Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

Alberta gives naturopaths full status as medical professionals


Amadeus89

Recommended Posts

If naturopathic practitioners would stick to things that are evidence-based, I'd happily see them regulated. But, they stray too far into quackery and pseudoscience for me to feel comfortable with them being legitimized this way. Many people will take this as them being endorsed by the government, and that bothers me.

 

I don't see how something that's being used in eastern civilizations for hundreds if not thousands of years is going to be so bad that we should work our asses of to get it banned.

 

Btw, I am referring to homeopathy. Not sure how it differs with this.

 

You must be confusing homeopathy and natural medicine. They are *completely different.* Homeopathic preparations do not contain anything - they are diluted to the point of absurdity. Piss in the ocean is more concentrated than a homeopathy 'remedy.'

 

Many natural compounds have measurable therapeutic ingredients that have testable effects. Most of our modern medications trace their roots to plants or are even just a few steps removed (eg. Morphine, aspirin, penicillin.) Many plants (and some animals) are, in fact, useful as medications or are subjects of ongoing research for more useable compounds. For instance, the cone snail has a highly complex neurotoxic venom that has provided some really fascinating possibilities for painkillers much stronger than morphine, but nonaddictive. Though not often as effective as modern medicine, natural medications *do* have a place alongside pharmaceuticals, when their usefulness can be proven through scientific means.

 

Homeopathy, however, has absolutely nothing to do with medicine or science, and it was completely invented in the 1700s by one man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...