The Dichotomy Of Testing

I’m often left annoyed by the attitude people hold towards the concept of testing. This can refer to any number of scenarios of course, but in specific I’m talking today about the attitude I’ve seen a lot of lately around testing in medicine, and in it’s bitch-sister, the mighty borg that is alternative medicine.

Those who subscribe to the alt-med end of things are quick to dismiss things like vaccinations and medications as being “untested”, or not tested well enough to satisfy their fears. Of course, nothing gets through FDA approval without having been rigorously tested, so this argument seems ludicrous. Obviously if we are talking about an off-label use of a medicine or protocol then there’s some truth to be found, but this is generally not the case.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Being concerned that the things we put inside ourselves are safe is just good practice. And it’s a practice we’ve had instilled in us for ages, with programs like Mr. Yuk and those adorable Don’t You Put It In Your Mouthmuppet kids. I for one want to know that the medicines I’m getting are “safe”, or at least stand a reasonable chance of not causing me brutal side effects. But there is no magic. Nearly anything we take into our body can have a harmful reaction, and those things that do not have that reaction generally don’t have any curative powers either.

During conversations around both the H1N1 and HPV vaccine, I had anti-vax friends put forth the allegation that these vaccines were not thoroughly tested because there was no way to guarantee that they didn’t cause the one-in-a-million reactions like Dystonia, which was later found to be a brilliant red herring. This is ultimately an unfair argument. Without testing millions of doses on millions of people, we will never see the one-in-a-million reactions, and when you’re testing in such quantities, that’s not testing. That’s doing.

However, this argument is not unique to medicine. Many perfectly natural products that are sold in stores everywhere have potential side effects that can be fatal to a small subset of the population, and these reactions may well have not been caught in¬†any previous¬†testing. I’m thinking specifically of things like allergic reactions, which from what I’ve seen (and I’m no expert in the subject) appear to¬†have the potential to be cumulatively reactive; the more one who suffers the allergy is exposed to the allergen, the more severe their reaction becomes. Peanuts (those obvious products of Big Pharma)¬†are like this if I’m not mistaken. People who have allergies often have an insignificant reaction at first, and the reaction grows more severe each time until you’re carrying an epi-pen and scanning labels out of fear of your airway collapsing.

A lot of it is tied to what I would call an alt-med version of the Beautiful People myth. The idea is that brilliant sages (get it? Sage?) have since time immemorial been treating various diseases with natural remedies. But the greedy scientists who all work for The Grand Conspiracy Of Big Pharma have plotted to maintain sickness and disease by moving us farther and farther away from nature. This is ridiculous. Yes, there have been many natural remedies that have been used for thousands of years. And during those thousands of years, the lifespan of a person was ridiculously less than it is today.

Possibly the most ignorant thing I hear from the alt-med folks is that they get unnerved by the ads on TV for the potential side effects of medicines. And I’ll be the first to admit that I find them creepy too. I remember and ad that told us that pregnant women should not take or even touch broken tablets from a certain hair growth pill. But when you think about it, it’s a good thing we know these things. Presumably, this is a pill with a lot of hormones or some rather potent chemicals and it’s good to know that it has side effects so you can properly weigh the pros and cons of using the stuff.

By contrast, the alt-med people honestly believe that their products can do you no harm. These are natural solutions, and people have been using them for so long, so they must be safe, right? Well, not exactly. But with so little in the way of actual testing data to draw from, there’s no understanding of what side effects we’re talking about. If a natural product existed to cause spontaneous hair regrowth, and I’m adequately certain that there is no such product, it would unvaryingly have a slew of major reactions. This is because hair growth is triggered by hormone changes in the body. Either the solution would have to have hormones or something that triggers the hormones to increase their levels. Either way, we’re talking body chemistry, and messing with that is never a walk in the park. But would it wind up adequately tested and with all the appropriate warnings? No. Which is the worse scenario?

Recently, I got in an argument with my father about alternative medicine, and he brought up the amazing fact that cancer could be destroyed with sodium bicarbonate. My immediate reaction when I heard this was laughter. But being a good skeptic, I had to dig a bit deeper. I read the article by Dr. T. Simoncini that makes this allegation, and it is frighteningly laden with comments that should send shivers running down the spine of anyone reading it. This is an article by an oncologist making outrageous claims such as:

In the plant world, cancers are caused by a fungal invasion, and it is possible to argue that the same thing happens in human beings. Fungi are always involved in cancers: they are found both in vivo and in the post-mortem examination.

However, scientists believe that they develop after the onset of the illness. My opinion is that they come before it: they produce the cancer, blunt the immune system and then invade the entire organism.

Each type of cancer is caused by fungi of the Candida species, as also referenced by other research, and the histological configuration is a result of the defence reaction of a tissue against the invasion. In time, the tissue gets exhausted and produces only undifferentiated cells.

A cancer could be termed a ‘solid abscess,’ where the colonies form the centre, and host cellular reaction is all around.

It is possible to argue? My opinion is? Are you kidding me? These are people’s lives we’re playing with, and you’re basing your argument on a hunch? And there is nothing more than testimonial evidence¬†on the part of the¬†author to justify that this opinion is valid.

I don’t care if he’s a doctor. I don’t care if he’s being silenced for his radical views on cancer by the established chemo-peddlers. I want to see evidence, and evidence that has been rigorously tested. But none is forthcoming.¬†And this kind of woo is absolutely accepted as writ by so many people. And these are¬†the same people who claim that thousands of doses on human test subjects in labs using methodologically sound test practices does not constitute enough testing for a vaccine.¬†I see.

So what sorts of issues might the good Doctor Bicarb have missed? Well, the IGZ (Netherlands Health Inspectorate) sent two experts to look into this, and they were pretty clear on their opinion:

The IGZ concludes that the administration of sodium bicarbonate even has risks for patients with high blood pressure, patients with diseases of lungs, heart, or kidneys and for patients with cancer. This is certainly the case if a number of specific blood levels are not monitored daily before, during and after the treatment. The balance of the body can become completely disturbed when large amounts are administered. In severely ill patients, this may lead to organ damage. In sick people, there is in fact irresponsible health care if this product is administered without monitoring.
(taken from http://www.cancertreatmentwatch.org/reports/simoncini.shtml)

And that’s just one example. The truth is that I’m certain there are some brilliant cures hiding in the alternative medicines, and all that needs to happen is valid testing to ensure that we’re on the right path. But the assertion that any given remedy is effective has got to be backed up. But the alt-med crowd miss the bus on this one. They’re too busy arguing about the grand conspiracy of Big Pharma to notice that the real threat to them isn’t autism, it’s untested and potentially unsafe natural remedies.

And that’s the dichotomy. They want science to have a perfect record of no side effects and absolute effectiveness, but they don’t hold their own magic tinctures and memory-enabled water to the same standard.

Jim