Do men doctors actually understand patients who are not men?

Could it be men doctors (MDs) don't understand how
conditions of wellness or disease manifest in women
and children at all so they don't bother to interpret
salient data in these patients. Instead, ritual
proceedures make up the main stay of medical
care for women (ceasarian section operations,
masdectomys and hysterectomies) and children
(Thimerisol laden vaccines, ritalin , fluoride, silver
and mercury tooth fillings which expand and contract unlike
the enamel and dentin they fill and silver nitrate inoculations
for the eyeballs of new borns). More please, give me more...kind sir.

Views: 782


You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 10:43am
No. I am arguing that they are bunch of amoral quacks who are conning money out of desperate idiots who don't understand medicine and encouraging frankly dangerous attitudes to healthcare and promoting superstition rather than hard science. 

It is simple. It is no better than a placebo effect. If I administered tap water alongside a homeopath's preparation it would have the same effect as the homeopaths work. Hell I could pretend to be a real accupuncturist, shove needles inside you willy nilly and still get the same effect as one by as long as I pretended sufficiently well. 

It's simple. If you showed up with an unknown chronic pain, your doctor would say "I don't know" because that is the truth. Your quack would make stuff up because he is seeing this as a way to mint money out of your gullibility. 

A PhD Ed. can say all he wants but it doesn't change the empirical fact that those guys are weapons grade bullshit merchants. 

It's simple. In your world you have enough doctors to fix their messes when it goes wrong. No one takes you to a "homeopathy hospital when you have a heart attack" they take you to see real doctors.

Where I live people ACTUALLY DIE from these moron's treatments. They con desperate people for money. I have even seen adverts for a natural "rabies cure" (It's a 100% mortal disease. In history only 15 people have survived Rabies and that is due to medical intervention of the most radical sort called the Miluwaukee protocol. That is not 15 people per year. It is 15 people in human history.

This isn't a debate, this is science. We work by hard proof. It is simple. If you have any naturopath willing to take our challenge (there is a million dollars available) then we will meet them and devise an honest scientific experiment.

There have been no takers because "alternative medicine cannot stand upto rigorous testing". It is smoke and mirrors.  

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 10:39am
Avicenna, The English language has different referents employed by specific
credentials. Example: Blacks and Balentine's law references contain specific
useages of words for the practice. of law. You will find to your dismay perhaps
that Webster's and Oxfords dictionaries don't cover the usage of their contents
with respect to law at all. For he legal useage of words you must go to a law
reference, not a word dictionary.
Thankfully I already had this discussion with a lawyer who said: "the useage of
terms employed by varied credentials can not be plotted in a Venn diagram".
What you're hoping and arguing is that the terms MD Physicians use can
arbitrate the terms Naturopathic Doctors use. You'd better check with a handy
PhD Ed. on this because different credentials have different referents employed
in the terms they use. You don't seem to understand or respect this reality. Are
you some kind of a quack?
Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 10:32am

You mean

like the drug Marinol and Sativex? 

See the problem with the "legalise medical marijuana brigade" is that they are dumbasses.

No one wants to legalise it because then it becomes and uncontrolled self medication excuse (I am not a pothead, I just have chronic pain syndromes). I have met a suprisingly large number of "such chronic pain syndrome sufferers" and they generally seem like pot heads to me.

Smoking weed is bad for you. It's a big dose of carcinogens, and it's like smoking an unfiltered cigarette. The dose is also impossible to meter properly. Hence Marinol and Sativex whose dosages and pharmacokinetics are incredibly precise. 

However no body wants to take those instead opting for the plant. It's like rejecting morphine because you want to smoke opium... 

Comment by Grace Fitzpatrick on August 10, 2011 at 10:12am

I wish more research would be done on marijuana. I understand that it can be a valuable pain suppressant with fewer side effects than other medications currently in use.  I understand morphine is highly addictive which may be fine for someone with terminal cancer, but certainly not so fine for a person who deals with chronic pain.  Living with someone who deals with chronic severe pain, I do wish there was some medication which did not cause liver damage or keep them out of it.  I don't want to get high, but it would be nice to get  the benefits marijuana supposedly has for MS patients without getting high.  For that, it is going to take refinement by traditional research. 


It's too bad that drug companies seem to do the bulk of medical research, because their way usually includes some expensive drug which has tons of side effects.  When universities or the VA do research they seem to find not only cheaper solutions, but also ones with fewer side effects.  Sadly, I think we can kiss this type of government funded research goodbye because it competes with private businesses which fund political campaigns.  And now that the Repubs are slashing away at everything worthwhile (considering they seem to hate science), we can probably expect scientific research to be hit hard during budget cuts even though it saves money and lives in the long term.

Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 10:08am
Why would the British Medical Journal and the Lancet (two of the world's most famous papers) be controlled by the American Medical Association?

That simply doesn't make any sense.

Naturopaths are quacks. Medicine is what works. A lot of our compounds ARE natural. Asprin? Natural. Curare? Natural. Various antibiotics? Natural.

It's just that we don't quote unbelievable amounts of nonsense we administer medication.

It's simple. If you wish I will explain why blood does not change with diet (holy moly! Do you realise how horrific a disadvantage that is? Our entire evolutionary strategy is based of being omnivores not selection of food on blood type).
Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 10:05am
This bad practice of conflating what alopaths and naturopaths are expected to do has only lead to pejoritization of everything and everyone not connected to the AMA. It needs to be recognized for what it is, a mistake. It needs to be corrected.
Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 10:00am
The peers who would be qualified to review Doctor D'Adamo's research don't belong to the AMA. They would be Naturopathic Doctors who don't treat their patients with radiation, surgery or drugs. Medical Journals are controlled by members of the AMA. The AMA are not in any way arbiters over what naturopathic doctors do. It is a seperate accredited credential which is not an MD.
Comment by Rob van Senten on August 10, 2011 at 9:44am

@ Clarence Dember,


Perhaps I am, I've been ignorant about many things before and I expect to be or remain ignorant about many subjects. Perhaps I'm also a conduit of misinformation in this particular case.


I'm open to being informed and corrected on my apparent ignorance. So go ahead and inform me, because as far as I can see mr. D'Adamo has not published his theory in peer reviewed literature nor has the basis of his theory been confirmed in any way.


That to me is quackery.

Comment by Clarence Dember on August 10, 2011 at 9:29am
To Rob van Senten: I'm not getting in line to suck at your at your teat of
calumny. You want to post calumny, do it on your own blog. Extraordinary
claims such as yours that this N.D. has no scientific basis for his work and his
help to my family are false. It is you who have no proof to back up your claim of quackery. Moreover, you are the arbiter of nothing here.
Comment by Avicenna on August 10, 2011 at 9:27am
1. Your blood type is an antigen system and has nothing to do with your food intake. It has to do with immunity rather than "made up stuff". Here is a short primer on how immunity works (

2. If he had cancer would he be allowed to grow his own heroin? Or would he have to get professionally produced medication? Oh right! That's why! Because "self administeration of medicine" = "good way to fuck up real medicine".

3. Stevia was linked to mutagenic activity and honestly its only grown in some parts of the world and all you are doing is substitution sucrose for another plant. Eat fructose if you really want a low calorie option or invert sugar (honey) since it's less calories for the same level of sweetness.

4. The people who campaign for Marijuana usage are "morons". All they are doing is basically making MJ classified as a controlled drug and therefore ONLY AVAILABLE ON PRESCRIPTION. AKA in the same way your corticosteroids and beta blockers are available. You only get to use it if you need it. And not all glaucomas are treatable with cannabis and the most important problem with cannabis is that you cannot be active on it. You are basically "house bound" and it doesn't "Cure it" merely reduces the IOP that causes it.

The AMA has produced incredible amounts of research regarding real drugs. It's literally simple. I will challenge ANY naturopath to cure lepers. I have tonnes of them near where I live. We will take 30 and take a year. I will use my awesome medication and they can use their magic and we will see who wins. It's just that simple. The AMA knows what they are doing as do the vast majority of doctors. The vast majority of alt. medicine practitioners are doing something we like to call "bullshitting". The FDA tests drugs to make sure they are safe. Hint. All drugs are unsafe, it's the FDA's job to find out the point they stop being medicine and start being poison. Drugs only have effects. The good effects are good and the bad effects are adverse. A good example is anti-histamines. They are sold as anti-hayfever meds and cause dry nose and mouth (which you want!) and as sleeping meds which cause drowsiness. The side effects for hayfever medication is drowsiness and the side effect of sleeping meds are dry nose and mouth (among other things. This is just a simple example.)


Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service