My hand today is almost totally better. I can comfortably wear my ring again, the little bubbly welts on the sides of my fingers have disappeared, and I feel only an occasional mild itch on my palm. The redness and swelling have given way to just a slight orange-ish discoloration on the surface of the skin, kind of reminiscent of the exudate that wept from Matt's poison ivy for days, except it seems to all be receding back into the tissues instead of coming to the surface.So on that note, here is an interesting article about the historical competition, both philosophical and economic, between homeopathic doctors and allopathic doctors (those who practice conventional Western medicine). The blackballing and witch hunt tactics allopaths (with the AMA at the helm, as usual) used to drive homeopaths underground and out of business are, unfortunately, the same ones they used 100 years ago and are currently using again to try to suffocate midwifery (and have used against other disciplines like chiropractic). Especially chilling:
"... professional exchange, consultation and even conversation between allopaths and Homeopaths were banned. This ban on interaction between the two groups is a striking example of how a private organization, the AMA, could completely flout the public will, and take punitive action for something that was totally legal." [emphasis mine]
Remind you of anything?
The author further warns, "If you think doctors have outgrown this attitude from 1800, I will refer you to the recent article in the prestigious allopathic journal The New England Journal of Medicine. After reviewing the habits of a large cohort of patients, it was concluded that one third of Americans use some method of non-conventional medical treatment and pay more out of their own pocket to do so than the combined money spent on all primary care allopathic office visits.
As a result of this startling finding, the authors did not suggest further investigation as to why such a large number of patients prefer non-traditional treatment, nor was it suggested that these treatments must have something valuable to offer. Instead, in a move reminiscent of attitudes over 150 years old, the authors advised that doctors inquire if their patients are using some form of non-conventional therapy so that they can better bring these errant patients back to conventional treatment."
This reminds me so much of the homebirth situation, and explains exactly why doctors aren't comfortable letting patients (and birthing women) make their own decisions. "The allopaths blamed the public...contemptuously regarding them as ignorant, undiscriminating and easily deceived, clearly needing to be protected from their own perverse ignorance. It never occurred to the allopathic doctors that the public, rather than being ignorant of orthodox medicine, were very familiar with it and consequently didn't like it." [emphasis mine]
Imagine that.
I believe the article he's referring to is this one, in which the authors of the study further try to theorize why doctors aren't aware that so many of their patients are using complementary treatments (a term I prefer to "unconventional," which seems obsolete given both their long history and the acknowledged numbers of people using them!). Are patients afraid to tell their doctors? Are doctors afraid to ask? Well, my guess would be that most patients don't feel like they have a tell-all relationship with their doctors, because even when they do try to bring up a question or a concern, the doctor is edging out the door before they've even finished their sentence. Given that the average office visit is less than 20 minutes (and I'm inclined to think more like half of that, in many cases) for the history, physical exam, review of systems, and to prescribe a treatment and answer any questions the patient may have about it, it's not surprising that this information isn't coming up. And after a wham, bam, thank you ma'am kind of experience like that with healthcare, heaven forbid patients educate themselves and seek something different--dare I say BETTER?--than expensive drugs with dangerous side effects. Because using these therapies (like massage, or chiropractic, or acupuncture, which have all been around hundreds to thousands of years longer than the likes of Merck and Eli Lilly, whom we're taught to worship exclusively as the current jealous gods of medicine) "totally unsupervised...is dangerous," according to this article.
The idea that people's free will is dangerous is already an especially frightening statement, because even more so because we all know that the AMA has come to view itself as the autocratic gatekeeper of public health and safety (haha), and that its preferred methods of slander and lies can readily give way, if needed, to tyrannical legislation. We'd better watch out.
Imagine that.
I believe the article he's referring to is this one, in which the authors of the study further try to theorize why doctors aren't aware that so many of their patients are using complementary treatments (a term I prefer to "unconventional," which seems obsolete given both their long history and the acknowledged numbers of people using them!). Are patients afraid to tell their doctors? Are doctors afraid to ask? Well, my guess would be that most patients don't feel like they have a tell-all relationship with their doctors, because even when they do try to bring up a question or a concern, the doctor is edging out the door before they've even finished their sentence. Given that the average office visit is less than 20 minutes (and I'm inclined to think more like half of that, in many cases) for the history, physical exam, review of systems, and to prescribe a treatment and answer any questions the patient may have about it, it's not surprising that this information isn't coming up. And after a wham, bam, thank you ma'am kind of experience like that with healthcare, heaven forbid patients educate themselves and seek something different--dare I say BETTER?--than expensive drugs with dangerous side effects. Because using these therapies (like massage, or chiropractic, or acupuncture, which have all been around hundreds to thousands of years longer than the likes of Merck and Eli Lilly, whom we're taught to worship exclusively as the current jealous gods of medicine) "totally unsupervised...is dangerous," according to this article.
The idea that people's free will is dangerous is already an especially frightening statement, because even more so because we all know that the AMA has come to view itself as the autocratic gatekeeper of public health and safety (haha), and that its preferred methods of slander and lies can readily give way, if needed, to tyrannical legislation. We'd better watch out.
No comments:
Post a Comment