to wonder why dr's are so dismissive of "alternative" therapies?

[tialys]

For example - ds1 was a very difficult baby - he either cried or fed. He saw a cranial osteopath (as a last resort) when he was 5/6 months old. Within 2 days, he was a different baby. Dr's completely dismissed it as coincidence, as CO is completely untested and unresearched.
So 5 years down the line, it must have been another coincidence when ds2 underwent a similar miracle cure?

Another example - I've spent the last few months with terrible asthma - hospitalised 3 times, nothing the dr's did made any difference at all.
I've started having accupuncture (again as a last resort) and within 2 weeks, my asthma is better than it has been for years. Saw my dr, who said "ah good - looks like your steroid inhaler is finally doing its job" (I started it months before the astham attacks started ) and warned me away from charlatans like acupuncturists.

Why can't they accept that sometimes, alternative therapies can be more effective than giving more and more drugs to their patients?

Some are, some aren't. Some GPS are practitioners of alternative medicine themselves. I suppose it depends on their own experiences and approach.

Some do, some don't. I know a few GPs who are very pro-complementary therapies. And a whole lot more who aren't.

Why does it matter?

Fwiw, I think most complementary therapies are a load of rubbish and a waste of time and money but whatever rocks your boat.

OK, so I don't know much about cranial osteopathy but the words completely untested and unresearched answer your question pretty well, tialys.

(having said that I suspect CO has been researched)

I suppose it matters as much as any AIBU thread - it's something that really irritates me!

My own dr's practise is very anti complimentary therapies, but in my own personal case, it has worked better than anything the dr's could do (and this is backed up by 3 years worth of peak flow records)
I just find it annoying that the dr's will not even consider its benefits, when it may mean I can come of inhalers for the first time in 26 years.

medicine is based on science - using scientific research and testing. Alternative therapies arent

I have been to a doctors surgery that specialised in alternative medicine - what happened was that people in need of medication for serious problems were put off for months and only allowed alternative stuff instead. Conditions like depression went untreated apart from movement therapy even when the doctor agreed the patient was suicidal.

If there is scienfically approved research that says a certain alternative remedy works then the nhs will probably look into it and agree to prescribe it. Until then you are probably stuck with the repeatedly tested and proven stuff instead of wasting money on ideas that might possibly work in some cases but we cant tell if its a placebo or regression to the mean or coincidence

Can someone clarify the difference between alternative therapy and complimentary therapy? I thought one referred to things like acupuncture that have been accepted by researchers in conventional medicine as having an effect, and the other referred to things that do not, when studied using the scientific method, such as homeopathy.

There seems to be a lot of confusion between the two. So people will say, "I used arnica cream and it worked, so homeopathy works." But arnica cream has an active ingredient that everyone agrees works, and isn't the same thing as an arnica homeopathic treatment.

Could anyone clarify?

Yeah, but your isolated case does not a scientific study make.

Carry on with whatever makes your condition better, but don't get stressed about making other people believe it. You know it is working for you, so why care?

it matters 'cos the nhS could save a whole load of OUR money by suggesting something like "don't give dairy for a few weeks " to an asthmatic person or a child with glue ear or a runny nose.
or "try not eating tomatoes or oranges" to someone with eczema.
I think the drug companies WANT us all to eat crap it keeps them going doesn't it?

because they are totally unproven.

But if you want to try them then you're free to.

Accupuncture has been tried and tested, and has confounded scientists who cannot understand why it works, when in their opinions it shouldn't.

CO has been proven to help 70% of glue ear in young children - my own dsis (a dr) quoted that at me, yet still refused it for her own son, who ended up having gromits fitted - why?

It just seems that so many dr's have very closed minds to something that genuinely helps thousands of people.

MillyR - AFAIK, both 'complimentary' and 'alternative' refer to the same sort of therapies. The name change was supposed to remind people that these things are supposed to be used as well as standard medicine, rather than instead of them.

I think it's open to alot of fraud, but on the whole there I'd say it definatly works. My GP does Christian Healing evenings though !

ppeatfruit

I think you're confusing "good medical advice based on well-understood allergenic principles" - your examples; with "hokum" - homeopathy et al.

Wrt above - complimentary = works to SOME extent and practised alongside mainstream medicine.

Alternative = woo, crystals and snakeoil.

The reason why therapies are 'complementary' and 'alternative' is because (by definition) they are untested and unproven.

If they were tested and proven, then they would cease to be 'alternative' and become 'mainstream'.

So pleased that your LO is better , but the plural of anecdote is not data.

Oh don't get me started on scientific testing. Did they stop thalidomide those tests? the general herbs that have been used for thousands of years won't make the drug co.s rich they can't OWN the patents so they don't bother to test them.

Complementary - you use it alongside your conventional medical treatment.
Alternative - you use it instead.

so the same treatment can be either complementary or alternative depending on how you use it.

AvrilHeytch - acupuncture has been found (in clinical trials) to reduce pain - the test was done whilst a "patient" was having an MRI scan, so the brain activity was clearly seen. The acupuncturist used placebo needles (in wrong place) and needles in the right place, and it was found to work. However, because the scientists didn't know why it worked, it was considered interesting, but taken no further.

There is evidence that acupuncture has an effect over placebo for a couple of things - nausea and low back pain spring to mind.

ppeatfruit - you are swinging rather drunkenly. Could you pick a target and let us know what it is, so we can refute discuss your points?

ppeat - I wondered how long it would be till someone mentioned thalidomide.

You do realise many of us wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for modern medicine?

Besides, drugs companies extract and then synthesise extracts from certain plants to use as medication. For example asprin of course and digitalis. More up-to-date - the swine flu vaccine contains vitamin E and fish oil extract to improve the efficacy of the vaccine. Means they can use less of the active ingredient so there is less risk of any reaction.

This bad science is a good website. Ben Goldacre's book is very interesting too.

The placebo is a very powerful and misunderstood effect. The brighter the sugar pill, the better the effect too.

And grommets are currently being discredited in medical circles.

I do not think Alternative or Complementary therapies will cure my dd2's PDH!

It is because of the scientific method that thalidomide is no longer prescribed.

Lots of conventional medicines are made from herbs and other natural ingredients.

I have looked up the complementary medicine thing at the NHS site - complementary therapies are those that claim no diagnostic element - aromatherapy, reflexology.

Acupuncture is offered for nausea by midwives at my local NHS hospital, and I was told that was based on research findings.