Dr Cherilyn Lee

so edo let me get this straight - your wife is a pharmacist, without question makes very good money selling pills but somehow she is supposed to be unbiased? The healing starts with the mind, not with pills - and perhaps your wife can chime in and provide statistics on the placebo account... the difference between a placebo anti-depressant and a pharmaceutical anti-depressant is 2 points on a scale of 50-60, hardly a selling point for pills...

Consult any pharmaceutical guide and you'll get a book with a 1000 pages detailing pills - the known side effects are enough to scare the hell out of you - but the unknown side effects scare me much more... btw... perhaps you can also provide details as to why pharmaceutical companies weed out test subjects which are prone to the placebo effect, since they skew the results. A multi-billion dollar industry who is not playing fairly? Gasp! ..sort of like why we don't have water-powered cars, with the fossil fuel industry also being a multi-billion dollar business.

What about chinese herbal medicine? Accupressure and accupuncture? I suppose those are but a laughing stock as well?

I strongly encourage you and your wife to seek out a Heilkunst practitioner - I'm absolutely certain that your quality of life will improve - but don't take my word for it, contact one of the Heilkünstlers in the US... or is your mind affected by a virus and won't let you take that step...

 

new age

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze9IZNeeumo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o3-nfHWhXE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzjoKhBklYg&feature=PlayList&p=668F799DB894567A&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=75

 

I never mentioned acupuncture or acupressure. My problem is with HOMEOPATHY, though I wouldn't touch most traditional Chinese medicines with a 10 foot pole.

If you want to take your Head-On, Airborne, Enzyte, eat dried seahorses and cockroaches (traditional Chinese medicines), and treat cancer with coffee enemas, (probably the best use for Starbucks House Blend) by all means go for it.

If any of that crap worked, the drug compaines would be first in line to patent and sell it.

 

Traditional Chinese Medicine has been around for 6,000 years and is remarkably successful at treating many things that conventional medicine still can't treat effectively.

People get tripped up with homeopathy because it is operating in a completely different sphere of influence on the body; it has absolutely no biochemical interaction at all, but works within the realm of physics, altering the subtle energy systems in the body, in a different, but related way to how acupuncture works. Homeopathic medicine is widely used in Europe, Brazil, the UK, and parts of India, among other places. It was used before the advent of antibiotics to effectively treat cholera epidemics, and the Royal Family is treated by a homeopathic physician. Many homeopathic remedies have been tested in double blind research and found to be effective, though the nature of the way homeopathics are prescribed (in most cases for a constellation of symptoms, rather than a single condition or symptom) makes it difficult to test the same remedy on multiple people in a single study, since finding people with the exact same symptom constellation is difficult.

Now... I am no fan of the Clayton College, and this school, with their deceptive marketing and ridiculous amount of lobbying resources (since they have no costs of actually teaching anybody) has managed to get some terrible laws passed in several states.

In California, for example, the Clayton lobby succeeded in watering down the naturopathic doctor act. Before the lobbyists ruined the law, it would have ensured that only legitimate naturopathic doctors (who graduate from legitimate, regionally accredited naturopathic medical schools, and have a clinical rotation and internship in similar fashion to medical doctors) could be licensed, as has been the case in many other states.

The Clayton people lied their asses off and said their graduates don't diagnose or treat, they don't handle any life-threatening conditions, and don't make claims of providing medical care, but only "coach," which is the biggest crock of crap I've ever seen. Clayton's curriciulum is a joke, and there's no way anyone who graduates from that program is remotely qualified to practice any sort of medicine, or even to "coach" people.

I think this woman who worked with Michael Jackson probably realized that if she used her Clayton degree, it would immediately bring scrutiny, and perhaps also get her busted for practicing and misrepresenting herself and her qualifications. Which is why I think she stuck with the "nurse" quallification. That's too bad, because she might have helped to shine a spotlight on Clayton and its sister school, the American Institute of Holistic Theology.

 

Oh, and wow... this woman wasn't satisfied with one crappy degree, she is currently enrolled to get another one from Trinity College of Natural Health

Which is a shame, because, other than her two unwonderful degrees, she actually has a legitmate nurse practitioner's credential and a physician's assistant credential, so she is clearly a qualified professional.

But... as Steve Levicoff has said about unwonderful advanced degrees when a person has a legitimate undergrad or masters... it's like baking a nice cake and frosting it with shit. Doesn't matter how nice the cake is, you ruin it with the frosting.

 

As a fourth study says it's no better than a placebo, is this the end for homeopathy?

Homeopathy, favoured medical remedy of the royal family for generations and hugely popular in the UK, has an effect but only in the mind, according to a major study published in a leading medical journal today.
The conclusions of the Lancet analysis are a body blow for proponents of homeopathy, which has been around for 250 years and has attained cult-like status among its aficionados.

Swiss scientists compared the results of more than 100 trials of homeopathic medicines with the same number of trials of conventional medicines in a whole range of medical conditions, from respiratory infections to surgery. They found that homeopathy had no more than a placebo effect.

Here is the whole article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/aug/26/health.medicineandhealth3http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/aug/26/health.medicineandhealth3

 

The results of this and another study done at Linköping University in Sweden, which found no significant difference in response from those getting true acupuncture and those getting sham acupuncture, provide evidence against the accuracy of the traditional Chinese meridian map. It doesn't seem to matter where you stick the needles, whether you stick them in deeply or twirl them, or, as we shall see, whether you stick them in at all. The fact that it has been shown that the same effect can be induced from true acupuncture and fake acupuncture that doesn't stick needles into the subject casts doubt on the need to claim that some sort of mysterious energy, called chi, is needed to explain acupuncture's effects.

The Linköping study involved 215 patients with various types of cancer being treated with radiotherapy, which often leads to severe nausea and vomiting. It has been hypothesized that acupuncture can be a significant causal factor in the relief of such nausea. One group was treated with traditional acupuncture. The other group got a sham treatment that involved an identical looking and feeling needle that retracted into a handle on contact with the skin. This method prevents the patients from knowing whether they've actually been stuck with a needle. Both the true and the sham groups believed the treatment had been invasive and effective in reducing nausea

The differences between the two groups are not statistically significant. These results strongly suggest that the effects of acupuncture are placebo effects. Apparently, as long as the patients believe they are getting acupuncture, they get some relief from the treatment, but it doesn't really matter whether they are stuck with needles. Of course, there is no way to disprove the claim that just coming near the acupoints triggers the unblocking of chi along one of the major meridians, thereby leading to a restoration toward balance of yin and yang. This, of course, would mean that acupuncture's use of needles is superfluous. It might also turn out that touching the patient is unnecessary.

http://www.skepdic.com/acupuncture.html

 

Now the news media is still calling her a nutritionist?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090722/ap_en_ot/us_michael_jackson_nutritionist

 

Here is a clever 2-minute film on homeopathy . . . sent to me by a friend who has a real MD, but practices only as a homeopath and acupuncturist.

http://www.kontraband.com/videos/18586/Homeopathic-AE/#show