What's BS? The ideas? The goals? The fact that CAM stands in for these? I'm well aware of the problems with these (3 and 5, say) but I think it's reasonable to say that CAM tries to bind them all up under a single label.
This is Twitter. I have an extensive body of writings going back to 2004 explaining, sometimes in excruciating detail, why I consider CAM to be a bogus term. They can't be encompassed in even a Tweetstorm. I'd start posting representative links, but I doubt you'd be interested.
-
-
Basically, CAM and integrative medicines are labels designed to facilitate the integration of pseudoscience and quackery into medicine.
-
IME, it's nearly impossible to find anyone advocating for "CAM" or integrative medicine who *doesn't* make false/exaggerated claims about it.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Come, come, now. What serious scientist would make so many assumptions about others on such limited data? Super unscientific.
Let’s try that again
“I have published extensively on this topic. If you are interested, I can share.” -
I made a conclusion based on your tone.
https://twitter.com/usnehal/status/997166028416323584 … - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Further, Twitter is never just about the person you are responding to. It is a public forum and whatever you assume about me and my interests, there are silent readers whose interests you cannot know. If you have published on the topic, it is a public service to share it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.