Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Originally posted by Velvet1
**********
You know, this is your first reply that genuinely made me smile in good way.
Answer: Nope! 
Reason: Not what you think - I don't have time today. BUT, never say never soo...I'll bite.
I will start a foundational ball rolling though with Q's that you and I already know the answers to, but are relevant in your proposed debate.
1) In order to pass the USMLE, how many of the block MCQ's are dedicated to alternative medical knowledge and application?
It varies year to year and topic to topic. No two USMLE exam years are the same. For instance, anatomy was previously a miniscule (if not absent
entirely) portion of the USMLE, but has been making a resurgence in the last two years. CAM (complementary and alternative medicine) isn't a discrete
section, rather, it is mixed into other topics, such as renal pathophysiology, neoplasia, etc.
2) Same for 9 clinical case simulations - if you presented a well known and positively researched alternative course of treatment only, would
you pass 'without' also cross referencing a classic stock treatment programme?
Yes, you would pass. If you are referring to USMLE Step 2, they accept any treatment that had been verified as medically and ethically sound, which
includes many alternative treatments such as acupuncture and green tea, for starters. Green tea is a wonderful CAM for lymphoma, in conjunction with
modern treatments.
3) How many, once licensed can and do cut through the tightly controlled use of alternative medicines, within the general system, without
invalidating insurance claims or getting sacked? This is getting even more tight under the new Codex Alimentarius rules governing many alternative
medicines.
The Codex has absolutely nothing to do with how doctors prescrbine anything. It simply requires clear packaging for mineral/herbal supplements. Also,
insurance companies, by and large, love paying for alternative therapies as they often are much, much, MUCH less expensive than standard
treatments.
If you also practice personally researched positive alternative medical routes (?), then you are admiral, but certainly not the norm and are
usually to be found in private practices.
Most doctors I know prefer to either allow or suggest some pain-relieving or symptom-relieving alternative therapies. I guess my anecdote cancels out
yours.
When I debate a topic. Unless I say otherwise I am always using a
general-specific pattern to any argument.
If you are unfamiliar with this standard debating principle (or RFAS
Rhetorical Functions in Academic Speaking) from reasoning and being reasonable, then I suggest you take time to learn, if you want to be taken
seriously in your opinions, especially by sage contributors and lecturers.
Does that same debate pattern require you to ignore counter-arguments and babble on about topics not related to the matter at hand?
**********
hmm Reasonably constructed, albeit ambiguous answers from you, but not the 'really on the ball' ones I was looking to debate, unfortunately.
I do however admire your inclusion of alternatives (quite rare actually, especially in Gov practices in the UK) but only if you really understand how
and why they work. This can only be achieved by setting up your own personal research projects within general or private practice. There are still
many grants available for this work, if you are not super rich?
It has been many, many years since I debated with a generally reflective thinker against a truly analytical one, and you have demonstrated to me why
that is.
Peace!
