YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community


Welcome to the YorkieTalk.com Forums Community - the community for Yorkshire Terriers.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. You will be able to chat with over 35,000 YorkieTalk members, read over 2,000,000 posted discussions, and view more than 15,000 Yorkie photos in the YorkieTalk Photo Gallery after you register. We would love to have you as a member!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please click here to contact us.

Go Back   YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community > YorkieTalk > Yorkie Health & Diet
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar JavaChat Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-18-2015, 09:23 AM   #1
Furbutts = LOVE
Donating Member
Moderator
 
Wylie's Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 35,889
Blog Entries: 2
Default From Dogs Naturally: Evidenced Based Medicine

{{{ This article was PMd to me and the member asked that I post it here, as she was not comfortable posting this article due to its potentially controversial content. }}}

Link to article

Evidence Based Veterinary Medicine


Many of our posts, articles and authors seem to irritate vets and pet owners who are firmly entrenched in traditional medicine. By and large, the most common challenge they use against us is, “where are the scientific studies backing up your claims?”

It’s paradoxical that holistic medicine is unfairly held to a higher burden of proof than mainstream medicine. Do the vets and pet owners who accuse us of promoting medicine that lacks ‘scientific validity’ know that the majority of conventional drugs have an unknown mechanism of action?

One Golden Example

Some interesting examples from conventional human medicine include the 1950’s use of tetracycline (an antibiotic) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis on the theory that it was caused by infectious agents. This was discontinued when rheumatoid arthritis came to be thought of as an autoimmune disease and the standard treatment changed to gold compounds despite their mechanism of action being largely unknown.

The mechanism of action for acetylsalicylic acid, a compound found naturally in white willow bark, and better known as Aspirin, was not discovered until 1971, although it had been available commercially and prescribed since about 1899.

The mechanism of action is in fact unknown for large numbers of commonly prescribed drugs including statins, most psychotropic /psychiatric drugs like Lithium, acetaminophen and Lysodren (a common chemotherapy drug) and general anaesthetics. Would it then make sense to stop using those on surgical patients?

And this is by no means a comprehensive list.

It’s very common in the pharmaceutical industry for drugs to be in vogue for a particular condition, for a certain period of time and to later be found as useless, ineffective, dangerous, or more useful for some other condition than for which they were created.

Ironically, we don’t have that problem with homeopathic remedies or medicinal herbs. The same ones that worked 200 years ago still work today. On the same conditions.

Sadly, “evidence based medicine”, although an excellent concept, has been corrupted into a buzzword used to discredit the results of raw feeding, homeopathy and other so-called alternative health care methods. “Evidence based” means that data from randomized controlled studies provides certainty about whether a treatment will work and is safe. The reality is 66% of the treatment procedures and drugs that are commonly used in conventional medicine have no or little evidence to recommend them (British Medical Journal, 2007). Many procedures have serious complications and many drugs cause difficult and unwanted effects. It is these issues that drive pet owners toward less harmful and health promoting approaches in the first place.

Below is the breakdown of clinical evidence for 2,500 common medical treatments from the study in the British Medical Journal.*

{{{ SEE CHART ATTACHED BELOW }}}

That’s a big grey area on the left, isn’t it? Add “unlikely,” “likely to be ineffective or harmful,” and “trade-off,” and that’s two-thirds of conventional medical treatments that are dubious.

The situation is likely worse in animal medicine. Often, human drugs and medications that have failed human trials are subsequently solicited to the pet market. In addition, there is no formal requirement for reporting adverse reactions to pharmaceuticals in veterinary medicine.

The next time somebody defends conventional medicine by asking us for “scientific validity”, we might ask them the same question.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Conventional-mech-of-action-pie-chart1 copy copy.jpg (58.2 KB, 10 views)
__________________
~ A friend told me I was delusional. I nearly fell off my unicorn. ~

°¨¨¨°ºOº°¨¨¨° Ann | Pfeiffer | Marcel Verdel Purcell | Wylie | Artie °¨¨¨°ºOº°¨¨¨°

Last edited by Wylie's Mom; 05-20-2015 at 05:55 AM. Reason: Fixed link
Wylie's Mom is offline   Reply With Quote
Welcome Guest!
Not Registered?

Join today and remove this ad!

Old 05-18-2015, 09:28 AM   #2
T. Bumpkins & Co.
Donating YT Member
 
107barney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 9,816
Default

Can't access the link.
__________________
Washable Doggie Pee Pads (Save 10% Enter YTSAVE10 at checkout)
Cathy, Teddy, Winston and Baby Clyde...RIP angels Barney and Daisy
107barney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2015, 09:36 AM   #3
Furbutts = LOVE
Donating Member
Moderator
 
Wylie's Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 35,889
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 107barney View Post
Can't access the link.
Weird...I couldn't either that time .

Does this one work? It's All In The Evidence, Or Is It?
__________________
~ A friend told me I was delusional. I nearly fell off my unicorn. ~

°¨¨¨°ºOº°¨¨¨° Ann | Pfeiffer | Marcel Verdel Purcell | Wylie | Artie °¨¨¨°ºOº°¨¨¨°
Wylie's Mom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2015, 10:36 AM   #4
Don't Litter Spay&Neuter
Donating Member
 
mimimomo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: So Cal
Posts: 9,874
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom View Post
Weird...I couldn't either that time .

Does this one work? It's All In The Evidence, Or Is It?
It works, Thank you.
__________________
Jenny Mimi Momo Princess Turbo
Madan Pin Brush: www.toplinepet.com
mimimomo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2015, 10:36 AM   #5
YT 3000 Club Member
 
pstinard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Urbana, IL USA
Posts: 3,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom View Post
Evidence Based Veterinary Medicine

Many of our posts, articles and authors seem to irritate vets and pet owners who are firmly entrenched in traditional medicine. By and large, the most common challenge they use against us is, “where are the scientific studies backing up your claims?”

It’s paradoxical that holistic medicine is unfairly held to a higher burden of proof than mainstream medicine. Do the vets and pet owners who accuse us of promoting medicine that lacks ‘scientific validity’ know that the majority of conventional drugs have an unknown mechanism of action?

One Golden Example

Some interesting examples from conventional human medicine include the 1950’s use of tetracycline (an antibiotic) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis on the theory that it was caused by infectious agents. This was discontinued when rheumatoid arthritis came to be thought of as an autoimmune disease and the standard treatment changed to gold compounds despite their mechanism of action being largely unknown.

The mechanism of action for acetylsalicylic acid, a compound found naturally in white willow bark, and better known as Aspirin, was not discovered until 1971, although it had been available commercially and prescribed since about 1899.

The mechanism of action is in fact unknown for large numbers of commonly prescribed drugs including statins, most psychotropic /psychiatric drugs like Lithium, acetaminophen and Lysodren (a common chemotherapy drug) and general anaesthetics. Would it then make sense to stop using those on surgical patients?

And this is by no means a comprehensive list.

It’s very common in the pharmaceutical industry for drugs to be in vogue for a particular condition, for a certain period of time and to later be found as useless, ineffective, dangerous, or more useful for some other condition than for which they were created.

Ironically, we don’t have that problem with homeopathic remedies or medicinal herbs. The same ones that worked 200 years ago still work today. On the same conditions.

Sadly, “evidence based medicine”, although an excellent concept, has been corrupted into a buzzword used to discredit the results of raw feeding, homeopathy and other so-called alternative health care methods. “Evidence based” means that data from randomized controlled studies provides certainty about whether a treatment will work and is safe. The reality is 66% of the treatment procedures and drugs that are commonly used in conventional medicine have no or little evidence to recommend them (British Medical Journal, 2007). Many procedures have serious complications and many drugs cause difficult and unwanted effects. It is these issues that drive pet owners toward less harmful and health promoting approaches in the first place.

Below is the breakdown of clinical evidence for 2,500 common medical treatments from the study in the British Medical Journal.*

{{{ SEE CHART ATTACHED BELOW }}}

That’s a big grey area on the left, isn’t it? Add “unlikely,” “likely to be ineffective or harmful,” and “trade-off,” and that’s two-thirds of conventional medical treatments that are dubious.

The situation is likely worse in animal medicine. Often, human drugs and medications that have failed human trials are subsequently solicited to the pet market. In addition, there is no formal requirement for reporting adverse reactions to pharmaceuticals in veterinary medicine.

The next time somebody defends conventional medicine by asking us for “scientific validity”, we might ask them the same question.
I was going to let this article pass without comment, but since it provides misinformation that could affect the health decisions that one makes for one's dog, it deserves a cursory examination.

First, this article creates a "straw man" type of argument. A straw man argument is defined as: "a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on false representation of an opponent's argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument." (From Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

This article gives a false definition of "evidence based medicine." The actual definition of evidence based medicine is "the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients. The practice of evidence based medicine means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research." (From Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't | The BMJ)

In other words, it is medicine that works in a practical sense on real patients. If a treatment doesn't work, it isn't evidence based medicine. This makes the graph accompanying the article rather puzzling and unhelpful. It doesn't help that the most important links embedded in the article don't work, and it's not possible to track down where that graph actually came from, or what it was meant to demonstrate.

Clearly, based on what evidence based medicine actually is, statements like the following aren't relevant:

"The mechanism of action is in fact unknown for large numbers of commonly prescribed drugs including statins, most psychotropic /psychiatric drugs like Lithium, acetaminophen and Lysodren (a common chemotherapy drug) and general anaesthetics. Would it then make sense to stop using those on surgical patients?"

This isn't evidence based medicine either:

"Often, human drugs and medications that have failed human trials are subsequently solicited to the pet market. In addition, there is no formal requirement for reporting adverse reactions to pharmaceuticals in veterinary medicine."

The original article DOES link to the following website on homeopathic medicine, which I suppose is the point of this article: - Home

Clearly, homeopathic medicine is subject to the same rules as evidence based medicine: Does it work?

I can't answer that question, but I will simply state that this article doesn't help explain what evidence based medicine is, and whether or not homeopathic medicine works.
pstinard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2015, 10:45 AM   #6
YT 3000 Club Member
 
pstinard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Urbana, IL USA
Posts: 3,648
Default

Since I met the character limit on the previous post, I couldn't give the more expanded definition of evidence based medicine. Here it is:

Evidence-based medicine has been defined by its proponents as the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients. In this definition, the practice of evidence-based medicine means integrating individual clinical expertise with a critical appraisal of the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research. By individual clinical expertise is meant the proficiency and judgment that individual clinicians acquire through clinical experience and clinical practice. Increased expertise is reflected in many ways, but especially in more effective and efficient diagnosis and in the more thoughtful identification and compassionate use of individual patients' predicaments, rights, and preferences in making clinical decisions about their care. By best available external clinical evidence is meant clinically relevant research, often from the basic sciences of medicine, but especially from patient-centered clinical research into the accuracy and precision of diagnostic tests (including the clinical examination), the power of prognostic factors, and the efficacy and safety of therapeutic, rehabilitative, and preventive regimens.

The practice of evidence-based medicine is a process of lifelong, self-directed learning in which caring for one's own patients creates the need for clinically important information about diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, and other clinical and health care issues, and in which its practitioners:

1. Convert these information needs into answerable questions.


2. Track down, with maximum efficiency, the best evidence with which to answer them (and making increasing use of secondary sources of the best evidence). Examples of such secondary sources are the Cochrane Library and journals of critically appraised clinical articles such as ACP Journal Club and Evidence-Based Medicine.

3. Critically appraise that evidence for its validity (closeness to the truth) and usefulness (clinical applicability).

4. Integrate the appraisal with clinical expertise and apply the results in clinical practice.

5. Evaluate one's own performance.

The rest of the article (probably behind paywall) is here: Evidence-based Medicine - Encyclopedia of Biostatistics - Sackett - Wiley Online Library

Nothing about quadruple-blind peer-reviewed studies conducted in the darkest recesses of pharmaceutical company basements here. Rather than erecting a bogeyman, I think it's important to know what evidence based medicine actually is.
pstinard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2015, 03:14 PM   #7
Resident Yorkie Nut Donating YT 20K Club Member
 
ladyjane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 27,447
Default

Very thoughtful response, Phil. I know for me, it comes down to one thing....my dogs will never be guinea pigs. I want well thought out and tried and true methods of treatments for them.

Ann, no disrespect intended here, but I cannot think that you would believe this article is valid. I realize you did it for a member as you put that disclaimer on it. Yes, I realize you like all sides expressed, but you and I have the same professional background and I seirously doubt you bought this article. I would not post it for anyone, even at a price! I can see why that member would be uncomfortable posting it...he/she already knows it is controversial. That alone should raise a red flag to them!! I just wish people would realize that no one is just arbitrarily bashing them for their posts of these things. People try so hard to make others understand that much of this is simply not good information; and I know that I like to let people know for their good and the good of their pets. It scares me that things like this are so readily just accepted as gospel.
ladyjane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2015, 08:00 PM   #8
Rosehill Yorkies
Donating YT Member
 
Yorkiemom1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 9,462
Default

Thank you Phil for the honest clarification of the article that was presented.
Yorkiemom1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:15 AM   #9
YT 2000 Club
Donating Member
 
gemy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Huntsville,Ont,Canaada
Posts: 12,335
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by


[B
Evidence-based medicine has been defined by its proponents as the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients. In this definition, the practice of evidence-based medicine means integrating individual clinical expertise with a critical appraisal of the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research. By individual clinical expertise is meant the proficiency and judgment that individual clinicians acquire through clinical experience and clinical practice. Increased expertise is reflected in many ways, but especially in more effective and efficient diagnosis and in the more thoughtful identification and compassionate use of individual patients' predicaments, rights, and preferences in making clinical decisions about their care. By best available external clinical evidence is meant clinically relevant research, often from the basic sciences of medicine, but especially from patient-centered clinical research into the accuracy and precision of diagnostic tests (including the clinical examination), the power of prognostic factors, and the efficacy and safety of therapeutic, rehabilitative, and preventive regimens.[/B]

The practice of evidence-based medicine is a process of lifelong, self-directed learning in which caring for one's own patients creates the need for clinically important information about diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, and other clinical and health care issues, and in which its practitioners:

1. Convert these information needs into answerable questions.


2. Track down, with maximum efficiency, the best evidence with which to answer them (and making increasing use of secondary sources of the best evidence). Examples of such secondary sources are the Cochrane Library and journals of critically appraised clinical articles such as ACP Journal Club and Evidence-Based Medicine.

3. Critically appraise that evidence for its validity (closeness to the truth) and usefulness (clinical applicability).

4. Integrate the appraisal with clinical expertise and apply the results in clinical practice.

5. Evaluate one's own performance.

The rest of the article (probably behind paywall) is here: Evidence-based Medicine - Encyclopedia of Biostatistics - Sackett - Wiley Online Library

Nothing about quadruple-blind peer-reviewed studies conducted in the darkest recesses of pharmaceutical company basements here. Rather than erecting a bogeyman, I think it's important to know what evidence based medicine actually is.

Thanks Phil for posting this more complete definition of what is meant by evidence based medicine. It is interesting to take note of the fact that clinical personal experience is highly factored into an evidenced based approach. There is nothing in the above definition that precludes naturopathic or homeopathic doctors from practising an evidence based approach. With the glaring exception of the fact that the body of scientific studies for herbal remedies (of one nature or another has not been built).


In my reading of the article below this person was not providing a definition of Evidence Based Veterinary Medicine in its totality - but as asserted in the first paragragh speaking to a specific question that they get quite commonly - ergo - where are the studies backing up your claims? And I have no doubt that is a question they often get! Certainly one I would ask.

I believe it is a common conception (perhaps misconception) that there are scientific studies in traditional medicine to back up every treatment plan a vet or an MD makes. This article is pointing out the fact that this is patently not so. Is this assertion valid? IDK. But common sense tells me it is so.


The author focussed on mechanism of action being unknown for many drugs out there. Is this a true statement of fact? IDK - How important is it to know the mechanism of action before prescribing a drug? Marketing it? Or is it more important to know that it works on some of the ppl some of the time - and if over time it is shown to be ineffective for condition a/b/c then you stop prescribing it.


I have a question for you Phil - I have heard recently that Canada and the USA signed an international agreement years ago - 15 or more years ago - signed an accord that said - the funders of the research *own the research* - and that includes publishing or not the results of the study. As of yet I have not been able to confirm that assertion. If true that is very disturbing to me.


Homeopathic medicine has a huge body of clinical experience available to the doctors of said medicine. At least that is my understanding.


I how-ever agree that this article whilst pointing out some of the short-comings of Western medicine does nothing to advance the validity of homeopathic or naturopathic discipline.





Evidence Based Veterinary Medicine

Many of our posts, articles and authors seem to irritate vets and pet owners who are firmly entrenched in traditional medicine. By and large, the most common challenge they use against us is, “where are the scientific studies backing up your claims?â€

It’s paradoxical that holistic medicine is unfairly held to a higher burden of proof than mainstream medicine. Do the vets and pet owners who accuse us of promoting medicine that lacks ‘scientific validity’ know that the majority of conventional drugs have an unknown mechanism of action?

One Golden Example

Some interesting examples from conventional human medicine include the 1950’s use of tetracycline (an antibiotic) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis on the theory that it was caused by infectious agents. This was discontinued when rheumatoid arthritis came to be thought of as an autoimmune disease and the standard treatment changed to gold compounds despite their mechanism of action being largely unknown.

The mechanism of action for acetylsalicylic acid, a compound found naturally in white willow bark, and better known as Aspirin, was not discovered until 1971, although it had been available commercially and prescribed since about 1899.

The mechanism of action is in fact unknown for large numbers of commonly prescribed drugs including statins, most psychotropic /psychiatric drugs like Lithium, acetaminophen and Lysodren (a common chemotherapy drug) and general anaesthetics. Would it then make sense to stop using those on surgical patients?

And this is by no means a comprehensive list.

It’s very common in the pharmaceutical industry for drugs to be in vogue for a particular condition, for a certain period of time and to later be found as useless, ineffective, dangerous, or more useful for some other condition than for which they were created.

Ironically, we don’t have that problem with homeopathic remedies or medicinal herbs. The same ones that worked 200 years ago still work today. On the same conditions.

Sadly, “evidence based medicineâ€, although an excellent concept, has been corrupted into a buzzword used to discredit the results of raw feeding, homeopathy and other so-called alternative health care methods. “Evidence based†means that data from randomized controlled studies provides certainty about whether a treatment will work and is safe. The reality is 66% of the treatment procedures and drugs that are commonly used in conventional medicine have no or little evidence to recommend them (British Medical Journal, 2007). Many procedures have serious complications and many drugs cause difficult and unwanted effects. It is these issues that drive pet owners toward less harmful and health promoting approaches in the first place.

Below is the breakdown of clinical evidence for 2,500 common medical treatments from the study in the British Medical Journal.*

{{{ SEE CHART ATTACHED BELOW }}}

That’s a big grey area on the left, isn’t it? Add “unlikely,†“likely to be ineffective or harmful,†and “trade-off,†and that’s two-thirds of conventional medical treatments that are dubious.

The situation is likely worse in animal medicine. Often, human drugs and medications that have failed human trials are subsequently solicited to the pet market. In addition, there is no formal requirement for reporting adverse reactions to pharmaceuticals in veterinary medicine.

The next time somebody defends conventional medicine by asking us for “scientific validityâ€, we might ask them the same question.




Thanks Ann for posting this article - although finding the links were tough.
__________________
Razzle and Dara. Our clan. RIP Karma Dec 24th 2004-July 14 2013 RIP Zoey Jun9 th 2008-May 12 2012. RIP Magic,Mar 26 2006July 1st 2018
gemy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:20 AM   #10
YT 3000 Club Member
 
pstinard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Urbana, IL USA
Posts: 3,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yorkiemom1 View Post
Thank you Phil for the honest clarification of the article that was presented.
Thanks! I can understand WHY the article was written. Proponents of homeopathic medicine feel like they are under attack from the traditional medical community, and they are fighting back. However, BOTH sides need to realize that smear campaigns, name calling, and misrepresenting their opponent are not helpful or acceptable. It would be great if both sides could present the positive aspects of their sides, and if they have criticisms of their opponents, it would be fantastic if they could present their criticisms in a constructive, reasonable manner . No more talk of "tendrils of woo," "bulls**t," "evil empires," and "big pharma," please! I can understand the frustration, but please, really!
pstinard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:24 AM   #11
Resident Yorkie Nut Donating YT 20K Club Member
 
ladyjane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 27,447
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pstinard View Post
Thanks! I can understand WHY the article was written. Proponents of homeopathic medicine feel like they are under attack from the traditional medical community, and they are fighting back. However, BOTH sides need to realize that smear campaigns, name calling, and misrepresenting their opponent are not helpful or acceptable. It would be great if both sides could present the positive aspects of their sides, and if they have criticisms of their opponents, it would be fantastic if they could present their criticisms in a constructive, reasonable manner . No more talk of "tendrils of woo," "bulls**t," "evil empires," and "big pharma," please! I can understand the frustration, but please, really!
I agree. There is a place for both. I know that I use some homeopathic "cures" but I don't agree that they will ever be a total replacement "for". I really think this comes down to almost a political thing....far right vs far left. The extremes always make it look bad for the mainstream.
ladyjane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:43 AM   #12
Resident Yorkie Nut Donating YT 20K Club Member
 
ladyjane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 27,447
Default

One of my favorite examples of mixing homeopathic with traditional medicine is one of my former pups who has since left me due to renal failure. He came to me at the age of 8 with horrible skin issues. For those who have seen these photos before, I apologize; but I think he is such an excellent example ...

Index of /cody (the first two links are his before and after)

Cody had bacterial and fungal infections. My vet prescribed an antibiotic for the bacterial infection but not an anti fungal. She told me to bathe him 3 times/week and then rinse him in 50/50 warm vinegar and water. I remember questioning her because I felt he should have an anti fungal, but she insisted it would work and felt it was better than to use the medication. It was amazing! He started to respond after the first week...and I so remember when he started growing hair on his little bare chest. I remember telling him that he was going through puberty. LOL

Since that day/experience I have had many pups with allergy issues who have had fungal infections and to this day I have never given an anti fungal. I had a member here who once told me that tea bags cure staph infections ... to me that is way off the beaten path. We know for a fact that antibiotics cure bacterial infections. Maybe if you get to something early, you can get away with homeopathic but certainly not once an infection has set in/taken hold.

Just one example...but I think it is a good one especially since the photos are really a great overall picture of it.

Last edited by ladyjane; 05-20-2015 at 05:45 AM.
ladyjane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:47 AM   #13
YT 3000 Club Member
 
pstinard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Urbana, IL USA
Posts: 3,648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
Thanks Phil for posting this more complete definition of what is meant by evidence based medicine. It is interesting to take note of the fact that clinical personal experience is highly factored into an evidenced based approach. There is nothing in the above definition that precludes naturopathic or homeopathic doctors from practising an evidence based approach. With the glaring exception of the fact that the body of scientific studies for herbal remedies (of one nature or another) has not been built.
My point exactly! Alternative methods CAN be evidence based. They simply need need to build a data set (case studies, etc.) that show that their approach works. That's all evidence based medicine is asking: Does it work? The "why" can be worked out later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
In my reading of the article below this person was not providing a definition of Evidence Based Veterinary Medicine in its totality - but as asserted in the first paragragh speaking to a specific question that they get quite commonly - ergo - where are the studies backing up your claims? And I have no doubt that is a question they often get! Certainly one I would ask.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
I believe it is a common conception (perhaps misconception) that there are scientific studies in traditional medicine to back up every treatment plan a vet or an MD makes. This article is pointing out the fact that this is patently not so. Is this assertion valid? IDK. But common sense tells me it is so.
Yes, exactly! But traditional medical approaches that have failed are NOT evidence based medicine. Evidence based medicine is a recent concept that (believe it or not) was developed in the 1990's, and a lot of older, failed approaches still need to be held up to higher standards and discarded if they don't really work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
The author focussed on mechanism of action being unknown for many drugs out there. Is this a true statement of fact? IDK - How important is it to know the mechanism of action before prescribing a drug? Marketing it? Or is it more important to know that it works on some of the ppl some of the time - and if over time it is shown to be ineffective for condition a/b/c then you stop prescribing it.


No, the mechanism of action of MOST drugs is known--the article was pointing out a few examples of drugs for which the mechanism was not known at the time they were developed. The most important question is "does it work?" but obviously it helps if they know the mechanism, because it makes it easier to develop more useful drugs, as well as to know the interactions with other drugs that might result in side effects.

The reason they were making this point is that the mechanism of homeopathic medicine is not understood, either. And that's okay, IF there is a body of evidence that shows that it works. Mechanisms can be worked out later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
I have a question for you Phil - I have heard recently that Canada and the USA signed an international agreement years ago - 15 or more years ago - signed an accord that said - the funders of the research *own the research* - and that includes publishing or not the results of the study. As of yet I have not been able to confirm that assertion. If true that is very disturbing to me.


My next research project . I will see if I can find out for you. My understanding is that if a drug is going to be marketed, they HAVE to publish the data that proves that it works, or make it available to the regulatory agencies (not all data is worthy of publication). The manufacturing techniques, though, are trade secrets, and they don't have to reveal those. They do have to prove safety and effectiveness of the final product, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
Homeopathic medicine has a huge body of clinical experience available to the doctors of said medicine. At least that is my understanding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
I how-ever agree that this article whilst pointing out some of the short-comings of Western medicine does nothing to advance the validity of homeopathic or naturopathic discipline.

Thanks Ann for posting this article - although finding the links were tough.
Yes, and smearing evidence based medicine is definitely something they DON'T want to do. Otherwise, how can they show that their approach works? You can't have it both ways. (Sorry for the strange way the quotes are handled in this post--I can't fix them.)
pstinard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:54 AM   #14
Furbutts = LOVE
Donating Member
Moderator
 
Wylie's Mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 35,889
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemy View Post
Thanks Phil for posting this more complete definition of what is meant by evidence based medicine. It is interesting to take note of the fact that clinical personal experience is highly factored into an evidenced based approach. There is nothing in the above definition that precludes naturopathic or homeopathic doctors from practising an evidence based approach. With the glaring exception of the fact that the body of scientific studies for herbal remedies (of one nature or another has not been built).


In my reading of the article below this person was not providing a definition of Evidence Based Veterinary Medicine in its totality - but as asserted in the first paragragh speaking to a specific question that they get quite commonly - ergo - where are the studies backing up your claims? And I have no doubt that is a question they often get! Certainly one I would ask.

I believe it is a common conception (perhaps misconception) that there are scientific studies in traditional medicine to back up every treatment plan a vet or an MD makes. This article is pointing out the fact that this is patently not so. Is this assertion valid? IDK. But common sense tells me it is so.


The author focussed on mechanism of action being unknown for many drugs out there. Is this a true statement of fact? IDK - How important is it to know the mechanism of action before prescribing a drug? Marketing it? Or is it more important to know that it works on some of the ppl some of the time - and if over time it is shown to be ineffective for condition a/b/c then you stop prescribing it.


I have a question for you Phil - I have heard recently that Canada and the USA signed an international agreement years ago - 15 or more years ago - signed an accord that said - the funders of the research *own the research* - and that includes publishing or not the results of the study. As of yet I have not been able to confirm that assertion. If true that is very disturbing to me.


Homeopathic medicine has a huge body of clinical experience available to the doctors of said medicine. At least that is my understanding.


I how-ever agree that this article whilst pointing out some of the short-comings of Western medicine does nothing to advance the validity of homeopathic or naturopathic discipline.

Thanks Ann for posting this article - although finding the links were tough.
This is similar to how I read/interpreted the article as well.
__________________
~ A friend told me I was delusional. I nearly fell off my unicorn. ~

°¨¨¨°ºOº°¨¨¨° Ann | Pfeiffer | Marcel Verdel Purcell | Wylie | Artie °¨¨¨°ºOº°¨¨¨°
Wylie's Mom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2015, 05:54 AM   #15
aka ♥SquishyFace♥
Donating Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,873
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pstinard View Post
My point exactly! Alternative methods CAN be evidence based. They simply need need to build a data set (case studies, etc.) that show that their approach works. That's all evidence based medicine is asking: Does it work? The "why" can be worked out later.



Yes, exactly! But traditional medical approaches that have failed are NOT evidence based medicine. Evidence based medicine is a recent concept that (believe it or not) was developed in the 1990's, and a lot of older, failed approaches still need to be held up to higher standards and discarded if they don't really work.



No, the mechanism of action of MOST drugs is known--the article was pointing out a few examples of drugs for which the mechanism was not known at the time they were developed. The most important question is "does it work?" but obviously it helps if they know the mechanism, because it makes it easier to develop more useful drugs, as well as to know the interactions with other drugs that might result in side effects.

The reason they were making this point is that the mechanism of homeopathic medicine is not understood, either. And that's okay, IF there is a body of evidence that shows that it works. Mechanisms can be worked out later.



My next research project . I will see if I can find out for you. My understanding is that if a drug is going to be marketed, they HAVE to publish the data that proves that it works, or make it available to the regulatory agencies (not all data is worthy of publication). The manufacturing techniques, though, are trade secrets, and they don't have to reveal those. They do have to prove safety and effectiveness of the final product, though.



Yes, and smearing evidence based medicine is definitely something they DON'T want to do. Otherwise, how can they show that their approach works? You can't have it both ways. (Sorry for the strange way the quotes are handled in this post--I can't fix them.)


I almost bit my own hand off trying to not respond so thank you for taking the initiative!


Yes, it is important to understand how/if/why the medicine is targeting the appropriate pathways and networks and this is important in pathological and psychological medicines.


Even if it is not immediately known, this is always investigated once the efficacy has been established. It would be unethical, otherwise, to recommend or market the medication ... Yes, I know that after the fact a lot of meds are recalled or there is a development in the efficacy or lack thereof but that just goes to show that research is ongoing, even for 'approved' medicines and that we continually have to readjust our expectations and recommendations re: certain meds.


Okay, my mouth is now empty of hand.
SirTeddykins is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Google
 

SHOP NOW: Amazon :: eBay :: Buy.com :: Newegg :: PetStore :: Petco :: PetSmart


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167