 |
 |
John Walker posted a web address for a very important site on quackery. It holds a great many links that lead to a wealth of information. I support having access to this data, but wish to stress that this information is biased toward the "system" in place and the status quo. The people responsible for gathering, posting and recommending the information have "bought into" the in-place system in several ways. Many have paid a great deal of money for an education based on this information. Many are licensed or regulated by the state or federal government and are required to support the views of the State. They and others are being paid money through the system in place and respond by speaking the language of the system. This is not horrible. This is logical, "responsible" and . . . . comfortable. It is inconvenient to gather data that may refute commonly held beliefs. It can be expensive without the likelihood of future recompense. It is dangerous to buck the system, especially when new and controversial data can endanger the income and status of the loyalists to the accepted "wisdom". It can be embarrassing to be held up to ridicule for trying to find alternative approaches. But, in the U. S., at least, it is not illegal to search. The known way is not necessarily the only way, or possibly the best way, and there is no sin in trying to find a different, safe way. Always ask for the research. Look at it and check how the studies were set up and executed. Go to the source and ask your questions. Lovely little stories about how Aunt Minnie took baths in goat milk and never seemed to age must be viewed with an eye on whether they can really be extrapolated into the general populace (especially if told by a goat farmer!). On the other hand, there are therapies that are truly effective in vivo, but which have not met the rigorous criteria of FDA approval. A number of treatments for PD that are routinely done now were attacked vigorously when first presented. Think, and then try what you truly feel would be safe and -- just possibly -- effective. Keep on doing it if it seems to help you, and be careful to say that you speak only for yourself about these "results." Stop the things that don't help or that cause unwanted or unacceptable side effects, and be careful to say that you speak only for yourself about these "results." If a person or agency or other source listed on the quackery web site is attacked, think about the attacker, think about what is true in the message of the attacked, what might be true, and what is unsubstantiated. Question the attacker as well as the object of attack. I daresay that each supposed authority quoted as well as each supposedly spurious or specious claim has the backing of people who are indisputably distinguished in their fields. It can be interesting to "follow the money". That means we each must make individual decisions, allowing others input, but relying upon self for the final responsibility. The quackery page is one tool to use. Deanne Charlton (CG) [log in to unmask]