thoughts on alternative medicines

[Lord Zentei]

My question is, when someone takes an alternative medicine which is clearly quackery (for this purpose lets ignore those ones which have some anecdotal evidence and deserves a proper clinical trial to decide whether it really works), should we just shrug and watch natural selection in action, or do we need to do something about combating the practioner of said quackery. Or do we do both?

We combat the practicioner of said quackery, always. We might as well argue that we should watch "natural selection" in action by not rescuing a drowning man simply on the grounds that he is drowning because of his own stupidity. It is simply not a moral position to take. Also, I second the points that smarts are learned and that "do no harm" also encompasses the preventation of acceptance.

if there's a failure here, it's been the erosion of public faith in medicine over the last 20 years, and I personally think that the industry has no one to blame but itself, and particularly the drug companies.

That is probably true, though we should not shy away from combatting ignorance at every turn. Actually, if the pharmasutical companies are not using honorable methods in testing their medicines, then they are just as much guilty of quackery and need to be dealt with accordingly.

[Darth Wong]

The pharmaceutical companies are rife with dishonesty. They grossly exaggerate the cost of bringing drugs to market, they take credit for R&D spending which is actually subsidized heavily by the federal government, they make a tiny modification to a drug in order to get a new patent and then they bribe physicians to prescribe the new drug (even though a generic clone of the old one would have exactly the same effect) by sending them on all-expense paid trips to "information sessions" which happen to be located in tropical locales, etc.

They also exaggerate the ease of making generic drugs. While normal drugs have to go through an NDS (New Drug Submission) where they perform clinical trials for efficacy and safety, generics do not get to simply copy their formula and manufacturing method which were submitted to Health Canada for the original NDS; they only know the active ingredients and must produce their own formula for an ANDS (Abbreviated New Drug Submission), complete with their own clinical trials for safety. The only shortcut they get to take is skipping the clinical trials for efficacy.

[HemlockGrey]

The pharmaceutical companies are rife with dishonesty. They grossly exaggerate the cost of bringing drugs to market, they take credit for R&D spending which is actually subsidized heavily by the federal government, they make a tiny modification to a drug in order to get a new patent and then they bribe physicians to prescribe the new drug (even though a generic clone of the old one would have exactly the same effect) by sending them on all-expense paid trips to "information sessions" which happen to be located in tropical locales, etc.

They also killed Ralph Fiennes' wife.

[Lord Zentei]

Over here, pharmacists are required to offer a cheaper alternative to the prescribed drug, provided that it has the same active ingredient and has passed clinical safety trials.

They also killed Ralph Fiennes' wife.

Who?

[HemlockGrey]

Who?

It's a joke. Ralph Fiennes plays the lead in The Constant Gardener, a movie based on a John le Carre novel in which the main character's wife is killed by pharmaceutical company.