[107barney]

Originally Posted by SirTeddykins

Well said in that yours is a balanced view of the pros/cons of approved medication as it pertains to the masses and the minorities. It is important to be well-informed re: any medicinal option with respect to efficacy, side effects and risk vs benefit analysis.


It is important to remember that marketed medication is tested under rigorous conditions before approval (hence some of the long approval times for meds like Alzheimer's etc) but cannot take into account every potential eventuality in every individual circumstance. Also, we have to admit that research is funded by pharmaceutical companies so there is a conflict of interest to a degree. (Arguably, a large degree in some instances).


However, the danger with some 'natural' or 'holistic' alternatives is that the research there can be even more limited.


Therefore, it is important to make evidence based decisions and one can only do this by researching on the basis of empirical research conclusions AND personal circumstance.


For example, NSAIDS (like ibuprofen) are said to be just as effective as morphine in pain relief. This is great! A 'proven' pain reliever, which is cheap and easily obtainable by the population. However, further research shows that NSAIDS should not be used by certain populations i.e. those on other medications or who have co-morbidities such as gastritis, for example. Therefore, although this particular 'proven' medicine is great for the MASSES it can have dire consequences for the minority.

Exactly. Not only is holistic or natural medicine more limited in research, there is often NO research. And no oversight.