NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/sci/skeptic/22765

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-23 | 6.3 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU!CARL
From: [e-mail] (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Healthy skepticism
Date: 23 Jan 1993 11:07:56 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Lines: 108
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>,<[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kevin Sven Berg) writes:
>      Naturopaths claim that herbal products are better because
>      they're found in nature, whereas synthetic materials are
>      "chemicals the body's never been exposed to before," and so  are
>      more dangerous according to Pizzorno.  This assumes that  every
>      plant product on the planet was in the immediate  environment of
>      our African primate ancestors, of course.  It's also a bit like
>      saying that we should be restricting  our building materials to
>      grass, mud, and rocks since steel,  glass and concrete weren't
>      present during the course of  human evolution.
>
>The ending analogy is totally unfounded. What has happened here is
>that much has been taken out of context, perhaps to suit the presentation.
>I believe Pizzorno is referring to "trace elements", or residues that
>are present as a result of manufacturing process (If you're interested
>I can dig up specifics). Many of these are recognized toxins by other
>areas of medical science.

Kevin's implicit (and quite bogus) claim here is that herbs don't also contain
"``trace elements'' or residues that are present as a result of the
manufacturing process."  That claim is pure bullshit.  Many herbs contain
toxins quite as dangerous as those found in trace amounts in manufactured
drugs.  Only in the herbs, they occur in much more than trace amounts.  As to
trace elements, quite a few plants are very good at concentrating, e.g., heavy
metals.  Of course, Kevin would have us believe that no such plants exist.

[Another paragraph based on the ridiculous assumption that plants are free of
trace elements deleted]

>     Naturopaths claim that purifying a drug from  a plant material
>     makes it more toxic, which is why they  prefer to use the whole
>     herb in their treatments.  [M.D. William] Bennett  says:
>     "That's a piece of 19th Century romantic philosophy."
>
>The quote from M.D. Bennett focuses on a the removal of a specific
>material (like digoxin), not the process in which trace elements can
>be introduced. But we've already covered that...

Er, Kevin?  How about processes whereby these trace elements you're so
hysterical about are REMOVED form the natural sources of the precursors of the
drugs.  Oh, never mind.  Since they're being removed via a manufacturing
process, that doesn't count right?

>     ...Naturopath Pizzorno also claims that
>     "many of  the herbs have synergistic agents that work together to
>     produce the effect you're looking for."  But the fact is  that no
>     one has identified such "synergistic agents."
>
>I do not know about the situation of processed herbs, but it is
>certainly true that modern science has identified natural enzymes
>which indeed, have been shown to have "synergistic" effects in
>the body. These enzymes are effectively destroyed above 140 degrees F,
>which rules out their presence in most processed materials.

Hmmm.  Care to back up that rather strong statement.  I have here in front of
me a vial of human insulin.  Produced via what a naturopath would surely term a
"manufacturing process."  Not only a manufacturing process, but that evil of
evils, BIOENGINEERING.  Now, last I heard, insulin doesn't stand up too well to
high temperatures.  Suppose you tell me how Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals
managed what you seem to believe is such an outstanding acheivement?

>     ... acupuncture
>
>This could be another subject entirely. Suffice to say that most
>research in this area has not been done in the U.S.

E.g., the Chinese study, where they showed acupuncture to be very effective?
Of course, in that study, they administered a medication to the patients to
relax them before administering acupuncture.  The type of medication?  Why,
anaesthetic, of course.  The medication *COULDN'T* have been the reason for the
reported anaesthesia, now could it?
 I find the

>     ... homeopathy
>
>Personally I think we'll see more light on this in the future,
>especially as it relates to immune processes. Interestingly
>enough, Dr. Gorski earlier mentions penicillin, which is fits
>the homeopathic model.

Since you're obviously *NOT* talking about homeopathy, would you be so kind as
to define the concept to which you're misapplying the term?  In particular,
I've never heard of penicillin being used to treat the severe allergic reaction
which is the most common "symptom" produced by the drug.  Nor have I ever heard
of a physician diluting penicillin to on the order of 1 part in 10^30.  So just
what the hell are you talking about when you say it "fits the homeopathic
model"?

>I recall one study of influenza patients where diet related
>treatment beat traditional medicinal treatment by significant
>statistically measures. Quacks? Who's quackin' who?!?

Er, just what the hell do you think the "traditional medical treatment" for
influenza is, you idiot?  If you think it's anything other than bed rest,
forced fluids, something like aspirin, acetaminphen, or ibuprofen to control
fever, and perhaps an expectorant to loosen bronchial congestent, you're even
further out of touch with reality than you'd seemed so far.  Oh, yeah, if
there's any indication of a secondary infection developing in the lungs, a
physician will probably prescribe an antibiotic (and *NOT* in homeopathic
doses, either).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: [e-mail] | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.