[lbo-talk] Doug Henwood's Critique of Gary Null

[paul childs]

>I think it's the stigma attached to these therapies: for many
>people (witness this thread), even considering the possibility
>that an alternative therapy is effective suggests that you're
>a goofy hippie.  For somebody trying to get tenure/research
>grants/peer-reviewed publications, this is a pretty
>dangerous way to portray yourself.

I suspect you're right. However in Canada anyway alternative therapies are gaining legitimacy
in academia and the regulated health professions.

Personally, I have no problem with people trying alternative therapies, I've seen too many
of them that work to dismiss them.

What I object to and why I think the stigma is earned;

1. Claiming that because it's an alternative treatment the rules for showing
that the treatment works don't apply because they're 'old/established/traditional'
science rules.

2. The logic that develops a chain going roughly; 'St. John's wort works for me better
that prescription and OTC anti-depressants.....maybe we should stop inoculating for MMR too'.

3. The suggestion that because the science associated with something like, say, fluoridation,
is associated with something moral corrupt, like say, atomic weapons, the benefits of that
science, like say, the near elimination of dental caries, is tainted. I wear contact lens and clothes
that prevent me from getting hypothermia. Am I the moral equivalent of
Josef Mengele's lab partner?

I think I've now broken one of the LBO informal rules by mentioning 'Nazis' after a certain number of
posts on a thread

PC

N P Childs

'I'm Mister Bad Example, the stranger in the dirt,
I like to have a good time and I don't care who gets hurt'.

-Mr. Bad Example, W Zevon