Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I hadn't realised that Homeopathy was just water with a "memory" of something in it. That re-inforced my sceptisism quite a lot.


It did seem, however, pretty reasonable to accept that these therapies generally have a positive affect despite appearing to be little more than a placebo. If the practioners choose to interpret them in specific ways then that's fine too. What does worry me is if this is taken to the extremes, as mentioned earlier, where a woman gave her child natural remedies rather than take it for standard innoculations.

Having seen the programme last night, for the first time I felt I could see the positive side of all that quackery.


I found myself comparing a relaxing hour with a kind, caring and well-meaning person who is entirely focused on listening to the patient's problems, with my recent experience at the Dulwich Medical Centre:


As usual, I wasted an hour pressing redial at 9am in order to get an appointment for 4.30pm (a full working day down the pan there), then waited twenty minutes in their reception until finally getting approximately four minutes with a doctor who says I need some blood tests, for which I will have to come back the next week (the nurse does that???).


So, another morning off work for blood tests; two weeks later (having heard nothing from them) I call them up and ask for the results.


"Oh your results are normal - we only contact you if there's something wrong".


So after a day and a half off work, and a typically demeaning experience with the NHS I'm back at square one with my mysterious ailment...

Yes, scientists did believe bleeding worked but they don't do that any more because better methods came along, it's called advancement. Imagine if they still continued to use them but they didn't actually work, then you could have a go at science.


But yes, I agree creating better conditions for the body to heal itself should be taken more seriously. When you have the flu and go to the doctors she will says take some rest, the reason being that when your body is not having to work on your limbs moving, that energy can go towards fighting the bug. Now if you went a faith healer and lay down for an hour and relax, bingo, just what the doctor ordered, you will feel better.


I think some of it comes down to how you wrap up chilling out, relaxing and re-composing yourself. Either do that with meditation, reading a nice book, a cup of tea and a chat to your mum or with a healer or all of them but please don't undermine people's trust in proven medicines when you do so.


blinder999, perhaps if ?10 million hadn't been spent on the Homoeopathic hospital refurbishment you may have had a better experience at the clinic. Maybe not, but it's worth thinking about.


[edited once]

I don't think whilst watching that any of the 'quackery' therapists tried or even considered undermining people's trust in proven medicines. Not at all. This is why I couldn't understand why Dawkins was so hell bent on protecting his precious, proven, western scientific medicines. No one was putting Flemming or Jenner on the stand!

The next time I have appendicitis I shall forego the standard 'doctor route' and opt to spend a relaxing hour with a 'kind, caring and well-meaning person'.

Mark is totally right.. alternative 'medicine' is about relaxation, which it's true can help the body to rest, recover and heal. But there are many ways to relax and they needn't involve spendng fifty quid for an hour with ET's glowing finger.

I particularly enjoyed the part where Dawkins was a little taken aback when Teressa Hale from The Hale Clinic, informed him that the Auyurvedic therapists sit a four year degree in order to practice. They have to have know their anatomy and physiology both from the Western and Eastern sides of medicine.


They didn't just learn it off the internet overnight.

MadWorld74, please stop calling it western scientific medicines. Look here: A case of ileocecal cancer associated with old tuberculosis from the National Hospital Organization Kyushu, Japan. Which is in the East. It is Eastern Science. Please don't dismiss it by saying that Dawkins is only talking about western scientific medicines. Science in the East is no longer purely this romanticised image of whispy haired old men casting wise words, they may still be whispy haired but they do have lab coats over there.

"perhaps if ?10 million hadn't been spent on the Homoeopathic hospital refurbishment you may have had a better experience at the clinic."


I don't think it would make any difference to my experience whatsoever - mostly healthy males in full employment, who aren't addicted to drugs or alcohol will never be a focus for the NHS - we merely pay for it.

MadWorld74 Wrote:

>I'm talking about the 'ancient eastern medicines' compaired to our scientific laboratory proven medicines in the west.


Christ on a bible, don't you understand that there are scientific laboratory proven medicines coming from the East as well? I even showed an example of a medical study from the East.

Is that like the ancient eastern wisdom of the Fists of Righteous Harmony. Protected by magic armour and supported by legions of the spirit soldiers they attempted to oust the West in a huge rebellion at the turn of the last century?


You have to feel for them*, humiliated by barbarians, seeing their people hooked on opium, but luckily the imperial powers' ignorant dependence on scientific devices like the machine gun and the breech loading rifle could not stand in the way of ancestral spirits, kung fu and the Chi that would give them superhuman and supernatural powers.


Doh!!


*actually not that much, they may have lost 10,000 people to futile attacks on well defended forts, but they also massacred 35,000 fellow chinese who had converted to christianity on their way there. Very spiritual!

yes and I have read it Mark, so lay off with the condescending tone of voice


I am not refering to 'scientific laboratory medicines from the east'. I am talking about medicines such as Auyurveda and Reiki. To my knowledge neither have been in a laborartory and tested on mice.


Dawkins tried said that homeopathy was alright for 'scratchy heads and sore throats'. It is his belief that ONLY western medicine is 'proper' and that all other is placebo, this is the crux of my argument.

So far it has been Monica, Citizen Ed and myself that continue to post on this thread, to try and allow others to see and think how we do. Still we continue to have our thoughts 'rubbished' by some of you boys with your wordy, weighty and a little arrogant in tone, responses.


No wonder the others have disappered and ceased posting.

I do salute your commitment to the cause, Madworld (especially as you declared you didn't want to participate in it ten pages ago hee hee). But essentially, all you've really got to go on is satisfied customers who 'swear by it'. Alternative therapists refuse to be stringently 'tested' and I think this tells most people all they need to know.

I skipped over Monica's postings as there are no spaces after commas and they give me a headache if I try to read them.

Sorry if I come across as patronising. It's just with my historian's hat on for a moment I'm amazed that 2 words seem to have a weird ability to make people think in weird ways.


Ancient, Eastern.


From a historical context there's nothing romantic about ancient times, and thank your lucky stars you didn't live then, either in the east, the west, the fertile crescent, north africa or south america.


Then Eastern. If you think the ancient west was bad, you should try the east. China made roman brutality look positively amateur, and India wasn't alot better. And as for the celts or any other pagansof the time, they didn't have some huge love in, painting each other blue and communing with the spirit world; it was a hard hard hard life, and if you were lucky enough not to be massacred by a passing celt with a bad attitude, or goth or roman, or hun or alan or vandal...blah...etc...then your life expectancy was about 30 years. Many of us would already be goners, without the chance to be having this debate.


And you know why we're living so long don't you.....

Mockney, what are you banging on about? I've watched the way you post, and you always go off on a tagent. Goths, romans and huns, yee gads man, you love the sound of your own voice!


So, Dawkins was 'investigating' alternative medicines v 'proper' medicine. Get your bum out of the history books and back on this forum!

This thread is simply called the enemies of reason. People lose their faculties of reason by equating the concepts of ancient and eastern with wisdom and spirituality.


I was merely trying to point out that that's bollocks.


If you want to keep this 'debate' as an endless cycle of one side saying:

"You have no evidence whatsoever for alternative therapies doing anything other than making people feel good about themselves (not intrinsically a bad thing)"


and the other side saying either:

"I don't need evidence, it works" or

"You ignorant people, you know nothing"


then you're welcome to do so. It was getting a bit tiresome that's all.


Funny how one side doesn't get personal, enjoy it.

My Grandma always said 'If the Jehovos come knocking, take a leaflet and send them on their way. Don't try to get any sense out of them because they're f*cking nutters.'


I expect a few good people on here would invite them in and try to convert them to athiesm. Don't bother. Even if you manage it they'll never thank you.


Brian - you're not the messiah you're a very naughty boy.

Mark - I'm not sure your east/west argument is really that helpful... in the interest of objectivity:


Modern "scientific" medicine did originate in Europe, so is Western in a sense, even though it is now practised elsewhere. But there are also practitioners of other forms of medicine throughout the western world.


Certain traditional "spiritual" medicines such as acupuncture and reiki originated in Asia, so can be said to be Eastern, even though they are now practised elsewhere. There are now also practitioners of western/scientific medicine throughout Asia.


Why is Eastern/Western such an inappropriate distinction?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...