I'm sorry for your loss of your father, Oak.
NBNW, glad you got to London but that was a long trek for baby..
Printable View
I'm sorry for your loss of your father, Oak.
NBNW, glad you got to London but that was a long trek for baby..
Wow, the latest spammer (in the commuting tires thread) is a neat one. Warm praise in chatty and fluent English, designed to make any reader feel friendly. Looks a bit stupid when they're praising something that doesn't exist in the thread (a blog), but hey, can't win 'em all ;-)
I paid $90 for a digital photography workshop for photographing wildlife. The only thing the instructor suggested was using the running man setting on the SLR and taking lots of pictures, playing with the settings. Which settings? Who knows, she didn't tell me. She was more interested in showing off her expensive digiscoping toys.
What a waste.
DH and I headed home after a week in Maine (we're 16 hours into a 21 hour drive). It was s lovely week. We stayed in a charming and private rental home that was a home away from home. We were about 15 minutes outside of Acadia National Park. Thanks to almost perfect weather, we were able to do a lot. We went sea kayaking in Somes Sound and also kayaking in Long Pond, where we saw a number of loons. We road aimost all of the carriage roads in the park and did a road ride with a man we know from RBR's forums. We also hiked a bit. I found the hiking in the park difficult. The granite was just really tough on my knees and feet. We stupidly opted to take our lighter hiking shoes. That was a mistake. We also spent some time eating and shopping in Bar Harbor. It was a fun town to explore. Back to reality!
Sounds like a great vacation, Indy!!
It really was, Pax! I loved the area. Now we're an hour from home. I can't wait to see the cats!
How are you doing? You were on my mind this week. I'm so sorry times are tough right now.
Indy, sounds wonderful. :)
I know I'm beating this drum to death, but there have been so many posts attacking so-called "alternative" therapies (meaning, therapies that were used successfully for thousands of years and have been suppressed more or less for the past hundred years) - and most of the bases for the attacks are (1) attacking classical, abandoned theories (similar to attacking north/western medicine because bleeding someone to balance their humours is patently unhelpful) and (2) claiming that they have poor success rates. I just have to re-emphasize that the success rates of other than north/western therapies, while they're admittedly often modest, are at least as good as the success rates of contemporary north/western therapies, and the intended devastation in lives (commonly known as "side effects") is nowhere near as great.
The subject comes to mind again because the literature has been reviewed yet again in the news.
Uh, what?Quote:
Originally Posted by OakLeaf
I sort-of agree with you. There is a place for pharmaceutical intervention. There is also a place for *some* traditional therapies (though I have to wonder what you mean by that). Some traditional therapies (like some drugs) are crap. Some of them, like drugs, work for some/many/most people. I'm not sure that underhanded dealings by a pharmaceutical company, though, means that pharmaceuticals are inherently bad and that "alternative" medicine is therefore better. I'd also like to know which ones you have in mind that were "used successfully."
And I'm pretty sure that the goal of modern drug design is "greatest efficacy, fewest side effects." But that's just me and my "Western medical science" training, surely. ;)
Ugh. My husband's best friend lost his father unexpectedly in February. Now, this same man's mother is under hospice care. She's had an eleven (yes, eleven) year fight with breast cancer and, sadly, the cancer is finally claiming victory. It's been a long struggle, and I'm heartbroken about it. She's like a second mother to my husband and someone I've grown extremely fond of myself in a relatively short period of time. She's a gutsy lady and has handled much hardship and pain with incredible courage and grace. I cried myself to sleep last night and woke up at 3 a.m. only to start crying again. It arguably goes without saying, but cancer sucks.
(((((Indy))))), I'm so sorry for your pain.
Just heard my SIL's younger sister has Stage II breast cancer. She is 44, lives alone far from all of us, and found the lump a year ago when she had no health insurance. She recently got a job with benefits and had it checked.
Indysteel So sorry for your friend's mother, you, your husband and your friend. The only thing I can say right now about this is it sucks! I'm tired of cancer taking the best, the brightest, and the loved.
Thanks for your support, ladies. I feel sort of silly being as upset as I am. I haven't known her for long, but she's one of those people that just makes an impact right from the get go. She's sort of larger than life. Plus, I have a soft spot in my heart for her son. He's been so dedicated to her through her long struggle. He's such a good son. It breaks my heart that he's going to lose both parents in the course of about six months.
I'm so sorry about your SIL's sister, Pax. Cancer's bad enough. Add in health insurance issues and it really sucks. I sure hope her prognosis is good.
I think we need a group hug.
Oh man, Pax, Indy, friends ... hugs and prayers to all who need them.
Just because many modern medicines have questionable effectiveness does not mean that "alternative" therapies are effective. And think of all the wonders modern medicine has brought us. Like vaccines, antibiotics, birth control pills, surgery with anesthesia.Quote:
Originally Posted by OakLeaf
It is all about evidence. Tradition is not evidence. Old traditions, new medicine, all need to show that they are effective and that the benefits outweigh the risks.
http://whatstheharm.net/
North/western medicine has been very effective in bleeding control and (until evolution outpaced the gross overuse of antibiotics) infection control. "Modern" medicine is a misnomer, since therapies with a historical basis have also evolved and changed and learned, and are equally "modern" as north/western systems that are less than 300 years old and lack long-term validation.
That's all. The major progress was over 50 years ago. Infection control and hemostasis are what equalized life expectancies between childbearing women and men - and ultimately resulted in women's greater life expectancies - and things have been getting worse ever since. Invasive therapies' (including medications') benefits at this point almost never outweigh the ... you said "risks," but it's not "risks," it's absolute harms.
It's not just one drug company. It's all of them, and the medical device manufacturers, and the hospitals, and the surgeons.
Tell me about anesthesia. Tell me how doctors are addressing the long-term cognitive deficits and personality changes brought about by anesthesia. (Or even how they know whether those problems are brought about directly by the anesthesia, or by the after-effects of the pain and terror suffered by an immobilized, anesthetized patient.) Show me the evidence that orthopedic surgery is more effective than physical therapy. <cue crickets>
The point of the article (and many many others including recent ones in the medical journals that I've cited before) is that the so-called "evidence" is at best cherry-picked, and often outright falsified.