Misunderstanding Empiricism

quote:

---

The scientific method is the best way we have, by far, for giving ourselves confidence about what we know of the real world.

​

Why this point isn't clear to PD and LL and JM and NJ and others is beyond me, but the prevalence of people of such an inclination makes it clear why it is so difficult to convince anyone concerning issues like creation/evolution, 911 conspiracies, UFOs, ESP, faith healing and all the rest.

---

Wow, I made the illogical list just because I'm trying to show you that the average person is at the mercy of battling experts.I do understand, but I also understand the way society works.If we could see the experiment or study first hand, there would be no problem, but we don't usually have that option. The average person is at the mercy of the interpretations of others. (experts, authority, etc.)BTW, I already agreed concerning autism (117). So please give credit where credit is due.I've lived long enough to know that experts can be right within the limits of the information available to them. I also know that scientists can be wrong, peers can be wrong, doctors can be wrong. Experts can be wrong. I also know that some discoveries that change the way we do things today were not considered viable by their peers.The average person gets mixed signals. I have an illustration in mind, but no time to type it right now.

quote:

---

But the point you're either ignoring or just not getting is that science is still the best method we have for figuring out the way the world works.

---

Never said it wasn't.BTW my issue in this isn't concerning vaccines, it's just general. My issue is with being told one MD is right and another is wrong or one study is right but another is wrong etc., etc. It doesn't matter whether it is vaccines, surgery, supplements, etc.

quote:

---

Okay, so let's say you're an average person getting mixed signals. The answer is to listen to the experts. The real experts, not the self-appointed ones with their own websites or who publish in their own journals.

---

Who are the real experts available to the average person concerning medical issues?
Who do you think we're getting the mixed signals from?I've disagreed with doctors plenty before web sites came around.Since my daughter's birth was covered under the military, I had five different doctor's to deal with during the pregnancy. Four missed the fact that there was a problem, but the fifth caught it.There are dentists who say wisdom teeth should come out. Others say no need unless there is a problem and there are many ideas of what constitutes a problem.Are those not our experts? If they are, then what makes one practicing doctor right and one wrong?

I'm sorry I'm so inept at English that you people really, really, really, really, can't comprehend me.Read the sentence, it has nothing to do with what I require. The average person does not have first hand access to experiments or studies. We are at the mercy of the interpretations of others. We are trained to take "experts" at their word. An expert is someone who has training. MDs, NDs, Nutrionists, etc. have training. We have been programmed.Watching the experiments or studies first hand, would be hard evidence and would probably leave little to the imagination. Unfortunately the average person doesn't have that option. The average person is at the mercy of the interpretations of others. Personal experiences factor into how we deal with those interpretations.BTW, if you assume that I divulge every little detail of how I make my healthcare decisions or that I have to justify them to you or this forum, you are incorrect.

Maybe I've just spent too much time in my life finding ways around brick walls to just cave because something doesn't go as planned. A study or experiment is very specific. Closing one avenue doesn't negate all the other avenues to be investigated. Did a study or experiment address my particular issue? Does it negate one avenue and leave others open? You don't wish to take into consideration McGarey's work, I do. You provided nothing that showed that castor oil packs are dangerous.

quote:

---

So forgive me if I don't really trust that you would have no problem giving up your preferred belief if you could see an experiment first hand. I really doubt that it would make any difference.

---

That's your prerogative, but you would be wrong.What you miss is that if the packs don't work for me, I won't use them, just like Midol (which doesn't work for me). Risk factor is another key. Castor Oil is GRAS per the FDA. If it truly can't get through the skin, then there is no harm in someone trying it for themselves. IOW, first hand information.You keep saying think, but seem to be annoyed when I want to look at possibilities. Just because my thinking doesn't follow the same path as yours, doesn't mean it's wrong. We've had different experiences in life which equip us with different information.Remember: you do as much research as you can on your particular problem(s), and you see how they are to work with, and if what they do and advise you to do works.

quote:

---

What I asked for in the OP of that thread, and you never actually provided, was to be shown that castor oil packs worked.

---

Obviously I don't understand what is necessary to "show" you that something works over a written forum. In an effort to learn, you have the floor. Show me how it is done.Show me that Midol Menstrual Complete works.

You've shown me that it should or could work given what you found on at least two of the active ingredients, but you haven't shown me that Midol does work.BTW, the pubmed links didn't show your findings.

quote:

---

I don't understand what your objections are, PD.
If I've shown you that the active ingredients in Midol work as intended, then why are you balking at the idea that Midol works?

---

No objections just observation.You've shown me that two of the active ingredients when tested separately on people have been shown to do what they are supposed to do. They work.So going with that information, Midol should work. But you haven't shown me that all the ingredients together as Midol do what they are supposed to do.From the castor oil thread: So from what you've shown me Midol should work, but does it work?
How does one show that it does work?Am I correct in assuming that in an acetaminophen test, women in pain are given the drug or placebo and then asked if the pain has been relieved?

Thank you.

quote:

---

(Although, as Percy and Nator have pointed out, the same scepticism also needs to be applied to snake-oil salesmen.)

---

Although Percy doesn't believe it I do understand that.I don't hold the position that science can't be trusted. It surprises me that that is what they see. I enjoy science actually. I find experiments fascinating. Unfortunately I didn't feel they wanted to actually discuss the science, but wanted the opposition to quietly accept the supposed consensus regardless of the practical issues.Between public affairs and secretarial, my skills have put me in high level areas of government and business and privy to info that doesn't get written down or made available to the public. That's why I said I understand why decisions are what they are at the national and corporate levels.If they want people to avoid the snake-oil salesmen, then they need to provide the tools to help them see the science and not the politics or hype. If the snake-oil salesman is misrepresenting a scientific study, then show how he is doing that and why his conclusions are wrong.Implying that all who stray from the traditional are quacks, doesn't show anyone anything and isn't looking at the science. I really wanted them to get down to the science.Unfortunately a debate isn't a place to discuss possibilities. It's pick a side and hang on. In some of these I've hung on to try and get a better answer, but to no avail.Since I've worked in sales, public affairs, and recruiting; I know how to make a sows ear look like a silk purse.I do appreciate your explanation of how science works in the real world.

quote:

---

Given this 5 decades of study, can you give me any good, reasonable explanation for why you are finding it difficult to accept that Midol works better than placebo at relieving cramps?

---

Why do you persist in creating a negative position for me?In Message 49 you stated: What I asked for in the OP of that thread, and you never actually provided, was to be shown that castor oil packs worked.In Message 50 I asked that you show me how it is done. In your first response the links didn't work, so I only had what you wrote to respond to. What I saw was that by using what we do know about two of the ingredients we could extrapolate that Midol should work. I didn't disagree with that.Now you have provided a study that shows that acetaminophen and caffeine "work". So again, from the studies done on two of the ingredients we can extrapolate that Midol should work. I don't disagree with that either.So extrapolation is an acceptable means of showing that something works, correct?Now tell me whether scientists test all plants, seeds, etc. for medicinal potential or do they focus on those that according to human use supposedly have medicinal properties, see if they do what is claimed, and then try to figure out how it works and find the active ingredient, etc.To answer your questions, I have to know what is acceptable. So far what I've provided has been deemed unacceptable.

quote:

---

Nator is trying to cite scientific studies for you, and you can still say this? If you want to have scientific discussions then ask some scientific questions instead of making accusations of bias and malfeasance.

---

Please don't confuse me with others. You and Nator seem to have difficulty separating my actual position (if even presented) and my presenting some of your opposition's issues.I feel that I tried to ask questions. Since I'm not a scientist by trade my attempts may have been clumsy.

quote:

---

PD writes:

​

Since I've worked in sales, public affairs, and recruiting; I know how to make a sows ear look like a silk purse.

And this skill is unique to mainstream medicine and is completely absent from naturopathy? Which isn't regulated by the FDA and doesn't have laws and regulations governing claims?

​

It is invalid to project bias and malfeasance only onto the side you disagree with. People are people everywhere. When you begin making the same demands of naturopathy that you do of mainstream medicine then your own rather extreme bias won't be so evident.

---

Sigh! Since I was addressing snake-oil salesmen, what part of that sentence dealt with bias or malfeasance?I feel the big problem is you're either confusing me with someone else or haven't really read or comprehended what I've written. If you can't remember what my personal position is when given and can't remember what I agree with; then there isn't much we can discuss.

Percy,I did respond to Nator's post.The castor oil pack thread has all the info I have access to. Message 86Please pay attention to what I've written and what I'm asking for. I'm trying to figure out how or if it's even possible to acceptably answer nator.If she only accepts information one way, then I may not be able to provide her with an acceptable answer.Good grief! I'm trying to learn and you're still wielding the 2x4.

quote:

---

You know, I'm going to stop jumping through hoops...

---

As am I.You're creating a false position for me.

quote:

---

But PD, we already know that for various healthcare related things like your castor oil packs, you never required that studies showing their effectiveness for what you are using them for even existed.

---

False. You don't actually know what I did or didn't do.

quote:

---

Why do you need to see studies first hand for some things, yet simply take your Naturopath's word word for it concerning other things?

---

False. I never claimed a need to see studies first hand.

quote:

---

Lemme ask you, PD. When your ND prescribed castor oil packs, did you similarly demand to see the studies showing that they worked for precisely the conditions you were going to use them for?

---

False. Again, I never claimed a need to see studies first hand so nothing to be similar to.

quote:

---

Did it even occur to you to inquire about efficacy studies before you started undergoing the treatment?

---

Yes. As I said in Message 38: if you assume that I divulge every little detail of how I make my healthcare decisions or that I have to justify them to you or this forum, you are incorrect.Your question did not address the point of my statement in Message 24 and apparently any attempt to correct that is useless. Message 38From the Forum Guidelines page. I'm not sure why you and Percy persist in making this personal, but I'm not going to play that game.

This response includes your Message 79. I really thought your comprehension skills were better than this.What part of Message 50 did you not understand? The issue with Midol is for instructional purposes only. I figured it would be an easy one since it has been around for 90 years.When a child is repeatedly told they are doing something incorrectly, at some point they should be shown what is considered to be the correct method.You've created a fictional character out of miscomprehension and apparently correcting you is useless.I've been attempting to use your own criteria to support/investigate/research an opposing view. Unfortunately, when I try to understand what is expected, I meet with resistance.If you wish to continue viewing me as the fictional character you've created, I'll be disappointed. Needless to say I won't respond. I don't have to defend what you've created.Edited by purpledawn, : Typo

quote:

---

OK, correct me then.

​

What did you actually do?

---

Nice trick.You create a false statement and you have the audacity to require specific personal information for me to "clear my name".The castor oil thread was not about analyzing my personal choices. It was about whether castor oil packs work or are quackery.

quote:

---

Then what did you mean when you said the following:

​

quote:

---

Watching the experiments or studies first hand, would be hard evidence and would probably leave little to the imagination. Unfortunately the average person doesn't have that option. The average person is at the mercy of the interpretations of others. Personal experiences factor into how we deal with those interpretations.

---

---

I meant exactly what it said. My statement dealt with the idea that the average person is at the mercy of battling experts. It has nothing to do with what I personally require or demand in any given situation.Jumping to the conclusion that I personally need to see studies first hand for some things, yet simply take a Naturopath's word for it concerning other things is false. You have no idea what I require for my personal decisions from either side.Why do you have the need to make this about me personally? It is difficult for someone to remain emotionally uncommitted or detached when you are trying to publicly criticize their personal life. It's even more frustrating when you're creating a false personal position and expecting the person to defend your illusion. That's what I mean by making it personal.Making things personal is a sales tactic, as well as recruiting and proselytizing. Whether this is also a debating technique to frazzle one's opponent, I don't know, but I'm not playing.

quote:

---

You do realize, I hope, that you're pulling a Faith.

---

Well then just call me purplefaith, because if you used these same comprehension skills with her that you have with me, I'm starting to sympathize with her.This is the last time I will address these. If you don't comprehend this time, there's no more I can say.

quote:

---

You're treating traditional medicine with severe skepticism while being very accepting of naturopathy. This is both inconsistent and unscientific. There isn't anything remotely complex about this particular issue. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If scientifically supported medical claims deserve extreme scrutiny, then so do the claims of naturopathy.

---

Message 4 of the Holistic Thread. Message 81Message 110Message 117I can't go through everything I've ever said, but I don't see severe skepticism for one side vs the other.

quote:

---

The issue isn't that you questioned Midol, as you seemed to imply I was saying. The issue is that you're questioning Midol but not castor oil packs. This is the basic question Nator asked way back in Message 35: why the extreme bias against traditional medicine while embracing naturopathic claims. I can only guess that there is something significantly appealing to you about claims of being "natural".

​

From you Message 96
Why don't you drop the indignance and just address the question: Why are you subjecting Midol to extreme scrutiny and not castor oil packs? That's what you're doing, we're not making this up. It's both inconsistent and unscientific. Why the double standard?

---

Good God Percy it has nothing to do with Midol. Pick whatever you damn well please! The point was to demonstrate to me how to show on a written forum that something works. I figured Midol was out there in the age range with Castor Oil packs, sorry it was too difficult.

quote:

---

If you really believe I'm "creating a fictional character" when I say that you're placing far more stringent requirements on traditional medicine than on naturopathy then just let me know and I will quote you from your own messages. I am not making up the things you said.

---

Go for it! My question would be did you actually comprehend what I said.

quote:

---

If the only knowledge you accept is knowledge you gain firsthand, then there is very little knowledge you'll ever accept.

---

My comments in Message 24 and Message 38 are not referring to what I accept or don't accept personally. Get over it!

quote:

---

The problem isn't that I didn't understand your Message 50, rather it's that I did. When you say, "Show me that Midol Menstrual Complete works," why don't you also say, "And show me that castor oil packs work."

---

Why would I ask nator to show me that castor oil packs work, when that is what she is asking me?Quite frankly, you're bordering on harassment concerning these personal issues. The worst part is you're harassing me to address what I haven't said. Back off Percy! Get out of my personal space.