Taking the Prescription (Conclusion)

Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve taken several reasons to aid my counter-argue the effectiveness of natural medicine and I’ve broken them down into individual posts to be examined in-depth. However, it’s time to conclude what I’ve been arguing about to finish my blog-based project. This is much like my introductory post where I’ll sum up everything I’ve learned and informed readers.

Faith is a strong characteristic in people, and when it comes to traditions, superstitions, and medicine, the power of belief is solid. Health consumers that are unsatisfied with conventional medicine or patients trying to combat health care costs often find themselves turning towards natural medicine and alternative therapies to relieve their ailments. Although some alternative practices are safe and effective, there’s still a wide selection that are unsafe or wasteful to consumer’s time and money.

Believers in natural medicine say it truly works, but in reality, natural medicine has too many problems with its concept to make it a credible source of healing. Natural medicine isn’t safe or effective, because it encourages self-diagnosis or diagnosis from people that refer to themselves as “health care specialists.” It’s possible that natural medicine only produces placebo effect results, but alternative medicine is difficult to test in order to be sure. Some natural medicine is actually poisonous or deadly if not taken correctly, and alternative therapies don’t have enough testing to provide solid evidence. Several practices or medications are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Lastly, consumers can be tricked by false advertisements, and buyers may end up spending more money than they had originally thought in order to feel or have the desired effects.

The past weeks of making this rebuttal blog have been enlightening. I’ve done some research, and I’ve managed to compile all my information into daily blog posts, which have hopefully educated its readers. There’s additional information about this blog among the “Learn About This Blog” and “The Author” pages, but if you don’t get to them, let it be known that I’m not a professional doctor, and this blog is not meant to diagnose, treat, or cure anyone’s conditions. This is a class assignment that’s meant to be informational as well as cause for friendly debate. Thank you for reading and commenting.

Safety, Evidence, and Money

I’m near the end of the argument against natural medicine, but there’s one more huge factor to talk about. This would be the lack of scientific research and evidence to show the effectiveness of natural medicine, but I’ve also made a mention to the money that people spend for supplements. Not only is the safety an important part, but natural medicine’s approval with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a concern to consumers, too. The FDA plays a major role in what products are deemed safe for public consumption, including medicine. The FDA is only concerned with the safety of a supplement– natural or pharmaceutical– not the effectiveness (Cook, 32). This is a huge problem for natural medicine, since most products are not approved by the FDA, but the FDA also hasn’t approved some natural therapies either.

The FDA has three basic phases which all products are subjects to that takes over several years before a product can be considered safe for its intended users. Phase I determines the safety in a small number of subjects, then Phase II grades the effectiveness with hundreds of testers– a two-year progress, and Phase III determines the correct dosage and frequency of use– roughly, a four-year process (Cook, 14-22). Few natural products will test through all three phases, and companies selling natural products usually just meet the standards of Phase I.

A form of natural medicine that’s easy-pickings for terrible scientific testing is homeopathic medicine. The originator of homeopathy, Samuel Friedrich Hahnemann (1755-1843), discovered herbs and plants which created negative effects on healthy people that he thought caused certain conditions or diseases (Haugen, 39). The theory of homeopathy is that these negative effects on ill people would trigger their body’s defenses to heal itself. However, Hahnemann never actually tested on ill people to see if negative effects on negative conditions produced positive ones (Haugen, 43). It’s difficult to try and test homeopathic medicine because the treatments are “individualized” for each specific person (Thompson, 231). In several rigorous and randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trials, homeopathic medicine was found absolutely ineffective for controlling pain and infection after a total abdominal hysterectomy and for preventing migraines (Ojeda, 132). In fact, the FDA approved several dozen homeopathic products many years ago, but these approvals were withdrawn by 1970; in other words, no homeopathic remedy had FDA approval as “safe and effective” for its intended purpose (Ojeda, 135).

Alternative therapies can result in economic harm to the user who might expend valuable economic resources on questionable protocols and techniques, too (Ojeda, 119). In fact, American’s spent about $4.2 billion on herbs and botanical remedies alone in 2001 (Haugen, 68). It can cost a person too much money to buy supplements when all one needs it to have a better diet. For example, no amount of calcium supplements taken in a user’s old age is going to make up for the deficiency that could’ve been obtained during youth (Ojeda, 65). Teenagers and the elderly are two prime targets for health fraud promoters (Cook, 35).

Here's a product with a common warning in the bottom-left to protect the company legally. If natural products are not "intended" to heal ailing customers, then why do their ads claim they are made to prevent or cure certain conditions?*

So, natural medicine has taught us three more things. Once again, there’s no guaranteed safety in taking these natural supplements; many of them haven’t been tested properly and can be used for fraud. Because there isn’t enough testing and regulation for alternative therapies and natural medicine, there isn’t much evidence to prove their effectiveness. Finally, the cost for a natural process of healing can sometimes empty out the pockets of people more than they’d like. It’s about time to wrap up the idea of natural medicine being effective, because it’s starting to look unreliable.

*label obtained at Acai Berry Site.com from a supplement review page <http://acaiberrysite.com/>

Colloidal Silver Response

A little over one year ago, I read an article about a man that turned blue after using a natural product, colloidal silver. Colloidal silver is a liquid suspension of microscopic particles of silver– the simple definition being various concentrations of ionic silver, silver colloids, ionic silver compounds or silver proteins in purified water. He has been using this product for fourteen years– rubbing it on his skin and ingesting it, which has now given him a permanent case of argyria, a chemical exposure to silver. Thankfully for the internet, people can watch (or read) about Paul Karason. However, if you are unable to watch the video or hate the loading times, feel free to check out the FoxNews.com article (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317564,00.html) and the MSNBC.com health blog (http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/22/598906.aspx).

There are so many thoughts I have after re-visiting this story. It’s a wonder after fourteen years of use that other severe effects haven’t entered in Paul Karason’s life. According to the video, he even swears that colloidal silver produces results, but from his appearance it’s apparent that colloidal silver is ultimately not safe, especially after fourteen years of use.

Paul Karason would’ve also spent quite a bit of money, too. According to online websites selling colloidal silver, one eight-ounce bottle is approximately $34; I merely used a search engine and found a product at www.drnatura.com. Suggested dosages range from three to seven teaspoons a day, which means that one eight-ounce bottle can be easily ingested in about a month. In one year, Paul Karason would’ve spent $408, and in fourteen years, that total would reach $5,712!

At this same website, there’s a question-and-answer section at the bottom of the product page. When prompted to answer if this particular brand of colloidal silver was safe for a person’s baby, it claims that “there is no known risk for an eleven-pound baby to ingest up to 70 micrograms (mcg) of pure silver daily, for up to 70 years– that’s almost seven teaspoons a day.” However, people reading closely to this will remember that just after fourteen years of everyday usage in Paul Karason’s case, there’s a huge risk to obtain the permanent condition of argyria. This result came from an older adult, and with an unregulated product it could possibly affect or harm developing children in less time.

So, is colloidal silver the miraculous and natural cure-all that some users claim it is, or is it a potentially life-threatening substance that needs more testing and regulation? Just from Paul Karason’s story, it’s clear that colloidal silver is not the everyday substance that people should take to heal their ailments.

Possible Poison (Dangers)

A common belief among people about natural medicine is that it’s beneficial to remove aliments. Some might believe that certain supplements are also a good way to help the body produce and use vitamins, minerals, amino acids, anti-oxidants, and chemicals. However, just because it’s natural doesn’t meant that it’s safe.

One form of supplements which people purchase are herbal remedies. Although there are some reputable herbal products, herbal remedies have no assurance of safety. Some may not produce any effects whatsoever, but there are some herbs which may have unmonitored effects. Kava, for example has been ultimately found to be toxic to the liver (Haugen, 68). Currently, many herbal supplements are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). As of 2001, only nine herbs have been judged to be both safe and effective (Cook, 341).

Other alternative practitioners, such as chiropractors, might have many followers, but their practices have many dangers, too. Chiropractic practitioners are not qualified doctors– some chiropractors may not even be licensed! Chiropractors also reject the germ theory of disease and therefore cast aside the use of vaccinations (Haugen, 57-58). They also tend to overuse x-rays and target children for their practice.

This bar graph from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine website shows that children are common to be patients of chiropractors over many other forms of alternative medicine. Chiropractic treatments involve manipulating the spine, which is still developing in young children.*

Natural supplements and alternative therapies are not the only thing that can be dangerous. Even the intake of essential vitamins and minerals can lead to a less beneficial future. Consumers might take a multiple or single vitamin, but there’s growing evidence that high doses of individual nutrients may be harmful (Ojeda, 64). The best way to obtain natural chemicals for the body to process is through diet. For example, vitamin C is an essential nutrient for the body, and many consumers take oral supplements for the daily intake. However, by eating one or two apples, a person can absorb just as much vitamin C, as well as other helpful chemicals that are anti-viral, anti-carcinogenic, anti-inflammatory, and contain anti-oxidants (Ojeda, 63-64).

In trusting natural medicine and alternative therapies to heal and provide the body with nutrients, users are risking their safety. It’s possible to directly harm oneself due to the use of dangerous, often non-standardized treatments (Ojeda, 119). Natural medicine is dangerous to consumers, especially with the combination of no official testing and the belief that natural products can actually heal (when really it’s just a placebo effect that heals). Besides this reasonable union, some alternative medicine can be hurtful or lethal.

*graph obtained from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine by the National Institutes of Health <http://nccam.nih.gov/news/camstats/2007/72_dpi_CHARTS/chart7.htm>.

Healing with Placebos?

Unbiased researchers and non-consumers of natural medicine usually agree about the positive effects of alternative therapies; there are none. Many people– both against natural medicine and unbiased– find that the only healing effects or miraculous cures comes from the mind. The power of belief is incredible, and everyday people use prayer, therapy of the arts, and untestable methods to heal and relieve the body.

Before introducing the dangers of natural medicine and the need for additional testing, I’ve been examining if natural medicine can actually cause any healing. Perhaps natural medicine users are affected by the placebo effect, in which case they think that their alternative therapy is the cause for their recovery but really it’s their own morale and beliefs that restore their well-being. However, although some people might believe that alternative medicine is one giant placebo, it’s difficult to prove this.

It’s difficult to test natural medicine for a placebo effect for several reasons. Scientific principles don’t exist for therapies such as acupuncture, homeopathic medicine, and herbal remedies. Therefore, they can’t be tested effectively like pharmaceutical drugs. There are some forms of alternative medicine which seem impossible to work, especially since practitioners strain their credibility. Because of this, no one’s attempted any beginning trials on reflexology, magnetic bracelets, health stones, paranormal healing, and aromatherapy (Thompson, 175). Some alternative therapies are too dangerous to test to discover if they cause a placebo effect– let alone a cure; chiropractic treatments risk vertebral artery dissection through neck manipulation, hydrotherapy can rupture the colon, and herbal medicine may cause liver toxicity (Thompson, 176). Alternative therapies are so diverse and have all kinds of variations that it makes it difficult to test for any kind of effect.

According to Carl Bartecchi, M.D. and Robert Schrier, M.D., this table rates the effectiveness and toxicity of herbs and natural chemicals in the bodies that can be purchased online and in supplement stores.*

The only ‘evidence’ that natural medicine practitioners offer is that their treatments are supported by belief, theories, anecdotes, opinions, and traditions (Thompson, 174). These practitioners also argue that their therapies can’t be subjected to the scientific method. So although it’s challenging to test whether alternative therapies are just the causes for placebo effects (or any healing effects at all), there are many skeptics that argue against the effectiveness of natural medicine.

While it might not seem like the possible placebo effect is a strong point in the argument against alternative medicine, it’s a slight introduction to the dangers or side effects which natural medicine brings, as well as the scientific testing and research that needs to be regulated. The placebo effect could be the only positive result from any form of natural medicine, so it needed an detailed examination.

*table obtained from an article about alternative medicine from Healther, Longer, Life.org <http://www.healthierlongerlife.org/Chapters/Alternative.html>.

We’re Not Medical Experts

I’m well on my way to making my first claim as to why natural medicine is dangerous and ineffective; I’ve noted some background information to provide extra knowledge to my readers. I’ve already mentioned the shortened version of my argument, I’ve listed out some of the reasons, and I’ve given my definition of natural medicine and alternative therapies. The first point I’ll dive into is natural medicine’s encouragement of self-diagnosis.

There are several methods of alternative medicine which believe in self-diagnosis. Homeopathic medicine and herbal remedies are the top two forms of natural medicine which encourage self-diagnosis the most. If users have experience with either type of natural medicine, they can easily recommend or ‘prescribe’ a supplement or treatment to their family, friends, or themselves. Even if consumers are not knowledgeable in natural medicine, they can easily try to diagnose themselves using the internet– a simple but untrustworthy source at times. I’m sure all consumers can agree that finding a holistic company’s self-diagnosis manual is more accurate than the answers on a Google search engine. However, a physical book form of symptoms or a user’s experience doesn’t allow the use of self-diagnosis to be safe. Two main ways that self-diagnosis can go wrong are by the failure to diagnose a serious illness or to incorrectly diagnose a person with an extremely serious illness (“Self-Diagnosis Pitfalls”).

The use of self-diagnosis prevents getting the proper treatment by conventional medical doctors. The everyday average person isn’t a expert to diagnose themselves or anybody else; only doctors have the knowledge and experience to properly perform the process of diagnosis. Besides a person’s medical expertise, one can’t always see their symptoms (“Self-Diagnosis Pitfalls”). A face-to-face consultation with doctors allows them to see numerous forms of visual information about a person’s symptoms. Illness can also interfere with a person’s mental processing, as well; a fever could change the way one usually makes decisions, for example. By using a combination of self-diagnosis and alternative therapies, an ill person may indirectly harm themselves by failure to receive helpful treatments or from delaying the acceptance of conventional treatment that may be more effective at an earlier stage of a disease or medical problem (Ojeda, 119).

Therefore, natural medicine should be ashamed of itself. It encourages its consumers to diagnose themselves, resulting in incorrect diagnosing, mistreatments, and possibly creating unwanted medical problems. Conventional medicine never asks its users to attempt to solve their own medical problems; it has always suggested a visit to the doctor first and foremost whenever a medical problem occurs, which allows the doctor to recommend or prescribe something that is proven to be beneficial and helpful. However, it is always up to the consumer to decide how serious a problem is before visiting a doctor, how many doctors’ opinions to seek out, and whether or not to take what doctors suggest. However, it’s clear that doctors should definitely be the people consumers trust to diagnose them.

Seek the Dictionary (Definition)

Before counter-arguing the effectiveness and safety of natural medicine, we have to understand how we define natural medicine. Some consumers think it’s merely herbal supplements and vitamins that we can find in health food and supplements stores. However, experienced users of natural medicine and alternative therapies, as well as scientists and researchers know that there are several categories which define natural medicine.

Here’s the basic breakdown of how I would define natural medicine and alternative therapies. Natural medicine is organic, and it comes from the manipulation of organisms. It can also be the manipulation of a person’s body as well, but it doesn’t involve unnatural procedures, such as surgeries. Natural medicine is what its name says– it’s natural. We can see this in examples of natural, like herbal remedies, chiropractic treatments, and homeopathic medicine.

These examples help mold the idea of natural medicine which I’ve expressed. Herbal remedies are obviously organic and commonly found all over the world, and by picking them and processing them into teas, pills, and tinctures, consumers can intake a natural source from the earth. Chiropractic treatments– or spinal manipulation– holds the belief that even a minor slippage of vertebrae can cause pain, illness, and other problems. By physically handling and removing obstacles in the spine, chiropractors encourage the body to heal itself. Homeopathic medicine is much like herbal remedies, because the base of their products derives from plant life, but homeopathy revolves around ingesting diluted forms of toxic or dangerous herbs in order to stimulate the body’s defenses.

This is the definition I will be referring to when I discuss natural medicine in my counter-argument. A definition needed to be stated, because many people– most of them new or unaware of the world of alternative medicine– just have the general knowledge or belief that natural therapies pertains to herbs and vitamins. Truly, this subject is natural, but it’s more than herbs and vitamins, because there are techniques that don’t even require ingesting anything.

Consulting the Doc (An Introduction)

This is the beginning of what will be a counter-argument against natural medicine. Over the next couple of weeks, I will post information and media to help support my position. This is just a little introduction for readers to begin, but it can also be considered the short version of my argument without detailed evidence for readers seeing if they’d like to continue reading. If you’re looking for more information about this blog (or about me), check out the “Learn About This Blog” and “The Author” pages.

With an increase in health care costs and consumers disappointed in conventional medicine, people often look for a new way to heal themselves or to prevent any chronic conditions. There are people in the world that have so many health problems– once they get rid of one, another one attaches itself to them. Consumers try to find quicker and less costly ways to cure and prevent health concerns, and some of them turn to alternative medicine for help.

Although there are some alternative practices or natural forms that are proven safe and effective, the number is small. Natural medicine is dangerous and ineffective for several reasons. It encourages self-diagnosis or diagnosis from people that refer to themselves as “health care specialists.” Natural medicine only produces results from placebo effects, and some natural medicine is actually poisonous or deadly if not taken correctly. Alternative medicine also doesn’t have enough testing to provide solid evidence and several practices or medications are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Lastly, consumers can be tricked by false advertisements, and buyers may end up spending more money than they had originally thought in order to feel or have the desired effects.

I’ll break down each of the reasons throughout the next following weeks and explain the negative side of natural medicine. People interested or who have been recommended to use alternative medicine should continue reading to gain another perspective, but even users of natural medicine might want to consider the opposition of natural medicine, especially if they have been using alternative therapies for a while without question.