Future Of Medicine

[Runenight201]

Thought this would be an interesting topic to bring up and see what other people thought about where the future of medicine will lie, and how long/what steps would need to be taken for our society to arrive there?

My mom swears by this aspirin/honey/lemon drink that saved her from covid hospitalization, and it made me realize something. At not one point did her doctor ever advise her on what dietary or supplemental preventative and supportive measures she could’ve undertaken to help her better deal with the virus. All she was told was the generic rest and take OTC medicine for symptoms.

I see this as a huge oversight in the American medical system, where people are being directed towards meaningful remedies and foods that could drastically improve their quality of lives and illness risk. I think it would be wonderful if the main primary care doctor included in their practice evaluation and guidance on diet, lifestyle management, sleep, supplements, stress management, etc... etc.... Kind of like if everyone had access to their own holistic practitioner.

I believe right now the alternative medicine world is too shackled to pseudoscientific practices, which prevent it from being accepted by the wider scientific public. If the field could be accepted and then refined, it could drastically change the shape of the modern nation’s health for the better, reducing all sorts of physical, psychological, and economic woes. The alternative medicine world should open themselves to full rigorous scientific investigation, so that what works can be accepted into widespread medical dogma and what has no credible basis can be stripped away and left in the past.

 

[yerrag]

I believe right now the alternative medicine world is too shackled to pseudoscientific practices,

Well, if I were confining my opinion to what Wikipedia says, and to what Google would spit out from my search queries, I would agree with you.

I don't prefer nor want to play by big pharma's rules. If that means everything has to be "evidence-based" according to their definition. Where it requires very expensive studies that requires a well-funded sponsor. Which leaves out simple natural substances in these studies, which could be superior in all aspects. If these effective substances are excluded from these studies and then labelled "pseudoscientific," then we're not getting anywhere if we don't get to use them because we're told by 'experts' that they are quack.

While a lot of alternative medicine is as you describe them, you can't be painting with a broad brush and lumping all of them together. There are good ones out there, and the more the good ones stay below the radar, the more you won't hear of them. Those that stay below the radar do so because success and popularity invites the Inquisition from big pharma. Yet these people are far from pseudo, and compared with big pharma medicine, they are the un-pseudo.

How un-pseudo is big pharma? Just go to worldmeters.info into the COVID updates. Then look up the top 10 countries in terms of COVID fatality per million population. Then do a search and look at the top 10 countries with the highest health expenditure per capita. Now see how many of these western advanced countries are in those two lists. Bam! You'll see a 70-80% match. What does that say about the pseuodo-scientific-ness of big pharma medicine? A lot.

If you're suggesting that the alternative medical world abide by the rules of big pharma and "open up," you are just delusional.

The rules are stacked against them. Don't bother. It's a big waste of time!

 

[Nebula]

Maybe a future healthcare profession will be something like a metabolic coach. Qualified to help you get valuable blood tests cheaply and accurately. Then prescribe diet, supplements, devices, lifestyle that might have the most impact for your context. If investment was poored into making all of this more affordable that could revolutionize the healthcare industry quite a bit along with a strong focus on cleaning up the food and water supply, emphasizing production/access to the most metabolism supporting foods. I imagine this approach would be much cheaper than the current one with much better results.

 

[Energizer]

The book Medical Nemesis very accurately describes the present (and likely) future of establishment medicine as a significant threat to human health. It is shocking how much Ivan Illich predicted has come true.

 

[Runenight201]

Well, if I were confining my opinion to what Wikipedia says, and to what Google would spit out from my search queries, I would agree with you.

I don't prefer nor want to play by big pharma's rules. If that means everything has to be "evidence-based" according to their definition. Where it requires very expensive studies that requires a well-funded sponsor. Which leaves out simple natural substances in these studies, which could be superior in all aspects. If these effective substances are excluded from these studies and then labelled "pseudoscientific," then we're not getting anywhere if we don't get to use them because we're told by 'experts' that they are quack.

While a lot of alternative medicine is as you describe them, you can't be painting with a broad brush and lumping all of them together. There are good ones out there, and the more the good ones stay below the radar, the more you won't hear of them. Those that stay below the radar do so because success and popularity invites the Inquisition from big pharma. Yet these people are far from pseudo, and compared with big pharma medicine, they are the un-pseudo.

How un-pseudo is big pharma? Just go to worldmeters.info into the COVID updates. Then look up the top 10 countries in terms of COVID fatality per million population. Then do a search and look at the top 10 countries with the highest health expenditure per capita. Now see how many of these western advanced countries are in those two lists. Bam! You'll see a 70-80% match. What does that say about the pseuodo-scientific-ness of big pharma medicine? A lot.

If you're suggesting that the alternative medical world abide by the rules of big pharma and "open up," you are just delusional.

The rules are stacked against them. Don't bother. It's a big waste of time!

Thank you for your reply. Many trials are not too convoluted to do and would very easily confirm or deny the effects of whatever alternative practice is being performed. I am in no way saying that each alternative practice is woo woo, but I am saying that some of them are. Take homeopathy. I am of the belief that the whole thing is a giant placebo, and it’s practice by naturopaths tarnishes the name and prevents people from seeking out help when it comes to diet and lifestyle guidance.

I’m suggesting that people run whatever controlled studies on whatever phenomena they’d wish to see, and then let the results speak for themselves.

 

[Runenight201]

Maybe a future healthcare profession will be something like a metabolic coach. Qualified to help you get valuable blood tests cheaply and accurately. Then prescribe diet, supplements, devices, lifestyle that might have the most impact for your context. If investment was poored into making all of this more affordable that could revolutionize the healthcare industry quite a bit along with a strong focus on cleaning up the food and water supply, emphasizing production/access to the most metabolism supporting foods. I imagine this approach would be much cheaper than the current one with much better results.

I like this approach. I would think a routine physical where they check all the different aspects of the physical body to also be very revealing. But it’s seen as all interconnected, and not isolated. For instance, seeing gingivitis as an inflammation problem that can be addressed by looking at blood work and diet/supplements, rather than saying go see a dentist and use this mouthwash!

 

[Lollipop2]

Take homeopathy. I am of the belief that the whole thing is a giant placebo, and it’s practice by naturopaths tarnishes the name and prevents people from seeking out help when it comes to diet and lifestyle guidance.

I have used Homeopathy for over 30 years. It is a remarkable science. In other countries-Germany, India, MD’s use. It was only the FDA witch-hunt that tarnished its name in the US. Like every field, some good players, some bad players.

 

[Blossom]

I sadly have to say after 23 years in the field (in the US) I’ve seen zero positive change. That doesn’t mean there aren’t some well meaning people in medicine but the system seems broken beyond repair. A person is better off maintaining their good health if possible and only using medicine for emergencies in my honest and sincere opinion. If you can find a good practitioner that will listen and work with you consider it a great gift. Thank goodness for the internet that has been so valuable in getting information out and connecting us with people all over the world. We now have the ability to do remote consultations for non emergent problems at least.

 

[thorgus]

I think it would be wonderful if the main primary care doctor included in their practice evaluation and guidance on diet, lifestyle management, sleep, supplements, stress management, etc... etc.... Kind of like if everyone had access to their own holistic practitioner.

I don't know if you're already familiar with it, but it seems that you're describing functional medicine.

 

[Lejeboca]

I have used Homeopathy for over 30 years. It is a remarkable science

Indeed, remarkable. I'd say homeopathy is too complex for anyone to learn it on their own.
It has its principles-laws and relies the water structuring and long interactions long before Gilbert Ling's contributions.

One may be a believer or not but, whenever something works, it works. There are numerous cases studies to attest to this, which is more valuable, I think, than a typical the naysayers' "evidence" that results from data wrangling and a literature review.

Interestingly, the wikipedia page on homeopathy, after starting with accusations of it as pseudo-science, is anyway compelled to give over 100 references for homeopathy working. This platform typically doesn't do that much "justice" to other subject, which it can dismiss easier.

 

[Lollipop2]

I sadly have to say after 23 years in the field (in the US) I’ve seen zero positive change. That doesn’t mean there aren’t some well meaning people in medicine but the system seems broken beyond repair. A person is better off maintaining their good health if possible and only using medicine for emergencies in my honest and sincere opinion. If you can find a good practitioner that will listen and work with you consider it a great gift. Thank goodness for the internet that has been so valuable in getting information out and connecting us with people all over the world. We now have the ability to do remote consultations for non emergent problems at least.

This is strong considering your extensive background. I agree with you. This is my strategy. Thank you for taking the time to weigh in.

 

[Lollipop2]

Indeed, remarkable. I'd say homeopathy is too complex for anyone to learn it on their own.
It has its principles-laws and relies the water structuring and long interactions long before Gilbert Ling's contributions.

One may be a believer or not but, whenever something works, it works. There are numerous cases studies to attest to this, which is more valuable, I think, than a typical the naysayers' "evidence" that results from data wrangling and a literature review.

Interestingly, the wikipedia page on homeopathy, after starting with accusations of it as pseudo-science, is anyway compelled to give over 100 references for homeopathy working. This platform typically doesn't do that much "justice" to other subject, which it can dismiss easier.

+1 I have to say I have seen miracles with homeopathy. Back 20 years ago I lived in Santa Fe and they were having a 5 day workshop in homeopathy for MD’s. I begged the school to let me in even though I was not an MD. What a life changing experience! The materials and references were enough for at least two lifetimes of study. They brought in several experts, one was an American who was living in Nepal and studying with monks. He showed pictures and case studies of crazy birth deformities cured in months. He claimed it doesn’t work as well in USA nowadays because of the layers and layers of pharmaceuticals, whereas in India poor people are not given so many drugs - at least at that time 20 years ago. Homeopathy used to be as miraculous in the US when there were several homeopathic hospitals again shut down by the growing power of FDA.

 

[Dolomite]

I am in healthcare, too. Hospitals are run by bean counters now. A family member had a grandfather doctor who had his own hospital. Before he died he told his son to stay away from doctors and that was in the late 40s. So that son did avoid doctors. It is my goal, too.

The use of Hospitalists is also a problem if you end up in the hospital. They don’t have the time to read your chart let alone listen to you.

 

[Lollipop2]

I am in healthcare, too. Hospitals are run by bean counters now. A family member had a grandfather doctor who had his own hospital. Before he died he told his son to stay away from doctors and that was in the late 40s. So that son did avoid doctors. It is my goal, too.

The use of Hospitalists is also a problem if you end up in the hospital. They don’t have the time to read your chart let alone listen to you.

Just WoW. Compelling story about the grandfather MD.

 

[yerrag]

Thank you for your reply. Many trials are not too convoluted to do and would very easily confirm or deny the effects of whatever alternative practice is being performed. I am in no way saying that each alternative practice is woo woo, but I am saying that some of them are. Take homeopathy. I am of the belief that the whole thing is a giant placebo, and it’s practice by naturopaths tarnishes the name and prevents people from seeking out help when it comes to diet and lifestyle guidance.

I’m suggesting that people run whatever controlled studies on whatever phenomena they’d wish to see, and then let the results speak for themselves.

I agree.

Maybe do crowd-funded studies instead of rely on pharma to do these studies. Or else none gets done.

And don't make these studies unnecessarily complicated that none gets done except by pharma.

But on the preventive front, a lot is already known. Enough to be usable and practical and effective. Enough to make us independent of needing healthcare insurance. Maybe what we just need is accident insurance. Even delivery of babies shouldn't be a complicated thing.

Doctors should be maximizers of our health, not maximizers of profits for public corporations whose business model is the recurrence and worsening of disease to generate recurring income from patients. Patients should not be a gold mine for them to extract profits as they drain their life away like leeches.

The profit-driven model, especially the public corporation to fund retirees' nest egg kind, only serves to make the future of medicine stay as useless and as harmful to our health.

 

[Lejeboca]

I begged the school to let me in even though I was not an MD. What a life changing experience! The materials and references were enough for at least two lifetimes of study.

What a luck!!

Homeopathy used to be as miraculous in the US when there were several homeopathic hospitals again shut down by the growing power of FDA.

Many allopathic doctors of the 19th -- early 20th century actually switched to homeopathy because they themselves witnessed that homeopathy could treat, and not just manage, untreatable diseases, such as vaccinosis. Some examples of such doctors are
Compton Burnett, Edward Bach (English), James Tyler Kent (American).

Would be great if it is back to the future of medicine -- homeopathy!

 

[yerrag]

What a luck!!



Many allopathic doctors of the 19th -- early 20th century actually switched to homeopathy because they themselves witnessed that homeopathy could treat, and not just manage, untreatable diseases, such as vaccinosis. Some examples of such doctors are
Compton Burnett, Edward Bach (English), James Tyler Kent (American).

Would be great if it is back to the future of medicine -- homeopathy!

If vaccination is accepted, even if it's proven already to cause autism, why then is homeopathy not accepted, when it hadn't been proven to harm anyone.

It's such as low bar really to gain acceptance, what more if it's already proven to be of great benefit.

My brother already had an appendectomy, but my sister gave him a homeopathic substance, and he didn't need the operation anymore. But such a story is always considered anecdotal, especially if seen as an individual case.

I would submit if more cases are documented in clinical practice, it would no longer be anecdotal except for the hypocritical promoters of 'evidence-based medicine' that allows the manufacture and sale of harmful drugs like Vioxx and Fentanyl, as well the approval of Remdisivir in a sham trial for COVID.

I'm a little skeptical of homeopathy myself. I haven't seen it work on me nor on my cats, but I'm still learning. I don't fault OP for not believing in homeopathy, but it's only because it is hard to understand the concept of increasing dilutions making for stronger potency. It's very counter-intuitive but that's also the way we get fooled by magic tricks.

Also, many homeopathic practitioners only know homeopathy and rely on a book solely where he matches symptoms to a homeopathic dilution of a substance. But these practitioners have a limited toolkit because they little understanding of the body, whether in a western medical sense or an Eastern sense as in TCM or Ayurveda. I think homeopathy is better when practiced as part of a broader training. Just as Kampo (a Japanese adaptation of a branch of TCM) is applied by doctors trained on Western principles in Japan.

 

[JudiBlueHen]

Primary Care here DOES include dietary advice - the kind you get from CNN and NPR and articles on the grocery checkout aisle newsstand. Useless garbage!

If you ask your PCP for diet info, he/she will look at your "diagnoses" and give you the right sheet - say one for T2DM, one for heart disease, high cholesterol (avoid saturated fats and get plenty of fish oil...) etc. Useless garbage but "tailored" just for you.

The medical mafia won't have it any other way. BTW if you show your PCP an alternative health article, or a Peat article, he might take it and thank you, but probably it goes in the garbage before the next patient arrives. Or he will glance at it and explain that there are no RCT studies to prove what the article claims, so you should ignore it. At least that is my experience - not only my PCP, but also my specialist.

 

[Lejeboca]

If vaccination is accepted, even if it's proven already to cause autism, why then is homeopathy not accepted, when it hadn't been proven to harm anyone.

As you said it yourself: because homeopathy does not maximize profits. I am guessing it cannot be patented either.

Also, many homeopathic practitioners only know homeopathy and rely on a book solely where he matches symptoms to a homeopathic dilution of a substance.

I suppose that "hard-core" homeopaths, yes. But most of the GP's I seen (in France) practice homeopathy, as "add on". They would "suggest" a remedy if basically you ask for one, otherwise they will send you out only with a standard antibiotic. At least this was a case about decade ago.

As with other "traditional" medicines (TCM, herbal, etc) in Western society, people often approach homeopathy---and often get cured---after Western doctors "washed their hands" on them. Go figure.

Assuming that "things only get worse" in our society due to the current craziness and Global Reset, the access to Western medicine for treatment rather than for triage will get even more elitist, so everyone has to become their own doctor in whatever combination of natural treatments, in addition to prevention, they can, as you, yerrag, aptly point out above too.
I guess, we can call this a future survival skill.

 

[yerrag]

Definitely a future survival skill Lejeboca. Those who went to the ICU - a lot of them did not survive. I may even prefer going to the third class hospitals, because the doctors work with the low-cost solutions, and these solutions aren't used in the "world class hospital." So those "benefiting" from insurance may be the ones being given the pricey meds, which are prescribed more out of a need to please big pharma than to help patients.

Those who can't afford insurance and hospital care, come to rely on practice-based evidence for their choice of solution, than for "evidence-based" medicine. And their outcomes would be better, especially knowing there is no ICU to put them on life support.

Those who don't get sick because they know how to care for their immunity - thus avoiding the side effects of pharma drugs, and staying away from vaccines - have the best outcomes. They are surviving on good knowledge and not stressing out of phantom fears. They need healthcare insurance as much as they need microchips under their skin.