But I am fiercely proud of the model I have helped to develop, and I think it is the most valid model in the CAM professions, and one that fills an important need in the community.
-
-
To close, I'd like to shout out a few authors that helped me to develop this model.
@AlanLevinovitz,@JHowardBrainMD,@AliceDreger, Michael Cohen (not the one in my friends list),@CochraneLibrary,@drdadsays, Gordon Guyatt, and@ChooseWiselyCA, among others.3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @drbrignall @RobertKStarr and
There are plenty of quacks with an MD after their name. I’d take someone with an ND, who follows the evidence, over Dr. Oz and his ilk. Because that’s what it’s about. I’ve never seen Matthew post anything I’d disagree with and he’s a fierce advocate for vaccines.
4 replies 2 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @JHowardBrainMD @AliceDreger and
But M.D.s are NOT TRAINED to be quacks like N.D.s (e.g. required to learn and believe that homeopathy is real). Oz is the exception that proves the rule for M.D.s just as Hermes is the exception that proves the rule for N.D.s
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Display_Geek @JHowardBrainMD and
^ This. I don't understand the argument "Some MDs are quacks, so that's why I'm going to see an ND, who was trained in pseudoscience."
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @RobertKStarr @Display_Geek and
NDs may be trained in pseudoscience. Some end up rejecting that. Not many it seems. I only know Matthew from twitter. But based on this, he understands evidence as well as any MD I know. I imagine in real life he inspired a lot of people to adopt healthy lifestyles.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @JHowardBrainMD @Display_Geek and
I understand that you're trying to be supportive, but this reads like parody.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RobertKStarr @Display_Geek and
I’m not trying to be supportive. I’m trying to be honest. If you can find a pseudoscience statement Matthew has made, do that and I’ll call him out on it. If you can’t do that, then what’s your point?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
-
Replying to @RobertKStarr @JHowardBrainMD and
There are CAM treatments with evidence behind them. Those are the ones he supports.
5 replies 1 retweet 4 likes
This gets into one of my favorite topics, how there should be no such thing as CAM. There are medical treatments that are scientifically proven; scientifically unproven; or scientifically disproven. "CAM" consists largely of the last 2.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @tarahaelle and
Treatments that are scientifically demonstrated to work and be safe cease to be "alternative" or "CAM" or "integrative" and become simply "medicine." "Integrative medicine" is the "integration" of quackery with science-based medicine.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @tarahaelle and
In a perfect world, but not in this world. Even though it is in guidelines, does primary care use DASH diet per algorithm like meds for hypertension? And I think folks immediately think modalities when they hear CAM. I believe visit model is way more important to popularity
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.