One of the issues that separates medical science from the rest the sciences is that pseudo-science is rarely given equal billing with science.
The opinions of astrologers do not accompany the findings of astronomers. Advances in chemistry are not reported with commentary by alchemists. But so often pseudo-science and pseudo-medicine is reported along side real medicine as if they are equivalent.
They are not.
Case in point: Beyond the Flu Shot: There’s more than one way to boost your immunity this cold and flu season.
The article starts with a discussion of the flu vaccine as a way to protect yourself and as a moral responsibility to protect others:
“Immunization isn’t just about me, it’s about the people around us … The people who can get a flu shot should to protect the people who can’t.”
And they go down the rat hole of wackaloon pseudo-medicine.
hypnotherapy can boost your immune system.
Anytime a provider ways they can boost your immune system, ignore them. You can’t. The only thing what will be boosted is their income.
Then they talk to a acupuncturist and naturopathic physician, who uses homeopathy (including nosodes), herbals, and acupuncture to boost the immune system while actively advising against the flu vaccine because
western medicine rarely gets the right variation of the flu, but they fill the shots with toxins, preservatives, and variants of the flu that don’t actually exist in nature… It’s all very toxic, people get really sick from that.” He cites his father getting pneumonia from the vaccine as a key example.
An excellent example why ND’s should not be allowed to be primary care, or any care, providers.
And then suggest reiki to boost immunity including self reiki:
Practicing Reiki on yourself is just as simple as putting your hands on a part of the body that needs the most help.
Insert your own inappropriate comment here.
At least they did not talk to a chiropractor.
Naturopathy, acupuncture, reiki and hypnotherapy offer nothing for the prevention influenza and only serve to put patients at risk by legitimizing worthless interventions.
The article implies that the opinions of pseudo-medical providers who offer only worthless pseudo-science is the same as real medical providers.
While confusion still surrounds the question of the flu shot, and disagreements arise between alternative and traditional medical professionals,
This false equivalency can only harm patients. But I should not be surprised. Given the infiltration of pseudo-science into most of the major medical systems in the US, why expect anything else?