The most controversial/ridiculed/discredited/dangerous treatments out there.

[Wayne]

Wouldn't it be a kick to discuss putting Fluoride in drinking water supplies?

Are you implying it may not be so easy for you to maintain your sense of equanimity?

 

[Wishful]

I think I figured out what we're arguing about. You offered DMSO as an example of an effective, reliable drug that is being suppressed by corporate greed. However, it lacks evidence of being effective and reliable, so I didn't consider it a valid example. I think I realized that subconsciously, but not consciously. Your experience of it being effective at blocking toothache does not prove all the claims for it being valid. Many of us here have found treatments that work really well the first time we take it, but then stop working, and don't work for anyone else. Maybe DMSO works wonderfully well, one in a thousand times, due to a large number of factors that are hard to determine and hard to control. If it's not being funded for approval, it might not be because it would displace profitable drugs, but rather because it hasn't been reliable enough in unapproved usage to risk the investment.

As for the conspiracy part, is there any hard evidence of bribery, threats, or other coercion? I suppose the conspiracy theorist's standard reply is that the conspiracy is suppressing or destroying all such evidence, but that isn't proof of a conspiracy.

Again, fine with me, if that is no proof for you. I know from years of experience with many nutrients and lifestyle changes that (other than approved medications) they do work for remissions.

That you found some that worked for you doesn't mean that they are reliable or effective for everyone else. I don't expect the medical system to fund the approval process for cuminaldehyde as a PEM blocker, since it only worked for me. I also don't expect the government to ban cumin. As with the nutrients you found effective, they are available for personal testing, not banned by a global conspiracy. Local bans on such things as LDN are local politics.

Should doctors offer lists of not officially approved alternative treatments that had claims for working for some people? I think that would be a disaster, with lawsuits, scammers pushing their snake oil on the lists, and so forth. Who's responsible for verifying anecdotal claims? If someone wants to try alternative treatments, there are forums such as this one, and people can make their own personal judgements as to which to try.

I agree about the harm from approved pharmaceuticals, but that doesn't mean that relying on alternative treatments would result in fewer deaths overall. The deaths from approved pharmaceuticals are likely mostly from abuse, rather than doctor prescribed and monitored usage. Alternative treatments would likely be abused just as much. Some of those treatments might be helpful in small doses for a short time, but harmful beyond that. If there's an alternative sedative or analgesic, people might drive impaired while thinking "I can't be impaired, that capsule is all natural!" I'm not seeing what deaths from approved (and abused) pharmaceuticals is supposed to be an argument for.

 

[pamojja]

The deaths from approved pharmaceuticals are likely mostly from abuse, rather than doctor prescribed and monitored usage. Alternative treatments would likely be abused just as much.

You're exhibiting a very strong bias against natural remedies, and in strong favor of approved medications.

If and when from overdose nutrients or DSMO, nobody dies, it's because nobody abuses those?

But if numerous deaths result from prescribed medications, it could be due to abuse only? Pure biased speculations on your side, with no evidence in real life.

People do die in the hundreds from some class of prescribed medications each year in the US. And aren't from freely available natural nutrients althogether.

That you found some that worked for you doesn't mean that they are reliable or effective for everyone else.

Then take a look how effective the prescribed medication against my walking-disability from PAD (and which I refused due to their evidenced ineffectiveness) - which are all well studied in 5 years RCTS - would have been for its worse outcome, premature mortality:

Statins Given for 5 Years for Heart Disease Prevention (With Known Heart Disease)

83 for mortality

In Summary, for those who took the statin for 5 years:

Benefits in NNT

• 1 in 83 were helped (life saved)
• 1 in 39 were helped (preventing non-fatal heart attack)
• 1 in 125 were helped (preventing stroke)

Harms in NNH

• 1 in 100 were harmed (develop diabetes*)
• 1 in 10 were harmed (muscle damage)

*The development of diabetes is one such unanticipated harm found in a recent large study and it seems likely therefore that this applies to the data above, although this is a best guess.

82 out of 83 statins medicated users experience no benefit against earlier mortality whatsoever!

Aspirin to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Known Heart Disease or Strokes

333 for mortality

In Summary, for those who took the aspirin:

Benefits in NNT

• 1 in 50 were helped (cardiovascular problem prevented)
• 1 in 333 were helped (prevented death)
• 1 in 77 were helped (prevented non-fatal heart attack)
• 1 in 200 were helped (prevented non-fatal stroke)

Harms in NNH

• 1 in 400 were harmed (major bleeding event*)

*Required hospital admission and transfusio

332 out of 333 Aspirin medicated users experience no benefits whatsoever, against earlier mortality!

Blood Pressure Medicines for Five Years to Prevent Death, Heart Attacks, and Strokes

125 for mortality

In Summary, for those who took anti-hypertensives:

Benefits in NNT

• 1 in 125 were helped (prevented death)
• 1 in 67 were helped (prevented stroke)
• 1 in 100 were helped (prevented heart attack*)

Harms in NNH

• 1 in 10 were harmed (medication side effects, stopping the drug)

*fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction and sudden or rapid cardiac death

124 out of 125 without benefit against earlier mortality.

Clopidogrel Added to Aspirin to Prevent a Second Heart Attack Or Stroke

None for mortality

In Summary, for those who took the clopidogrel:

Benefits in NNT

• None were helped (cardiovascular problem prevented)

Harms in NNT

• 1 in 167 were harmed (major bleeding event*)

Millions of Clopidogrel additional to Aspirin, without benefits against earlier mortality?

Coronary Stenting for Non-Acute Coronary Disease Compared to Medical Therapy

None for mortality

In Summary, for those who received the stenting:

Benefits in NNT

• None were helped (life saved, heart attack prevented, symptoms reduced)

Harms in NNH

• 1 in 50 were harmed (complications such as bleeding, stroke, kidney damage)

- Ditto. -

Remission - as in my case from walking disability due to PAD - impossible with personally prescribed (but refused) medications. All evidenced by 5 years RCTs.

With really marginal benefits against earlier mortality in the range of below 1% of patients medicated, down to the infinite of no benefits whatsoever.

I agree about the harm from approved pharmaceuticals, but that doesn't mean that relying on alternative treatments would result in fewer deaths overall.

Because you're clearly biased in favor of pharmaceuticals. Properly prescribed pharmaceuticals do cause thousands of regular deaths each year. And, as is the case with CVD, don't cure.

Natural medicines are accused by regular press releases of much harm when overdone. But no cases.

The seventh time: Agreed to disagree.

 

[pamojja]

Should doctors offer lists of not officially approved alternative treatments that had claims for working for some people? I think that would be a disaster, with lawsuits, scammers pushing their snake oil on the lists, and so forth.

Practicing medicine has been made a state monopoly, in my country linked to obligatory health insurance.

Doesn't mean there aren't alternative practitioners, doing exactly, what you consider a disaster. With occasional lawsuits and scammers, just as within state medicine. However, because these alternative practitioners have to be paid out of one's own pocket, they do have to perform or go bankrupt. A quality control not existing as such, in insured state monopoly medicine.

Personally couldn't afford those privately paid practitioners. And have to use affordable ongoing sources for supplements.

For example, Orthomolecular medicine - high dose nutrients therapy - is actually a recognized additional available education for physicians in my state. Just as homeopathy. But those have to be paid out of one's own pocket. Licensed alternative practitioners do recommend DSMO for various ailments.

Ayurveda and Homeopathy are officially recognized and regulated in India. Up to 30% use those in its rural areas. A billion of people, but no disaster.

Chronic diseases, out of my multiple own experiences, are in better hands with alternatives to conventional state medicine.

Where state medicine really shines in all its glory is acute trauma care. When organs are ripped apart through accidents, its surgery and painkillers are indeed life-saving, with no alternatives. That still doesn't justify its business model of ineffective treatment till deathbed, therefore costly, with most chronic diseases. And almost no benefits, other than for less of 1% treated.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

Are you implying it may not be so easy for you to maintain your sense of equanimity?

perhaps. I recently discovered that fluoride is put into the salt here. So any takeout is contaminated.

I buy very little to no processed foods here, but then you realize even the tortilla is contaminated.

This introduces a new uncertainty into my list of Known Uncertainties.

But to put this poison into the drinking water supply is shocking to me.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

Practicing medicine has been made a state monopoly, in my country linked to obligatory health insurance.

agree, generally.
The rules the endless rules.

It seems with regard to our system for older working Americans, the government likes the private insurers to deny benefits and restrict access. So then the private insurers make considerable profits. Some law requires 85% to go into actual care and in theory, you get a refund.

In the US, health care is associated with a local zip code. Should you not have a local zip code, strange things will happen. Like my GP when I called, said they'd put my files in a basement. I was purged, by the office Manager I really like named Sheila.

by leaving the comfort of a zip code, all the money that got spent on health plans, is defeated.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

That website is quite handy.

I'm interested in metformin. I constantly hear its great.

But my chinese herbalist, who understands how my body reacts to these things, strongly advised against it. I heed his warnings.

So it's currently unclear if Metformin is in fact helping anyone.

https://thennt.com/nnt/metformin-for-type-2-diabetes-mellitus/

 

[Wishful]

You're exhibiting a very strong bias against natural remedies, and in strong favor of approved medications.

Nope, not at all. I avoid pharmaceuticals as much as possible. As I've posted several times, I've gotten more benefits from grocery items than from prescription drugs. I also avoid a lot of common grocery items due to ME-based intolerances. I'm against thinking that all those alternative treatments with glowing anecdotal evidence should be taken as truth. Some might be effective and safe; others ineffective and unsafe. We have to judge them for ourselves. For myself, I rate the chances of some alternative treatments about the same as food items randomly selected off the grocery shelves, and have zero confidence in the ones lacking a rational basis. Some people might find that blueberries or chives will be an effective treatment for them, but likely not because of the claims put forward by the health magazines (Bursting with antioxidants!!!) but rather by some biochemical process unique to that person.

Some pharmaceuticals have the benefit of lots of studies on large numbers of people, so the mechanism is understood (often not fully), and the expected reactions are based on lots of data. For a given drug, maybe it's 888/1000 cases that will meet predicted results. With an alternative treatment, maybe that's 8/1000. If that alternative is something commonly consumed, risk should be low. If it's not commonly consumed at the dosage and rate recommended as a treatment, risk is much higher.

Ideally, alternative treatments should be easier to access, but with tighter controls over claims without evidence. Obviously there's a difficulty ($$$$) in gaining trustworthy evidence, so the ideal solution isn't practical. The balance does vary between nations, so we can see what works better or worse. However, even comparing health and happiness about healthcare is difficult, due to socioeconomic factors and whatever else. No obvious, easy solutions.

 

[pamojja]

I don't expect the medical system to fund the approval process for cuminaldehyde as a PEM blocker, since it only worked for me. I also don't expect the government to ban cumin.

Herein one has to understand the distinction between synthetic medications and natural nutrition.

New synthetic medications of course have to be thoroughly tested about possible acute or long term toxicity.

The GRAS status (generally recognized as safe) given by the FDA to nutrition for millennia in human use without obvious ill effects is reasonable. But for synthetics, not really rigorously tested by independent researchers, isn't at all. And a clear overreach in their competence.

FDA regulated health claims shows another power overreach. Even if they only help 1% of medicated, as with Statins, health claims are legal, A much higher percentage staying healthy with nutrition and healthy lifestyle factors isn't allowed to claim the same for its ingredients? Here investment money only, which has the power to influence policies and brute state force, rules. No conspiracy.

Not so in the Indian Ayurveda system to health, where Cumin has been approved for thousands of years. Just do think of the possibility to prohibit a natural healthy herb without ill-effect and due to a health claim is perverted interests overreach. https://www.ayurtimes.com/jeera-cumin-seeds-cuminum-cyminum/

even the tortilla is contaminated.

Mexico seems to fight hard for its Tortillas not to be made of GMO corn any further. Which isn't considered GRAS, other than by FDA believers.

by leaving the comfort of a zip code, all the money that got spent on health plans, is defeated.

Yeah, the health care in the US really looks weirdest of all to Europeans. On the other hand, in most of the world there exist really rudimentary health care only. Example Myanmar: an appendix operation in a Government hospital costs 100,-$. Five times as much if one wants to increase changes of survival. Many Burmese simply have neither of those 2 choices.

So it's currently unclear if Metformin is in fact helping anyone.

One always has to weight possible benefits to risks in individual cases. In the case of Metformin, especially consider the non-severity of its only temporary risks:

1 in 6 were harmed (gastrointestinal events—nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal discomfort)

Also, how a medication is used. I, for example, can control blood sugar as pre-diabetic since many years with a clean diet. But on vacations n India, with regularly available otherwise healthy traditional food, I need some carbs to delute its hotness. Here I trialed Metformin, hang on through the initial vomiting and diarrhea, until well tolerated. Only take it on my yearly vacation to India, to avoid too high blood sugar during the time there. For which it works.

This year I had new-onset rheumatoid arthritis before my Indian vacation (not definitely diagnosed yet; specialist appointment is by November only). Increased anti-inflammatory Ayurvedic herbal extracts in India to its max, which improved joint-pains greatly. Just today on reflection I realized, Metformin is actually good at reducing cytokines too..

Most take such medications with a different mindset. They think they can eat and drink anything, because the pills magically prevent them from ills. Therefore, large-scale studies too have to be taken with a grain of salt, if one isn't of this mindset, builds on synergistic interventions, and doesn't have unrealistic expectations.

You have a TCM practitioner telling you what to watch out. I used regularly blood-laboratory monitoring to see if anything goes north or south, from any intervention combined.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

Mexico seems to fight hard for its Tortillas not to be made of GMO corn any further.

Original Corn: originated in Oaxaca Mexico. ITs called teosinte.

It still exists. So it's also about Cultural History and conserving wild genetics of our agricultural crops. Genes worth billions of dollars. To the industry: of growing corn.

 

[pamojja]

I'm against thinking that all those alternative treatments with glowing anecdotal evidence should be taken as truth.

And I'm even more against thinking that all those conventional treatments, with clear evidence of little benefits against chronic disease, are all what is needed. Trust the doc, take the pill, and forget about it. For god’s sake, such mindset wouldn't work with alternatives either, in real chronic diseases

That is how all people around and close to me handle the situation of chronic diseases. And all deteriorate. Sad.

The bitter truth I have to accept is, most aren't the born warrior, as I seem for some unknown reason. And conspire to move every handle possible in the regeneration of systemic health, with unfaltering perseverance.

Original Corn: originated in Oaxaca Mexico. ITs called teosinte.

I remember. In Oaxaca Bus stand on the way to Zipolite beach, my whole Backpack disappeared..

 

[Rufous McKinney]

The bitter truth I have to accept is, most aren't the born warrior, as I seem for some unknown reason. And conspire to move every handle possible in the regeneration of systemic health, with unfaltering perseverance.

the war against My Body (not behaving) started at age one. I became a warrior at age Ten, when they took my tonsils out. No, maybe it all blew up there at age 15, when they took my appendix. The last straw.

At 16, I ended any relationship with the American Medical Association. It's been a long drawn out battle. I stopped eating my parents food. I refused to do anything involving doctors, unless a body part fell off, or I collided with a moving object, then I'd welcome their care.

I remember. In Oaxaca Bus stand on the way to Zipolite beach, my whole Backpack disappeared..

I let my then teenage daughter take this wallet obtained in South Africa on a trip to Paris. (her French Class)

The wallet was a gift, from my husband to me. I can count those on one hand.

Well she went and got herself pick pocked in Paris France. "Honey, pickpockets have run Paris since 1040 AD". Just great, I was really mad about that wallet vanishing.

 

[pamojja]

For a given drug, maybe it's 888/1000 cases that will meet predicted results. With an alternative treatment, maybe that's 8/1000.

Still grossly exhibiting a very strong bias against naturals, and for illusional benefit of synthetics. This is a wild speculation and utterly wrong, out of wrong bias only.

Any given drug has 5 years RCT. So for your speculation to be true, you could simply show the evidence. Which you're unable to. 89% effectiveness of most medications? - phew. After I just elaborated in detail, that it actually is much less than 1% in drugs treating the chronic disease with the highest death doll! CVD.

Instead, ascribing such a ridiculous low 0.8% success from synthetics to naturals, where evidence either way is completely lacking. Due to the very neglection and unfounded warnings about nonprofitable naturals, the very topic of this thread.

Agreed to disagree, for the eighth time.

 

[pamojja]

However, even comparing health and happiness about healthcare is difficult, due to socioeconomic factors and whatever else. No obvious, easy solutions.

One can make it really difficult for oneself and others, by not searching out primary research, but parrotlike repeating unfounded speculations. And endless arguing on ground of absolutely no evidence, but bias.

It's really easy. I have had PAD, COPD, ME/CFS. The evidence is clear, that approved medications for those conditions don't improve their most likely outcome of disability or death. With the slightest chance, a bid better than playing straight Russian roulette, for mortality.

Nothing more to lose, could there be a more clear dissatisfaction about state directed healthcare?

And nothing more to lose, could there be a greater gladness, after affecting remission with easily accessible synergistic life-style changes and comprehensive nutrients' treatment?

 

[Wishful]

And I'm even more against thinking that all those conventional treatments, with clear evidence of little benefits against chronic disease, are all what is needed.

I agree: the medical system is overprescribing drugs that aren't all that helpful and which allows people to think that the pills mean they don't have to give up any of their bad habits. There was a new weight-loss pill announced recently. Will that really reduce dangerous fat levels, or will people just eat more?

Even if they only help 1% of medicated, as with Statins, health claims are legal,

I agree that's a problem. The doctors should have to reveal actual effectiveness and actual risks, as best discovered by studies. I agree that non-pharmaceutical treatments should be allowed to market too, but with comparable levels of trustworthiness of the evidence. Of course the system is biased for big corporations with big funds. I don't see a solution to make marketing access equal, but some shifts would be possible, except for the reality of corruption.

89% effectiveness of most medications? - phew.

A matter of perspective. I was thinking of drugs that do have that level of effectiveness, though I accept that many might be closer to 1%. I was not going to accept a prescription for statins. Acetaminophen probably has that high reliability for my usage. Antibiotics too, with reliable alternatives for specific resistant strains. While there might be alternative medicine treatments that are very reliable (clove oil for toothaches?), there are a lot that are very low reliability. If you have a badly infected tooth, how many alternative treatments are you going to try before giving in and getting a reliable antibiotic?

I really would like to see a study on successful treatment of medical problems by traditional medicine vs alternative. The problem is that quantitative measurement of the problem and the degree of success is less likely in alternative medicine.

 

[pamojja]

The problem is that quantitative measurement of the problem and the degree of success is less likely in alternative medicine.

The problem is more complex and self-inflicted. While in state medicine usually only 1 agent against one ill, is tested in RCTs, in alternative medicine almost always one never puts faith in one agent only. But synergistic effects of many natural nutrients and life-style interventions. Rarely ever tested in combinations due to multitudes of confounders (one exception is Bredesen's study against Alzheimer's)

So by default relying on 1 agent in RCTs, state medicine can't be that effective against chronic degenerative disease. Patients end up with dozens of medications, never to be evidenced to work in RCTs in those combinations. With remissions impossible.

how many alternative treatments are you going to try before giving in and getting a reliable antibiotic?

I always tried everything available. And would do again, since I had so much life-long damage from injection of Antibiotics as a newborn.

 

[Wayne]

If you have a badly infected tooth, how many alternative treatments are you going to try before giving in and getting a reliable antibiotic?

If you're interested, here's how I was able to avoid taking an antibiotic for a badly infected tooth.

I had so much life-long damage from injection of Antibiotics as a newborn.

I once read a book by an MD who eventually became a Naturopath. He learned to ask his new patients with chronic health conditions when it started, and did it occur around the time they took some antibiotics. He discovered that approximately 90% of them had their chronic conditions start after antibiotic usage.

I think Abx often do far more damage than most people would ever suspect. How many doctors would ever even consider that years of chronic health issues could possibly have started from taking antibiotics years and years earlier? Not many, but I think it's a highly relevant consideration.