'Guardian' latest - the word 'alternative' is a 'mental lie'

According to the 'Guardian', the very words 'alternative' and even
'complementary' are (quote) "mental lies" (unquote).

Yeah - crimethink. Mustn't have any of that, must we?

If one had to differentiate between the 'Guardian' and the 'Times' for
someone who didn't know them especially well, a first comment might be
that whereas the latter does a lot of PR for the weapons companies, the
former does a lot of PR for the drugs companies.

No flies on you, eh, Druin, you despicable bottom-feeder... You and your
cretinous concept of "certain kinds of truth" [sic]. Some fucking
thinker you must be, eh? One day your kind of attitude - fascist through
and through - will be chucked into the dustbin of history forever...


<http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1694856,00.html>:

***BEGIN ARTICLE***

The sceptic 

St John's wort 

Druin Burch
Thursday January 26, 2006
The Guardian 

Lots of trials have shown that St John's wort helps people with
depression. Supporters of complementary medicines have been overjoyed to
discover that one of their products actually works, taking this as
universally acknowledged proof that anything that comes from a plant and
is hallowed by centuries of German tradition must be a good thing. It
isn't, and it isn't a triumph for alternative medicine. It's a success
for one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century: the randomised
double-blind controlled trial, a magnificent tool for finding out
certain kinds of truth. With something as subjective as mood, it's about
the only way of keeping our prejudices from polluting our ability to see
clearly.

In general, the trials have been supportive. But it shouldn't come as a
surprise that some of the evidence of the effectiveness of St John's
wort is confusing: the truth often is. A recent review sought out every
single good-quality study ever done. It found 26 that compared St John's
wort with a placebo, covering a grand total of 3,320 patients. If their
depression was mild, St John's wort almost doubled their chance of
feeling better. But those who had begun with worse symptoms saw less of
a result: only 10% more than with a placebo. In the 14 trials comparing
St John's wort with an antidepressant (2,283 patients in total), the two
came off pretty much the same. To add to the difficulties, preparations
of St John's wort are not standardised. That means you've no idea
whether your money is paying for the substance that the trials showed to
work. If you happen to get the good stuff, then (like any other
substance that has a therapeutic effect on the human body) it has side
effects.

People who describe themselves as "pro-life" are not trying to engage
you in debate, they're trying to suggest there isn't room for one. Terms
such as "alternative" and "complementary" are mental lies. Something
about St John's wort can help some people feel better about life, just
like willow can prevent heart attacks and the yew tree can suppress
breast cancer. Regardless of whether we understand them, treatments
either work or they don't. What's the alternative to that? Cochrane
review: mrw.interscience.wiley.com

***END ARTICLE***

-- 
banana     "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
            give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
            Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
            rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)

date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:39:01 +0000 author: banana