Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Interactive SFN Forums
 Polls, Votes and Surveys
 Further Research on Fringe Topics
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 5

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 10/31/2004 :  12:03:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.

Well, I guess I'm just going to have to drop this, Beskeptigal, no matter how much it pains me to do so, since I can't seem to get you to even become aware of the points I'm trying to make. There comes a time when even I, idealist that I am, must admit that communications is impossible. I apologize for having annoyed you these past couple of months.

Sorry, been a bit busy.

I am not annoyed, just confused why you can't give me a term to replace Western medicine if you don't think it conveys the correct information. Evidence based medicine is not a correct replacement. This tells me you are missing the intent of my use of the term.

You seem concerned about what Western medicine implies but missing what it means. I thought my message had become succinct by my last post. Apparently not.

Western medicine does not imply legitimacy. It doesn't matter if it is imitated to deceive the consumer. It doesn't matter if the consumer doesn't know what is or isn't Western medicine.

Let's start over.

What do you call medicine taught in Universities with its resulting practitioners licensed as MDs?

It certainly isn't all evidence based. It isn't Eastern, alternative, holistic, or naturopathic, though some elements of those may be included.
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 10/31/2004 :  12:20:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message
There is some evidence to support a therapy called Therapeutic Massage. I'll get a link when I can. I wasn't ready to buy it when someone brought it up as a treatment for plantar fascitis but upon investigation found it had some good evidence based support in the literature.

I agree with a lot of what you all have been posting. Charlatan implies deceit whereas lots of unproven alternatives are practiced out of ignorance, not deceit.

Much of the dietary supplements are proving to not work as claimed when they are researched, with a few exceptions.

One has to be careful about accepting research conclusions which support popular treatments like acupuncture. Not all research is done well. OTOH, there is strong evidence for pain relief with stimulation of certain nerve pathways. And, we know certain areas which when pain is felt there, indicate injury elsewhere. It is called referred pain. Your liver hurts in your right shoulder. Your heart can hurt in your jaw or left arm.

One has to keep an open mind until the research is done.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 11/03/2004 :  17:40:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
Beskeptigal wrote:
quote:
What do you call medicine taught in Universities with its resulting practitioners licensed as MDs?
Actually, if I didn't overthink the question, I'd probably call it "mainstream medicine."

Here's what I've been trying to get at: if I had my druthers, any term which is actively being used by quacks - like "Western medicine" - in order to "sneer at" modern medicine in a political attempt to gain "converts" wouldn't be used by practitioners of mainstream medicine. If things would happen this way, the consumer would quickly realize that the term has lost its meaning for the "good guys." Should the mainstream medicine crowd need a new term, at times, they can use "flirtnip" for all it matters what the standard of practice is called. The practice doesn't require a particular name.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  01:42:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message
I have not had similar experiences with folks manipulating the term 'western med', but I can try to use 'mainstream med' in my posts. I guess if I had heard it used as a negative it wouldn't bother me. Consider the source.
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13457 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  09:24:51   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message
quote:
beskeptigal:
I have not had similar experiences with folks manipulating the term 'western med', but I can try to use 'mainstream med' in my posts. I guess if I had heard it used as a negative it wouldn't bother me. Consider the source.

I regularly go to new age expos and health expos. Believe me when I say that “Western Medicine” is something to be avoided becomes the overwhelming theme of these expos as I travel from booth to booth no matter what crap they are selling.

“Western Medicine is only focused on treating the symptoms while the ancient art of [insert treatment] treats the underlying cause” is the mantra of the new age…

“Wellness” is the goal and they make it quit clear that “Western Medicine” does not promote “Wellness.” Only short term relief that is probably doing more harm than good. They also accuse “Western Medicine” of profiteering at the expense of their patients. “Wellness” would cut into their profits since there would be less sick people to treat. So “Western Medicine” is also portrayed as a large conspiracy with the goal of keeping people sick and coming back for more.

So even though we know what we mean when using the term “Western Medicine” to many many people the phrase has become one of derision and should, unfortunately, be avoided…

William Burroughs once said, “Language is a virus.” The perversion of the term “Western Medicine” may be but one example of the virus in action…

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  10:42:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message
sigh.....more Bush supporters no doubt*.

(*See gen discussion forum for explanation of strangly out of context replies from me for the next few days.)
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  07:10:08   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
beskeptigal wrote:
quote:
I have not had similar experiences with folks manipulating the term 'western med', but I can try to use 'mainstream med' in my posts. I guess if I had heard it used as a negative it wouldn't bother me. Consider the source.
How many others consider the source? That's one of the things we're here on the SFN to try to fix, but that - obviously - is a very long-term goal. In the meantime, once the manipulation is known, it's not a matter of changing your vocabulary here, but with your patients and coworkers. At least, that would be my priority, but I'm not you.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Wendy
SFN Regular

USA
614 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  08:13:08   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Wendy a Yahoo! Message Send Wendy a Private Message
I voted for religious "miracles" for the reasons stated by Cuneiformist. I believe more harm has been caused by religious fanatics than by cancer, AIDS, and heart disease combined. Debunking the myths would be my priority.

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  08:28:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Wendy

I voted for religious "miracles" for the reasons stated by Cuneiformist. I believe more harm has been caused by religious fanatics than by cancer, AIDS, and heart disease combined. Debunking the myths would be my priority.



This isn't asking which one you would like to debunk more, it's asking which do you think is most likely true. If we put research into it, we could come up with positive results, although I'm sure at least most of us knows that is very unlikely.

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Go to Top of Page

Wendy
SFN Regular

USA
614 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  08:55:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Wendy a Yahoo! Message Send Wendy a Private Message
quote:
This isn't asking which one you would like to debunk more, it's asking which do you think is most likely true.


Well, I just reread the question...

quote:
Poll Question:
As a skeptic, which of these "fringe" topics do you feel has yet to be fully explored and is most deserving of further research?



I don't see where it asks which I think is most likely to be true, only which one I think is most deserving of further research. You, of course, are certainly entitled to your opinion. I prefer to go with what is actually written.

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  09:26:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message
I think something is deserving of research if it could benefit us in some way, even if this benefit is just expanding our knowlege. I therefore conclude that it must be true in order to benefit us, and the one that deserves more study is the one which has a greater chance of being true.

This of course is based of the first assertion:

I think something is deserving of research if it could benefit us in some way, even if this benefit is just expanding our knowlege.

Which is merely just an opinion. So in the end, you are right, if you disagree with this, then you disagree with the entire thing, and that is only an opinion.

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4954 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  09:32:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
William Burroughs once said, “Language is a virus.” The perversion of the term “Western Medicine” may be but one example of the virus in action…


Not to get too far off topic, but the same could be said for a number of other terms. "Liberal" now has a bad connotation to it, and somehow "Darwinist" is used with negative implications by Creationists in a way that could never be done with "Newtonian" or "Euclidian"...
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4954 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  09:38:44   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky

I think something is deserving of research if it could benefit us in some way, even if this benefit is just expanding our knowlege. I therefore conclude that it must be true in order to benefit us, and the one that deserves more study is the one which has a greater chance of being true.

This of course is based of the first assertion:

I think something is deserving of research if it could benefit us in some way, even if this benefit is just expanding our knowlege.

Which is merely just an opinion. So in the end, you are right, if you disagree with this, then you disagree with the entire thing, and that is only an opinion.



Hey, Ricky. I read the question like Wendy did-- that is "what bogus claim out there needs to be researched more in order to expose it more convincingly as bogus." It did not strike me that any of the things listed might actially be real and could be proved; but there could still be research that helps push whatever fringe topic further to the fringe.

Still, I can see how your reading of the poll could be made and, in fact, may be the better one...
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  11:26:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message
You should not do research in order to accomplish a goal, but instead to learn more about our universe and the laws that govern it. This is why I do not think you should ever do research in order to debunk something to a greater extent.

That's basically where I am coming from, but I just want to say once again that I think your interpretation is just as good as mine.

Edit:

Dave, did you mean one of these two interpretations, or possibly a third which has not been mentioned?

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Edited by - Ricky on 11/08/2004 11:30:52
Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2004 :  11:44:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
Dave, did you mean one of these two interpretations, or possibly a third which has not been mentioned?


Actually, I submitted the poll idea to Dave and he posted it.

I originally meant "which is most likely to have a kernel of truth," but I can now see how one could arrive at the opposite interpretation of "which is most in need of debunking."


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 5 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.36 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000