Sep 202010
 

There are several systems of medicine in the world. Our hospital based system is referred to as allopathic. Contrasting systems are naturopathy, Chinese, and Ayurvedic. Americans are pretty much locked in to allopathic practice (by insurance and a huge amount of brainwashing). Allopathic practice essentially involves the application of drugs to sets of symptoms which are normally identified with a name (ie. lupis, or fibromyalgia, diabetes). The overriding premise of allopathy is that once you get your disease you must treat it with chemicals or radiation. You are sort of stuck with it and might work your way to remission. But, once you are diabetic, that’s it. Insulin forever. It’s much like saying that once your leg is broken, that’s it.

But the body seems inclined to heal itself. The broken leg being a good example. Sure it helps to have it set properly. And, hospital based medicine does a good job with trauma. It also helps to have a cut pulled together and stitched. That done, the body follows its design and begins to heal. Why won’t any diseased organ or system heal naturally if given the proper environment and conditions to do so? Naturopathic medicine postulates that the body can heal itself without pharmaceutical assistance. It’s a concept which is difficult to get through one’s head. The following  talk in seven parts by Doc Shillington clearly outlines the principles of naturopathy. It takes an hour to listen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO84kxHrkBs&feature=channel

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

A declining economy will affect our ability to get medical care. Transportation costs and the inconvenience of travel will inhibit the ability of islanders to travel for medical care. It seems prudent to me that everyone familiarize themselves with self-care, taking responsibility for one’s own health and not relying on pharmaceutical solutions as remedies.

Share

  7 Responses to “Medical Self-Care”

  1. The theory of Naturopathic “medicine” is contrary to science and common sense. It is a disservice to promote this as a rational alternative to anything.
    For what it is worth diabetes is an inheireted disease. You get it from your parents not your diet. What most people think of when they think of diabetes are the symptoms not the disease. This is essentially what you referred to when you said “once you are diabetic, that’s it. Insulin forever”. Usually diabetics develop increasingly serious symptoms until they reach the point that insulin is necessary to minimize the symptoms and in some cases to save their lives. Even then many diabetics could control their symptoms through diet and excercise but there are risks and the insulin offers a method of controlling their disease with fewer risks. Naturopathy offers nothing for the diabetic (of course it offers nothing for anyone who is ill).

  2. The majority of diabetics are type 2 non insulin. Although genetically based, most type 2’s can keep their symptoms in check with exercise, diet, a thinner build and not smoking. I know of no risk to eating right and exercising versus taking insulin. The problems usually arise when diabetics attempt to tweak their dose or can’t afford the monthly bill.
    The value to naturopathic medicine is that it offers alternatives to a host of other common pharmaceuticals that adversely affect the uptake and production of insulin. Betablockers, calcium channel blockers, niacin, and a host of other “must have” meds all screw with the bodies reaction to insulin. This has been my observation as a paramedic in the back of Medic One. With that said I love my new cobalt/chromium hips.

  3. True naturopathic medicine is NOT medicine. There are some alternative treatments that are referred to sometimes as naturopathic probably because the label sounds “natural” and fits their bias.

    As to alternative treatments/medications: My feeling is anything that was of any value was long ago incorporated into science based medicine. Pretty much everything left in the realm of “alternative medicine” is either an outright fraud or dangerous. When you take some herb or other natural preperation exactly what are you getting? The right dose (of whatever) or ten times the right dose or 100 times the right dose? Who knows. And pretty much who cares since the goal isn’t to make you better it is to seperate you from your money.

    Science based medicines and treatments are not perfect. The human body is complex and the variations between different people more then sufficient to create problems with even “safe” medications. Aspirin probably kills more people then any other medicine with Tylenol a close runner up. Yet we still sell them over the counter, you and I both use them and would give them to our children under the right circumstances. So to simply talk about bad side effects or unintentional side effects does not tell the whole story nor does it make “alternatives” look better.

    I do know a blind man who thought he could manage his diabetes with diet and excercise. He was wrong. That does not mean it can’t be done just that there are risks.

  4. Windy7

    Windy7,

    Maybe you need a bit more information on medicine vs alternative medicine. Let me be vain enough to suggest:

    Diagnosis Unknown by Randy Smith

    PS Google around. You can find it free on line.
    Also the email you use appears not to work.

  5. It is both funny and ironic that when you google “diagnoses unknown” you also get links to many frauds and bogus “cures”. My favorite was “8 Real Lfe Energy Boosting Secrets”. I am tempted to buy that and “boost” my energy. LOL !

    There are no effective and safe “alternative” medicines or treatments. If there were then they would be recognized as such and adopted by the science based medical community. Alternatives can harm you not only because they may be harmful but they can also harm you by preventing you from seeking actual medical care.

  6. A decade or two back, NIH (National Institutes of Health) set up a new research directorate to investigate, compare & contrast various “alternative/complementary” approaches to health and disease with others that are typically used in medicine. Slowly, more and more information that”s useful is coming out of that work and similar efforts around the world.

    Not all standard medical treatments are effective and health care providers (the good ones, at least) are increasingly aware of limits to their knowledge. Not all alternative/complementary approaches are effective either. Some treatments in both ‘regular’ and ‘alternative’ approaches to health and disease harm rather than heal. That’s why more and more providers (regular and alternative) are pushing, or at least accepting, a move to ‘evidence based practice.” But getting solid, reliable evidence takes a long time, money, very tough and often yields results that aren’t as conclusive as anyone would like.

    Randy, I read your book. I honor your efforts and courage in seeking creative solutions to Linda’s problems. But I repeatedly wondered if you might have been better off had you demanded both blood work AND imaging as you went through your search. Imaging could have revealed an encapsulated — and surgically treatable — infection. I’ve had two life-threatening experiences with this. If I’d bailed out of ‘regular’ medicine, I’d have died. Instead, I (with Bill’s help) mercilessly hounded people in the ‘regular’ system — including trips to the emergency room and stubbornly rejecting insinuations that I probably just another ‘woman of a certain age’. Turns out that such encapsulations aren’t uncommon in people with strong immune systems – for example, ~10% of cases of appendicitis. But it’s the 90% majority that (logically) capture any diagnostician’s mind first. That’s why patients & their partners have to learn & persist & challenge, no matter what type of health care they pursue.

    For the future? If low-tech (not low-knowledge) options are available, we surely should use & encourage them. We also should support the Parish Nurses and EMT programs here, maybe try to expand them somehow.

  7. Wynne,

    Flattered that you read my book but not sure what you mean by demanding “blood work and imaging.” Linda had blood work multiple times plus EKGs and chest X-Rays (p. 35). Also a full sinus X-Ray (p. 33) and a CAT Scan (p.44). Non of these helped the conventional docs diagnose her issue.

    The point of the book is:

    1. We walked away from conventional medicine and lived to tell about it.
    2. We tried many alternative modalities which are detailed in the book and I thought was clear that most of them didn’t work for us.
    3. We found a practitioner who was able to discover problems energetically that no conventional practitioner had been able to discover using XRay, blood test, or CAT scan.
    4.Conventional dentists and oral surgeons looked at the XRays and couldn’t see a serious bone infection. Biological dentists could see it clearly.
    5. The guy who finally diagnosed her problem did recommend surgery as step number one.

    I’m just not too interested in what NIH is doing. Just another bureaucracy. I’m not going to wait for studies. Also not interested in hounding docs to do the right thing.

    Conventional medicine didn’t work for us. In fact, proved harmful. ADA dentistry caused the problem.

    But I’m always happy to hear about any medical success story whether conventional or alternative.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)

*