Choosing the Best Treatment - part three (May 20, 2014)
I’ve already recommended seeing the appropriate physician to find out exactly what your problem is (which, if I did not say so earlier, means to see a chiropractor if you have any kind of back or neck problem) and then to question him/her thoroughly.
But if you are NOT satisfied with the recommended treatment (or are not content to use it exclusively), how does a non-expert judge the value or appropriateness of a treatment that is too new to have much information available about it, that looks interesting but is controversial, or for some other reason is not a logical slam dunk? Here are a few suggestions:
1) Is it going to do me any harm? Taking 1000 mg of vitamin C every day may not help you but it won't hurt you -- unlike the same amount of zinc.
2) (a) What if it doesn’t work? Will I be worse off than before? Many surgeries fall into this category, so make doubly sure if you decide to go this route.
2) (b) What if it doesn't work? Am I just out a little time and money, or have I allowed a condition to progress to the point where other possibly useful treatments won’t work? If you are just feeling a lilttle sniffly and feverish, by all means use garlic, herbs or other treatments. But if you’ve been bitten by a tick and have a target rash around the bite, for heaven’s sake use antibiotics.
3) What is it going to cost me in terms of time and money? Don’t spend a lot of either on a treatment that hasn’t been proven to work – give it a certain amount of time and then cut your losses if it isn’t working.
4) Most importantly, what evidence IS there in favor of this treatment, and how good is that evidence? My personal rankings:
Best: Something that has been around for a while with a lot of human experience in favor of it even if there are few to no published studies. Most useful folk remedies are in this group, and if an herb really has been used for thousands of years for a particular purpose that’s a pretty strong recommendation for its use.
Next: A (often new) treatment that has some substantive evidence in its favor, but is still controversial. Glucosamine sulfate for osteoarthritis fell into this category for at least a decade.
Possibly: Almost anything that has been tried by someone credible you know personally who swears it worked great for them, as long as it passes 1) - 3) above. WARNING: YouTube videos by strangers do NOT fall into this category!
Not: “Scientific studies” by the people who are selling the thing which have not been published or which have been published in journals that no one has ever heard of. Here it can be helpful to ask: Who is pushing the treatment, and how does it benefit them personally?
REALLY Not: The already-cited YouTube video by someone who invented the treatment or by someone who knows the inventor, or a bunch of anecdotal raves on the internet by people with no last names, only initials. This one has to move up to "Possibly" before I’ll consider it.
If a treatment is controversial and you realize that you don’t know enough to evaluate the available evidence, then try evaluating the people who are doing the arguing and the legitimacy of their arguments. Of course if one side is arguing facts and one side is not, that's a dead giveaway as to which side is more credible. Regarding evaluating an argument, everyone should be acquainted with logical fallacies, and if you are not, here is a link to a discussion of them:
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html
It’s a long article, but very comprehensive, and worth reading especially if you are unfamiliar with the concept.
Do not ever forget that if a treatment does not help you, or harms you, it may not be your fault but you are still the one suffering the consequences. It’s like being killed on the freeway while having the right of way – there's not a lot of satisfaction there in having been right. So for that reason, do not ever give over complete responsibility for your health to someone else. No one can possibly take as good care of you as you can.
--dr. diane holmes
Copyright © 2014
I’ve already recommended seeing the appropriate physician to find out exactly what your problem is (which, if I did not say so earlier, means to see a chiropractor if you have any kind of back or neck problem) and then to question him/her thoroughly.
But if you are NOT satisfied with the recommended treatment (or are not content to use it exclusively), how does a non-expert judge the value or appropriateness of a treatment that is too new to have much information available about it, that looks interesting but is controversial, or for some other reason is not a logical slam dunk? Here are a few suggestions:
1) Is it going to do me any harm? Taking 1000 mg of vitamin C every day may not help you but it won't hurt you -- unlike the same amount of zinc.
2) (a) What if it doesn’t work? Will I be worse off than before? Many surgeries fall into this category, so make doubly sure if you decide to go this route.
2) (b) What if it doesn't work? Am I just out a little time and money, or have I allowed a condition to progress to the point where other possibly useful treatments won’t work? If you are just feeling a lilttle sniffly and feverish, by all means use garlic, herbs or other treatments. But if you’ve been bitten by a tick and have a target rash around the bite, for heaven’s sake use antibiotics.
3) What is it going to cost me in terms of time and money? Don’t spend a lot of either on a treatment that hasn’t been proven to work – give it a certain amount of time and then cut your losses if it isn’t working.
4) Most importantly, what evidence IS there in favor of this treatment, and how good is that evidence? My personal rankings:
Best: Something that has been around for a while with a lot of human experience in favor of it even if there are few to no published studies. Most useful folk remedies are in this group, and if an herb really has been used for thousands of years for a particular purpose that’s a pretty strong recommendation for its use.
Next: A (often new) treatment that has some substantive evidence in its favor, but is still controversial. Glucosamine sulfate for osteoarthritis fell into this category for at least a decade.
Possibly: Almost anything that has been tried by someone credible you know personally who swears it worked great for them, as long as it passes 1) - 3) above. WARNING: YouTube videos by strangers do NOT fall into this category!
Not: “Scientific studies” by the people who are selling the thing which have not been published or which have been published in journals that no one has ever heard of. Here it can be helpful to ask: Who is pushing the treatment, and how does it benefit them personally?
REALLY Not: The already-cited YouTube video by someone who invented the treatment or by someone who knows the inventor, or a bunch of anecdotal raves on the internet by people with no last names, only initials. This one has to move up to "Possibly" before I’ll consider it.
If a treatment is controversial and you realize that you don’t know enough to evaluate the available evidence, then try evaluating the people who are doing the arguing and the legitimacy of their arguments. Of course if one side is arguing facts and one side is not, that's a dead giveaway as to which side is more credible. Regarding evaluating an argument, everyone should be acquainted with logical fallacies, and if you are not, here is a link to a discussion of them:
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html
It’s a long article, but very comprehensive, and worth reading especially if you are unfamiliar with the concept.
Do not ever forget that if a treatment does not help you, or harms you, it may not be your fault but you are still the one suffering the consequences. It’s like being killed on the freeway while having the right of way – there's not a lot of satisfaction there in having been right. So for that reason, do not ever give over complete responsibility for your health to someone else. No one can possibly take as good care of you as you can.
--dr. diane holmes
Copyright © 2014