dras knowledge

Thursday, September 23, 2004

Televangelist Agrees to Cancer Surgery

Televangelist Agrees to Cancer Surgery
Flamboyant Gene Scott, who relied on faith healing, says his disease is now 'out of control.'By TERESA WATANABE Times Staff WriterGene Scott, a flamboyant televangelist who previously relied on faith healing to cure his prostate cancer, announced he would undergo surgery Monday at UCLA Medical Center, saying his disease had run "out of control."A statement by three of his organizations said the 75-year-old preacher had discovered this month that a "golf ball-sized cancer" had spread to his bladder from his prostate, where cancer was first diagnosed four years ago. The statement said Scott would also undergo radiation treatment and chemotherapy, which could prolong his life for two years.The spread of cancer "comes as a sobering shock to this religious leader who advocates faith healing" instead of regular medical care, said the statement by his Los Angeles University Cathedral, University Broadcast Systems and Wescott Center. Scott made the announcement of his impending surgery on his global telecast Sunday.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Cynicism aside, this does not have to be a disappointing challenge of faith. The experience can be a learning and faith promoting one if the whole intent has been to understand God's will. The truly faithful believe they can be Divinely inspired to better understand His will in their own choices along life's path. If you really believe, and know the true intent of your own heart, understanding that God’s primary concern is salvation of your soul more than wealth and even physical health, you’ve taken your first steps to better understanding what His will is for you. Eventually, the steps can lead to miracles.

In full cynic mode, I wonder if the reverend wishes all parishioners to abstain from intercessory prayers on his behalf in full recognition of complete abandonment of the faith-healing alternative? After all, "God has had His shot" at the cancer. -dras

Friday, September 17, 2004

Ionized water foot bath

Based on Google hits regarding Ionized water foot bath, I think this has everything to do with specialized water.

The best Website for the casual reader I have found is: http://www.chem1.com/CQ/clusqk.html or http://www.chem1.com/CQ/wonkywater.html. These are fun pages. The Website reads and follows like an extreme "debunker" site which makes me little skeptical of all the information. But, I'm sure if I researched things out for myself, I'd find nothing wrong with the scientific facts that are presented. The links in the reference section are just as fun.

Just so I'm being fair. Here is a site, indicating an MD is the author, that explains not only the science, but the wonderful marketing potential of altered (structured) water. http://www.aquatechnology.net/page11.html . Here is why I am skeptical of this Website:
1. It's a commercial site that is OUT TO SELL SOMETHING.
2. It uses personal attacks against "naysayers."
3. It provides no references for scientific statements of proof, despite having a long list of them available on the site.
4. It excuses the lack of scientific evidence by claiming an argument for "subtle energies" that are not measured using traditional empiric means.
5. The scientific statements presented do not clearly explain any real difference between the structured water they wish to make available to market and regular tap water.

There is established science pertaining to structured water: Do you have a water softener? Water out of a water softener meets most anyones definition of "structured" water. Any claims about structured, clustered, ionized, etc. water benefits beyond what regular softened water would provide is purely speculative in my belief.

**The "chem1.com" website I reference above is part of an anti-quackery webring (linked on the site's homepage,) I have not been to all the webring sites, but I do know all the Websites in it are not created equal. Some are full of rants (non-objective complaints), and some are a little anti-religion. I always remind myself that healthcare approaches are not about "good and evil." Rather, anywhere between extremes of being scientifically established and full of deceit and fraud.

Thursday, September 09, 2004

I don't need to prove to you I'm sick, or that alt-med made me well.

As perverse as it may seem, it is much, much easier tohave a disease (or government conspiracy, or both) toblame for your misfortunes than it is to accept thatyour problems are due to chance ("fate"), genetics orpersonal choices (or non-choices - the failure tochoose is a choice, the failure to act is an action).Putting on my Nomex shorts for the inevitable flaming.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since you're expecting it:

You are not me! How dare you tell me my illness is either my own fault, psychosomatic, or just plain a part of my life I have to learn to accept and deal with!! If you were me you'd know that my illness is real, because you'd be sick. Too sick to spend time trying to rationalize away other peoples conditions the way you do. You should be glad you are not me, because you would be content to just suffer it out at home and not do anything about it, and let it take you. I, on the other hand, am committed to finding out what's making me sick. Maybe so that we can learn how to prevent people like you from getting sick like me. Unlike you, I'll remain optimistic that a cause will be found, and that I can get better. It's people like you with attitudes blah, blah, blah...

I could go on, but is that enough? Maybe I could use the word "you" a few more times?

Sincerely, I was not inclined to reply to the CSF thread because I've expected and have shared sentiments in the replies of others on the list, and I see myself much less enlightened and very much less eloquent or complete in a reply.

One additional tidbit commenting on our current culture of illness. I've read some personal journals from individuals living in the mid to late 1800's. I've wondered if the word "melancholy" could have been a a buzz-word of the time. People would often excuse themselves or others from tasks or describe interruptions in daily routines due to feelings of melancholy. Seems they overall accepted these perhaps exacerbations of a chronic conditions or depression in themselves and others. They realized that there will be days when they can be at top performance, and days when they cannot. And that some suffer more than others. Social dogma and qualification for benefits or disability was not as big a factor back then.

NIH study proves Naturopathic Medicine works, or does it?

http://www.news-medical.net/?id=4613News-Medical.Net Study shows that naturopathicmedicine helps women experiencing jaw pains Posted By: News-Medical in Medical Study News Published: Wednesday, 8-Sep-2004



This study will likely not support the whole of Naturopathic medicine. Since study information is not yet available in peer review, I'll only go by this press release, which reads like a pro-Naturopathy tract. I note six observations about this report of an NIH study and add some comments.

1) "Naturopathic medicine is based upon a holistic philosophy, an approach to medical care that emphasizes the study of all aspects of a person's health, with an emphasis on finding the underlying cause of the patient’s condition rather than focusing solely on symptomatic treatment."

I would like to know what the University-based TMJ clinic would say if accused of "solely focusing on symptomatic treatment." I would be surprised if they do not use the very latest evidence and research behind the causes of TMJ - and I'm skeptical that it has much to do with toxins in the gut as inferred in the Naturopathic treatment arm protocol. My opinion: this report has statements of pro-Naturopathy propoganda that attempt to subversively legitimize the pseudo-scientific aspects of Naturopathic philosophy within the auspices of a scientific clinical study.

2) All patients had co-morbidness of menopause symptoms, CFS, or depression.

Selection bias. A TMJ clinic is not going to thoroughly evaluate and address interventions for these co-morbidities. Outcomes of the study will likely be influenced by symptomatic changes in the co-morbid conditions. For example, the treatment from the TMJ clinic is all about TMJ, the treatment in the Naturopathic arm is about the "whole" body. No subject will expect depression to get better by going to a TMJ clinic, so no one will report it. The Naturopathic arm is told treatment will improve everything, so such is reported by the subjects.

3) Each Naturopathic subject was seen by one of two Naturopathic physicians and allowed nine one-hour visits over a six-month period.

How did this compare with the other treatment arms? Did the TMJ clinic subjects get 9 one hour sessions with one of two physicians? If not, there is convincing evidence of unequal treatment arms that will introduce bias and not control for placebo effect.

4)In the Naturopathic arm, subjects were asked about their "...ability to detoxify harmful substances in the body..."

What is this line of questioning? Does it have something do with Naturopathy using the "most current advances in modern medicine" because I don't seem to recall similar questioning in any medical evaluation or differential diagnosis I am aware of. Please show me the clinical physiologic evidences where an inability "to detoxify harmful substances" has anything remotely to do with TMJ. This statement is an example of what's expressed in my opinon under #1 above.

5)The Naturopathic test subjects accepted changes in lifestyle as recommended by theNaturopathic practitioner.

Outcomes demonstrating the Naturopathic treatment arm as superior can not validate Naturopathic medicine as a whole as is apparently the argument of the article. What it can do is validate that doing more is better than doing less.

6)In the Naturopathic arm, patients reported “ 'transformational' changes. A number of patients came to believe that they had been “stuck” in their pain level and that they could not imagine that they could feel better. After the study, they reported they had become “unstuck” in their way of thinking."

Reporting bias. Could this outcome possibly be because the Naturopathic arm subjects are conditioned for this type of reporting as a result of the one-on-one counseling? Who would expect such reporting after treatment at a TMJ clinic?
Comments:

To the credit of the NIH and researchers, perhaps the visceral argument of the study is that mainstream medicine has to do better at addressing the spiritual, psychosocial, and psychological aspects that could be contributing to a health condition. How to do it, and what is appropriate by whom are the questions.

If you want to make an argument for the whole of Naturopathic medicine, I would like to see the study where the TMJ arm has all the lifestyle and other benign recommendations of the Naturopathic physician (or acceptable equivalents,) along with the one-on-one counseling. Then let the Naturopathic arm throw in the detox procedures and nutraceutical remedies. Even better would be to have another treatment arm use sham detox procedures and sham nutraceuticals.

It is disturbing that NCCAM seems to have created a study to exploit the obvious benefits of an expanded clinical approach in order to get society to swallow Naturopathic medicine whole, pseudo-science and all.