"Alternative" Therapies

[gav]

And one a bit more local...

Doctors doling out more opiate drugs
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25300922-23289,00.html

 

[Soft Dough]

Soft dough, I can list many, many examples of incompetence of doctors, as you have listed for alternative medicines. It does proves nothing except there are bad in both.

Atorvastatin side effects include abdominal pain, allergic reaction, back pain, changes in eyesight, cold, constipation, diarrhea, dry eyes, dry skin, flu symptoms, gas, hair loss, headache, heartburn, indigestion, inflammation of sinus and nasal passages, itching, joint pain, leg cramps, muscle aching or weakness, purple or red spots on the skin, rash, sore throat, urinary problems, vomiting, weakness and occasionally liver damage.

If I suffered from any of those and found an alternative that kept my cholesterol levels down, I'd certainly use it - even if it lacked research.

Too many doctors over prescribe. SD, do you have any ideas how this can be combated?

What do they overprescribe? because as you might be aware, there are restrictions placed on prescribing that mean that doctors cannot prescribe certain medicines unless indicated.. so some examples please.

and as for side effects what is the alternative, which is efficacious, that has no side-effects? Please, provide me 1 natural medicine that is clinically proven to reduce cholesterol without side effects, and especially one with the relative risk reduction of atorvastatin.

 

[Soft Dough]

And one a bit more local...

Doctors doling out more opiate drugs
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25300922-23289,00.html

2 doctors?

please try harder.

Of course there are dodgy professionals in every profession, but to stereotype doctor prescribing habits because of 2 doctors is ludicrous.

AND

at least the medical board is doing something about it, and they are being reprimanded.

Are you also aware that controlled drug sales are monitored? that there are checks and balances?

 

[gav]

What do they overprescribe? because as you might be aware, there are restrictions placed on prescribing that mean that doctors cannot prescribe certain medicines unless indicated.. so some examples please.

Read the articles in my last 2 posts.

and as for side effects what is the alternative, which is efficacious, that has no side-effects? Please, provide me 1 natural medicine that is clinically proven to reduce cholesterol without side effects, and especially one with the relative risk reduction of atorvastatin.

I am not a naturopath, and have no idea what one would recommend to reduce cholesterol. If you desperately want to know, go see one for yourself. I simply stated if I was suffering side effects from a drug such as the one you mentioned, and found an alternative that also kept my cholesterol down, I'd use it. Even if it didn't have any clinically proven evidence.

 

[gav]

2 doctors?

please try harder.

Of course there are dodgy professionals in every profession, but to stereotype doctor prescribing habits because of 2 doctors is ludicrous.

How about an entire nation? Read the first article I posted...

 

[robots]

hello,

looks like we have a spruiker

thankyou
associate professor robots

 

[Soft Dough]

Read the articles in my last 2 posts.



I am not a naturopath, and have no idea what one would recommend to reduce cholesterol. If you desperately want to know, go see one for yourself. I simply stated if I was suffering side effects from a drug such as the one you mentioned, and found an alternative that also kept my cholesterol down, I'd use it. Even if it didn't have any clinically proven evidence.

That last 2 posts. 1 was relevant, and the other was from America ( which has totally different health regulations to Australia and so it makes the article irrelevant )

So you are defending naturopathic practices, and admit you have no idea about them.

Interesting, I might save some time, you see I know that natural products are untested, unreliable, and are used inappropriately, I do work in the health industry.

 

[gav]

That last 2 posts. 1 was relevant, and the other was from America ( which has totally different health regulations to Australia and so it makes the article irrelevant )

So you are defending naturopathic practices, and admit you have no idea about them.

Interesting, I might save some time, you see I know that natural products are untested, unreliable, and are used inappropriately, I do work in the health industry.

Wow, you work in the health industry? Well then, you must know everything!

Unfortunately the article about America IS relevant, to think that nothing in that article happens here is just plain naive, as is your thinking that the majority of natural products only work due to the placebo affect. And to think doctors don't over prescribe... well Julia worked in the pharmaceutical industry for 12 years and she believes doctors do prescribe too readily, so there's another "industry opinion" for ya.

I used to work for a naturopath, and my partner is a qualified naturopath but no longer practices. Just because I defended naturopathic practices does not mean I am one, and not knowing what one would prescribe for a specific ailment does not mean I have no idea about them. Just as you working in the health industry does not mean you know more about them, nor does it mean your opinion is more valid than mine.

Have a good night.

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia, have noted your comment "May assist in the relief of.........
That has to be stated on these natural alternatives to protect the supplier from litigation if it does not work.
Some things work for one but not others due to imo the genes we inherit.
Some homosexuals can be exposed to HIV/AIDS and never get it.

Some people develope cancer and can conquer it where others can't.

Some people can be exposed to ASBESTOS but never developes into ASBESTOSIS or MELOTHEMIOMA (Ithink that is the way they spell it ).

I was exposed to lots of asbestos in the late 1940's and have carried PLURAL PLAQUES around my lungs for my whole life............

Hi Noco,

Thank you for telling us your story. Must have been a really hard time for you. I'm so pleased it has turned out well.

I'm happy to concede that some 'natural' products can indeed have useful effects. I guess I'd just like some scientific research into why they do what they are suggested to do.

If the manufacturers were to engage in genuine clinical trials with at least some of their products (and if the results were actually as they claim) then I'd imagine the short term expense would ultimately be balanced by more sales from a clinically proven product.

In other words, if pharmaceutical manufacturers face up to spending the millions involved in getting a drug through all the checks and balances in order to gain FDA/TGA approval, then I don't really see why the alternative industry shouldn't be prepared to do likewise, if they want the same level of recognition.

LOL touchy subject? In fact judging from your reply, you may want to go check your own blood pressure :

You may get someone try to sell you placebos and not do any tests if you seen someone who was not qualified (which is why the industry needs to be regulated), however if you seen my g/f when she was practicing she would have asked you to provide evidence for your high cholesterol (test or letter from doctor) before prescribing what she believed was best (I have no idea what she'd prescribe). As for the blood pressure, she can test that herself (and yes she IS qualified to do that).

Gav, again, not wishing to in any way malign your g/f's capabilities, you can buy blood pressure monitors at retail these days for home use. Anyone can use them. Probably more complicated to take one's temperature!

Depending on the client's circumstances the first thing she'd recommend aerobic activity, and maybe a magnesium supplement and/or hawthorn berry supplement - unlike the many GP's whom her clients have come from who end up with side effects from blood pressure meds without even being recommended aerobic activity...

Again, I acknowledge that you're not the naturopath here and are probably guessing a bit, but I'm surprised that for the second time you haven't suggested some modification of diet/weight loss in the attempt to control the hypertension.

Unfortunately their years of training and experience mean little if they prescribe something that has had insufficient testing.

Very, very few medicines make it to market with 'insufficient testing'.
There are minimum requirements that have to be met. Every now and again something like Vioxx is discovered to have longer term side effects which were not experienced in earlier testing. Or perhaps this might have been something which did become apparent in early trials and was 'buried' by the company.
But instances like this are rare indeed.

And there will always be ongoing research which will discover new facts about medications e.g. after HRT being used for many years, additional research implicated it in the increased incidence of breast cancer.

You may argue that alternative medicines have not had any testing for efficacy, and I agree with this. However, for prescibed drugs to be recalled shows they have had initally had insufficient testing, and should not have been prescribed in the first place. Unfortunately it is costing people their health, and often their lives.

The lives saved by medicines would far and away outweigh any lives lost, to the degree that it's pretty ludicrous to attempt to make this point.

A drug recall (again something which happens very rarely) does not at all necessarily indicate insufficient testing, as you suggest, but rather - as I've pointed out above - ongoing research will always allow the possibility of new information being discovered.

And regarding side effects you listed somewhere, what needs to be made clear is that if the drug is trialled on a million patients and just one of them gets a cough while on it, then that has to be listed as a potential side effect.
Absolutely does not mean it is likely to happen.

What do they overprescribe? because as you might be aware, there are restrictions placed on prescribing that mean that doctors cannot prescribe certain medicines unless indicated.. so some examples please.

Yes. When I agreed that GP's have a tendency to over-prescribe, I think I qualified that remark with the explanation that it's pressure of time that promotes this. Doesn't make it good, though.

 

[Hedders]

Very interesting thread! Just a couple of things to add-

1. I agree with Julia, that natural products would benefit from more clinical trials. I'm certain that at least some of them work but until they have proven clinical benefit, it would be unwise to swap from a proven medicine to an unknown entity. Some natural products HAVE undergone good clinical trials, such as echinacea, and olive leaf extract. Both have demonstrated clinical effectiveness and I have no problem recommending them when it's appropriate to. (some echinacea studies are positive, some are negative though- so, it's not entirely clear-cut)

2. As for the post citing side effects from Atorvastatin- yes , the side effects can occur, but they are rather infrequent. I have over 100 patients taking it regularly, and I know of only 3 or 4 that couldn't tolerate it. That doesn't make it a bad drug. And the fact that it's use is continually under review in subsequent studies is helpful too. We will learn more as time goes on, to see why it suits some and not others. Another reason why ongoing trials are important (they certainly discovered things about Vioxx down the track, that weren't apparent initially).

Many people use drug side effects as a reason to slam the whole industry, as if any kind of side effect is evidence that taking drugs is a poor alternative to taking natural products. This ignores the fact that natural products can also cause serious side effects- look at St John's Wort, Valerian and Ginseng for example. What's the difference? A drug's patient literature must list a side effect even if it's only been documented in one person, while natural products are not obliged to tell you.

Many drugs have come about by refining natural products, and removing the substances that are clinically useless and cause side effects. This is a desirable pursuit in my opinion. Look at Ziconotide- a non-opioid anaesthetic derived from cone shell toxin. At present the side effect profile is so bad (suicidal thoughts, hallucinations, confusion etc) that it can only be infused directly into the spine, to reduce/avoid the side effects. But I think most people would like to see this natural substance studied further, as it could give rise to new pain killers that don't develop tolerance or dependence.

So I am an advocate for researching natural products, but I don't think it's always wise to keep using them in their natural state, placing principles before better health outcomes.

3. Finally, the placebo effect. A personal passion of mine. Hopefully one day we can work out just how our brains can bring about physiological change via thought processes (in either direction). The one thing I DON'T like about handing people information on side effects is that a significant number of people go home and literally wait for one of them to materialize! And lo and behold, they get one! Now, often it is a real side effect, but I've had people say things like brand A of drug X makes them feel sick, but brand B of drug X is fine (even though brand A and brand B come from the same factory, made by the same people, possibly from the same manufacturing batch!). Here's another example- as soon as I mention head lice, some of you will begin to itch your scalp!

Natural products probably benefit from a lack of "negative placebo effect" because the consumer is not made aware of all the potential side effects.

I should say that I'm a pharmacist, but I'm not affiliated with any drug company. I'm not against the concept of natural remedies. But all too often the information available about natural medicine is not clinically validated or extensive enough to make an informed choice.

 

[aussiepipe]

The lives saved by medicines would far and away outweigh any lives lost, to the degree that it's pretty ludicrous to attempt to make this point.

Is the opposite true of natural or alternative remedies?

I believe that if natural or alternative should be regulated then they should be given the same government funding and also placed on the pbs if they have found to have beneficial effects.

If you are interested there was a study done in the US by some doctors called Death by Medicine and it stated that death from the regulated medicine was there 3rd or 4th biggest killer more than heart disease or cancer. If you are interested just google it. Even if you don't believe it or think it happens in Aust. its an interesting perspective.

One issue not raised so far is the placebo effect. Research has shown that a third of cases (varies from 0 to 76% depending on the medicine prescribed) people feel better taking a placebo and it has no side effects. Put it on the PBS.

Cheers

 

[aussiepipe]

One issue not raised so far is the placebo effect. Research has shown that a third of cases (varies from 0 to 76% depending on the medicine prescribed) people feel better taking a placebo and it has no side effects. Put it on the PBS.

sorry Hedders i had started typing before your message came up. My short on the ftse went against me so I got distracted.

Somebody asked for Aussie article before here is a link to an Aussie article if anyone is interested but it is easy to find articles for both sides of the argument.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/death-by-medicine/2007/08/17/1186857771586.html

cheers

 

[Hedders]

Is the opposite true of natural or alternative remedies?

I believe that if natural or alternative should be regulated then they should be given the same government funding and also placed on the pbs if they have found to have beneficial effects.

If you are interested there was a study done in the US by some doctors called Death by Medicine and it stated that death from the regulated medicine was there 3rd or 4th biggest killer more than heart disease or cancer. If you are interested just google it. Even if you don't believe it or think it happens in Aust. its an interesting perspective.

One issue not raised so far is the placebo effect. Research has shown that a third of cases (varies from 0 to 76% depending on the medicine prescribed) people feel better taking a placebo and it has no side effects. Put it on the PBS.

Cheers

Just mentioned placebo in my previous post- I think it's great! A classic case is putting coloured water on children's warts- it will get rid of them in most cases if the child thinks the "paint" is a real wart butt-kicker. You have to talk it up

 

[Hedders]

Sorry Aussiepipe- we must be posting at the same time!

 

[aussiepipe]

Hedders,

I hadn't heard about the wart one but that could be why apple cider vinegar worked on my warts because I could never understand it. I thought it was a ridiculous remedy but it worked.

Thanks for your comments. It gave me some good food for thought.

Cheers

 

[Soft Dough]

Very interesting thread! Just a couple of things to add-

1. I agree with Julia, that natural products would benefit from more clinical trials. I'm certain that at least some of them work but until they have proven clinical benefit, it would be unwise to swap from a proven medicine to an unknown entity. Some natural products HAVE undergone good clinical trials, such as echinacea, and olive leaf extract. Both have demonstrated clinical effectiveness and I have no problem recommending them when it's appropriate to. (some echinacea studies are positive, some are negative though- so, it's not entirely clear-cut)

3. Finally, the placebo effect. A personal passion of mine. Hopefully one day we can work out just how our brains can bring about physiological change via thought processes (in either direction). The one thing I DON'T like about handing people information on side effects is that a significant number of people go home and literally wait for one of them to materialize! And lo and behold, they get one! Now, often it is a real side effect, but I've had people say things like brand A of drug X makes them feel sick, but brand B of drug X is fine (even though brand A and brand B come from the same factory, made by the same people, possibly from the same manufacturing batch!).

1. Olive leaf extract and echinacea did not have any conclusive results last time I checked. I will check on medline, embase and cochrane tonight, and see if any reputable studies, published in real journals have been done.

3. 100% agree. How many people want to be prescribed the real ocp when most generics are made by the originator company. The most interesting one is how many say that their ventolin works better than their asmol, I was told that they are both made by GSK.

 

[Soft Dough]

. Research has shown that a third of cases (varies from 0 to 76% depending on the medicine prescribed) people feel better taking a placebo and it has no side effects. Put it on the PBS.

And knowing PBAC they will probably be willing to pay $60 to $80 for a months supply of this.

 

[Sunder]

Some natural products HAVE undergone good clinical trials, such as echinacea, and olive leaf extract. Both have demonstrated clinical effectiveness and I have no problem recommending them when it's appropriate to. (some echinacea studies are positive, some are negative though- so, it's not entirely clear-cut)

The question is, when does *something* extract stop being a naturopathic product, to becoming a drug? Is it when other parts of the plant, such as the fibre, or water are removed? Or when the chemical left is called something like X123-somethingzine-flavinoid?

Lactoferrin and penecillin has been both brought up. Nobody would drink 20 litres of milk to get one dose of lactoferrin, and nobody would eat mouldy orange to get penecillin, yet, they both come out of natural, every day products. If someone came out with a conclusive study that said echinacea extract was an effective anti-viral, I would classify it as a drug just like lactoferrin and penecillin.

The issue isn't what is prescribed. The issue is the PHILOSOPHY behind the two "treatment" methods. One is based on rigourously and empirically tested methods, extensive training, and understanding of biology and physiology. The other is based off what? How many naturopaths understand, say, how viruses bind to cells? What the different causes of high blood pressure are and how to lower them back again? No point going on a low fat diet and doing Yoga if the cause of high blood pressure was a congenital heart defect, and avoiding surgery in that case could be fatal.

You see, that's my problem with natural "treatments"- it assumes the body is self healing, and just needs the right environment. The human body can be pushed so far out of alignment by viruses, toxins, genetic conditions and environmental conditions, that restoring it back to a healthy environment just gives the body a better place to die, where as medicine can intervene.

 

[noco]

LOL touchy subject? In fact judging from your reply, you may want to go check your own blood pressure :

You may get someone try to sell you placebos and not do any tests if you seen someone who was not qualified (which is why the industry needs to be regulated), however if you seen my g/f when she was practicing she would have asked you to provide evidence for your high cholesterol (test or letter from doctor) before prescribing what she believed was best (I have no idea what she'd prescribe). As for the blood pressure, she can test that herself (and yes she IS qualified to do that). Depending on the client's circumstances the first thing she'd recommend aerobic activity, and maybe a magnesium supplement and/or hawthorn berry supplement - unlike the many GP's whom her clients have come from who end up with side effects from blood pressure meds without even being recommended aerobic activity...

Hi Gav,
You can monitor your own blood pressure with an OMRON available at most major chemists.
I purchased mine on a doctors prescription a couple of years ago for $149.99 and received $150.00 back from my private health care.

Whilst I was on prescribed medication, my blood pressure started to climb to 170/90 which began to concern my GP.

She asked me to monitor my blood pressure before I get out of bed each morning and last thing at night before I retire for one whole month.
Before doing so I looked my ALTERNATIVE CURES BOOK and learned that by taking a 1000mg capusule of Omega 3 fish oil with each meal would lower one's blood pressure.

So being a fanatic on alternative cures I became my own guinea pig and carried out what I had read.

To my surprize, my blood pressure kept coming down over the month untill I finished up with 132/82. According to my book, OMEGA 3 relaxes the walls of the arteries and reduces blood pressure.

My doctor was amazed at the results which she could not explain the reason untill I explained to her what I had done. Her answer was if it works keep it up. What a great doctor I have to participate in alternative cures!

I am not a Naturapath. What works for some may not work for others.

 

[Soft Dough]

My doctor was amazed at the results which she could not explain the reason untill I explained to her what I had done. Her answer was if it works keep it up. What a great doctor I have to participate in alternative cures!

Fish oil is great for vessels, but not for blood pressure, especially not in the order that you describe. Perhaps you do not suffer the anxiety of a bp measurement now that you think it is doing something for you?

see in a trial they would offer

placebo
500mg
1000mg

and see if there is a dose-response to fish-oil supplementation. see if it is a placebo you could not even test this yourself as you are aware of the dose that you are taking.

I love the fact the the book makes an unsubstantiated claim as to mechanism of action.