Bashing therapies

[Guest guest]

When anyone quotes the scientific literature even if shows failure,

or states their own contrary experiences, or lays out their rationale

why a therapy might not be the best choice, this is

constructive. The concerns might prove to be off the mark, but

honest science has a way of zeroing in on the reality. To perceive

this process as " knocking " or " bashing " a therapy could indicate a

reflexive defensiveness, an emotional/financial investment, a fragile

ego, or perhaps an unyielding philosophy/indoctrination. All real

science welcomes thoughtful presentations of weaknesses in a

questionable view that is posited even if the counter argument is

exposited in a dry or wry manner. People tend to be blind to holes

in their own theories and this is part of the reason for the

existence of the peer-review system.

Both conventional and alternative medicine are rife with fantasists

and ideologues. They can often be spotted by their insistences, by

their defensiveness, by their slipshod arguments, by their

excitability, or by their seething rabidity. There are subscribers

to this list who are trained in science or gifted in logic; they

really should consider posting more often.