His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales has today published in the JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY his vision of what he now calls “post-modern medicine” and previously named integrated health care. As the article does not seem to be available on-line, allow me to quote those sections which, in my view, are crucial.
“By integrated medicine, I mean the kind of care that integrates the best of new technology and current knowledge with ancient wisdom. More specifically, perhaps, it is an approach to care of the patient which includes mind, body and spirit and which maximizes the potential of conventional, lifestyle and complementary approaches in the process of healing”.
Charles believes that conventional medicine aims “to treat the symptoms of disease” his vision of a post-modern medicine therefore is “actively to create health and to put the patient at the heart of this process by incorporating those core human elements of mind, body and spirit”
The article continues: “This whole area of work – what I can only describe as an ‘integrated approach’ in the UK, or ‘integrative’ in the USA – takes what we know about appropriate conventional, lifestyle and complementary approaches and applies them to patients. I cannot help feeling that we need to be prepared to offer the patient the ‘best of all worlds’ according to a patient’s wishes, beliefs and needs“.
Charles also points out that “health inequalities have lowered life-expectancy” in parts of the UK and suggests, if we “tackle some of these admittedly deep-seated problems, not only do you begin to witness improvements in health and other inequalities, but this can lead to improvements in the overall cost-efficiency and effectiveness of local services“.
1)Integrated medicine is a smoke screen behind which any conceivable form of quackery is being promoted and administered.
2) The fact that patients are human beings who consist of mind, body and spirit is a core concept of all good health care and not a monopoly of integrated medicine.
3) The notion of ‘ancient wisdom’ is a classical fallacy.
4) The assumption that conventional medicine only treats symptoms displays a remarkable ignorance about modern health care.
5) The patient is at the heart of any good health care.
6) The application of unproven or disproved treatments to patients would make modern health care not more human but less effective.
7) The value of the notion of the “best of all worlds” crucially depends on what we mean by “best”. In medicine, this must describe interventions which demonstrably generate more good than harm – not ‘preferred by the future king of England’.
8) Some might find the point about inequalities affecting health offensive when it is made by an individual who profits millions without paying tax for the benefit of society.
I don’t think anyone doubts that medicine needs improving. However, I do doubt that Charles’ vision of a “post-modern medicine” is the way to achieve improvement – in fact, I fear that is would lead us straight back to the dark ages.
i have just been informed that the article by HRH is based on a speach which can be found here https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/media/speeches/article-the-journal-of-the-royal-society-of-medicine-integrated-health-and-post
It’s interesting that HRH seems to have moved on from the best of ‘both’ worlds to the best of ‘all’ worlds by factoring in CAM’s get-out-of-jail-free card, namely ‘patient choice’.
However, I think that HRH may be suffering from amnesia. In 2005, he proposed that everyone should have access to the treatment of their choice “safe in the knowledge that it is effective and well regulated”.
Essentially, that would exclude CAM.
yes, most of it.
Re “ancient wisdom”, I wonder what HRH would have to say about the following four-minute video clip of the BBC2 ‘Alternative Medicine: The Evidence’ episode “Ancient Wisdoms” which looked at acupuncture. It showed a young woman apparently having open-heart surgery aided by acupuncture. However, what is unforgivable is that the programme’s presenter, Kathy Sykes, did not explicitly state that the patient was also receiving three powerful conventional sedatives — midazolam, droperidol and fentanyl — along with large volumes of local anaesthetic injected into her chest. IOW, the whole segment was a sham:
ancient wisdom? yes, let’s go back to blood-letting and the days when diabetes or even appendicitis were death senteces!
It took much less than diabetes or appendicitis to kill people. Ancient wisdom is what led in the past to most people not surviving beyond, what is for us, not even middle age. It was “ancient wisdom” that was incapable of even dreaming up the idea of frequent use of soap and water for personal hygiene.
By today’s standards the ancients, for the most part, lived painfully short, squalid lives. They died from what are now treatable or preventable conditions and diseases.
The “wisdom of the ancients” was mostly superstition and demonstrably wrong. It’s the same “wisdom” that created the heavens and the earth in 6 days. And when it comes to medicine HRH is unable to say how many people were poisoned by the “witch doctors” whose herbs and wisdom he so greatly admires. All his knowledge of medicine, and science in general, seems to be based on fantasy.
What a progress modern medicine provided us. We dont die in our very precious mid thirties, now we stick it out to our worthless mid eighties, shitting our diapers and drooling on our bed sores.
Speak for yourself. If you prefer the lives of pain and misery, and squalid existence of of your distant ancestors, that’s your prerogative. You still have a choice.
I think point (8) is very slightly *ad hominem*, and, as such weakens this otherwise excellent article. Sorry to be grumpy, but let’s keep the fight clean, crisp, and scientific.
I have to agree with the previous commenter. Point 8 is an ad-hominem and really not related with the income inequalities concerns of prince Charles. I’m not a monarchist and not even an UK citizen, but seeing that prince Charles has a good part of its civil rights suspended (voting for instance) and since its life-long job is effectively *for* the UK people (even if i disagree with any monarchy) that point should not be considered and it does weakens the rest your excellent points.
perhaps slightly; yet i think it is a comment that needs to be made.
And it also demonstrates that he missed out a bit on what homeopathy is about. A homeopath prescribes remedies based on symptoms. And the more symptoms you have, the more remedies will be prescribed. It is a symptom based system in the extreme – not a holistic system (You know this of course – I just had to get it out of my system 🙂 )
In my experience of those of my acquaintances who believe homeopathy is effective medicine, homeopaths rather rely on public ignorance of what homeopathy actually is. They seem to be happy if anyone thinks it’s the same as herbal medicine, or that it’s anything but a symptom based idea, and never seem too keen on explaining exactly how dilute their nostrums are. One can only assume, at least on the part of the manufacturers, the various associations, leading advocates and retailers, this is a deliberate policy.
Peter Vintner wrote: “In my experience of those of my acquaintances who believe homeopathy is effective medicine, homeopaths rather rely on public ignorance of what homeopathy actually is…One can only assume, at least on the part of the manufacturers, the various associations, leading advocates and retailers, this is a deliberate policy.”
It would seem so. For example, HRH is reported as saying that complementary medicine is not about “quackery and witchery, hocus-pocus and snake oil” but *about giving patients accurate information* and letting them make informed choices:
To the detriment of patients and the public, he obviously likes to cherry-pick what constitutes “accurate information” and ignore rigorous scientific evidence which, let’s not forget, he declared in 2008 should support “a truly integrated health system”. I assume that he was including CAM in that system:
“Ladies and Gentlemen, believe it or not I have been advocating the development of a truly integrated health system – one rooted in appropriate regulation and supported by rigorous scientific evidence – for the best part of twenty five years.”
Point 8 would have been better if it had said ‘an individual whose family has always received free private health care’.
I actually like point 8, which seems to me a useful reminder of the prince’s detachment from the world experienced by 99% of his subjects. I’d only quibble with the use of “earned” to describe the way he acquires his wealth.
point taken – i will replace earn with profit.
What always bothers me about the “ancient wisdom” is that they never qualify which one they mean. There are many
traditional or otherwise non-science based schools of treatment, most of which are contradictory to each other.
Since most of them don’t actually do anything besides emptying the patient’s pocket, they don’t clash much in practice though.
Charles seems to be proud of being an enemy of the enlightenment http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1248347/Prince-Charles-unbelievable-abuse-faces-views.html
Hey Prof do I detect same kind of animosity towards Prince Charles?
“Ancient wisdom” should bother everyone. It is the past through rose tinted spectacles. It’s the idea that the past was better than today. That their understanding of their physical world in the past was better and more profound than it is today. That their superstitions were more profound and of more value than any more recent scientifically deduced understanding.
“Ancient wisdom” is the delusion of an idyllic life in an idyllic (preferably rural) setting in a time long past, devoid of the pain, stench, abject squalor and misery of reality. “Ancient wisdom” is the domain of idiots, where history is not allowed to impinge on childish fantasy.
It bothers me that proponents of CAM talk about body, mind and spirit as if these were somehow co-equal. The body we know a fair bit about and is where the interactions of the various disease entities take place. The mind is as is becoming more and more clear, an emergent property of brain function. It is more a model our brains create of the outside world which allows us to interact with one another and have reason and “feelings”. It is, however, mostly dependent on the underlying bodily function not in control of them. It is possible to interact with patient’s “minds” in such a way as to improve quality of life. It is becoming clear that improved attitude will do little to change any underlying problems by itself. Then there is the spirit. What exactly is that? It has about the same substance as a homeopathic preparation that might be used to treat it.
We have on one hand medical treatments that address the function of the body and by interaction can and should deal with attitude. On the other hand we have treatments which only deal with attitude and perception and go on to treat the imaginary “spirit”. Unless the later are free, it is hard to see how they could be cost effective. If they lead to delaying effective treatment for serious conditions, this make believe medicine will only add to costs.
Perhaps I can give an insight into what Charles Windsor is referring to when he states “By integrated medicine, I mean the kind of care that integrates the best of new technology and current knowledge with ancient wisdom. More specifically, perhaps, it is an approach to care of the patient which includes mind, body and spirit and which maximizes the potential of conventional, lifestyle and complementary approaches in the process of healing”.
In May 2012 I had my colostomy reversed, this was the end stage of 18 months of treatment for stage three rectal cancer. Colonoscopy found the tumor, CT and MRI identified the spread. Radiation and chemotherapy shrunk it and a skilled surgeons hand removed the tumour and infected lymph nodes and chemo therapy was used post surgery to kill cancer cells that may not be visible on the imaging.
I saw the consultant two weeks after the reversal and he made an appointment to see him again in 6 January 2013 for a check up. I was 20 kilos over weight had no feeling in my hands and feet, could barely walk 100 meters without feeling exhausted and despite the fact the cancer appeared to be gone, I was starting to feel down because I wanted to be healthy again. My doctors were delighted with the results, I was in remission and they had nothing left to offer me, I dont say this as a criticism, they did a fantastic at removing the cancer, returning to health and hopefully preventing a return of the cancer was up to me. I am afraid Edzard in my experience my doctors were only interested in my signs and symptoms and I received no advice on wellbeing, this may also be because they recognised, I probably knew more about exercise and nutrition than they did and have asked me to give a talk.
I changed my diet, started exercising every day, getting at least 7 hours of sleep a night, meditating in fact I was happy to do anything that I BELIEVE would get me back to health. So being a chiropractor I get my spine adjusted every week and acupuncture for the peripheral neuropathy. Skeptics will argue that there is no evidence to support the choices I have made. When you are seriously ill you dont give much thought to the “evidence” its pretty depressing when it comes to cancer. I discovered I had a 50/50 chance of five year survival, were I to do nothing. Looking at the evidence its like trying to pick a winner at the horse races, you gather all the evidence and there is still no guarantee you will pick the right horse. What in my opinion ( from the patients I met|) is more important to the individuals return to a healthy strong body is their mind set and the spirit to keep going, in the knowledge there is no cure for cancer, its always lurking in the background ready to strike. Then again you could get hit by a bus, whats important is to do everything you can to stop that bus hitting you, but if it does make sure you are happy the moment of impact and have no regrets. My “spirit” is what has sustained me through this awful illness and aided a speedy recovery after each intervention. On May 18 I will compete in a marathon, not just any marathon one of the hardest marathons in the world on the Great Wall of China, I am certain from the times I am posting now for ten miles I will complete it in a respectable time. People ask me what charity I am doing this for, none! I am doing it for me, because I have convinced myself, if I can do this and then an Ironman in 2 years, cancer will keep its distance. No doubt the naysayers will say I am deluded, wasting my time, but surely they are able to see if I get one, two, ten years of happiness believing what I do, thats what is important to quality of life. If one day I am shown to be wrong, it wont take away the happiness that belief and spirit gives me and enables me to look forward to an exciting future without fear.
i wish you all the very best and am glad it worked out well. i hope HRH means this sort of scenario when he talks about integrated medicine. but he, you and i know what is all too often hidden behind this smoke screen. what about his recommendation for Gerson? you’d be pushing the daisies by now, had you really listened to HRH!
‘you’d be pushing the daisies by now, had you really listened to HRH!’……I do not think Prince Charles is advocating that one excludes medical care. It seems to me that he is suggesting that one should include alt med therapies that would benefit the patient. At the moment health care is basically a medical monopoly and according to you should become a 100% monopoly as you claim all alt med therapies are bogus.
perhaps not – but the Gerson people might see to that. so advocating Gerson is iffy, to say the least.
Which altmed therapies do you believe might benefit patients??
When Charles states “By integrated medicine, I mean the kind of care that integrates the best of new technology and current knowledge” I take that to mean going to a medical doctor and a hospital, not Gerson. However if an individual believes in Gerson or wants to pray for devine intervention if it puts them in the right frame of mind to undergo treatment the oncologists are going to support it, even though they may not believe in it.
However what if someone is terminal and the best current knowledge states there is no cure as has happened to Dr Feelgood guitarist Wilko Johnson. He has decided he does not want chemotherapy because its not going to cure him. Chemo may give him a few more months and its a horrendous experience http://www.billboard.com/news/dr-feelgood-guitarist-wilko-johnson-has-1008082062.story#/news/dr-feelgood-guitarist-wilko-johnson-has-1008082062.story . Now he may decide to try some CAM to help him not because he expects to be cured but is trying to make his final months more comfortable. For example he is going to continue playing right to the end no doubt because it makes him feel better. Whatever he decides to do, it is his choice because cancer is a different experience for everyone and the family of people who decide not to have chemotherapy dont deserve to have their loved ones described as “victims of CAM” when they decide not to go through the torment of cancer treatment, when it may only offer a few extra months of hell
“Victims of CAM” are (1) people who’ve made a misinformed choice to use CAM in place of treatment that would have saved them and (2) people who’ve wasted money on worthless therapies because of false claims made about them. Nobody cares if someone with terminal cancer turns to complementary therapies, “trying to make his final months more comfortable”. That’s what complementary therapies should be for.
Skepticat says…..“Victims of CAM” are people who’ve made a misinformed choice to use CAM in place of treatment that would have saved them………. The suggestion seems to be that ‘treatment’ would have saved them. Guess what:
Many cancer patients using conventional medicine die of the cancer or because of the side effects of chemotherapy and radiation. In the case of CAM the patients die because of the treatment according to you but in the case of the cancer patients undergoing conventional medical treatment that die its because the disease took its natural course ‘We did everything we could’….’he lost his battle against cancer’……..
Thank you for that illustration of your muddled thinking.
“In the case of CAM the patients die because of the treatment according to you”
Bollocks. I’ve never said any such thing and neither has anyone else. Read my assertion again:
“Victims of CAM are people who’ve made a misinformed choice to use CAM in place of treatment that would have saved them”.
There is nothing to read in that sentence except what is there. “Treatment that would have saved them” means exactly that: would have saved them. There is nothing in my comment about what treatment would have saved them. I don’t mention chemo or radiation. Thus, your comment is a non sequitur. You really do need to study that link Alan posted.
For examples of victims of CAM, try the ‘What’s the harm?’ website or here: http://discoverhomeopathy.co.uk/?page_id=116
Of course its wrong to exploit the vulnerable, however to assume all CAM practitioners are doing this when I am sure there are many times more people who would say they have had some benefit from CAM, than those who would say they have been ripped off. I would also say, to assume that there are guarantees of being “saved” in the management of cancer is a mistake its always there and more likely than not thats how i will eventually die. They vast majority of people with cancer chose the medical route, its when the cancer comes back, or they have been scared by seeing people undergoing chemotherapy, that they decide to try something else. It never occurred to me not to go the medical route and no one of all those CAM practitioners I know suggested I should. When Edzard Ernst used the terms “victims” he used it in relation to an elderly man who died in April 2012. I pulled him up on this, asking from my practice Twitter account on April 10 “so if my cancer comes back and I decide I am not not going to do chemo again and die. Will you again blame CAM” he sneered at my comment and marked it as one of his “favourites” . Those comments and one by Andy Lewis when he announced on Twitter in May 2011 that I was “treating my cancer with chiropractic”, showed to me how little skeptics understand by an integrated approach to treating chronic illness which is now being advocated by most medical clinicians. In “evidence based medicine” it comes under what Sackett calls “Patient values”
Alan…..your question ‘Which altmed therapies do you believe might benefit patients??’…infers that no alt med therapies have any benefit and are bogus.
no – only if you are suffering from fairly severe paranoia, i’d say.
and please don’t turn round now and claim that i said you are paranoid – because i didn’t
Eugen: Please don’t worry yourself about what you think I might infer. It was a very simple question: Which altmed therapies do you believe might be of benefit?
Most CAM exert their effect through the placebo response by a complex system that involves our psychologies manifesting physiological changes that scientists are just beginning to probe into with the aid of the latest technologies such as PET/MRI in trials. One such outfit is the one led by Ted Kaptchuk in association with Harvard Uni.
According to the “Program in Placebo Studies & Therapeutic Encounter” hosted at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center the placebo response can be as powerful as drugs in some instances:
“Until PiPS researchers began contributing to the field of placebo studies, there had been comparatively little patient-centered research aimed at harnessing placebo responses in the treatment of common illnesses. PiPS has addressed this gap by creating a comprehensive agenda for placebo research that targets high-priority clinical challenges.
Taking advantage of the research-intensive environment and clinical resources at Harvard University and its teaching hospitals, the PiPS team has completed or is in the process of completing clinical studies related to the following illnesses. The majority of these studies were funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
■Asthma – In an article published by the New England Journal of Medicine in July 2011, the PiPS team demonstrated the impact of placebos on subjective outcomes: placebos can have effects similar to powerful medications as measured by a self-appraisal of subjective symptoms, yet have no detectable effect on objective pathophysiology. This study was funded by NCCAM, NIH.
■Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) – In an article published in PLoSin 2010, the PiPS team reported an RCT that suggested that when patients were informed about the potential for benefit from the placebo response, deception was not required to produce benefit from placebo treatment (described as a pill without any medication in it). The study established the “proof-of-concept” that it may be possible to directly harness placebo effects while still conforming to ethical norms of informed consent. PiPS plans to extend this investigation to other clinical conditions with the goal of further elucidating how to optimize the use of placebo treatments in patient care.
In a related study published by the British Medical Journal in 2008, PiPS researchers showed that placebo treatment for IBS could be administered in a dose dependent manner analogous to drug administration. They also demonstrated that components of the therapeutic encounter such as empathy, confidence, thoughtful silence and touch could dramatically improve clinical outcomes. Both of these studies were funded by NCCAM, NIDDK, NIH.
■Chronic arm pain – In a clinical trial, the PiPS team demonstrated that placebo needles produce better pain relief than placebo pills but that placebo pills are better for insomnia. These findings suggest the complex symbolic nature of the placebo response. This study was funded by NCCAM, NIH.
■Acute migraine headache – PiPS researchers are nearing the completion of a methodological study to develop ways to 1) treat patients more effectively and 2) more efficiently distinguish between the effects of medication and placebo treatment. The results of this work have the potential to improve drug development for migraine headaches and produce methodologies that will be useful in examining the role of placebo treatments in other illnesses.
■Depression – In a series of influential meta-analyses, PiPS researchers documented the exceptionally high rate of placebo response in depression. The team recently began a pilot study examining how to maximize placebo effects in the clinical care of depression. In a widely cited methodological article, PiPS researchers also elucidated statistical practices that can produce distorted perceptions of clinical efficacy. This study is partly funded by NCCAM, NIH.
■Osteoarthritis of the Knee – Using clinical research methodologies and functional magnetic resonance imaging, PiPS researchers are currently investigating how expectations modulate responses to sham acupuncture and genuine acupuncture. This study is being funded by NCCAM, NIH.
■Chronic Low Back Pain – Using positron emission tomography (PET) embedded in a clinical trial, the PiPS team is currently conducting a major study that examines how expectations and the patient-provider relationship can modulate the treatment of low back pain as measured by clinical outcomes, neural circuitry involvement and modulation of neurotransmitter systems. This study is being funded by NCCAM, NIH.
In the future, PiPS plans to investigate the effects of placebos in Parkinson’s disease, heart disease, hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia and the management of cancer symptoms. In these endeavors, we aim to determine whether the ritual of treatment, including the patient-provider relationship, can be ethically used to produce a positive effect on clinical outcomes.”
i do think that research into all this is very important. BUT, even if one day we have a full understanding of placebo-effects, this will not amount to a justification of placebo-therapies! there are several reasons for this, the most important being that we do not need a placebo to generate placebo-effects: treatments with specific effects administered with compassion will do this too – and will produce specific effects in addition.
You need to look up the meaning of “infer”. A question infers nothing. You might infer from a question, but that’s your business not the questioner’s.
Thanks for the lecture. However I guess you got the point.
Since you have stated that the question “Which altmed therapies do you believe might benefit patients” implies that “no alt med therapies have any benefit and are bogus”, your point seems to be that anyone researching the efficacy of altmed therapies assumes that they are bogus. While this does seem to be a claim frequently made by proponents of altmed, you (and they) are using the rhetorical device known as “poisoning the well”.
If you read nearly every post on this blog regarding alt med you see time and time again that the word ‘bogus’ is used and many other derogatory terms when referring to alt med therapies. I see Prof Ernst and his mates are using various tactics to take the attention away from the discussion eg…..I lack understanding, I dont know how to have a logical and reasonable disciussion, I am paranoid, I use every fallacy in the book, etc……basically ad honimens. This blog it seems to me is not about a discussion to get a better understanding or about hearing the other side but merely an opportunity to bash alt med……….oops there I go being paranoid again.
Nobody has accused you of being paranoid; here you are attacking a strawman argument – another fallacy. The other comments, that you “lack understanding, [you] dont know how to have a logical and reasonable disciussion, … [you] use every fallacy in the book” are observations on what you have posted, and are not ad hominem arguments.
An ad hominem argument involves claiming that your argument is invalid not because of character of your argument but because of your own character. Saying that you use fallacies is a comment on your arguments, not your character. Saying that you don’t know how to have a logical argument, or that you lack understanding, are observations based on the arguments that you have posted.
Please explain how the question “Which altmed therapies do you believe might benefit patients” implies that “no alt med therapies have any benefit and are bogus”. That was your claim.
Alan, I think I have named a few that helped me feel better, will they work for others they only way they will find out is if they try it. I dont think prayer would give me any benefit, however I sure it provides comfort to millions of people. I and most people with a chronic illness would try anything that I thought might help, however I am not sure I would make the decision based on the say so of a guy who was asking me to mortgage his house. I went to the inaugural conference of the College of Medicine which had a work shop about “living with cancer”. I met two medical doctors who worked at the Penny Brohn cancer center in Bristol and spent three days there later in the summer. Did not cost a penny and I did not get one begging letter even though they rely on donations and I hope to help them in they future. They advocate the approach I have described above, the “integrated” approach Charles asked for and I would expect any sensible practitioner working with cancer patients, or any chronic illness.
EUGEN ROTH: foremost, you are almost constantly off topic. i will not allow you to continue in this vein. either discuss the subject at hand or be quiet.
I am merely responding to your posts.
It is about time you controlled your pride and started listening to people like Prince Charles.
His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales has today published in the JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY his vision of what he now calls “post-modern medicine” .
Post modern medicine is a synthesis of both Allopathic and Complementary and Alternative medicine, the synthesis of the union of opposites of reason and intuition . Reason alone has not found a cure for cancer or diabetes and billions of pounds have been spent on research whilst nothing is being spent on CAM, therefore there has to be a paradigm of thought .New technology with current knowledge Allopathic and Ancient wisdom, chakras activation , sound healing Reiki etc The union of opposites the vesica pisces of intellect ,will give us a synthesis of intellect to find cures for CHRONIC DISEASES.
Dr Alfred Dominic Borda
First of all, ‘allopathic medicine’ does not exist. It is an invention of Hahnemann. So you want to combine medicine, which works, with Mumbo-Jumbo that doesn’t work.
Yup, that makes you as sensible as Prince Charlie.
Set out a hypothesis for a CAM. If it is plausible test it rigorously, if it works use it. Ooops it’s then mainstream. If the CAM advocates including Prince Charles, put the half the effort into proper scientific testing that they put into marketing hype me might get some where.
Nothing? The US National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine has so for spent over $1 billion on research since its inception as the Office of Alternative Medicine in 1993.
Hardly nothing as you allege, but ‘nothing’ perfectly describes what they have found in the way of effective alternative therapies having spent all that taxpayers’ money. Not a jot. Not even one chakra.
The USA has spent a lot of money on Complementary and Alternative Medicine but the UK has not. Allopathic is a synonym for mainstream medicine, therefore the synthesis of mainstream medicine and CAM is the way forward , the union of opposites of reason and intuition , light and sound, intellectual androgyny . Secondly if allopathic medicine does not exist , then mainstream medicine does not exist , that make Prince Charles and I a lot wiser than you think….
are you the “doctor” using/advocating Reiki-healing?
The USA has spent a lot of money on researching whether Complementary and Alternative Medicine works, and has largely found that it doesn’t, to the extent that one of the promoters of the NCCAM has complained that it has “fallen short” in its pupose “to investigate and validate alternative approaches”.
And “allopathy” is not “a synonym for mainstream medicine”, but a derogatory term invented by Sam Hahnemann to describe the mainstream medicine of his day; medicine has changed out of all recognition, both in the treatments that it uses and its basic principles, over the last 200 years.
Ironically, those “allopathic” forms of medicine that still exist are generally regarded as being part of CAM.
…apple pie and cow pie…
You appear to be implying a sexist assumption about the relative abilities of the genders to apply critical and rational thinking.
Non sequitur, because “mainstream medicine” and “allopathic medicine” are not the same thing.
Have you heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect?
Does altmed work differently in the US and do you think trials done in the UK would come up with a different result in the UK?
Allopathic is a derogatory term coined by a 19th Century magnetic healer and has nothing to do with conventional medicine.
“the synthesis of the union of opposites of reason and intuition”
So basically we need to combine treatments that we have found to work with treatments we wish would work?
I am the doctor advocating healing with sound and reiki….in the beginning was the word was sound …big bang …therefore everything has a sound in it …which is linked to mathematical shapes…even cancerous cells….If you synthesise both sides of the brain reason and intuition light and sound and light is sound at the atomic level then intuition comes from a higher level of consciousness comes from the archetypal big bang….,A PhD on the Earth is like a grain of sand on a 50 mile beach…consciousness intelligence is infinite , it is pride which stops people seeing the truth, THEREFORE THE SYNTHESIS OF SOUND INTUITION LINKED TO EARTHLY REASON gives us a synthesis of intellect which in the bigger picture is very small indeed
joie de vivre
thanks for this insight!
could you tell us what evidence there is for sound and reiki to be healing anything?
“Active music therapy in Parkinson’s disease: an integrative method for motor and emotional rehabilitation.
Pacchetti C, Mancini F, Aglieri R, Fundarò C, Martignoni E, Nappi G.
SourceParkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders Centre, Istituto di Ricerca e Cura a Carattere Scientifico C. Mondino, University of Pavia, Italy. [email protected]
BACKGROUND: Modern management of Parkinson’s disease (PD) aims to obtain symptom control, to reduce clinical disability, and to improve quality of life. Music acts as a specific stimulus to obtain motor and emotional responses by combining movement and stimulation of different sensory pathways. We explored the efficacy of active music therapy (MT) on motor and emotional functions in patients with PD.
RESULTS: MT had a significant overall effect on bradykinesia as measured by the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (p < .034). Post-MT session findings were consistent with motor improvement, especially in bradykinesia items (p < .0001). Over time, changes on the Happiness Measure confirmed a beneficial effect of MT on emotional functions (p < .0001). Improvements in activities of daily living and in quality of life were also documented in the MT group (p < .0001). PT improved rigidity (p < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: MT is effective on motor, affective, and behavioral functions. We propose active MT as a new method for inclusion in PD rehabilitation programs.
PMID:10845352[PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]"
"Kumar AM, Tims F, Cruess DG, Mintzer MJ, Ironson G, Loewenstein D, Cattan R, Fernandez JB, Eisdorfer C, Kumar M
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Miami School of Medicine, FL 33101, USA. [email protected]
Find all citations in this journal (default).Or filter your current search
Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine [1999, 5(6):49-57]
Type: Clinical Trial, Journal Article, Review, Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Abstract Highlight Terms
Gene Ontology(1) Diseases(1) Genes/Proteins(2) Chemicals(5)
CONTEXT: Music therapy is known to have healing and relaxing effects. Although these effects appear to be mediated by release of neurotransmitters and neurohormones, the specific neurohormonal systems involved have not been fully investigated.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a music therapy intervention on concentrations of melatonin, norepinephrine, epinephrine, serotonin, and prolactin in the blood of a group of patients with Alzheimer's disease.
DESIGN: Blood samples were obtained before initiating the therapy, immediately at the end of 4 weeks of music therapy sessions, and at 6 weeks follow-up after cessation of the sessions.
SETTING: Miami Veterans Administration Medical Center, Miami, Fla. PATIENTS: 20 male inpatients with Alzheimer's disease. INTERVENTION: 30- to 40-minute morning sessions of music therapy 5 times per week for 4 weeks.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in melatonin, norepinephrine, epinephrine, serotonin, and prolactin following music therapy. RESULTS: Melatonin concentration in serum increased significantly after music therapy and was found to increase further at 6 weeks follow-up. A significant increase was found between baseline values and data recorded after the music therapy sessions as well as at 6 weeks follow-up. Norepinephrine and epinephrine levels increased significantly after 4 weeks of music therapy, but returned to pretherapy levels at 6 weeks follow-up. Serum concentration of prolactin and platelet serotonin levels remained unchanged after 4 weeks of music therapy and at 6 weeks follow-up.
“Effect of music therapy on anxiety and depression in patients with Alzheimer’s type dementia: randomised, controlled study.
Guétin S, Portet F, Picot MC, Pommié C, Messaoudi M, Djabelkir L, Olsen AL, Cano MM, Lecourt E, Touchon J.
SourceService de Neurologie, Centre Mémoire de Ressources et de Recherches (CMRR), Inserm U888, CHRU Montpellier, Montpellier, France. [email protected]
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Numerous studies have indicated the value of music therapy in the management of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. A recent pilot study demonstrated the feasibility and usefulness of a new music therapy technique. The aim of this controlled, randomised study was to assess the effects of this new music therapy technique on anxiety and depression in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer-type dementia.
METHODS: This was a single-centre, comparative, controlled, randomised study, with blinded assessment of its results. The duration of follow-up was 24 weeks. The treated group (n = 15) participated in weekly sessions of individual, receptive music therapy. The musical style of the session was chosen by the patient. The validated ‘U’ technique was employed. The control group (n = 15) participated under the same conditions in reading sessions. The principal endpoint, measured at weeks 1, 4, 8, 16 and 24, was the level of anxiety (Hamilton Scale). Changes in the depression score (Geriatric Depression Scale) were also analyzed as a secondary endpoint.
RESULTS: Significant improvements in anxiety (p < 0.01) and depression (p < 0.01) were observed in the music therapy group as from week 4 and until week 16. The effect of music therapy was sustained for up to 8 weeks after the discontinuation of sessions between weeks 16 and 24 (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: These results confirm the valuable effect of music therapy on anxiety and depression in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. This new music therapy technique is simple to implement and can easily be integrated in a multidisciplinary programme for the management of Alzheimer's disease.
Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel."
music therapy is not the same as SOUND THERAPY!!!
I think this is what Dominic means by sound healing:
Source: TWISTED TRUTH TWISTED LIES By DR ALFRED DOMINIC BORDA.
Is that correct?
yes that is my book , reflection about teaching in special .ed.
just a hint about sound healing
Has anyone ever told you that is gobbledegook nonsense?
In the beginning was…absolute silence.
Not ‘big’. That is a relative term and there was nothing smaller.
No bang. Not even a whimper.
Please catch up before posting again. Thank you.
In the beginning was absolute silence …you are quite right, 2 sounds of the same pitch gives you silence….20 octaves up in harmonics and one of the sound slightly changes gives us the big bang….in the beginning was silence then big bang , everything in the Universe has sound in it.. including everything at the atomic level
Hey Prof…..sound and reiki……MMmmmm. I am sure you would prefer to get back to chiro bashing despite our communications getting a bit tetchy at times. Anyway I see that I have been ‘banned’ as you are not publishing any of my comments. Thats OK. So it seems to me that if one is not flattering your ego or wishing to become ‘your matron’ ….(seriously scary…..I nearly had to take a serious drug cocktail of Xanax, Valium and Prozac)….one gets banned. So be it. I find it very disappointing that you refuse to comment on the risk/benefit of Prozac and comment on the risk/benefit of the vaccination link I sent you. What conclusion can I draw from this? The only conclusion I can come to is that your blog’s purpose is to discredit all alt med practices and that you are not really an evidence based scientist investigating whether alt med really does or doesnt have any benefit to patients but rather somebody who wants to destroy alt med (I suspect you have some personal grievances). The great thing about being evidenced based is that one can choose to dogmatically reject any evidence that that does not fit into one’s belief system……..a bit of an oxymoron that!
i have NOT banned you!
however, i have asked you several times to stay on subject – and you don’t; so i will not post any more of you inuendo.
did you understand this? is it too complicated?
Hello Eugen and Professor Edzard,
quote: all alt med practices and that you are not really an evidence based scientist investigating whether alt med really does or doesn,t have any benefit to patients but rather somebody who wants to destroy alt med (I suspect you have some personal grievances). The great thing about being evidenced based is that one can choose to dogmatically reject any evidence that that does not fit into one’s belief system……..a bit of an oxymoron that! I totally agree , they have spent billions of pounds on finding a cure for cancer / diabetes and not one of these professors has healed anyone .What I am trying to say is that we have to look at healing in a holistic way…the analogy is you do not fix the engine when you have a flat tyre.
Secondly I am doing trials on myself as I have prostate cancer and I have brought my PSA down from 200 to 3. I have spent the last 10 years trying to get professors to take me seriously, and I could not even get a small grant .I have just written to another University .
Last but not least CAM is 80% placebo but the other 20% is beyond all traditional medical doctors….
Professor Ernst there might be a University who will take me seriously
I also suffer from diabetes which I am working on as well…
i think i understand why nobody takes you seriously.
i did ask you for evidencefor reiki and sound therapy – shall i conclude that you have none (other than experiments on yourself)?
I am being seen by traditional; doctors about my prostate cancer and three cancer specialists wanted me to have chemo and radiotherapy I refused due to the fact that I knew allopathic and CAM will heal me…As a professor of alternative medicine you contradict yourself and will not listen to reason.
I am using myself for trials how much more evidence do you want? No wonder CAM healers do not stand a chance ,as Eugen said quote:The great thing about being evidenced based is that one can choose to dogmatically reject any evidence that that does not fit into one’s belief system……..if I use myself as evidence no-one can prove that I am wrong.. as it is being witnessed by traditional doctors and they have no notion why its happening.
humility professor Ernst is key.
why do you not answer my question about evidence?
how do i contradict myself?
what more do i want? i was thinking of some published evidence that others can read and replicate.
how can you say that i choose docmatically, if you give me nothing to choose from?
“no-one can prove that i am wrong” – how about proving to us that you are right?
humility, in your case, would mean to do just that!
Hello Professor Ernst,
How much more evidence do you want, I am using myself for trials and have been successful. PSA 200 down to 3.
I am now trying to get a professor in a well known university for a meeting so I can do a few more trials. Using myself as evidence may open the door for CAM healing, physical proof. Written proof will follow, it is getting professors to accept CAM which is the hard bit. Professors want evidence but will not give us grants for research
Name one professor who has healed cancer or diabetes or aids etc etc. Prince Charles on the other hand keeps an open mind and is slated for it As a professor of CAM you should be opening doors for CAM doctors like me.10 years I have been trying to get a grant to do a few more trials,therefore evidence in this case comes in reality……moi.
If HRH is reading this, maybe a meeting with cancer specialist at the College of Medicine could be arranged straight away.
humility is waiting for someone to see reason and hear the truth.
How many of you are there?
Then your “trials” cannot tell us anything because they do not have adequate controls.
i told you exactly what evidence i [or anyone else] will insist on. if you do not have it, do not make claims!
you might be interested to hear that a high PSA does not necessarily mean you have prostate cancer and that a drop to normal values can happen, if for instance an inflammation has subsided.
you might also be interested in learning that my professional role has never been to promote alt med [as you suggest] but to CRITICALLY evaluate it – this is what professors do!
can i ask you a question: what are you “doctor” of and where did you get that title?
professor Ernst PSA of 200 and no cancer , you must be joking 4 psa suggests you have cancer….you may want to critically evaluate what I am saying but you cannot as I am the authority on sound healing and you do not have a clue how can you critically evaluate something not in your field of intellect….therefore I need a professor of sound harmonics , sympathetic resonance to communicate with .Alt Med is an area for specialists
and what about my question about your dr-title?
and what about my questions, that you do not know anything about sound healing, therefore you are making yourself into an authority….secondly the union of light and sound left and right brain union of opposites which is reason and intuition . The great thing about research having to be evidenced based is that one can choose to dogmatically reject any evidence that that does not fit into one’s belief system i.e RATIONAL THOUGHT ONLY……..most professors rely on reason alone.
Take a Savant with damaged left brain show him a part of London for a few minutes , then he can draw what he had seen in front of him…perfectly, right brain intelligence based on intuition…genius.
When we unite the union of opposites reason and intuition we get a higher level of consciousness. A higher frequency of thought
i never claimed to be an expert in sound healing!
AND NOW, PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT YOUR DR TITLE.
It’s plainly – and painfully – obvious from what Dominic has said here and from that extract from his self-published book I highlighted, that he has scant knowledge of science.