How do you fancy playing a little game? Close your eyes, relax, take a minute or two and imagine the newspaper headlines which new medical discoveries might make within the next 100 years or so. I know, this is a slightly silly and far from serious game but, I promise, it’s quite good fun.
Personally, I see the following headlines emerging in front of my eyes:
MEASLES IRRADICATED
VACCINATION AGAINST AIDS READY FOR ROUTINE USE
IDENTIFICATION OF THE CAUSE OF DEMENTIA LEADS TO FIRST EFFECTIVE CURE
GENE-THERAPY BEGINS TO SAVE LIVES IN EVERY DAY PRACTICE
CANCER, A NON-FATAL DISEASE
HEALTHY AGEING BECOMES REALITY
Yes, I know this is nothing but naïve conjecture mixed with wishful thinking, and there is hardly anything truly surprising in my list.
But, hold on, is it not remarkable that I visualise considerable advances in conventional healthcare but no similarly spectacular headlines relating to alternative medicine? After all, alternative medicine is my area of expertise. Why do I not see the following announcements?
YET ANOTHER HOMEOPATH WINS THE NOBEL PRIZE
CHIROPRACTIC SUBLUXATION CONFIRMED AS THE SOLE CAUSE OF MANY DISEASES
CHRONICALLY ILL PATIENTS CAN RELY ON BACH FLOWER REMEDIES
CHINESE HERBS CURE PROSTATE CANCER
ACUPUNCTURE MAKES PAIN-KILLERS OBSOLETE
ROYAL DETOX-TINCTURE PROLONGS LIFE
CRANIOSACRAL THERAPY PROVEN EFFECTIVE FOR CEREBRAL PALSY
IRIDOLOGY, A VALID DIAGNOSTIC TEST
How can I be so confident that such headlines about alternative medicine will not, one day, become reality?
Simple: because I only need to study the past and realise which breakthroughs have occurred within the previous 100 years. Mainstream scientists and doctors have discovers insulin-therapy that turned diabetes from a death sentence into a chronic disease, they have developed antibiotics which saved millions of lives, they have manufactured vaccinations for deadly infections, they have invented diagnostic techniques that made early treatment of many life-threatening conditions possible etc, etc, etc.
None of the many landmarks in the history of medicine has ever been in the realm of alternative medicine.
What about herbal medicine? Some might ask. Aspirin, vincristine, taxol and other drugs originated from the plant kingdom, and I am sure there will be similar such success-stories in the future.
But were these truly developments driven by traditional herbalists? No! They were discoveries entirely based on systematic research and rigorous science.
Progress in healthcare will not come from clinging to a dogma, nor from adhering to yesterday’s implausibilites, nor from claiming that clinical experience is more important than scientific research.
I am not saying, of course, that all of alternative medicine is useless. I am saying, however, that it is time to get realistic about what alternative treatments can do and what it cannot achieve. They will not save many lives, for instance; an alternative cure for anything is a contradiction in terms. The strength of some alternative therapies lies in palliative and supportive care and not in changing the natural history of diseases.
Yet proponents of alternative medicine tend to ignore this all too obvious fact and go way beyond the line that divides responsible from irresponsible behaviour. The result is a plethora of bogus claims – and this is clearly not right. It raises false hopes which, in a nutshell, are always unethical and often cruel.
19 Responses to Yet another homeopath wins the Nobel Prize
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
People who claim Aspirin as an example of a herbal medicine should know that salicin was identified in 1823 but it was 1899 before Aspirin was patented because it took that long to find a salicin based compound that would give the pain relieving benefits without the appalling side effects.
You are quite misinformed.
It seems the real killer in the USA during the Spanish Flu epedimic (1918-1921) were the doctors using Aspirin.
a) That’s a hypothesis, not fact.
b) It doesn’t invalidate what John Robertson said. Not one bit.
It would explain why patients of homoeopaths had a lower mortality rate though. 😉
John is correct, aspirin is not found in willow as such, but is chemically modified to make it useful.
Similarly, taxol can hardly be called a herbal medicine, since its natural abundance in is so vanishly low that many yew trees would have to die to treat a single patient. Taxol is again manufactured by chemical modification of related compounds that are much more abundant.
So why do patients not respond to scientifically effective treatments, old friend?
Glad to see you are supporting the College of Medicine in their efforts towards Healthy Ageing. Well done.
Exactly! This was my point: Aspirin, Taxol etc are NOT herbal medicines
Andrew, I believe that is an ecological fallacy.
@Dr Sikorski
They do. I did. Had it not been for scientifically effective treatments (as you put it), I would most likely have been dead from pneumonia earlier this year. Magic water and sugar pills would not have saved my life.
As homeopaths work entirely on anecdote, you can have that one for nothing and stop criticising EBM.
“Similarly, taxol can hardly be called a herbal medicine, since its natural abundance in is so vanishly low that many yew trees would have to die to treat a single patient.” This was true up until the 19702 when new techniques were developed that allowed it to be extracted sustainably from the needles; there are also other semi-synthetic methods of extraction now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paclitaxel
To be completely clear, the needles dont contain taxol, only the precursor deacetylbaccatin.
What I take from that little mental experiment is that science progresses, while pseudoscience does not. You will never ever see the headline “New research leads to paradigm shift in homeopathic proving!” or “Auratherapy 80% more effective in a frequency range between 80 and 93 kiloherz, traditional practitioners baffled”
Well, what matters it, I keep the hope up that society will eventually catch up with todays science.
Dr. Bruker would surely have won a Nobel for claiming that you can’t get polio when you avoid refined sugar. If that we’re true… If he wasn’t dead by now, he would have to be sued for murder.
Good point, Margit: pseudoscience is not just holding back progress, it is dangerous.