Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Why are most mfp users against holistic nutrition?

1…1314161819…42

Replies

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    born_of_fire74 wrote: »
    I’m not sure where I said anything about criminalization. Please point that out. Chiropractic, massage and acupuncture are all de-listed services that standard provincial health care doesn’t pay for. Some people with additional health insurance can have coverage but everyone else pays out of pocket for it. This means it is not as available as traditional, western medicine and is what I meant when I said western medicine proponents actively limit access to alternative health care.

    I fully admitted that I’ve brought in a straw man to this discussion, based on previous discussions I’ve had with the anti-woo crowd. The trouble is that it’s difficult to know what is woo and what is not as it changes depending on who you are talking to. At this point, we’ve established that some alternative medicine is not woo to some of you. That’s great. But this thread is also full of people telling the OP that she will be preying upon sick people if she pursues other types of alternative medicines. And this is another way in which people are trying to prevent others from having access to alternative medicine. If no one goes to school to be a chiropractor, a massage therapist, an acupuncturist, a holistic whatever the hell OP wants to be[/], there will not be anyone to offer to those services to the adult people who want to access them.

    Please do continue to take my comments to their limits of absurdity though or simply gloss over the inconvenient parts; such classy debate.

    But the OP isn't studying to be an acupuncturist or a chiropractor. They've given us the name of the school and some of the specific things they're worried about:
    Candida Overgrowth, Leaky Gut Syndrome, Adrenal Fatigue, Detox, Connection between gut micro biome and brain health, Refined Sugar causing disease and nutritional deficiencies, birth control pills depleting B vitamins and causing copper toxicity, Free radicals causing disease and accelerated aging, lack of hydrochloric acid causing mineral and vitamin deficiencies as well as digestive symptoms, soy being bad for hormonal health, regular dairy being bad for general health, the negative effects of GMO's, heavy metals in water and food.... The list could go on and on
    So far, the textbook they've based a lot of their information on is "The Basics of Nutrition" by Elson Haas. Unfortunately they don't give us access to powerpoints or lecture notes. They promote websites like pubmed which is good.. But then they also support people like Mercola
    I'm studying at the Canadian School of Natural Nutrition.

    The school doesn't seem to teach acupuncture or chiropractic care based on a quick look at their course descriptions, so I'm not sure why this post keeps getting pulled in that direction (it hasn't been just you. It keeps happening). It feels like some of us are replying to the OP's specific situation and others are replying to the topic of holistic healing as a whole and it's creating a disconnect between posters.

    I've mentioned acupuncture and chiropractic care specifically to respond to born_of_fire74 and would agree those are different (when used properly, of course) to the kinds of things OP was talking about.

    I think claiming that insurance not being mandated to cover them = making them unavailable is wrong.

    This was an issue with ACA, because chiropractic was not required to be covered, but states were given flexibility to choose to require them (mine did require coverage for chiropractic): https://www.healthinsurance.org/faqs/are-visits-to-the-chiropractor-or-physical-therapist-covered-under-the-affordable-care-act/

    I would agree that has nothing to do with OP's topic and apologize for getting sucked in, but I did think that was an important distinction to be made.

    born_of_fire74's argument seems to be that if someone finds it helpful it is the equivalent of medical care, whether acupuncture or massage therapy (which I personally believe can be helpful and there is research supporting that) or whether it's the blood type diet. She then identified the thread as people not wanting insurance to cover these things, so that's why I wonder how far she would go in having insurance cover treatments such as "detoxes" or "nutritionists" (non-accredited) prescribing the blood type diet.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 31,935 Member
    clicketykeys wrote: »
    My specific mention of NOT wanting to criminalize non-peer-reviewed therapies was in response to the assertion by @born_of_fire74 that "the anti-woo crowd" is "trying to prevent alternative medicine from being an option."

    I would like to know what they were referring to, if not legal status.

    I think one is already in trouble in a debate/discussion when using a phrase like "the anti-woo crowd". (And I'm not singling out the poster you mentioned, as folks on both sides of the question have used it here.)

    Making generalized, abstract propositions about large, amorphous groups is not just substandard debate, it's fuzzy reasoning. The propositions can't be true (or false) because they don't refer to anything clearly defined. It's not as if there's an International Anti-Woo Crowd Association we can turn to for the crowd's purported definitive opinions. ;)

    And before anyone says it's just convenient shorthand: "Some anti-woo people" isn't much more typing, but it's lots better reasoning. Heck, go for "most", if you want to. ;)

    (@clicketykeys, I'm not trying to hijack your very good question. I quoted your post to make my point because it refers to the term "anti-woo crowd", but doesn't use it. I didn't want to seem to attack an individual.)
  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    stevencloser wrote: »
    fitfreakymom wrote: »
    I will use what works for me and if smoking a plant takes care of my body pain and my head then I will do that before popping a pill made in a lab.

    What "Big Pharma" could do would be extracting the active ingredient that helps with your condition so you wouldn't have to hurt your lungs with hot smoke.

    Here your go!

    "Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) refers to a psychotropic cannabinoid (dronabinol, trade name Marinol is a synthetic form of THC, approved by the FDA) and is the principal psychoactive constituent of cannabis. Its chemical name is (–)-trans-Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol and the term THC is used to refer to isomers as well. The pharmaceutical formulation dronabinol is available by prescription in the U.S, Canada, Germany and New Zealand."
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    Fyreside wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    And the only reason they synthesize at all is because you can't patent a natural extract.

    Um, yes....yes you most certainly can. Natural extracts are extracts, meaning there was an extraction, an extraction is a process, you can patent processes. You can't patent willow bark but you certainly could patent a natural extract from willow bark. The nature (no pun intended) quality and purity of the extract will be specific and unique to the process.

    I'd love to see an example of that.
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Try telling the thousands of people who are getting real results treating child seizures with cannabis oil that it's hokum, because it doesn't have approval and a sufficient body of clinical testing evidence.

    Honestly i'd probably tell them exactly what you said, that it doesn't have a sufficient body of clinical testing evidence and has not shown to be effective. If they want to use it anyway I'm not going to stop them but I might suggest that they look into what seizure medicines HAVE been clinically tested and shown to be effective and that they might want to at least try those first. I mean, that is sensible right?
    That sounds perfectly sensible to me. But then I've been fortunate enough to not have to watch my child have seizures and what I've read seems to suggest those parents who have found it to work already tried all known options. They aren't using it as an "alternative remedy" but rather, the best remedy. And here is where we have the disconnect with modern medicine. Science is great. But very few people are putting money into science for the glory of science itself. So, until someone decides to put the time and money into running the clinical trials required. Those parents will commit a federal crime in pursuit of helping their children in the best way they know of.

    Don't get me wrong. I think legality of substances is a huge other topic that really isn't part of this discussion. But Cannabis just happens to be an excellent example of something that is working for many people. And with no support from western medicine. Because Western medicine is bound by it's own bureaucracy.

    Do I want people to have safe drugs that work and have been tested and vetted in a scientifically sound manner.. Yes. Do I think people who have days/weeks/months to live should be able to try experimental drugs, lotions, potions or voodoo? Definitely. I'm not saying anything bad about western medicine. I'm simply saying it is silly to even suggest that anything not covered by it is automatically hokum. Because Western medicine is a big business that by it's own admission, does not have all the answers and is discovering new things every day.

    There are currently 259 NDA products with natural extracts as an API.

    FDA/CDER - has a searchable and public database.
  • joemac1988
    joemac1988 Posts: 1,021 Member
    Why do you care what the people on here think? Personally, I buy into things that are proven by science, not what someone believes but if you, as you say, are "a firm believer" in it that should be good enough for you.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Medicine (holistic and every other kind) has always been big money because when people are desperate, they will pay. Except maybe in communist countries. But of course then the public had to worry if the service were available at all.
  • quiksylver296
    quiksylver296 Posts: 28,442 Member
    goldthistime wrote: »
    Not sure if I've told this story before on here, but last year a friend who had cancer got advice from someone who persuaded her to follow a juice diet. Her tumour had shrunk in half after starting a new chemo treatment and this new diet, and she didn't want to take the chance that it was the diet rather than the chemo, so carried on with this juice diet. She was advised to add a little avocado for fat and nuts for protein and was about to start having bone broth soup for "added protein" when she died. She starved to death. The whole thing was horrendous to watch and is painful to think about still. It left me with a very bad attitude towards holistic medicine.

    OP I don't know if you're still reading this thread or if you've had to protect your investment in your education by ignoring the majority of posts, but I hope you find a different career path.

    My aunt did the same thing.
  • jseams1234
    jseams1234 Posts: 1,216 Member
    suzannesimmons3 wrote: »
    jseams1234 wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    fitfreakymom wrote: »
    I will use what works for me and if smoking a plant takes care of my body pain and my head then I will do that before popping a pill made in a lab.

    What "Big Pharma" could do would be extracting the active ingredient that helps with your condition so you wouldn't have to hurt your lungs with hot smoke.

    Here your go!

    "Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) refers to a psychotropic cannabinoid (dronabinol, trade name Marinol is a synthetic form of THC, approved by the FDA) and is the principal psychoactive constituent of cannabis. Its chemical name is (–)-trans-Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol and the term THC is used to refer to isomers as well. The pharmaceutical formulation dronabinol is available by prescription in the U.S, Canada, Germany and New Zealand."

    I was put on Marinol (Dronabinol) by prescription by the VA several years ago after I dropped so much weight because of my treatment. Nothing else was working to help with my appetite and nausea. They were reluctant but gave it to me. Well, let me tell you - the stuff worked like a charm. It worked so well in fact and got me so stoned that I stopped taking it in the morning at at lunch because I couldn't work on it. So, I'd save my pill and take all of them at once as soon as I was clocked out. I'd walk to the mall and hit the food court and just demolish plate after plate after plate of food. I'd then take the train home (yes, no driving). The high from it is exactly the same high you get from edibles... and yes, although I don't use MJ anymore - I spent my teen years and the first year out of the Army in college trying to smoke myself into an alternate universe. So, plenty of experience. lol

    I'm also confused about it's use for pain. There are so many other drugs, including simple ibuprofen that are better for localized and sharp pain. Maybe ok for general aches and stuff but it never worked at all for me for things like tooth aches or injuries. Pain was still all there, just maybe too stoned to complain about it as much. ;)

    I'm sure I read they are looking into strains that have all of the good qualities they want without all of the thc.

    That would be interesting. How much do you want to bet that if they came up with a strain that had no THC, didn't get you high at all, but really worked on a specific ailment, that the majority of folks who claim medical use would not want to use it? I'm sure there are people who would welcome such a product but in my experience the head change/high is the main aspect of MJ that people are looking for.
  • vingogly
    vingogly Posts: 1,785 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    This surprises me. My Blue Cross/Blue Shield health insurance plan pays for chiropractic treatment. I can even self-refer.

    My BCBS plan here in Illinois paid for a year and a half of chiropractic treatment, including massage therapy. Medicare (which I just signed up for) also pays for medically necessary chiropractic treatment.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    jseams1234 wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    jseams1234 wrote: »
    suzannesimmons3 wrote: »
    jseams1234 wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    fitfreakymom wrote: »
    I will use what works for me and if smoking a plant takes care of my body pain and my head then I will do that before popping a pill made in a lab.

    What "Big Pharma" could do would be extracting the active ingredient that helps with your condition so you wouldn't have to hurt your lungs with hot smoke.

    Here your go!

    "Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) refers to a psychotropic cannabinoid (dronabinol, trade name Marinol is a synthetic form of THC, approved by the FDA) and is the principal psychoactive constituent of cannabis. Its chemical name is (–)-trans-Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol and the term THC is used to refer to isomers as well. The pharmaceutical formulation dronabinol is available by prescription in the U.S, Canada, Germany and New Zealand."

    I was put on Marinol (Dronabinol) by prescription by the VA several years ago after I dropped so much weight because of my treatment. Nothing else was working to help with my appetite and nausea. They were reluctant but gave it to me. Well, let me tell you - the stuff worked like a charm. It worked so well in fact and got me so stoned that I stopped taking it in the morning at at lunch because I couldn't work on it. So, I'd save my pill and take all of them at once as soon as I was clocked out. I'd walk to the mall and hit the food court and just demolish plate after plate after plate of food. I'd then take the train home (yes, no driving). The high from it is exactly the same high you get from edibles... and yes, although I don't use MJ anymore - I spent my teen years and the first year out of the Army in college trying to smoke myself into an alternate universe. So, plenty of experience. lol

    I'm also confused about it's use for pain. There are so many other drugs, including simple ibuprofen that are better for localized and sharp pain. Maybe ok for general aches and stuff but it never worked at all for me for things like tooth aches or injuries. Pain was still all there, just maybe too stoned to complain about it as much. ;)

    I'm sure I read they are looking into strains that have all of the good qualities they want without all of the thc.

    That would be interesting. How much do you want to bet that if they came up with a strain that had no THC, didn't get you high at all, but really worked on a specific ailment, that the majority of folks who claim medical use would not want to use it? I'm sure there are people who would welcome such a product but in my experience the head change/high is the main aspect of MJ that people are looking for.

    That's odd because in my experience, the ill and suffering people I would appreciate the option to address their symptoms without the "head change." There are people who are actively seeking options that involve less of the "traditional" impacts of cannabis right now, just look up research on high CBD (cannabidiol) strains. These aren't theoretical future developments -- people are working on them now and people are using them.

    Consider children, for example. Or people with certain jobs or people who just don't like being high. Or even people who like being high, but want it to be a choice for recreation, not required to address their serious illness.

    Honestly, the idea that all these people are just seeking ways to get high . . . it's insulting.

    I'm sure there are. I didn't say "all" people. What I did say is "I'm sure there are people who would welcome such a product.." Have you been to a medical marijuana dispensary? I have and do you know what strains are the most popular and the most expensive? The strains with the highest content of THC and the ones marketed to get you the "highest".

    It's all a moot point here in California now anyhow, as recreational use has been legalized. I admit it is all anecdotal evidence on my part. It's what I've seen in my life and around me in my area. I'm sure, there are plenty of exceptions.

    and its moot for me because even though I don't personally smoke or use marijuana I certainly don't care if other adults decide to and I don't think it should be against the law.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories