We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, November 26. 2013
Yes, Obamacare's insurance standards cover quackery: Obamacare and the New Age quacks
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I wonder how many of the "disorders" in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" are quackery?
For instance: "When caffeine is consumed immediately before bedtime or continuously throughout the day, sleep onset may be delayed, total sleep time reduced, normal stages of sleep altered, and the quality of sleep decreased." AKA Caffeine-induced sleep disorder?
The labels are silly, but hurting people are not silly, and we can help them regardless of label. The labels are for insurance companies.
Your promotion of this author's opinions is worrisome. Your editorial board most have some mind-numbed medics.
His gross ignorance concerning the practice of chiropractic and the current state of chiropractic education is breath taking for a number of reason. For example, to say that a vertebral subluxation complex cannot be demonstrated radiographically is simply untrue. He also fails to note that x-ray images are but one tool is locating an anomoly of the functioning of the intervertebral motor unit. To say that chiropractors seeks to remove "...blockages of vitalistic energy..." is a lie. This fool probably thinks that the sacroiliac joint is immobile and an antibiotic is a sure cure for a viral infection.
He also fails to mention that 50 years ago osteopathic medicine was considered to be quackery by the medical profession. Yet, even today, osteopaths manipulate the spinal column. Are these practitioners "quacks" too?
Your readers deserve better.
Faith healing works until you get sick.
My opinion is that chiropractic is quackery. Diversity of opinions is a good thing, right?
Osteopathic "medicine" is still considered quackery by anyone with more then a little scientific knowledge.
I have zero sympathy for the problems of the chiropratic reputation. It was chiropractors who made the outrageous claims of being able to cure diseases and make miracles if you just crosed their palm with hundred dollar bills. They have been trying to climb out of that self made hole for a couple of decades now but there are still those in the chiropractic commuity who insist they can do more then crack a few joints and make you think you feel better, pay the bill on the way out please.
Of course diversity of opinion is a good thing since it need not be based on fact.
To label osteopathy as quackery is to exhibit gross ignorance. Just what is it that a medical doctor can do that an osteopathic doctor cannot? Short answer: NOTHING. In fact, osteophatic training is more demanding than that of medicine. Check out their course of study. Oh wait, that may debunk your "opinion".
Any honest health care professional will admit that his practice is an art and not a science. Slash for cash is scientific? "Modern scientific medicine." Drink the kool aid, fools.
To believe that massage can cure diseases is worse then ignorant at best it is quackery. An osteopath is a doctor with strange ideas and beliefs. He is still a doctor and can indeed do what a doctor does but his strange ideas and beliefs prevent him from doing it. That is a fact. Those of us who believe in science based medicine cannot understand superstition based medicine or those who believe in superstition based medicine. But those who believe in superstition based medicine always seem to think that the otherside of the arguement are the ones who just don't know their course of study or the history of medicine and if we would just read the same propaganda that you read we would be enlightened. Steve Jobs is a good example of the benefits of alternative medicine. Had he placed his health care in the hands of a real doctor he would be alive today.
"Science based medicine?" Or he could have placed his health care in the hands of a "real" doctor and still have died, possibly sooner. Nice try.
So an osteopath who is a thoracic surgeon or an orthopedist or a cardiologist or an ophthamologist or a neuro-sugeon knows the "right" thing to do but won't because of his "... strange ideas and beliefs?" You are such an idiot I tire of wasting my time on attempting to correct your ignornance.
Exit question. Why do "scientific" medical doctors pay grossly more for malpractice insurance than osteoopaths or chiropractors? Short answer: they kill/maim/mutilate more patients.
Have another gulp of the kool aid you contemptuous bigoted ass.
I can't explain his strange beliefs, perhaps too much pot smoking or raised by hippies but for whatever reason he choose to become a DO instead of an MD. That says it all. If he believed in science he wouldn't have choosen to be an Osteopath or Chiropractor.
There was a famous case of a cardiovascular surgeon (in New York I think) who was the best in his field. So he took on the least promising cases, the ones where he thought he could do the most good. Of course working with patients with a very slim chance of surviving he lost many patients. But just to prove no good deed goes unpunished his malpractice insurance went up to the point where he couldn't afford it. The moral is that if you are an Osteopath you mostly treat people who need attention and aren't really sick. A really sick person would go to a real doctor don'tcha see. I bet you go to an Osteopath and someday you will suffer from a serious medical malady and you well have an epiphany and go to a doctor who will actulally help you rather then massage you.
I am indeed a contemptuous ass. I know this because my Ex told me on more then one occasion. But your insults say far more about you then they do about me. If you can't have a conversation or a debate or even an arguement (if you prefer) without name calling you have some issues you need to deal with. If it is so important to you that your beliefs about superstition based medicine are only confirmed and never challenged then you shouldn't bring them up unless you are with like minded people
I am neither an osteopath nor a chiropractor. But I suspect you're a medic.
Of course "...you contemtous bigoted ass.." is, in your book, name calling but "quack" isn't. Now there's cerebral flatulence at its finest.
Your comments exemplify the observations of Mamet's "The Secret Knowledge" and Hoffer's "The True Believer." In fact they could be considered an in-depth study of your opinions.
I am not conected with the health care industry in any way. I am the happy recipient of good medical care from good doctors and nurses.
"Quack" is a discriptive name. I suppose if you are the target of that description it wouldn't make you happy but hopefully it would make you think. My wife's cousin is a chiropractor and is one of the nicest most generous men I know. At his graduation a dignitory from the ACA spoke and reminded the graduates that they should not allow themselves to believe or express belief in curing diseases with manipulation techniques. That in the previous 20 years the reputation of chiropractors was harmed by those who had made wild claims. The fact that Chiropractors did indeed slip into quackery is not in dispute. There are many out there who still are quacks. But at least they are trying to police themselves.
No! My opinions and beliefs are based on the scientific method and common sense. I try not to put too much weight into one commentary or one author's book, and at heart I am a skeptic and tend not to believe anything too easily.
If it looks like a bigot, talks like a bigot and walks like a bigot, you can be assured it's a bigot.
Ask any of today's Palestinians (who and where ever that is) what is the basis of their mirerable lives and they'll tell you it's the Juezzzz. It's just common sense to them and the rest of the anti-Semites in the world.
If opinions and beliefs are based upon the scientific method, they would be facts and not opinions or beliefs. But then, even the scientific method can produce facts that are not facts such as the former scientific "fact" that light travels in a straight line and cannot bend. Then along came that wierd Albert guy.
Oh! A nasty doubling down on name calling. No one cares how low you can go. Read a few of Miss Manners books and get your head straight.
I don't know where the Palestinain rant came from or what you mean.
The scientific method is much misunderstood as you just proved. From Wikipedia "The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning". It isn't perfect but stives to be and is self correcting when followed. It is what it is and it's preferable to the alternatives out there.
Please ... PA LEEZ try to keep up.
At 72 YOA my head is as straight as it'll ever get.
Name calling is our friend. Just like carbohydrates, fats and proteins. After all, what would you do if you couldn't casually thrown around the word "quack." Your quack is my bigot.
Explanation: You said your opinions are based upon the scientific method and "common sense." The two are most often mutually exclusive since common sense is personal and the scientific method isn't. Unless, of course, you buy into A.G.W.
Ain't this fun?! You've provided me two day's worth of chuckles, grins, smiles and out right laughter.
And, by the way, thanks for admitting that you know a chiropractor who isn't a money grubbing ogre chasing little green pieces of paper. He'll just follow Obama's law of economics that "...at some point you have to realize that you've made enough money." Wadayathink? Will he shun speaker's honoraria after he leaves office?
I disagree (what a suprise). It is only "name calling" if the intent is to disparage or provoke. If the "name" is intended to be discriptive of the action being discussed it is hardly name calling ansd certainly not bigotry.
The scientific method and common sense aren't mutually exclusive and in fact they work really well together. You should try it sometime.
Fun? I suppose, if it wasn't I guess I wouldn't respond.
This particular Chiropractor is someone I look up to and try to emulate. He is 40 years younger then me and a better person then I was at his age. Both of his parents are outstanding people as well. A good honest caring person who goes out of his way to help in his community and carries a smile with him everywhere he goes.
I think Obama will continue to live off of others and take advantage of everything and everyone he can. I don't begrudge politicians or famous people their fees for appearances and speaking but I dislike when it is a thinly veiled "payoff" for past favors.
And now Sven boards his long ship with his band of merry vikings and sails off into the setting sun. He swells with pride as he recalls their most resent raid to loot, rape and pillage those who are of obviously lesser worth and not within his tribe. It's just common sense that Vikings should take from these lesser beings. After all, Odin says so.