Complementary vs homeopathic medicine

Complementary and homeopathic medicine are terms that are often used interchangebly; However, there is a distinct difference between complementary medicine and classic homeopathy.

Complementary Medicine, such as the use of leeches: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12233807

Complementary Medicine, while unorthodox, can be measured empirically using scientific methodology. Conversely classic homeopathic treatments consist of typically toxic substances being diluted thousands of times over in water or alcohol. Such treatments have been proven to be ineffective and could delay truly beneficial treatments.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_2_1x_What_is_Homeopathy_.asp

The following article is what prompted me to repost my brief statement above (I originally posted it on my Facebook page):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/26/AR2009102602456.html

The debate surrounding vaccination is more complicated than CDC sometimes makes it out to be. Never the less the above referenced article indicates the dangers of not being able to differentiate complementary medicine that may well have merit with that of junk science. Classic homeopathy is clearly junk science that can have dire consequences when used in lieu of valid precautions and preventative measures.

Ks3(Keep safe, smart, strong),

JD Blackstar

Obstructive vs Constructive criticism of the Obama administration

April 20th will mark the third official month of the Obama administration. Ninety days is the probationary period for many positions and the current administration has received consistently high approval ratings. Although that analogy doesn't realistically hold with the being the elected President of the United States, it's worth noting because this very young administration appears to be one the most scrutinized ones ever. Outside of the faux pas remark made by Obama about his bowling skills, the only major mistake has been his casual dismissal of the regulation of marijuana as a viable source of income (an issue which I will address in a separate blog). That being said, Obama and his administration appear to be making a veritable attempt to address all the variables in the current economic crisis.

Some strategems and tactics are better than others. Some will work and others will fail. What appears to be truly different about this administration is that they are open to suggestions (with the possible exception that I previously alluded to). Regardless, there is a small but vociferous percentage of people, many of them politicians, who criticize the administration's politices without offering any alternative ones. Some have even publicly expressed a desire to see the administration fail. Which begs the question, is being an obstructionist anti-patriotic?

One could certainly make an argument that our economic crisis is an infinitely greater danger than extremist ideologues. Individuals and groups who, often rightfully, questioned the tactics and overall strategy of the previous administration were often villified and constantly had their patriotism questioned. Perhaps a more logical, but equally stringent criticism of the current administrations obstructionists is required. If only to spur them to either "...put up or shut up.."

Ks3(Keep safe, smart, strong),

JD

Critical thinking...aka looking out for B.S.

Let me begin by stating that my focus for 2009, in both the "real world" and "cyberspace" is espousing critical thought. Some have accused me of thinking too critically. Regardless, I have decided to, tactfully, filter my thoughts about any given subject less. Since one of my goals is to help others learn to think more critically I would be remiss by not to being forthcoming in this area. Contrary to the belief of many of the people I have encountered of late, becoming more skeptical and empirical does not inherently lead to group thought. What typically occurs is quite the opposite! I love to debate and debate in its highest form consists of clashing critical thoughts.

In any event, I'm going to share my recent encounter with one of the well known dangers of the Internet. That being unregulated online pharmaceutical sites. Admittedly, the FDA leaves much to be desired and is in desperate need of an overhaul; however, these pharmaceutical sites typically operate beyond the jurisdiction of the FDA. That means it is incumbent upon individuals and or online businesses that encounter sites like these to repudiate them like any other spam or scam site. It is impossible to eliminate these types of sites, but they can be kept in check if members of the online community treat them as the potential dangers they are.

Unfortunately, that has not been the case with a site I came across while using a reputable referral site. I won't list the URL of the referral site nor, more importantly, will I list the pharmaceutical site. In case you're wondering what dangers are held by an unregulated prescription drugs site a short list follows:

no prescription required
no oversight by a medical professional
no confirmation of the drugs potency
drugs could be expired
drugs could be placebos
drugs could be inaccurately labeled

I voiced my concerns about the site and I'm hoping the listing will be removed. Which begs the question shouldn't such a site be automatically vilified in the same manner as obvious spam and scam sites are? If one thinks critically the answer is an emphatic yes!

Ks3(Keep safe, smart, strong),

JD Blackstar