"Death by Medicine" rhetoric
Follows are my comments to some of Gary Null's rhetoric used to sell his health supplement products. These are pasted below. At the outset, his label of "orthodox medicine" is not comprehensible. This label is created by Null and others as a marketing tactic. My folly here is to accept his designation that an "orthodox" camp of ideals as he describes even exists. -dras
In every instance "orthodox" medical treatment's predictability for benefit is MUCH better than anything "alternative" Null has to sell. Show me each alternative medicine study Null cites in his spill, so I can match them with the studies for the "orthodox" medical equivalent. But, I would be wasting my time, Null is likely not interested except to use whatever means to push his products.
If 10-20% is proved, another 60-70% of "orthodox" medical treatment is based on sound, rational common sense that won't need a controlled trial to validate. By the way, has even 2% of what Null has to offer been "proved" in controlled trials? Null's entire statement here is counter-intuitive when applied to clinical medical practice. Does anyone really believe that 80%, or even the majority of the people who go to the doctor are worse off for going? I bet he hopes listeners are too deep in the shock-and-awe presentation to think rationally.
These fantastic, conspiracy laden statements exist to play on the fear of the unknown in an uninformed populace. A slimy sales tactic to get people to make illogical choices and take frivolous actions that are based solely on enticed emotions and passions. Please have Null specifically list all the "unnecessary or overused procedures." For every one, I bet "orthodox" medicine can list at least TEN very necessary and often used procedures. Again, if I was convinced he would even be interested.
Dale
"...Does orthodox medicine have the scientific basis to prove that it should stand alone, unchallenged, in offering remedies for the ills that we suffer from? Does an alternative approach have any scientific basis? Can it substantiate its value? Simple question, and legitimate ones concerning how the orthodox has been promoted without question and the alternative has been condemned without trial."Later, he commented as follows:"Look at the facts. Quote only 10-20% of all procedures [he did say earlier that these figures are from a 1978 study by the Office of Technology Assessment] currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial. So you would think that by listening to a quackbuster or someone from the surgeon generals office or someone from the AMA that everything they are telling you is backed up by science. Not true. In fact, between 90 to 80 percent of all medical procedures would then be deemed be unproven. Well using their rules of attack and destroy as quackery and fraudulent anything that has not been proven, then the very defenders of orthodoxy must now turn, look in the mirror and ask the following question. You are the ultimate quacks.[That's not a question, but that's what he said.] And the government's own agency has shown you haven't proven your medicines are safe or your procedures effective. So you, through vaccines and any other procedure [sic] we can show you are using unproven methods and techniques and using the American public as human guinea pigs.""Does orthodox medicine work? In some cases, very well and is necessary. But has it been proven? Only 10-20%. The rest is a game, a guess with enormous potential for injury, damage and enormous expenses. When someone causes 400 billion dollars a year to be taken out of people's pockets where there is no benefit and only harm from unnecessary or overused procedures, and we have proven that, then that is the biggest scam in American history. And that's every year. We're talking about trillions of dollars in fraud. And yet we've seen no cry for investigations."
In every instance "orthodox" medical treatment's predictability for benefit is MUCH better than anything "alternative" Null has to sell. Show me each alternative medicine study Null cites in his spill, so I can match them with the studies for the "orthodox" medical equivalent. But, I would be wasting my time, Null is likely not interested except to use whatever means to push his products.
If 10-20% is proved, another 60-70% of "orthodox" medical treatment is based on sound, rational common sense that won't need a controlled trial to validate. By the way, has even 2% of what Null has to offer been "proved" in controlled trials? Null's entire statement here is counter-intuitive when applied to clinical medical practice. Does anyone really believe that 80%, or even the majority of the people who go to the doctor are worse off for going? I bet he hopes listeners are too deep in the shock-and-awe presentation to think rationally.
These fantastic, conspiracy laden statements exist to play on the fear of the unknown in an uninformed populace. A slimy sales tactic to get people to make illogical choices and take frivolous actions that are based solely on enticed emotions and passions. Please have Null specifically list all the "unnecessary or overused procedures." For every one, I bet "orthodox" medicine can list at least TEN very necessary and often used procedures. Again, if I was convinced he would even be interested.
Dale
"...Does orthodox medicine have the scientific basis to prove that it should stand alone, unchallenged, in offering remedies for the ills that we suffer from? Does an alternative approach have any scientific basis? Can it substantiate its value? Simple question, and legitimate ones concerning how the orthodox has been promoted without question and the alternative has been condemned without trial."Later, he commented as follows:"Look at the facts. Quote only 10-20% of all procedures [he did say earlier that these figures are from a 1978 study by the Office of Technology Assessment] currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial. So you would think that by listening to a quackbuster or someone from the surgeon generals office or someone from the AMA that everything they are telling you is backed up by science. Not true. In fact, between 90 to 80 percent of all medical procedures would then be deemed be unproven. Well using their rules of attack and destroy as quackery and fraudulent anything that has not been proven, then the very defenders of orthodoxy must now turn, look in the mirror and ask the following question. You are the ultimate quacks.[That's not a question, but that's what he said.] And the government's own agency has shown you haven't proven your medicines are safe or your procedures effective. So you, through vaccines and any other procedure [sic] we can show you are using unproven methods and techniques and using the American public as human guinea pigs.""Does orthodox medicine work? In some cases, very well and is necessary. But has it been proven? Only 10-20%. The rest is a game, a guess with enormous potential for injury, damage and enormous expenses. When someone causes 400 billion dollars a year to be taken out of people's pockets where there is no benefit and only harm from unnecessary or overused procedures, and we have proven that, then that is the biggest scam in American history. And that's every year. We're talking about trillions of dollars in fraud. And yet we've seen no cry for investigations."
posted by nawledge at
4:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home