2009-07-22 17:51:14.570287+02 by Dan Lyke 1 comments
One of the hardest parts about talking about alternative health care is trying to sort out the actual useful and proven bits of conventional health care from the misinformation and shysterism that pervades health suggestions. The New York Times has a good little article on how most cancer screening is actually counter-productive.
[ related topics: Politics Health Consumerism and advertising ]
comments in descending chronological order (reverse):
#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-22 19:31:47.18413+02 by: m
Modern health care professionals as well as patients tend to improperly over rate relatively rare risks, and underweight common risks. This is a general human failing, not specifically health oriented. We might like to deny it, but there is a lot of superstition surrounding modern technology.
The most important factors in extending life are cheap and relatively easy, but have little cachet.
Yet I see individuals who violate two or three of the above, who get absolutely crazed over an estimated one in a billion chance (with a three orders of magnitude safety factor built in) of developing cancer as the result of exposure to some pesticide.
We will not edit your comments. However, we may delete your comments, or cause them to be hidden behind another link, if we feel they detract from the conversation. Commercial plugs are fine, if they are relevant to the conversation, and if you don't try to pretend to be a consumer. Annoying endorsements will be deleted if you're lucky, if you're not a whole bunch of people smarter and more articulate than you will ridicule you, and we will leave such ridicule in place.
Flutterby™ is a trademark claimed by
Dan Lyke for the web publications at www.flutterby.com and www.flutterby.net.