62 replies to this topic

[hyperactive]

mega,

firstly, western doctors have little training in diet and nutition.
secondly, spending 10 years studying something does not alone indicate your level of knowledge.
thirdly, when it comes to studies, the best (if possible to use) is the double blind study since it eliminates experimentor bias.
fourthly, when a number of studies on an area of interest are done it is valuable to perform a comparative analysis of the studies to best determine how the information can be applied.
lastly, there should never be "blind trust".

[The Skeptic Eric Raven]

Quote

you defended frog's blanket advice for kids to start drinking a glass of wine a day at age 21 because of "a qualified doctor".

interpretation 1: you are calling frog a qualified doctor when in the past his converstations have stated he wants to become a doctor.  

interpretation 2: blind trust in somebody because they hold an MD.  This is rediculous.  As I have said, the meta-analysis of the studies on the effects of alcohol at this time do not support telling people to start drinking one glass a day.  If a doctor who knows your personal medical history wanted to suggest such action to you, that is between you and your doctor.  Blanket statements at this time are irresponsible and reckless.

And blind trust in vegans is okay?

[hyperactive]

eric,

where did I say to put blind trust in vegans?  

[Beckys_Mom]

Quote

eric,

where did I say to put blind trust in vegans?  

You didn't exactly say those words NO..but you paint a pretty good pic of it...so tell me....putting blind trust into a vegan...do you think its OK?? Do you think that ie your word over a doc is much better?...it doesnt matter how many links that one may post....if it agrees that ..IE certain drink is good for you...if you disagree ..because you are against drink...then do you THINK that others should say..ok then to heck what doctorshave said..i'll jump in hypers boat?

None of the above questions are meant to be sarcastic..i am just trying to see where you are coming from

This is how I see health fanatics...(not aimed at anyone in particular)

Meat........is fully against it

Drink........against it

The gym....... is like a second home

Dairy...........against it

Nothing with sugar...........against it

Veg............Well HELLO I am a vegan/vegeterian!!

Fruit..........YUM YUM lots of it

Meds................against them

there are more but those are just some things your typical health fanatic is against......IT'S THEIR CHOICE...right?

It's the same with the lazy junk food fanatic.....

The gym...screw that..I have trouble reaching for the remote controll!!

No dairy............are you kidding me?

No meat.............get the fook outta here!!

No sugar..............get bent!!

No drink.................now you are taking the piss!!!

Veg -........... Dont think so!!

Fruit................Who the feck are you calling a fruit??

Meds........Keep em coming!!

This is a CHOICE for people like this too.....right?

BOTH health faniatics and junk food fanatics are putting themselves at more risk than they like to think....they can't help it...thats WHY they are FANATICS

OK now this is how I do things.....( and a lot of others too)

The Gym --............. No probs...once in a while..go out walking on good days too!!Exercise at home..its great fun!!

Dairy .............Yea a lil here a lil there...not TOO MUCH though

Meat.............YUP...but not the crap macdonalds serve you..and NOT every single day lolFish is good for ya too

Sugar.............YUP..again NOT TOO MUCH..dont go nuts on it...think about your teeth as well lol

Drink...............As long as you dont go over board...I only drink once or twice a month and I dont over do it....(Drink LOTS of water too)

Veg................YUP eat it..eat plenty if you can

Fruit..............Eat it as much as you can..it even works better than a chocie bar for a snack!

Meds..................I use alternative medicine..but will take pain killers if I had to and couldnt stick it...but try to stay clear as much as possible

keep a happy balance...you are not too much at risk if you do it in moderation...key word MODERATION!!!

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 14 June 2006 - 10:28 PM.

[hyperactive]

BM....

My comments were in this case a result of frog's blanket statement of "kids drink a glass of wine a day when you reach 21".  I specifically said if one decides to persue such a course after determining that it was not introducing a risk to their health, to go ahead.

The only fanatics here are those that run around in circles avoiding the research to date on diet and health making every excuse possible to defend their own lifestyles.  Moderation is my favourite exuse bantered about.

Of course, people tend to surrender to authority rather than doing the research themselves, assuming of course they are capable of doing the research.  

[Beckys_Mom]

Quote

BM....

My comments were in this case a result of frog's blanket statement of "kids drink a glass of wine a day when you reach 21".  I specifically said if one decides to persue such a course after determining that it was not introducing a risk to their health, to go ahead.

The only fanatics here are those that run around in circles avoiding the research to date on diet and health making every excuse possible to defend their own lifestyles.  Moderation is my favourite exuse bantered about.

Of course, people tend to surrender to authority rather than doing the research themselves, assuming of course they are capable of doing the research.  

Well I dont agree that when a person reaches 21 the should just drink period...if a person has never drank then why bother starting...just because there is good advice on red wine??? NO...if you dont drink...and you never thought you would like to...DONT DO IT...I hate red wine myself...but I only posted that link because it was intresting...dont mean I am going to go ahead and drink it LOL

As for fanatics..people have different views on what a fanatic is...

[Megalomania]

Quote

mega,

firstly, western doctors have little training in diet and nutition.

Then why mention an MD?

Quote

secondly, spending 10 years studying something does not alone indicate your level of knowledge.

Great, so people we trust to operate on our bodies could be absolute idiots.

Quote

thirdly, when it comes to studies, the best (if possible to use) is the double blind study since it eliminates experimentor bias.

I know.

And yes, and that's why we can't trust doctors?
I'm sure they do double blind tests.

Quote

fourthly, when a number of studies on an area of interest are done it is valuable to perform a comparative analysis of the studies to best determine how the information can be applied.

Yeah, but what if both of them are done by doctors who are apparently not trustworthy  

I'm sorry, but I know that too.

Quote

lastly, there should never be "blind trust".

Agreed.
But I feel you can trust doctors, you're just being silly/paranoid.

Edited by Megalomania, 15 June 2006 - 07:42 AM.

[hyperactive]

mega,

Just to clarify on doctors:

"a doctor" telling you something should be questioned and not accepted on the authority of his MD.  Analysis of diagnoses/treatments in post-mortums have shown that doctors, on average (remember, we are talking averages) have a fairly high level of misdiagnosis.  This is not to say they "know nothing", but they certianly don't know everything and do make mistakes.  Again, on average, doctors do very well at the simpler tasks such as reasing blood reports or xrays.  Remember that the GP is only as good as the knowledge he has kept abreast of.  Even you must admit there are "good doctors" and "bad doctors".

Now I was not the first to bring up doctors on this topic.

You are blindly trusting doctors because of their title.  Remember, there is a great deal of variance within the pool of doctors.  Each doctor is only as good as his experience grants him.  Practicing doctors differ in their understanding from those in medical research.  My personal trust of doctors goes as far as accepting anything that can be independantly verified (as with all professions).

Remember, this discussion is on individual samples of the medical profession vs population averages.

[halo_slightly_askew]

Quote

mega,

Just to clarify on doctors:

"a doctor" telling you something should be questioned and not accepted on the authority of his MD.  Analysis of diagnoses/treatments in post-mortums have shown that doctors, on average (remember, we are talking averages) have a fairly high level of misdiagnosis.  This is not to say they "know nothing", but they certianly don't know everything and do make mistakes.  Again, on average, doctors do very well at the simpler tasks such as reasing blood reports or xrays.  Remember that the GP is only as good as the knowledge he has kept abreast of.  Even you must admit there are "good doctors" and "bad doctors".

Now I was not the first to bring up doctors on this topic.

You are blindly trusting doctors because of their title.  Remember, there is a great deal of variance within the pool of doctors.  Each doctor is only as good as his experience grants him.  Practicing doctors differ in their understanding from those in medical research.  My personal trust of doctors goes as far as accepting anything that can be independantly verified (as with all professions).

Remember, this discussion is on individual samples of the medical profession vs population averages.

Having had so much personal/work related exposure with physicians I have to agree 100% with hyperactive on this.  


There are good and bad doctors, doctors more knowledgable than others. I've seen some scary things. Lol, and I do not say this simply because of the battle line that exists between doctors and nurses, either.

One should never trust a doctor simply because he is a doctor. One should trust a doctor after gauging and testing the depth of his/her understanding and knowledge of the things that are important to you. Ask questions, ask to see continuing education certifications. Forget second opinions, go for the 5th and 6th opinions!

Sadly, some are there simply for the money, it's finding the ones who actually have a passion and interest for their field/patients and that keep abreast of current research that can be difficult.

I've refused to work with many due to their lack of basic knowledge and gross negligence. Medical malpractice and negligence is out of control in this country.


I'll add, to be fair, that this includes all workers in the health care industry. Doctors, nurses, dentists, aides, therapists, etc.

Edited by halo_slightly_askew, 16 June 2006 - 12:05 AM.

[halo_slightly_askew]

Quote

Great, so people we trust to operate on our bodies could be absolute idiots.

Well....yes, they could be. For example.

My best friend presented to the hospital emergency room with severe pain in her lower abdomen. After numerous tests and procedures it was determined she was suffering from ovarian cysts and would require surgery for removal of the ovaries after she completed a round of ABT to clear the infection.

A week later, the pain became unbearable and she returned to same emergency room where her chart is on file. After taking her medical history, including her prior visit a week before, the ER doctor...without running any tests.... determined on the spot that she was suffering from acute appendicitis, requiring emergency surgery, and paged a surgeon.

The surgeon...without asking why no tests were run, not even knowing her blood type...proceeded to remove a perfectly healthy appendix, leaving the ovaries in place.

Unecessary surgery due to negligence x 2 doctors = absolute idiot in my book.

It happens alot.

[Megalomania]

Quote

Well....yes, they could be. For example.

My best friend presented to the hospital emergency room with severe pain in her lower abdomen. After numerous tests and procedures it was determined she was suffering from ovarian cysts and would require surgery for removal of the ovaries after she completed a round of ABT to clear the infection.

A week later, the pain became unbearable and she returned to same emergency room where her chart is on file. After taking her medical history, including her prior visit a week before, the ER doctor...without running any tests.... determined on the spot that she was suffering from acute appendicitis, requiring emergency surgery, and paged a surgeon.

The surgeon...without asking why no tests were run, not even knowing her blood type...proceeded to remove a perfectly healthy appendix, leaving the ovaries in place.

Unecessary surgery due to negligence x 2 doctors = absolute idiot in my book.

It happens alot.

Ah yes, I've heard of this happening,

However, I trust that my doctors have done the appropriate courses to know what they're doing.

But I do agree, you do get some peas that ruin the pod.

[Beckys_Mom]

Quote

Then why mention an MD?
Great, so people we trust to operate on our bodies could be absolute idiots.
I know.

And yes, and that's why we can't trust doctors?
I'm sure they do double blind tests.
Yeah, but what if both of them are done by doctors who are apparently not trustworthy  

I'm sorry, but I know that too.
Agreed.
But I feel you can trust doctors, you're just being silly/paranoid.

There are good and bad doctors....some care and do the best by you...some dont....simple as that...why do you think people go get a second opinion??

[The Skeptic Eric Raven]

Quote

There are good and bad doctors....some care and do the best by you...some dont....simple as that...why do you think people go get a second opinion??

I think there are good and evil vegans too.   I think some of the vegans on this board use the dark side of the olive.

[Megalomania]

Quote

There are good and bad doctors....some care and do the best by you...some dont....simple as that...why do you think people go get a second opinion??

Ah yes. I know that.

Well, just for the sake of it, I know that people get second opinions out of denial.
It's nuts.

[Beckys_Mom]

Quote

I think there are good and evil vegans too.   I think some of the vegans on this board use the dark side of the olive.

LOL But in all seriousness there is good & bad in everything


In general (this is aimed at everyone) ....I think if both vegans & those of us that eat both meat & veg...should just post our opinions without telling the other they are wrong and sounding so pushy....this all should be a friendly discussion...I gave my (well I tried to give my advice before and it didnt go down too well) but if you are a vegan with strong views....it's good to share your views.....if you have some medical knowledge...it's good to share them too...but it's not not when someone makes you feel they are better.....this can be avoided..heck I have done it...dont see why others cant

Vegans- remember we meat eaters do it in moderation...its out choice...when some of us post useful links from a web page ect....it's ok to debate but please dont be all up in our faces saying we are wrong, our links are wrong...thats being too pushy..shows arrogance

The rest of us - .. Should do the same (as above)

If we do this, it would be worth posting...if we dont...meh.you already know what happens LOL
I told this to an old friend of mine...this frind took it the wrong way...so guys please dont take it the wrong way

If i have spelt something wrong...I can't be arsed with the spell checker...so meh!!!