Talk:Gary Null
|
This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. |
|
This Pseudoscience related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information. |
| ||
|
| ||||
Um...doing some quick looking around, this doesn't seem to be accurate at all. In fact, he seems to believe that any medicine that doesn't CURE a disease is bad. He talks about how to prevent diseases from happening, and wants to get away from "treating" chronic diseases and instead to curing them. While he's still a quack, can we get a better article? (I would normally do so myself, but this is WAY out of my field.) Researcher 00:04, 27 December 2007 (EST)
- I'm reading through the quackwatch article, I don't think it's worth reproducing the content here entirely but I've added it as a source. ArmondikoVd hominem 12:40, 23 January 2009 (EST)
QuackWatch is not a reliable source of information. It's founder's ties to major pharmaceutical companies should be an obvious indication that Quackwatch is nothing more than a front for pro-industry (pharm) propaganda. THC LOADEE 11:42, 30 January 2009 (EST)THC Loadee
- Don't forget to sign your name, thc loadee. QW may be run by big pharma (I haven't checked yet) but does that make it always wrong, and its targets always right? This appears to be what you're implying. Yours trulyDear Sir 11:24, 30 January 2009 (EST)
Sorry about that. I just learned how to sign my name. Big Pharma may not always be wrong however there is a definite conflict of interest here. Gary Null may be a quack, or partial quack or whatever, but Quackwatch seems to me to be a site that stifles competition, discredits anyone who does not agree with the "established" dogma concerning pharmaceutical treatment of disease. Ayurveda and traditional Chinese medicine are probably considered quackery by the site as well. The point here is that anything or anyone that does not conform to "reality" concerning western medicine is called a quack. Are we that sure that western medicine is the be all end all of medical treatment and thus the only "real" choice? THC LOADEE 11:53, 30 January 2009 (EST)THC Loadee
- I'm not going to argue that (I use CAM myself), but at least now you're critiquing QW for what it says, rather than for its founder's connections. Yours trulyDear Sir 11:59, 30 January 2009 (EST)
- The traditional systems of medicine did stuff-all against cholera until Western medicine poked its big fat nose in and — hi, there! — eradicated it. This is because today's Western medicine is grounded in the scientific method, while the traditional systems have their origins with mystics.
ListenerXTalkerX 12:11, 30 January 2009 (EST)
- The traditional systems of medicine did stuff-all against cholera until Western medicine poked its big fat nose in and — hi, there! — eradicated it. This is because today's Western medicine is grounded in the scientific method, while the traditional systems have their origins with mystics.
- I'm not going to argue that (I use CAM myself), but at least now you're critiquing QW for what it says, rather than for its founder's connections. Yours trulyDear Sir 11:59, 30 January 2009 (EST)
Excellent point, however, this topic of western medicine cannot be decided by dividing solutions into either/or categories. Sure, cholera was treated successfully by western medicine, however, this disease and others are prevented by "traditional" medicine because the idea is to be healthy in the first place. Not "eat, drink, consume or imbibe" anything you want because there is always a pill or surgery to set you right. The idea here is that there are alternatives to overloading and poisoning the body with synthetic drugs and toxic food. Stay healthy to begin with, don't rely on modern science to solve all of your problems. Western medicine can be good at treating and curing problems that are already occurring in the body. "Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine does an excellent job at preventing disease and promotes well-being to begin with.67.113.192.50 12:32, 30 January 2009 (EST)THC Loadee
- "Being healthy" is always a good idea, and I haven't yet met a doctor who said othewise. In fact, they usually tend to bother me that I'm not being healthy enough. But sometimes it's not enough, as you can always get sick no matter how healthy you try to be. That's where medicines come in the picture, and I worry that people like this guy may discourage sick people from taking treatments that are necessary for their health. Competition is all well and good, but not when some people's lives are at stake. --LadyLuck 12:39, 30 January 2009 (EST)
- (EC) Before Western medicine found the cause of cholera, it was very difficult to avoid it simply by "being healthy." And what you are presenting here is somewhat of a "straw man" argument: Western medicine has never rejected the value of "being healthy." It simply remains more neutral on the subject than the ancient systems. ListenerXTalkerX 12:49, 30 January 2009 (EST)
- (EC) Before Western medicine found the cause of cholera, it was very difficult to avoid it simply by "being healthy." And what you are presenting here is somewhat of a "straw man" argument: Western medicine has never rejected the value of "being healthy." It simply remains more neutral on the subject than the ancient systems.
I disagree. To me, "being healthy" means that your immune system id functioning in an optimized state. In such a state, one would be less likely to contract an illness or disease. Western medicine does promote a perpetual state of sickness. When one acquires the cold virus, does western medicine help them to boost the immune system. No. Instead, western medicine chooses to cover up symptoms. That's the common element of western medicine, how to cover up symptoms. Sure, there are treatments like chemotherapy, but who the hell wants to drink something akin to drano. Why not consume a diet that fosters an enhanced immune system? I don't think doctors are intentionally pushing ill-health, but they are trained to have a certain perspective, that of treatment versus prevention. Some doctors, however, can think outside the box of western medicine. Those are the ones that I prefer. THC LOADEE 17:23, 6 February 2009 (EST)THC Loadee
- Unadulterated nonsense. "When one acquires the cold virus, does western medicine help them to boost the immune system?" Of course! Any good medical advice about coping with the common cold will include resting & lots of vitamin C, both of which help the immune system to fight the virus. "Sure, there are treatments like chemotherapy" - for cancer!, & it treats the cause of sickness (the tumour itself), not the symptoms of it. "Why not consume a diet that fosters an enhanced immune system?" If you are seriously suggesting that as an alternative to chemotherapy (which has proven results in millions of cases) in treating cancer patients, then you are crazy. Doctors don't have a perspective of "treatment versus prevention" - they treat what needs treating & prevent what needs preventing when it is known how to do so. Inevitably, most people see a doctor when they have something wrong with them, hence it's easier to see the treatment side than prevention, but there is masses of research ongoing all the time into preventing disease. Wèàšèìòìď
Methinks it is a Weasel 12:28, 7 February 2009 (EST)
Big Pharma. I'm saying that Stephen Barrett, M.D., the guy who runs QW has close ties to Big Pharma and that he has an economic interest in promoting the ideas of Big Pharma. Hence he should be discredited. By his own definition, Dr. Barret is a quack. He is not even a certified psychiatrist, nor an expert in supplements or nutrition. "Under cross-examination Barrett conceded that he was not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist because he had failed the certification exam. The most damning testimony before the jury, under the intense cross-examination by Negrete, was that Barrett had filed similar defamation lawsuits against almost 40 people across the country within the past few years and had not won one single one at trial. During the course of his examination, Barrett also had to concede his ties to the AMA, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food & Drug Administration (FDA)."
http://www.canlyme.com/quackwatch.html
His rants are alligned with the current trend of the FDA to stamp out all supplements. Anyone interested can look up the gestapo tactics the FDA uses on health food stores to shut them down. THC LOADEE 17:51, 6 February 2009 (EST)THC Loadee
Alternative medicine[edit]
THC Loadee writes: Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine does an excellent job at preventing disease and promotes well-being to begin with.
A lot of "Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine"" is just crap. Homoeopathy, urine therapy, faith healing, air therapy, colour therapy - the list is endless.--Bobbing up 12:52, 30 January 2009 (EST)
Are you going to tell me Ayurveda is crap? How about traditional Chinese medicine? I suppose Ibn Sina, the father of modern medicine is a quack, too? You are right to be skeptical about "alternative" therapies and medicines. There are countless varieties of quackery out there, but to throw out the baby with the bath water seems just as idiotic to me as marginalizing ALL "Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine." THC LOADEE 13:32, 2 February 2009 (EST)THC LOADEE
- Bring us some nice peer reviewed references and we might sit up and listen. Until then: no thanks.
(Toast) and marmalade 13:35, 2 February 2009 (EST)
- There's a nice word for '"Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine' that 'does an excellent job at preventing disease and promotes well-being to begin with' - it's 'medicine' Worm (t | c) 13:54, 2 February 2009 (EST)
- Interestingly, our article on Ayurvedic medicine does, more or less, call it crap. Also the comment I quoted was, it seemed about all CAM medicine. Is "THC LOADEE" changing his to position, and now saying that some of it crap and some isn't?--Bobbing up 14:15, 2 February 2009 (EST)
- There's a nice word for '"Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine' that 'does an excellent job at preventing disease and promotes well-being to begin with' - it's 'medicine' Worm (t | c) 13:54, 2 February 2009 (EST)
No, my position is the same. You are making assumptions about my statements. As "rationals" I thought you guys might actually read what I say instead of making assumptions colored by your own views. There are countless varieties of quackery out there, but to throw out the baby with the bath water seems just as idiotic to me as marginalizing ALL "Alternative," "traditional," or "ancient" medicine." Are chiropractors quacks? Is it the general opinion of RationalWiki that meditation is bunk? What about yoga? These are all examples of CAM. P.S. I read the info pages here at RationalWiki and I will no longer try to edit the Gary Null entry. I made assumptions about what I thought Rational Wiki was supposed to be doing. I was trying to remove bias when in fact that is what is encouraged here at this site, so, I apologize. P.P.S. It's rather hard to respond to criticism when I can't edit a page. How about removing the block so I don't have to use multiple PC's to make comments? THC LOADEE 17:20, 2 February 2009 (EST)THC Loadee
- You are "paroled" - try not to make me look stupid for trusting you. (Toast) and marmalade 17:38, 2 February 2009 (EST)
[off-topic discussion moved to User talk:THC LOADEE]
humorous line.[edit]
Gary Null's brain is about as full as the unix /dev/null file. 68.148.171.6 (talk) 01:54, 21 September 2015 (UTC)