Guys my new family doctor told me that acupuncture works and

Check personally if it works or not

>>9003197
You don't write angry letters to pilots saying "You're flying at an angle, straighten out god dammit!"
They know their job and do it well.
Unlike big toxin factories.

>>9003189
>chiropractor

If the chiropractor is properly trained then they can be amazing when you have something "out of place" that's causing a shit load of pain. I can't speak for the acupuncture shit and I'd never do it because it is invasive. The last time I went to a chiropractor was after lifting lots of stone, the next morning I went to wash my hands at a sink that was too low and "POP!" went my back. I was able to get in the same day to a chiropractor and he realigned the problem. It was murder driving there, but everything was perfectly fine when I left.

>>9003197
That is an incorrect simile.

>>9003197
Figuratively the US election 2016

>>9003240
Good thing you mentioned it was figuratively. Here I was thinking the US election is a plane

>>9003240
wow so this is the much vaunted /sci/ high IQ in action...amazing

>>9003189
he's totally taking a cut from chiropractor for sending customers his way, in poland lots of doctors send old people to massage therapists for fucking back pain

>>9003229
>If the chiropractor is properly trained then they can be amazing
Bullshit: your injury healed and the placebo effect made you feel better until that healing had taken place.

when it comes to chiropractors, i used to go to one whenever i had a lesion from sports or something and it would hurt like a bitch but god damn if it worked.
dunno about acupuncture but wouln't do it.
Imo, most doctors are shit because they have an economic motivation to not care that much for you.

a.k.a read a lot about this stuff yourself and consider various doctors opinions

fuck mexican "legal" medicine btw, got an unecesary operation just so the doc could shove a few big ones in his pocket.

Nothing wrong with a second opinion.

>>9003240
Really stimulates the synaptogenesis.

>>9003291
I guess you've never had a dislocated shoulder before.

File: 1437676628207.jpg (78KB, 338x305px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 338x305px

>>9003189
That pic is deceptive af. All of alternative medicine $, all of organic food $, and only a small fraction of traditional medicine $ in vaccines. Big pharma incorporates more than vaccines...

>>9003189
>Should I switch doctors?
Possibly. Ask him what he thinks is the theoretical basis for WHY it works.

If he talks about chi energy or any woo shit, then yes, switch doctors as fast as you can.

If he says he has no idea why it would work, but has seen it work in some cases and it might be worth a try, then you do not necessarily have to switch doctors. You might ask him to share with you any valid studies that suggest this nonsense works, just for lulz.

But if he recommends woo-based "medicine" again, then something is wrong with him and you should probably move on.

Whether you want to waste time and money having somebody stick needles into you for no reason is up to you.

That for acupuncture -- as far as chiropractors go, some of them are decent physical therapists. There is no real issue with using them as such, but talk to them before letting them get their hands on you -- if they believe in "subluxations" and that manipulating your skeleton and muscles can cure epilepsy, cancer, etc., run, do not walk, out of there.

File: pol is satire.png (83KB, 905x624px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 905x624px

>>9003284
yup, there's nothing to see here.
go on back now.

>>9003189
>Looks like Big Placebo does too.
poorly written
I'd be embarrassed to post something like that

>>9004090
>If he talks about chi energy or any woo shit
It's an interesting concept
Before the invention of the microscope, if you promoted the idea that microorganisms invisible to the naked eye are crawling everywhere, you'd get branded as a quack (look up Semmelweis)

>>9003189
Is your doctor an Indian?

>>9003189
Money spent = revenue, not profit

>>9004710
Believing something without evidence makes you a quack.

With hindsight you can cherry pick some situations where you could have used retarded reasoning and made up random crap and been right by pure coincidence, but you still would have been a quack. Just a really lucky quack.

>>9004727
>Believing something without evidence makes you a quack.
This definition is clearly insufficient. Quacks usually believe they have convincing evidence.

Semmelweis had some statistical and anecdotal evidence that doctors should wash their hands after handling dead bodies, but no direct scientific explanation. Just a lucky quack?

>>9004740
Statistical evidence is adequate. But yeah, he got lucky. There were plenty of doctors at that time that had conflicting ideas about how to prevent disease in hospitals, and he just is remembered because he happened to be the one that was correct.

Again, hindsight can really skew your perspective. Just because somebody is right, doesn't retroactively justify their reasoning.

>>9004745
>hindsight can really skew your perspective.
It can also provide clarity. Bloodletting was the accepted, scientific, "evidence-based" answer to infection at the time.

>>9004710
>Before the invention of the microscope, if you promoted the idea that microorganisms invisible to the naked eye are crawling everywhere, you'd get branded as a quack (look up Semmelweis)
I don't see why that's a bad thing.

>>9003189
he probably noticed you are a beta cuck that will fall for literally any meme, so he sends you to meme doctors since you have nothing at all

>>9004764
Maybe there's a "chi scope" just waiting to be built.

>>9004710
>an interesting concept
You know what's REALLY interesting? The concept that disease is caused by demons from Hell who torment you for your sins!

That's even more interesting than the concept of humors. I mean, if we're judging "medical" treatments based on how interesting they would be if they weren't made-up bullshit...

>>9004727
They do believe they have convincing evidence. They are wrong. They do not actually have it.

>>9004944
was meant for
>>9004740

>>9003189
Medical """"""science"""""" is just developing theories after heuristics / statistical correlations. Just because we can't explain acupuncture doesn't discredit it.

>>9004756
Wait-- are you arguing that blood letting is a great, evidence based idea? Or that evidence is not necessary to believe something and you should just believe every quack idea because there might be some evidence later?

I'm not sure what position you are advocating.

>>9004947
No, but the fact that when you do actual statistical analysis of patients, it is shown to have no effect -- THAT sort of discredits it.

Protip: "It worked for this one guy a friend of mine knows" is not convincing evidence. We'll leave it as an exercise for the student to figure out why.