Posted: Jun 21, 2010 5:40 am
by Dr. Nancy Malik
DST70 wrote:
Agreed, but those multi–pronged strategies come embedded in a rationalist model of medicine. In rationalist models illness is categorised by disease groups, so if you have disease 'A' you'll be treated in the way that disease 'A' always gets treated, as per the results of clinical research. This makes sense under a rationalist model where common symptoms are more important than peculiar symptoms. Whether or not this is the only way of observing human health and illness is debatable.

There's also a problem if you try and "standardize" a sample group too much. The more internal homogeneity the sample group has (more common symptoms), the less representative of the wider population any successful treatment is, so the less 'real world' application it has. Striving for homogeneity in sample groups is not always desirable; assuming it in the world at large is a very debatable concept.

I'm not denying the obvious benefits and huge improvements in medical care from this approach - that would be stupid. But the question remains whether that model is enough on its own to determine the efficacy of a treatment or cure. At least it's something considered by many people, not just alternative therapists.

David


Dr.Syed Ahmed (SFA) have an example to illustrate this

1- Hot days, loose motions, water, several times a day with pains. (call it diarrhea).
2- Hot days, loose motions with severe cramps coming in waves.(call it diarrhea too).
3- Travelling man, never without watery stools that want him to rush to the utility. (diarrhea again)

Now for an effective homeopath, it never mattered to call it diarrhea or xyz. As the symptoms are varying to an extent that the remedies are changing - every condition must have been different is some respect.

Carefully selected remedy would clear the complaint quickly.