I’ve never seen any of the woo sites proclaiming that injuries/trauma are best treated by an application of maggots.
Maybe that’s because they’re difficult to ship via mail order (the P.O. gets really p.o.'d if the package breaks in transit).*
*likewise for shipments of shit.
Zombies seem to be pretty well debunked.
However, when Galileo introduced the telescope and described marvels such as things sticking out of Saturn or dots moving around Jupiter, tubes with bits of glass that you would look into were pretty much the territory of carnivals and magicians. That was one of the things going against early adoption.
I’m not understanding this. The breakthrough in Holland that led to telescopes - and much later microscopes - was better techniques in forming and grinding glass. Lens themselves weren’t new, of course, and I suppose some tricks could be done with them, but they had been incorporated in burning glasses and spectacles and many other things for centuries. Every educated man knew about them. I suppose peasants and lower-class city dwellers might have been still ignorant. Newton is supposed to have become intrigued with prisms after seeing their use in a traveling show, but I wouldn’t consider prisms the territory of entertainers.
How exactly were carnivals and magicians using them?
Just to clarify- he was NOT committed to an insane asylum for his theories about hand washing. He was a brilliant man, but he was also an alcoholic who showed signs of genuine mental illness.
Semmelweis demolished mystical theories of disease through a statistical approach to the problems of established medicine. He did it by empirical scientific method that confers legitimacy on findings even if nobody believes them.
You miss the point to imply that popular acceptance can prove anything right or, in his case, wrong. Good thing, too, considering 67% of Americans believe in ghosts but only 27% of conservative Democrats agree that the Earth revolves around the Sun annually {NSF survey 2012}.
Acupuncture is not an example relevant to the question of woo since acupuncture, homeopathy, and snake oil remain alternative medicine because alternative medicine proven to work is called Medicine.
Contemporary medicine uses leeches to drain blood from tissue following certain surgeries because the are efficient, not because they are rebalancing the bodies’ 4 humors, a theory promulgated by the ancient Greek Galen.
That is the very old-fashioned nonesense dismissed in the 60’s, prior to their repurposing in modern medical applications.
However, use of leeches in healing practices like acupuncture still still arises from similar ancient mysticism regarding imbalanced energies.
Note that leaches were certainly in use in the 50s, 60s, and 70s: nobody was laughing, it just was not common / rare. I think that the centres for the continued use of leaches were in Europe, (probably Eastern Europe), but that doesn’t mean that American Doctors laughed at their colleagues in second-world countries.
Although there are medical ideas that people laugh at – perhaps surgical treatment for back pain, and, the importance of dirt, would be candidates – I’ve never sean leaches considered that way in the medical literature of the 50’s-70’s.
What about meditation? In the 70’s this was the stuff of utter hilarity. Only “flakes” took it seriously. Now though, study after study has shown its efficacy for everything from lowering blood pressure to increasing productivity to improving memory and even relieving (or controlling?) chronic pain.
My favourite is the treatment for polio paralysis discovered by nurse Elizabeth Kenny. She was called a quack for decades.Her claims contradicted everything that legitimate medical science knew about the disease. Eventually, medical science came to accept that she was right after all.
I’m not sure that’s the case. Hasn’t it been a typical recuperation advice of doctors and “doctors” through the ages to “take it easy”? (referring to both physical and mental stress). I’d see that as being a close equivalent to meditation even if it isn’t formalised.
No, that’s not meditation at all. Meditation creates an intense focus and awareness of your body, mind and environment. That’s the part that does something.
When we “take it easy” we are usually distracted- reding, watching TV or sleeping. This does not have the same effect as meditation.
Meditation is particularly beneficial to people who suffer insomnia… because its a replacement for sleep.
The traditional and asian herb (vegetable, bark, etc) treatments have been re-tested in various tests of recent decades. Some of them have been found to be better than a placebo.
What you’ve described there is exactly how I’d describe a long country walk, a gentle swim or a hot bath, or a session in a sauna. Would they not be fairly close to a meditative state? They are certainly the sort of activities I’d choose were I told to “take it easy”
not woo though, herbs etc. can (and do) have an active ingredient that may have a pharmacological effect, pretty much the definition of “medicine”
That’s my opinion too. I don’t think meditation is bunkum, but it doesn’t need to be so formal and specific, especially the cross-legged chanting hippy nonsense.
It can be, but it’s not really what defines these activities. If you are focused and present and keeping your head clear, sure. But you could just as easily be mentally composing your grocery list, thinking about that novel you keep meaning to write, and wondering where you want to go on vacation.
Agreed, it is probably the “switching off” that makes the difference. If I were having a long walk in order to ponder problems at work and come to an important decision then no, I wouldn’t count that as a meditative state.
I was about to pile on and add to those saying you don’t have a clue what is meant by “meditation”, but I read this and now I have to say I think you do. Part of the problem is there are sooo many different types of “meditation”. I know that informal zen meditation has real effects TO ME and is far from nonsense, but I sure wouldn’t call it medicine and I also acknowledge that my anecdotal thumbs up for it means nothing in scientific terms. Of course, I wasn’t doing it for medical reasons, so this is pretty much irrelevant.
Actually, your own source suggests that she had gained many adherents in the medical community within a decade or so of publicizing her physical therapy methods. That’s not a very long time for a medical treatment to become accepted, especially for that period.
And it’s questionable whether the practice of exercising muscles to prevent atrophy (which had a sound physiologic basis) could ever have been “woo”.
Go 80, 100 or 200 years back and it’s not hard to find physicians and scientists holding on to what would today be seen as unreasonable and even ludicrous beliefs. It’s a lot more difficult to point to a current evidence-based practice and predict that it will be overturned by centuries-old woo.
Not surprising, as pharmacognosy is a well-accepted discipline that is important to the research of many drug companies.*
*It’s amazing how many woo advocates will note this fact, while simultaneously telling us that no one investigates herbal remedies because “they can’t be patented”. 