How much faith do place in experts in mainstream medicine?!


Question: How much faith do place in experts in mainstream medicine?
Will there be some things you will not even think about unless you are told by a doctor or a nurse?

I ask because it seems some people will roll their eyes at any health advice that does not come from someone with one of those degrees.

A few years ago I told someone that ginger was helpful during a cold. That person did not believe what I said. But now that same person has enthusiastically told me that a nurse told her that ginger was good for a cold. She did not remember what I had said. She was giving me advice. She said to get it at the health food store. (I get mine fresh at the supermarket.)

Answers:

People have learned to decommission their brains when it comes to looking after their health. You should be able to inform yourself in regards to what works and what doesn't without having to rely on doctors and nurses for advice all the time. If my friend had listened to her doctor, she would be dead today. Thank God she used her head is all I can say. It is dangerous to place too much faith in people and in the medical profession as they are by no means infallible. Nobody is for that matter. The only person you need to listen to and trust, is yourself. Follow your gut instincts and don't allow people to railroad you into thoughts and views that are not your own. Ginger is excellent for colds and many other things.

http://www.healthdiaries.com/eatthis/10-…



Trust in degrees have killed many people. 200 years ago, degree physicians were bleeding people

In was in 1844 or there about that Ignaz Semmelweis recommended washing hands after autopsy and before doing pelvic examines on pregnant women. He was mocked for being Jewish and women died.

Fennel Tea will reduce flatus and fairly quickly. This remedy is quite old just as is your ginger remedy.

Modern medicine does know a lot but anyone who believe a doctor/nurse just because they wear the uniform --- should be told to get a second opinion.

Omitted link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semme…



Well, Doctors and Nurses are trained in this area, so it kinda makes sense to listen to them.

And it certainly makes more sense listening to them than a bunch of quacks.

FYI....ginger doesn't really do anything much for a cold. Also, anecdotes aren't data. Where treatments are concerned, most (rational) people prefer something with evidence supporting it.

Medicine is now more evidence based than ever; Doctors and Nurses are trained in interpreting data.



I place a huge amount of trust and faith in the ability of mainstream medical practitioners.

But I also am aware of many cases where intensively-studied and scientifically-tested medicine and drugs have killed lots of patients taking them due to previously undetected side effects (even after extensive testing and re-testing).

On the other hand, I know of many herbal infusions and home remedies that haven't undergone the same amount of rigorous scientific testing that these drugs have undergone, but have time and again delivered successfully on all the anecdotal evidence that have been put out there.



It's your health. This is not something you can afford to gamble with or take any risk.

If it was my car, then sure I'm happy to take advice from the guy next door as well as my local mechanic, if someone is wrong then it's just cost me money.

But seriously, a medical condition? Get a grip! Who are you going to trust to diagnose and recommend treatment for a fatal condition? Your doctor backed by multi-million dollar diagnostic services and a small army of medical experts, or some uneducated fool who's guessing what's wrong because they saw it on 'Scrubs' once?



I wouldn't say I place a lot of faith in doctors. I place a lot of worth in the fact that they have studied and practiced in medicine for many years. Knowing that information, I value their advice in matters of health more than someone who doesn't have those qualifications.

Hi Rhianna!



Faith, zero. Confidence, plenty.

After all, THEY'RE the ones who spent years studying the intricacies of biochemistry, physiology and pathology... while the homopathic quackjobs were playing hacky sack in the courtyard and posting "How I gets medkal weed lol?" on Yahoo!? Answers.



I'll take someone who went to school for over a decade to study the sciences ANY day of the week over someone who took a 4 month distance learning course online.

That said, I still like hot lemonade with ginger when I have a cold.



I'd place a whole lot more faith in my doctor than in people whose only qualifications for giving medical advice comes from homeopathy "school" or chiropractic or even worse, Google. I have been a doctor for the past few years and I've studied a lot about the human body and diseases and their causes and treatment. When I give medical advice I am confident that it is correct and it is in the best interest of my patient. There are many many times I am not sure so I will refer to another doctor, preferably a specialist.

I won't roll my eyes when a person asks me about something she or he heard from someone who is not from the medical field but I will tell that person to be careful and wary of such advice.



they are good at some things and awful at most others. they are good for first aid, but not for most illness, since they typically are ignorant of both cause and correction for it, and instead apply treatments that are often harmful. well, gary, our resident expert on upper cervical chiropractic has put his foot in it again. the accusation is that it uses rotary neck movement that hurts people. anyone who knows anything about upper cervical chiropractic knows it is most distinguished by NOT using rotary neck adjustment. he says they do manipulation. they actually do adjustment. the two are not synonymous. most uc techniques use some form of momentary impulse on atlas transverse while patient is on a side-posture table with a drop head piece. the patient remains stationary, the head and neck drop slightly straight floorward one half inch. there is no rotation. of course, any real expert on the subject would know this. he claims they move the upper neck every time. wrong again. it is only adjusted when test findings indicate the need, regardless of symptomology. he claims it hurts people. even rotary maipulation, which is not uc chiropractic, rarely results in any injury, this is borne out by the malpractice rates. side-posture adjustment is widely acknowledged as being even safer since no neck rotation occurs. i get tired of clueless pseudo-experts trying to con people with misinformation about upper cervical chiropractic



I'm going to say it depends. When I am sick and go to the doctor I generally trust in the diagnoses and the medication they prescribe. On the other hand if someone tells me something like ginger being good for a cold I will at least look it up and see if there is mainstream research on the issue and even if there is not if there are no reported adverse effects I will try it myself (since if it does no harm then it's allowed in medicine). Of course there is always the placebo effect so if I believe it will help me in some way then it might be useful.
Having a medical degree certainly doesn't mean you know everything (and usually almost nothing about herb and vitamins) and not having a medical degree doesn't mean you don't know what helps you (from personal experience) or non mainstream research.



One of the other answerers pointed out correctly that some 200 years ago, mainstream medicine was based on ancient ideas, which we today know are pure nonsense/dangerous. But mainstream medicine has grown up since then. History is full of examples (including those presented) of ideas that seemed absurd at the time, but became accepted when data showed them to be correct.

Mainstream medicine has learnt from bitter experience the necessity of testing ideas, and accept them if the tests show them to be correct and discard them if the tests show them to be incorrect.
And those tests must be designed so that biases from expectation, prejudices, normal waxing and waning of diseases etc. are avoided.

If you take a look at practitioners of various kinds of alternative (to) medicine, you will find that they have that same mindset, that existed within mainstream medicine 200 years ago. There is no way they will accept that their ideas could be wrong - even when rigorous testing show them to be.

So in short - experts in mainstream medicine are very trustworthy regarding health advice, because they constantly explore and test old dogmas/new ideas, and change their original views if data suggest that they should.



Not much.

RedAngel



Well often somebody is not ready for something at some point.

It doesn't always have to do with the expertise level of the person telling.

Some time ago I didn't believe much about craniosacral therapy and other energetic therapies.
I was practising taiji for some years, and I didn't know what this qi thing was about.
Scientists were laughing at the term, and as I am a scientist I believed that scientists all have some stardard credibility.

But then I did a meditation course, and I finally understood many of the things I had read about (Chinese philosophy).
I knew that taiji had a great value, but many of the teacher don't understand a lot behind the taiji.
And after that I understood that the cause level is even deeper than the energetic level.
(so taiji helps a lot to get the awareness of the problem, help temporarily, but eventually points you to where you really better change)

Energetically you can see/feel things before they are manifested.
But the cause is still at another level, but can even seen by some people.

Now I don't need experts anymore, but I don't judge experts by what they say.
I know they have their level of awareness and often that is a very coarse level.
But that is ok. They are helpful on another level.
Often we need pills, and often we need surgery, when for a long time we didn't listen to our body,
or the generations before us didn't listen to their body, or because of an 'accident'.

But that is simply my awareness,
there is no need to force other people to believe what is my conviction,
there is even no possibility (unless they like other people to think for themselves)
they can only change through experience,
as I did.




The consumer health information on answer-health.com is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for any medical conditions.
The answer content post by the user, if contains the copyright content please contact us, we will immediately remove it.
Copyright © 2007-2011 answer-health.com -   Terms of Use -   Contact us

Health Categories