago.
-a nauseated nutritionist
I'm just a civilian here, no md after my name, no shares in Herbalife either. What screams out loud and clear is that:
1. people believe what they want to, screw the evidence.
--"They'll throw flowers at our troops when we "liberate" Bagdad"
2. people think they "I" are everyone "you" and generalize from their specific information to a believe that it's true for everyone else. (this is actually a form of infantile objectification and it's no wonder people get so hot and bothered about their opinions on this blog: emotionally, they are still children).
3. everyone who disagrees with dr. sue must have flunked high school biology.
4. can we be surprised that 45% of americans believe in creationism? even the generally well read, and i'd like to think "smart" readers of Salon can't distinguish between data and experience.
5. i'm happy that those readers who disagree with dr.sue have found salvation in (your favorite placebo here), but I tried them all--acupuncture, bio-feed back, massage, physical therapy, "russian" electrical nerve stimulation, ginko-omega3-B1-17 complex, mega dose capsules with warm mild baths and none of them have helped ONE BIT my neuropathic foot, (but my hair is silky and shinny!).
condition to believe everyone else will
Um... herbs and vitamins in the U.S. are not allowed by the FDA to be labeled as "medicines", because of the agenda of the Big Pharm... so get your facts straight.
Also, who the hell wants to trust the FDA when it allows things like MSG, nitrates and nitrites, sulfates and sulfites, artificial flavorings and colorings, BHT and BHA, pesticides, other chemicals into our food along with genetically altered items called food, and certain amounts of other contaminants into our food???
And yet you claim that most illness is beyond our control to cure and that food and exercise have very little to do with the state of one's health. You are so delusional on this, it makes me laugh my ass off. Ms.Anthropia hit the nail on the head.
If food has very little to do with our health, then why do we need it to survive? Isn't it the very thing that NOURISHES us... and if that NOURISHMENT is interfered with in some way, isn't it going to cause problems???
Perhaps you should read this article (but of course, I expect you to throw darts at it)... http://www.herbschina.com/zen/index.php?main_page=page&id=9.
Your position on this is so profoundly ridiculous.
Physicians and nurses use and recommend dietary supplements: report of a survey.
Study Abstract:
Background
Numerous surveys show that dietary supplements are used by a large proportion of the general public, but there have been relatively few surveys on the prevalence of dietary supplement use among health professionals, including physicians and nurses. Even less information is available regarding the extent to which physicians and nurses recommend dietary supplements to their patients.
Methods
An online survey was administered in October 2007 to 900 physicians and 277 nurses by Ipsos Public Affairs for the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), a trade association representing the dietary supplement industry. The health professionals were asked whether they used dietary supplements and their reasons for doing so, and whether they recommend dietary supplements to their patients.
Results
The “Life…supplemented” Healthcare Professionals Impact Study (HCP Impact Study) found that 72% of physicians and 89% of nurses in this sample used dietary supplements regularly, occasionally, or seasonally. Regular use of dietary supplements was reported by 51% of physicians and 59% of nurses. The most common reason given for using dietary supplements was for overall health and wellness (40% of physicians and 48% of nurses), but more than two-thirds cited more than one reason for using the products. When asked whether they “ever recommend dietary supplements” to their patients, 79% of physicians and 82% of nurses said they did.
Conclusion
Physicians and nurses are as likely as members of the general public to use dietary supplements, as shown by comparing the results of this survey with data from national health and nutrition surveys. Also, most physicians and nurses recommend supplements to their patients, whether or not the clinicians use dietary supplements themselves.
Study Information:
Annette Dickinson, Nicolas Boyon, and Andrew Shao. Physicians and nurses use and recommend dietary supplements: report of a survey. Nutrition Journal 2009 July
Dickinson Consulting.
Unfortunately, most people don't know jack about even the most basic biological functions, and sadly, they also seem to have absolutely zero ability to rationally evaluate the truth or falsity of what they are being told.
People want to believe in fairy tales and magic bullet cures. They put their brains on hold and take out their wallets for anyone willing to tell them pretty stories. Anecdotes become "research".
I can't tell you how many people have told me recently, "Oh, I'm not getting the flu shot. Last time I got one it *gave* me the flu!" And then you try to explain how that isn't possible, but they might have gotten a cold (not the same virus as flu), or maybe they caught something before they were able to develop immunity from the shot (generally takes 2-3 weeks).
Instead of the flu shot, they take echinacea and vitamin C. Sigh.
I do take supplements, but I limit them to Vitamin D (proven benefits from numerous studies) and theanine/lemon balm (for stress relief, read several studies on it) and calcium (because I don't drink milk very often anymore and my intake of leafy dark greens is high, but sporadic).
While I will agree that there are many, many examples of quackery in the alternative medicine world, there are treatments that are supported by good clinical and pre-clinical research: acupuncture for chronic pain and tension headaches and the Sambcuol elderberry extract in the treatment of flu.
But, there are two major problems that need to be addressed. Conventional healthcare providers need more information and training on alternative medicines because the majority of patients are using them. Alternative medicines range from the harmless to the effective to the outright dangerous, and health care professionals, especially doctors and pharmacists need to know the differences.
Second, while dietary supplements are regulated by the FDA, the FDA does not have the manpower to adequately regulate them. If I remember correctly, something like 2 full-time "person-equivalents" monitor the entire American dietary supplement industry. At any rate, they are under-staffed and under-funded and unable to adequately regulate the industry. Secondly, the burden of proof is on the FDA, not the dietary supplement industry. The situation is reversed in for Big Pharma. Big Pharma is required to prove safety before a drug is put in the market. In the case of dietary supplements, the FDA has to prove that a dietary supplement is dangerous before they can pull it off the market. The FDA did do this in the case of supplements containing ephedra and ephedrine alkaloids. Better regulation and health care professional education like they have in Europe and Japan, would benefit not only consumers, but also those members of the dietary supplement industry who are actually doing a good job and putting safe, well-researched products on the market.
I think that some alternative medicines are effective in treating some conditions that conventional Western Medicine does not treat well like chronic pain and hot flashes, and it is useful as preventative and adjunctive medicine within the Western Medical framework. That said, I have bottle of Sambucol at home and will take it if I get flu symptoms. But, I am also getting the flu shot and, if I get shot, I definitely want the ambulance to take me to the emergency room. There is a rational middle ground here.
Frankly, I don't even consider it medicine if it is something that can be cured or treated by diet and exercise. If that is the case, then an orange to prevent scurvy is medicine. Rogaine to prevent hair loss is medicine? Botox to prevent wrinkles medicine?
Where do we draw the line? if 1/10th of the money that has been spent on Botox and Rogaine and Collagen lip injections had gone to cancer research or ALS, where would we be?
And this is in large part due to the funding of these "medicines" and the funding of these medicines is based on society's desire for them, in a world where, when we don't feel good, we can at least fool ourself into LOOKING good
"Better regulation and health care professional education like they have in Europe and Japan, would benefit not only consumers, but also those members of the dietary supplement industry who are actually doing a good job and putting safe, well-researched products on the market."
Yes, better regulation would benefit everyone except the quacks.
"Where do we draw the line? if 1/10th of the money that has been spent on Botox and Rogaine and Collagen lip injections had gone to cancer research or ALS, where would we be?"
I'd be happy to see the money re-directed, but that doesn't mean we would have a cure for those diseases. Science doesn't work like that. It may take many years before we make the discoveries that will allow us to cure those diseases.
Well, it's not easy to correspond with that statement, Doctor, and what does it have to do with American Medical Protocol which is based on Scientific Study, and living a healthy life that might include supplements. Your blog is written very cleverly, there's no scientific research by the FDA because these supplements belong to life, not some pharmaceutical company. There are prescription drugs that are very effective and are based on science and help cure people of disease, but you really can't compare them to being healthy and taking supplements.
When you look at the clinical trials data on the product inserts of many drugs, one often sees only a marginally significant difference, in both benefits and side-effects, between the tested drug and the placebo control. In some cases, it's hard to see how the risks outweigh the hoped-for benefits.
That's likely the reason why the inserts are printed in such tiny type and in such a consumer-unfriendly format.
What's the matter, honey, couldn't get enough traffic with a WordPress blog?
One of the strange things about OS is how people simply pretend that what they wish to see happen has actually happened.
I didn't flounce, I wasn't mad, and I certainly couldn't care less about those who cheerfully display their ignorance by yelling at me because they don't understand science.
I set up another blog (that makes more money for me) and cross post here.
I realize that for some people fantasy is preferable to reality, but when you indulge your propensity to lie, don't lie about me.
http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/onion_news1789.jpg
I wish I'd written this article. I wonder if there is a way to embed it at my own irregularly updated site on the Tripe page. Even more do I wish I'd coined the phrase Big Placebo, but I expect to get a lot of use out of it, anyhow. Along with homeopaths, naturopaths, reflexologists and the like I'd add chiropractors and psychologists to the list of placebo hawkers, though I think the latter might not be entirely fair as I think at least some of them are, more or less, straightforward about their product being a sort of placebo.
However, I think your claim that ALL alternative medicines are worthless is over broad. Many – but not all – herbal medicines have merit, as pharmaceutical companies who employ ethnobotanists recognize. Also, it is plain that acupuncture is effective, though it seems "fake" acupuncture works as well as "real," traditional acupuncture. That may be, also, all placebo, but I suspect it may, additionally, work something like the TENS unit I've used in the past. I think we must keep an open mind about any modality for which even anecdotal evidence exists until it is proven valueless experimentally. Which, of course, is not to say that we must embrace all alternative medicines, even the most unlikely ones, until someone troubles to debunk them.
I have to acknowledge one positive aspect of alternative "medicine;" like smoking, it allows the Darwinian principle to operate, even in our protective society, thus improving the intelligence of our gene pool to the point, I hope, where few will give such nonsense any credence.
[It seems my URL got edited out, which makes my reference to the "Tripe" page there meaningless. A websearch might turn it up.]
"It is very much as though you've attacked their religion, both AM and religion being faith-based."
It does seem that way, doesn't it? I suspect alternative health advocates cling so fiercely to their beliefs because alternative health lets you pretend that you have much more control over your health than you actually do.