If they want their anti-scientific, counterfactual nonsense to be protected by the government, then they should call it a religion.
- If it can’t outperform a placebo, then it’s faith healing.
1 Like
(and placebo is a much more affordable treatment)
1 Like
“evidence-based medicine” hospitalizes millions and kills over a hundred thousand people every year.
Let’s not pretend “evidence-based medicine” and traditional medical care (and treatment models) is an infallible golden child, that prescribed treatments don’t hurt millions every year, that patients are actually being given enough time, energy, attention, and focus for proper care. Let’s not pretend that Big Pharma and their millions of dollars don’t affect R&D and approved treatment, that their financial interests don’t prevent effective treatments and therapies from being studied and reaching the public, and on and on.
This isn’t in any way an endorsement of naturopathic medicine, homeopathy, or holistic treatment, but let’s be realistic here. Available treatments are available because they make someone money. If there’s little to no profit to be made, there will be fewer studies, trials, et al.
[quote=“megguspee, post:43, topic:78250”]
“evidence-based medicine” hospitalizes millions and kills over a hundred thousand people every year.[/quote]
I don’t see anything in your link about “evidence-based medicine”, which is a technical term related to the manner in which studies are accessed and interpreted.
4 Likes
1 Like
Right over your head then, eh?
Cory misused a technical term. You misused it as well.
Nobody anywhere that I’ve ever seen disagrees with the idea that modern medical science is imperfect and its application even more so due to profit motives, so no one chimed in to say “me too,” just to note your confused use of the term “evidence-based medicine.”
1 Like
and yours too, apparently.
This suggests a problem with your communication style.
1 Like
No, it suggests a problem with your communication skills. Your comments have no value, they don’t invalidate or relate to the point I was making, and they don’t further discussion. Cory isn’t the first person to use a phrase in a manner it wasn’t intended to illustrate a point (you’d think you would have noticed my quotation marks), but that doesn’t invalidate what he’s saying. Your selective focus, or “literal listening” is a form of “non-listening” and a barrier to effective communication. It indicates to me that you’re most interested in having something to be right about/holding a place of “power” over actually having a discussion. It’s an unpleasant distraction and waste of time in which I (and many others, to be frank) won’t engage.
You misused a technical term and then made a banal point. When someone pointed out your mistake you incorrectly claimed they missed the point, which is confused at best. Now you’re self-justifying and trying to project confabulations onto me. Clearly we haven’t got much to talk about since we don’t disagree, except insofar as I’d prefer to see the technical term used correctly.
1 Like
Where do you find anyone claiming [quote=“megguspee, post:43, topic:78250”]
“evidence-based medicine” and traditional medical care (and treatment models) is an infallible golden child, …prescribed treatments don’t hurt millions every year, …patients are actually being given enough time, energy, attention, and focus for proper care. …Big Pharma and their millions of dollars don’t affect R&D and approved treatment, …their financial interests don’t prevent effective treatments and therapies from being studied and reaching the public, and on and on.
[/quote]
because I just read this thread through and it was not present.
Did you leave an “/s” out?
1 Like
Sad that it came too late for the little girl, and as for State Acknowledgement, the Ontario Liberal Party is here and ready to pour some diluted shit down throats if you’ve got the cash, legitimacy is for sale, especially if your racket is selling legitimacy.
Once again, clearly you’re not interested in actual discussion over stroking your ego. As a result, I find no value in your opinions.
1 Like
If you’re not familiar with the phrase “evidence based medicine” then that is fine, though it doesn’t exactly situate you in a good position from which to cast snark at others.
1 Like
I have every right to express annoyance at your captiousness. Move on, son.
Wait, you are seriously finding fault with someone for fault-finding.
2 Likes
Attention to detail is the most obvious point of separation between evidence-based medicine and the fuzzy opposition to medical science. Fortunately for most of us, even as conspiracy theorists and other opponents of progress rant and rave, key indicators like infant mortality and life expectancy (as well as survival statistics for many major diseases) continue to improve, even here in the US where the medical system is apparently in the throes of an evil profit-driven industry. The only really visible places where the improvement has stopped or reversed is in diseases amenable to vaccines, where anti-vaxxers have parleyed their big Pharma bogeyman conspiracy into an epidemic of stupidity.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
