Emphysema, COPD & Other Conditions Beaten: 10 Advantages of Alternative Medicine & Natural Remedies
Emphysema, COPD & Other Conditions Beaten: 10 Advantages of Alternative Medicine & Natural Remedies
10 ADVANTAGES OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE AND NATURAL REMEDIES (One man beat emphysema and COPD in six weeks … over 20 years ago.)
Fact: Emphysema, COPD, cancer, arthritis, and other diseases and adverse health conditions have in many cases been beaten. But why aren’t these countless successes acknowledged by mainstream medicine?
PREFACE
Alternative medicine is kind of an umbrella title for a number of different health or healing philosophies and approaches to medicine, health and healing. Included in alternative medicine are homeopathy, naturopathy, chiropractic care, acupuncture, and natural remedies.
Many diseases and health conditions (i.e., emphysema, COPD, cancer, arthritis) have actually been beaten by alternative medicine and natural remedies. However, mainstream medicine has for years tended to not acknowledge these countless successes, apparently because they go against its established philosophies, methodologies, and are generally far less profitable than their mainstream treatments.
From my research and experience, and that of many highly qualified sources, many safe and effective alternative treatments and remedies have been ignored or even scoffed at for years by mainstream medical authorities and professionals. Mainstream medicine has labeled some alternative treatments as “unsafe,” “unproven”, etc. However, consider how many once “approved” mainstream pharmaceutical drugs, prescribed to millions of patients, have been recalled due to harm or death to patients? Consider the numerous potential side effects they list in their ads for their drugs still on the market. (Talk about “unsafe”! Yet, they can label alternative medicine and natural remedies “unsafe”?!)
Alternative medical, health and healing “testimonials” have also often been called “anecdotes” or “anecdotal evidence;” sometimes, as in a court room, such can be called “hearsay.” Some anecdotal evidence does not qualify as scientific evidence because its nature prevents it from being investigated using the scientific method. I’m not discounting the scientific method at all; it certainly has its place, and it is one of the single greatest strategies and reasons for humanity’s greatest advances in science, technology and medicine in the last two centuries.
There is truly “hearsay” and there is “anecdotal evidence.” Applying these labels too broadly, however, can shade or hide the reality of truly valuable and valid research and results. This terminology or labeling can be accurate (i.e., illogical conclusions), desirable and necessary in many situations. “Goat yogurt mixed with bananas and peanuts prolongs life. I heard of a man who ate this almost every day of his life, and he lived to be 112.” This would be a simplistic example of hearsay or anecdotal evidence; the conclusion is unreliable and does not follow the evidence. Such cases may hold some truth, but, by their nature, using the scientific method is not possible.
However, with many successful alternative treatments and natural remedies, I am asserting that there is often a much higher level of correlation linking them to health or healing, even though the scientific method may not be applicable. (Mainstream medical authorities have in the past tended to discount claims or research that wasn’t conducted with the scientific methodology). (Many celebrities, professional athletes, politicians, and other wealthy people are seekers and strong supporters of alternative medicine, natural remedies, etc. Such high performance people need, want and demand high performance supplements, practices and treatments for their minds and bodies. Why shouldn’t you and your family have the same? )
Objectivity is foundational to the value and integrity of the scientific method; however, in the area of medicine and healing, the subjective, human realities of the patient (i.e., belief, expectation, attitude, commitment, family or environmental support, etc.) have abundantly been demonstrated to play major roles in healing. But such real factors and dimensions cannot easily be incorporated by the scientific method; therefore, other methods of measurement, research and investigation are necessary.
Again, the scientific method is highly necessary and deserves glorious credit. But scientists, researchers, doctors, etc., need to have the wisdom to know when it is needed or applicable; they, and we, need to have the wisdom and integrity to not discount or discredit evidence simply because it has not or cannot be investigated by the scientific method.
With the human, subjective variables being very real, medicine, health and healing can be somewhat more complicated than, say, the aerodynamics of flight, or other areas of technology. It seems that to simply label evidence that doesn’t fit the strict western