September 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

« Boxing Day | Main | Recycling cyclical »

Dec 26, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ed's Mom

Okay--admit to using some "alternative" remedies with apparent success. Seven Sisters grad, married to MD for 31 years, even have MEd in public health education, for what any of that is worth. Pay for all myself. Would probably be cheaper to use Medicare for a prescription drug for interstitial cystitis, but "alternative" (recommended by a university pharmacologist) works just fine and has no side effects. Was amazed when university neurologist ordered a cocktail of over-the-counter meds for my second husband when he had ALS--they didn't seem to do anything, but the cocktail seems to be SOP both in Canada (and we know about them, right?) and the US. My point? Don't write alternatives off. Do research and don't just casually start taking things. Some of them are dangerous, some ineffective.

RBM

Since I have this habit of looking for (more)context I can't read this without thinking about the message AND the messenger.

In the linked article the messenger writes with 'certitude'. At his blog
the author (messenger) explains that that certitude is subjective.

Got that ??

The message is - at it's broadest perspective - an attempt to keep the consumer buying from the Central Authority.

I am alive today (cancer) because of the Central Authority's expertise.

The productivity of my daily existence, with a common malady (scoliosis), however, is due to what some could consider CAM.

There is/will be a dialog about who pays, how much, for what and how to develop a system to administer it.

This piece isn't it and the WSJ picking it up simply meets their agenda of continuing BAU, and less of spurring debate.

The comments to this entry are closed.