Hacker News Reader

Comment by rswail | Hacker News Reader

Just a comment, using the term "mainstream medical system" is a "code smell" for me when discussing medical science. Have you had your gut biota analyzed to see whether there is a basis for your inflammation issues?

Yes, "big pharma" has a lot of control, but medical research is not entirely driven by them, particularly outside of the US.

It sounds like you remade your gut biota via various paths. "Traditional" medicines are "medicines" when they get through a set of actual medical clinical trials, after which they are called "medicine".

The fact that you have given yourself some form of gluten intolerance/allergy does not exactly imply "success" in what you've done so far.

View on HN

In german speaking countries gut microbiome analysis is considered alternative medicine by many medical professionals and is actively discouraged by some interest groups. [1]

There always is a gap between medical research and application which people have different opinions on. For example when it was found out that high cholesterol was bad for you, doctors recommend patients with high cholesterol to eat less cholesterol. Later it turned out that there was little correlation between eating cholesterol and having high cholesterol. The correct opinion supported by scientific evidence was considered alternative medicine for decades.

[1] https://www.dccv.de/aktuelles/nachricht/teuer-und-sinnlos-dg...

According to the (4 year old) article there are no clinical studies showing that the gut microbiome analysis might be useful for either explaining or treating a chronic inflammation. That is pretty far from it being considered "alternative medicine"

They actively discourage its use: "Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS) rät davon ab, Stuhltests zur Untersuchung des Mikrobioms zu nutzen."

In my opinion there being no evidence in either direction does not mean that you should not try it, especially if there is no downside and you have a chronic condition.

I assumed lack of evidence + non mainstream opinion = alternative medicine. Maybe there is a better word for cases like this where there is some evidence but no clear indication of causality.

I had my gut microbiota sequenced twice. The results were not actionable at all, because there is very little knowledge about what constitutes a healthy microbiome. Those tests are great entertainment if you're curious about the subject. But that's about it.

We know that a diverse microbiome might be healthier than a non-diverse one. Exercise, eat your fibers, legumes, fruit and whole grains. Avoid processed food. Enjoy some fermented condiments. Avoid alcohol.

I totally disagree. I have found doctors to be fantastic when you have a physically obvious or life threatening injury. Broken arm? Gunshot wound? Doctors work great.

Chronic condition that has subjective symptoms at best? Doctors couldn’t care less.

My symptoms are not subjective. I lost weight, had constipation, was passing undigested food matter, had rashes all over my body, etc. But doctors still refused to investigate and told me nothing was wrong other than "yeah, you have some mild inflammation, don't eat food that bothers you".

>"Traditional" medicines are "medicines" when they get through a set of actual medical clinical trials, after which they are called "medicine".

To be fair, Tylenol almost certainly wouldn't pass clinical trials today. Selling a drug OTC that so easily causes organ(liver) damage? Ridiculous. So would most NSAIDS-- as those cause stomach bleeding even in regular clinical doses. That also would imply that companies had an interest in testing natural treatments that may not sell well

> Tylenol almost certainly wouldn't pass clinical trials today.

I've heard that said before. Is it really true? I'd like to think we'd pull it off the shelves if it were really that bad. Looks like about 250 people are killed per year from overdose (accidents only, not suicides).

NSAIDs cause quite a lot more deaths than that, but it's possible they're used more heavily than acetaminophen, I'm not sure on the usage stats.

Can you provide some references regarding the bleeding in normal doses? Honestly curious whats safer than ibuprofenum these days.

In addition most traditional medicine is centered around use of whole herbs. Lots of times there's complex processing that goes into it, but it's still something you can often just... grow. Clinical trials are extremely expensive and with the incentive system we have right now it'd make 0 sense for a company to invest in proving that something you can grow in your backyard can help treat something

The WHO on the other hand has been investing heavily in traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) in developing countries as they offer "care that is close to homes, accessible and affordable. It is also culturally acceptable and trusted by large numbers of people". Interestingly, the use and research into traditional medicine is actually increasing worldwide. The US seems to be pretty unique, even compared to developed nations, in how little it values TM. The WHO report linked below points out that 100 million Europeans, 76% of Singapore, and 86% of South Koreans commonly use TM. It also points out interesting research like:

> Another recent study indicates that patients whose general practitioner has additional complementary and alternative medicine training have lower health care costs and mortality rates than those who do not. Reduced costs were the outcome of fewer hospital stays and fewer prescription drugs (31)

Interestingly, they differentiate TM from CM. TM being a country's actual traditional medicine system and the knowledge passed down across many generations (e.g. Unani, Ayurveda, TCM, etc) and CM being more like "alternative medicine" that is not part of a country's traditional system (anthroposophic medicine, chiropractic, homeopathy, naturopathy, osteopathy, etc; think your aunt trying to sell you essential oils)

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241506096

This is not meant to be a flippant or politically-charged question… but why do you trust the WHO after their massive debacle rubberstamping China’s initial lies about COVID and legitimizing them by sending a dog and pony show to “investigate”?

Nearly everyone fucked up on COVID. Every side and opinion in hindsight was at least partially wrong.

I think people who do more for their health are generally healthier.

Whatever medicine whoever is using at the end the best way to stay healthy is exercise, good clean living conditions and a healthy diet.

No need for medicine unless you are ill

This reminds me of the Beat Poem "Storm" by Tim Minchin:

"By definition," I begin, "Alternative medicine," I continue, "Has either not been proved to work, or been proved not to work. Do you know what they call Alternative medicine that's been proved to work? Medicine."

This attitude conflating "not been proved" with "proved not" is a logical fallacy and used far to often as a reason not to do experiments in the exact cases that experiments are called for.

You've misunderstood my post. I'm not against modern medicine and "big pharma". My struggle is with these slow moving, outdated institutions that refuse to do any science or investigation at all. The mainstream medical system is bureaucracy and red tape, not science. I have done every laboratory analysis available to me. Most of the lab tests I had to order and pay for myself because doctor said "I don't think you need it, you seem fine". I had elevated inflammation markers and high levels of H Pylori and E Coli.

Yes, I probably remade my gut biota. Yes, I was shooting in the dark, because the medical system flat out refused to help me. I had doctors laugh in my face and tell me I was making things up because I was too young to be unhealthy. Is that science?

Yeah, clinical trials are needed to evaluate some traditional medicines. But why aren't those clinical trials being done? It's not like Ayahuasca was discovered yesterday. And it's not like it's hard to access. You can literally make it in your own home. I'm struggling to understand why so many people these days insist that "not doing science" is actually "science" as if science is static and we don't need to investigate anything new because we already know everything.

And as far as me giving myself gluten intolerance, fuck off. I've been gluten intolerant since these issues began, before I ever considered anything outside of mainstream medicine. I didn't do this to myself. And in fact, it's another thing that mainstream medical doctors refused to investigate. I had to order my own lab tests to confirm.

Most traditional medicines likely no better than placebo, this is why they are still traditional. Some are outright dangerous, like those that contained aristolochic acid[1].

[1] https://www.asianscientist.com/2017/10/health/liver-cancer-h...

You're saying this as if clinical trials have been done, and you know it for a fact. But there have been few clinical trials done on the traditional medicines I've mentioned. And none of them contained aristolochic acid... that seems like a very random point to make when so many pharmaceuticals also contain harmful chemicals.

Important to note, a guy boita analysis is a snapshot in time, and to make decisions with that in mind.

The best indicators of gut health are:

Minimum flatulence and burping, or at least being aware of what you put in contributes to what you off-gas; stools should be well formed, easy to pass, mid to dark brown, about the size of your index fingers and thumbs on both hands touching to form an elongated, and not malodorous.

Gut. I meant gut not guy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com