Archive for October, 2007

Hi there,

My recent blog on HolisticDoctorOnLine has created quite an uproar of comment, especially on Ecadamy, a business networking forum, where it was entitled "Critics of complementary medicine are arrogant and close-minded".

As the subject of evidence-based medicine is relevant to animal health also, I have copied it in full here:

At last! some rare signs that I am not alone!

I have found two posts on the PULSE website that make my heart sing.

A recent survey of 200 GPs shows that 56% either provide or recommend (like me) complementary therapies.

I insist on calling them complementary therapies rather than "alternative" as is used on the site – it is essential that science and therapies work hand in hand to help people through illness to wellness and a degree of self-healing.

Acupuncture was recommended by 40%, homeopathy by 11%. The summary does not discuss osteopathy, which I feel is also more commonly recommended (as those GPs with a  purely left-brained mindset can see how it "could" work so more likely to recommend it than, say, homeopathy).

The comments on the page are, unfortunately, back to the traditional arrogant scientific view of "it’s just the placebo effect" and "poor deluded patients, imagining an effect".

Then, amongst the links to the debate to ban all complementary therapies on the basis of lack of evidence-base (you mean, like appendicectomy and paracetamol?), I found the most wonderful article by Dr Michael Dixon from Devon – a fellow – thinker, he has put into words exactly my thoughts.

What a man; like myself he thinks that, maybe, "Critics of complementary medicine are arrogant and close-minded". I had noticed this myself; my patients are so relieved when they find they can talk openly with me about their use of herbal and homeopathic medicine. If at least 60% of the general population use or have used complementary therapies, it suggests to me that the scientists are in the wrong for ignoring and trivialising this.

I would like to point out here that I have spent 4 years in pure scientific research in physiology and pharmacology, and have been trained in the "art" of pulling apart scientific papers, as well as having been on the receiving end. With that experience behind me I feel that a.) evidence based medicine is an appropriate way to distinguish between two drugs to be used for the same problem. b.) No amount of large trials will convince the sceptical scientists that complementary therapies work (as I have already seen that they/ we can pull apart any research anyway). c.) As complementary therapies work at least partly at a holistic level involving the individual in self-healing, randomising patients will not demonstrate an effect anyway – this does not mean the placebo effect (as scientists devalue anything with that term) but the self-healing effect, which should be made use of by each of us in health care (patients and therapists alike).

Dr Dixon’s post is so close to my feelings, I copy it in full below (and wish there was a facility on Pulse for me to register my support for him).

Read the rest of this entry »

Hi Naturally Healthy People!

I have just seen an important bit of info on the Net.

Dr Carol Osborne, a vet in the US who writes a regular blog as well as excellent articles, has picked up on changes in the recommended vaccination schedules for dogs and cats in America, agreed by all the US veterinary schools.  The full post can be seen here: http://www.carolonpets.com/blog/cats/general-health/vaccination-newsflash/#comment-120

She writes:

NEW PRINCIPLES OF IMMUNOLOGY

“Dogs and cats immune systems mature fully at 6 months. If a modified live virus vaccine is given after 6 months of age, it produces an immunity which is good for the life of the pet (ie: canine distemper, parvo, feline distemper). If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralize the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. The titer is not “boosted” nor are more memory cells induced.”

Not only are annual boosters for parvo and distemper unnecessary, they subject the pet to potential risks of allergic reactions and immune-mediated hemolytic anemia. “There is no scientific documentation to back up label claims for annual administration of MLV vaccines.”

Puppies receive antibodies through their mother’s milk. This natural protection can last 8-14 weeks. Puppies & kittens should NOT be vaccinated at LESS than 8 weeks. Maternal immunity will neutralize the vaccine and little protection (0-38%) will be produced.

Vaccination at 6 weeks will, however, delay the timing of the first highly effective vaccine. Vaccinations given 2 weeks apart suppress rather than stimulate the immune system. A series of vaccinations is given starting at 8 weeks and given 3-4 weeks apart up to 16 weeks of age. Another vaccination given sometime after 6 months of age (usually at 1 year 4 mo) will provide lifetime immunity.

Read the rest of this entry »

Kidney disease in dogs is increasingly commonly recognized, as our pets grow older & more tests and treatments become available.

The kidneys are important for the excretion of waste, obviously, but also for maintaining blood pressure and the balance of water and salts in the blood and in the body as a whole.

The bladder and urinary system are very well equipped for excluding infection, not least by the natural beneficial bacteria in the system which help to prevent colonization by pathogenic (infective) bacteria.

Nowadays, dogs living to an older age are more likely to develop renal failure – just as is seen in cats and indeed in humans.

Read the rest of this entry »