To think osteopathy is "woo woo" therapy?

[candycoatedwaterdrops]

Apparently, this makes me UR and that it's not comparable to homeopathy. So, MNers what do you think?

Back, that is an interesting point. But by your reasoning health care professionals would still be practicing exactly the same methods as they did for centuries.

Medicine only has progressed because of trial and error. cranial osteopathy has been developed through clinical results, with practitioners working off the results they have in clinic. If no health care workers altered they way they worked inaccordance to their own results in their clinic medicine wouodnt have moved on ever.

there is some research but that is in its infancy. A large part of the problem is that their is little funding for large scale trials. Who is going to pay for a very expensive trial? Osteopaths can't afford to, people with colicky babies arent as their babies will be adults by the time the results come through.

I think you are confusing Osteopathy with Cranial osteopathy OP.

Osteopaths have to complete a 5 year masters degree ( years1&2 are pre clinical spent studying anatomy,physiology etc with medical students, years 3-5 are clinical years spent seeing patients and learning clinical and diagnostic skills). They can then register with the General Osteopathy Council. Osteopathy is recommended by NICE Guidelines as treatment for spinal pain and as a result available on the NHS in some CCGs.

On qualifying, many, myself included, do post graduate studies in acupuncture, sports medicine. This can take a further 3-4 years. I have studied for 8 years same as my husband (who's a GP! ) difference being those 8 years have been purely based on the musculoskeletal skeletal system. Physios do a 3 year BSc.

cathers

Yes, OP has acknowledged that she has mistaken the two.

Thanks for your explanation - but are you saying that cranial osteopaths aren't osteopaths?

Whole family fixed on many occasions by osteopaths and cranial osteopaths. Helped reset body after miscarriage, helped with trapped nerves, helped with baby's latch following difficult birth, ear infections, croup, everything. Would choose any day before I even contemplate seeing a doctor.

DziezkoDisco I can see that trail and error might have been the only way in more primitive times, but medicine doesn't progress now by trying out random treatments on ordinary patients does it.

New drugs for example have to be tested chemically so that their effects can be reasonably well predicted (we don't just mix things in a pot to see what it does to people) and then tried on volunteers in double-blind trials to see if they actually work as we hoped.

With surgery you can look at the bits you are cutting and see how they heal up and what happens to the body afterwards. With actual measurements of blood pressure, organ function and so on.

But most of these alternative treatments amount to putting your hands on or near someone and hoping they get better. The fact that some people feel better is proof of nothing as we've seen in homeopathy which can be proven not to work.

Threads like this where people are rudely dismissing others beliefs annoy me.

I believe in homeopathy as I see the difference when it isn't used.

I believe in osteopathy as I see the changes in my children when they are treated.

I believe in cranial osteopathy as the CO couldn't know things without it being real iyswim.

But, I will just be dismissed as a mug and patronised.

I have proof of my beliefs but I hope I am not rude when I tell non believers I think they are wrong.

No, not all sadly. To use the name ' osteopath' , the individual has to be on the GOC register. This provides regulation and the assurance that the practitioner is qualified. Some osteopaths chose to do post grad studies in cranial Sacral therapy (which as far as I am aware has no research proving its effectiveness), and ARE osteopaths which chose to go down this route.

However, unfortunately, some people get around this by calling themselves cranial-sacral therapists, osteologists and other similar names.They will not be registered with the GOC and often to short, non medical based courses. It think this is were a lot of confusion and wild reports of healing stems from personally.

Would never ever ever let any cranial osteopath lay hands on any child of mine, after reading about terribly sad case of baby who was killed by an incompetent practitioner.

cranial osteopathy is not equal to osteopathy. I might go to an osteopath, I would definitely not do cranial osteopathy.

I also wouldn't touch chiropractors, but that is based on their professional body's behaviour towards Simon Singh: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Singh#Chiropractic_lawsuit

Thanks cathers

"I have proof of my beliefs but I hope I am not rude when I tell non believers I think they are wrong."

I would love to see proof of homeopathy.

cathers Do you have a link? I was just on the NICE website searching for osteopathy and found it mentioned in passing as though worth a try. Hardly a ringing endorsement, but perhaps their search doesn't work well and I missed a lot.

"Some people get around this by calling themselves cranial-sacral therapists."

I nearly paid £100 for an initial session with cranial-sacral therapist. Something held me back and I cancelled the session at the last minute.

candy - very simply. I take a tablet from Holland & Barrett to help with my mental health. When I don't take them I am a very different person and it is horrible.

Not a problem! A lot of confusion, unfortunately stems from this issue and it does need to be more widely clarified by the GOC, NHS and primary health service as many people are understandably ignorant about this until they do have a problem. Sadly, at that stage, often people are desperate and end up having inappropriate or ineffective treatment.

I do not think that osteopathy is woo at all. It gets recommended by GP and orthopedic surgeon etc.

The two osteopaths I consulted were ALSO consultants in PMR (Physical medicine and rehabilitation), sports medicine and internal medicine.

The knowledge they have of anatomy and physiology is amazing.

Way beyond anyone studying medicine having all these courses and simply forgetting most of it afterwards.

Also not many doctors out there who actually still know how to cure by 'manipulating' the body and free nerves, re-align, etc.

Osteopathy was amazing when I had a bad back during pregnancy. I'd recommend it to anyone, lots of nice massage and manipulation and I felt tons better afterwards.

However one of my neighbours has just been banned by the British Osteopath association for claiming to cure cancer

Back on briefly- if you google NICE , it's called the CG88 paper.

Yes....Osteopathy is woo.

The confusion is because of the term, "Osteopath" sounds very like Osteopathic, which is the scientific medical branch that deals with bones.

(Someone else probably made that point, but I haven't read the whole thread).

Back - that would be true if you wanted to have your back pain treated by pharmaceuticals. But anti inflammatories and pain killers can only go so far.
You can't get all treatment out of a lab.

My osteopath is fantastic. I had a bad back for 15 years, doctors said it was soft tissue and to take painkillers. Osteopath took one look, said my pelvis was two inches out out line, fixed it over several weeks, and I can run, skip and play again!

HettiePetal - what are your grounds for saying that?

Osteopathic, which is the scientific medical branch that deals with bones

I thought orthope(a)dics do that...

"candy - very simply. I take a tablet from Holland & Barrett to help with my mental health. When I don't take them I am a very different person and it is horrible."

Mental health is not measurable in that way.

I saw an osteopath in both pregnancies due to pelvic girdle pain. I was on crutches by 14 weeks with my second child. With osteopathy I stayed off them until 30 weeks and it made a massive difference