Hahaha clearly you know nothing of the medical world then. Living to 40 in the middle ages is like living to 120 for us. Life expectancy for humans worldwide in the 1900 was still a whopping 35. It was thanks to advancements in antibiotics to help fight infections and vaccinations to help build immunities that vastly improved our lifespans in the 1970s and up to ~60-65 years. Today, thanks to that medice further advancing, we're seeing countries getting new life expectancies such as Japan with ~84 years of age average.
Please do not insult the medical world like that again.
In the Middle Ages was the Black Death, where almost a of Europe was infected and the population was comparable to today's population. That was reduced so drastically because people kept dying of the plague.
In the 1900s there were poor work conditions thanks to a huge industrial boom that took place Mid to late 1800s, until the stock market crashed worldwide after World War 1. Mass starvation and whatnot.
After Workd War 2 and Vietnam though you're generally right about that time. Don't try to sound so ignorant of history.
Dude, you realize that doctors prescribe natural cures too, right? Those are the ones that are helping out, it's natural things like antibiotics. I mean really? Antibiotics is what saved everyone, okay? That's the only one really, all the other stuff doctors are pushing is just bad.
In the Middle Ages was the Black Death, where almost a of Europe was infected and the population was comparable to today's population. That was reduced so drastically because people kept dying of the plague.
In the 1900s there were poor work conditions thanks to a huge industrial boom that took place Mid to late 1800s, until the stock market crashed worldwide after World War 1. Mass starvation and whatnot.
After Workd War 2 and Vietnam though you're generally right about that time. Don't try to sound so ignorant of history.
Penicillin - Created in late 1920s. Not widely used till 1940s and up. One of the most important medications to all mankind that first helped in improvements to our lifespan in fights against infections.
Small Pox Vaccine - With the help of this, smallpox was eliminated from the human race and is now only found in labs. It's was the most deadly disease.
Insulin - Helped diabetics. Has saved millions of lives.
Morphine - One of the best pain relievers to date.
There's even more medicines that have changed the human race, all of which play a role in the humans advancement on this planet.
Penicillin Natural - Created in late 1920s. Not widely used till 1940s and up. One of the most important medications to all mankind that first helped in improvements to our lifespan in fights against infections.
Small Pox Vaccine Natural - With the help of this, smallpox was eliminated from the human race and is now only found in labs. It's was the most deadly disease.
Insulin Natural - Helped diabetics. Has saved millions of lives.
Morphine Natural - One of the best pain relievers to date.
There's even more medicines that have changed the human race, all of which play a role in the humans advancement on this planet.
To look at 'natural' remedies versus 'pharmaceutical' remedies as a mutually exclusive decision is just silly.
It's like asking your doctor whether surgery or lifestyle therapy is a better solution. It depends upon the person, the nature of the illness/problem, and the personal standpoint of the individual.
For starters - the main thing that started pharmaceutical industries was the synthesis and standardizing of medications frequently found in plants, bacteria, and fungi. Pharmaceutical companies fund expeditions to and studies of native peoples to see how they go about treating various illnesses and infections - then to take samples of plants, animals, or whatever is used in the treatment process to try and find a biochemical reason behind the treatments' effectiveness.
The goal of the company is to then devise proper ways to administer the drug, the safety/effectiveness of it, proper dosages, etc; as well as ways of synthesizing the drug (found in nature) in a manner suitable for mass production at effective dosages.
The reason behind this is because 'natural' substances are not really 'safe' substances... or 'better' for you.
I'll run through a list of some of the more common ones:
Foxglove (The Genus Digitalis):
All species within the digitalis genus produce a chemical compound known as Digoxin. Digoxin is a glycoside that particularly affects the cardiac system and is useful in treating various heart conditions:
You must be registered for see links
. Digoxin, however, has fallen out of favor because drugs with less volatile dosages have been developed leading to better treatment regimens.
Digoxin concentrations vary so greatly from plant to plant that it is nearly impossible to use in its natural form (unless one were to commit to developing very tight hydroponic systems that allowed strict monitoring of Digitalis phenotypes for compound variation). However, some people use the plant in teas and other such things - which is usually not a high enough concentration to cause problems - but seasonal changes in growing conditions can 'fix' that.
This is a fun plant. We're taught, in SERE (Survive Evade Resist Escape) training to recognize some common poisonous plants (and encouraged to familiarize ourselves with nasties in new regions) and dig them - whether to use them in a trap or simply to make tracking teams slow down and watch more carefully for traps. Mandrake sits as one of the "plants that will **** you up 101" training items.
To be clear - ALL members of the Solanacaea family produce a myriad of toxic and/or useful alkaloids. Mandrake just takes the hazard level over 9000 by having a very large root that serves to store all of these potent drugs. It's a plant that is flat-out legendary:
You must be registered for see links
There's some beneficial stuff in there - but it is almost impossible to use without processing. Unless you fancy playing some D&D by rolling the dice with your life.
This plant should require no introduction and should be one of the first things shoved in the face of any "it's natural therefor good" parrot. It is commonly referred to as -deadly- nightshade. Merely handling this plant has killed people. It's such a potent plant that society enacted self-preservation measures by including "deadly" in the name of the plant.
To be fair - Atropine, one of the most important drugs on the planet:
You must be registered for see links
- considered a core drug by the WHO for establishing basic healthcare.
But it's in such concentrations within most of the plants that produce it (along with other 'fun,' natural compounds) that it's insanely hazardous to use in a natural remedy.
Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum):
I'll be frank. The first couple decades of the post-apocalypse are going to see a lot of idiots claimed to stuff like this.
Potatoes, like all Solanacaea, produce toxic alkaloid compounds. Wild potatoes conatin unacceptable concentrations of solanine and chaconine. The domestic varieties we eat are controlled through breeding programs to contain less than 200mg/kg at maturation. In practice - it's usually far lower than that. However - potatoes that have turned green can contain up to 1000g/kg of these substances with certain regions of the potato containing concentrations even higher.
While the fatal dose of those compounds is relatively high in humans - the fact that a potato is a tuber and often concentrates many of these things into the root systems means that potatoes can easily become a problem if/when the controls and regulations we've enjoyed to this day give way to more 'natural' systems and put potatoes at a much more central place in our diet.
You must be registered for see links
Of course, you know there is going to be some retard who thinks the little balls growing off of the potato plant are supposed to be the potatoes (that's how it works in the Sims 3, you know). Eating any 'meal worthy' number of them would probably kill you.
The fact of the matter is that a lot of doctors 'back in the day' killed their own patients because of the natural remedies they were using. It wasn't their fault - it was just that there were many factors that were far beyond their ability to control. In most cases - the risks of the natural remedy were equal to the consequence of opting out of treatment.
People were -filthy- 'back in the day.' You were in a city, you utilized the bathroom by squatting over a bucket, and then you tossed it out the window (quite possibly without looking to see if someone was about to get shit thrown on their head). It was a considerable upgrade to society when dedicated guttering systems were built so that people could throw their shit into a trench and let the rain wash it away. Bathing was relatively infrequent (that was a lot of friggin' water to carry from the pump to your home) - and many general concepts of hygeine were only enjoyed with any kind of frequency by the nobility.
That's why cuts could be quite lethal - and is actually a huge reason behind the painstaking development of chainmail. Broken bones could be set, even internal bleeding could be dealt with by many in the older days.... but when the skin was broken - all kinds of crazy things started to happen, and people didn't exactly know why. Thus - under-armors that prevented the skin from being broken (chainmail) were developed (and quite painstakingly - rivets were driven through each ring to ensure it stayed linked).
Things improved for Americans during the colonial era (unless you were a native - then you were dealing with all kinds of insane pathogens that were literally developed in a giant cesspool called a city) - the increased elbow-room and relative abundance of resources (including running water) really improved the quality of life and reduced the lethality of many infections. Though there were some problems caused by early puritain doctors who held the belief that God made each plant look like the part of the body it was meant to 'fix.' That probably did not help patient survivability very much. Thankfully, that nonsense was largely abandoned.
Anyway .... this has all been one very long way of saying that "natural" doesn't necessarily mean "better."
By all means - there are a million and one suggested remedies involving Garlic, Onions, and other stuff along those lines. You're probably not going to go wrong with trying one of those remedies (provided it's a minor issue that does not represent the need for serious/immediate medical treatment). And if it works for you - awesome.
That said... be careful venturing into the world of "natural cures." See what studies have been done on a given cure - and definitely be sure to read up on the plants that it suggests using. Also - compare how cost-effective it is... not all 'natural remedies' are cheap, 'easy to use' or able to be bought in bulk. Further... suppliers of some of the more exotic plants espoused in natural remedies can be finicky. Chances are - if they are selling something like Gensing - it's a flat-out lie (and they contain no gensing). Gensing is ridiculously expensive as only one group of farmers has figured out how to farm the stuff and it must be harvested naturally elsewhere (and, ironically enough, China's natural reserves have been largely depleted).
So... really - the whole "natural" versus "pharmaceutical" thing is just silly. Most people out there seek some form of medical treatment far too frequently. They want a pill to fix the problem - or, now, some of them want to know what kind of compress or tincture they can make that will have them in tip-top shape in no time... and that's just not the way medicine (of any variety) works.
Penicillin was one of the first main-stream recognized and used antibiotics:
You must be registered for see links
But you can find a more comprehensive discussion about them here:
You must be registered for see links
There are some that have been produced purely through chemical synthesis - but the large portion of them are extracts from plants/mold/bacteria or modifications of those extracts to stabilize the compounds or to make the compounds more specific to what they affect (sometimes replacing oxygen atoms with chlorine or switching up the sugar/alcohol groups).
A lot of this is slated to be replaced with genetic engineering. We can have corn that concentrates antibiotic compounds in the leaves and stalk (leaving the corn, itself, unaffected) while we process the stalks for medications while reducing the cellulose to some form of biofuel or in the production of Cellulose NanoCrystals (which can easily replace carbon fiber in most applications while being much cheaper).
Unfortunately - part of the reason biofuels are so expensive is because of the lack of marketable byproducts from them. Gasoline would be -much- more expensive if it was the only thing that was being used out of a barrel of oil. But as it stands - many industrial lubricants, tar for roadways, polymers for plastics etc come out of that refinement process - all of which can be sold along with gasoline.
Which is why biofuels are not market sustainable at this point in time - there's not a huge industry developed around the processing of various forms of cellulose (since only certain portions of cellulos fibers are useful for CNC production - the others can be turned over for alcohol production... which can be done by genetically modified bacteria that can also produce a number of other compounds - perhaps even some hydrocarbon chains that are still essential for plastics but nearly impossible to obtain without refinement of crude...)
anyway - I'm straying from the initial topic considerably.
Penicillin was one of the first main-stream recognized and used antibiotics:
You must be registered for see links
But you can find a more comprehensive discussion about them here:
You must be registered for see links
There are some that have been produced purely through chemical synthesis - but the large portion of them are extracts from plants/mold/bacteria or modifications of those extracts to stabilize the compounds or to make the compounds more specific to what they affect (sometimes replacing oxygen atoms with chlorine or switching up the sugar/alcohol groups).
A lot of this is slated to be replaced with genetic engineering. We can have corn that concentrates antibiotic compounds in the leaves and stalk (leaving the corn, itself, unaffected) while we process the stalks for medications while reducing the cellulose to some form of biofuel or in the production of Cellulose NanoCrystals (which can easily replace carbon fiber in most applications while being much cheaper).
Unfortunately - part of the reason biofuels are so expensive is because of the lack of marketable byproducts from them. Gasoline would be -much- more expensive if it was the only thing that was being used out of a barrel of oil. But as it stands - many industrial lubricants, tar for roadways, polymers for plastics etc come out of that refinement process - all of which can be sold along with gasoline.
Which is why biofuels are not market sustainable at this point in time - there's not a huge industry developed around the processing of various forms of cellulose (since only certain portions of cellulos fibers are useful for CNC production - the others can be turned over for alcohol production... which can be done by genetically modified bacteria that can also produce a number of other compounds - perhaps even some hydrocarbon chains that are still essential for plastics but nearly impossible to obtain without refinement of crude...)
anyway - I'm straying from the initial topic considerably.
Ok thats all well and good, but you realise that most antibiotics are still semi synthetic, Penicillin G and Penicillin V are pretty much the only Beta lactams penicillins that are natural and bacteria attained resistance to these decades ago, all the analogues of these coming out now are non natural semi synthetics. This applies to most antibiotics. The rate at which bacteria gain resistance is exponentially faster than the rate at which we discover new natural antibiotics. I would find it very hard to believe that even more than 1 % of antibiotics that exist for commercial use today are natural. To arrive in their final form no doubt they pass through some sort of chemical or purification process.
I know a person who beat cancer by eating ginger/turmeric daily.
All cures can be found in nature. Chemical prescripted medicine by pharmacy will only trash your immune system making you sick and a customer on the long run.
Ok thats all well and good, but you realise that most antibiotics are still semi synthetic, Penicillin G and Penicillin V are pretty much the only Beta lactams penicillins that are natural and bacteria attained resistance to these decades ago, all the analogues of these coming out now are non natural semi synthetics.
That's like calling a house unnatural because you've cut the wood with a saw and applied a finish to the wood to keep it from rotting.
This applies to most antibiotics. The rate at which bacteria gain resistance is exponentially faster than the rate at which we discover new natural antibiotics.
The threat of resistant bacterial strains is a lot of hype with less substance. See my signature. Most of the strains the develop resistance to one antibiotic are not resistant to another. The fact of the matter is that any 'resistant' bacteria are going to drive a selection process within other species to develop counters for it.
The difference is that we don't necessarily have to wait for evolution, nor do we have to 'give up' the ability to produce previous generations of antibiotics. We can mix and match various antibiotics from hundreds - even thousands of generations and sources of antibiotic compounds. There's no way an organism can develop a serious resistance to three of those compounds - let alone the entire arsenal we have accumulated from observing nature.
So the 350 different strains of Penicillin don't work on this new strain of staph causing infections? Cute. Hit it with Cefadroxil. Growing resistant to that? Slam it with a dose of clavulanic acid-reinforced Penicillin derivative and toss in Clindamycin for good measure.
I would find it very hard to believe that even more than 1 % of antibiotics that exist for commercial use today are natural. To arrive in their final form no doubt they pass through some sort of chemical or purification process.
Of course they pass through some kind of purification process. The compounds are usually something produced by a fungus, bacteria, plant, or even an animal. Not only do you want to make sure you're only getting what you want from such things - but you also want to make sure that you're getting accurate accounts of the concentration you have. There's a huge difference between 700 parts per million and 750 parts per million when you start getting into some of these more potent drugs (not necessarily antibiotics).
That said - this is a pretty comprehensive listing of antibiotics in use today:
You must be registered for see links
Pretty much every compound used in medicine traces its roots back to some compound created by some critter. It may have undergone substantial changes (usually to take something indescriminately destructive and make it not target human cells) over the years - but we've only recently developed the theoretical capability to model protein and biochemical environments/behaviors. Creating ground-up antibiotics is still not within our technological capability. Everything has been based off of what has been observed in nature - including the use of platinum group metals for antimicrobial purposes.
Not that it really matters to our bodies. They operate based off of the laws of physics. A compound introduced into the bloodstream doesn't care where it came from - and neither does your body. The only thing that will matter is the composition of the compound (there is some evidence that including certain elemental isotopes that are infrequent in nature in synthetic compounds can alter behavior of the molecule).
Now - that is worth keeping in mind - because we've recently found that a lot of simple vitamin supplements are horribly inefficient and not absorbed well by the body - because how they are 'packaged' within most natural systems aids in passing them to our bloodstream (as compared to simply depositing the raw compound into our stomachs) - where they are further broken down into components our body uses.
Which - one must then ask the question - if we were to fully synthesize a replica of how 'nature' (the things we've evolved to consume and digest) 'packages' these things - and consume it... does our body somehow react differently to it?
I'll go ahead and answer that - if the process creates an accurate replica - then, no. Our body will treat it as if it came straight from the apple (or whatever).
The reason people are on this 'natural craze' is because they feel somewhat detached from their roots. My generation is probably one of the first generations to grow up largely without any experience in agriculture/gardening (though I do have experience with such things). They have become detached from the process of 'living off of the land' and feel like they are in an increasingly synthetic and artificial environment.
So they hold a sort of spiritual reverence for the natural and turn a blind eye to the very reasons we developed 'synthetic' approaches, to begin with.
People have even started to question the produce section in the grocery store. Produce is picked, when possible, so that it will be ripe when it hits the store shelves - figure that you've got roughly a week of transportation from where it is picked to where it will be sold... and the reality sets in that these foods were picked well before they were ripe on the vine. Thus, they have a rather lackluster flavor to them by comparison to what you'll pick up at your farmers' market or out of your own garden.
Throw in a couple "genetic engineering" scare campaigns - and you've suddenly got a bunch of companies rushing to claim the 'organic' title (because the other stuff is made of plastic, or something... I have plans to drive some poor customer service representative up a wall with feigned ignorance on the issue... "So... this says it's organic... are the other brands that you carry synthetic... or what gives?").
I mean... I love the ambiance of nature... one of the things I want to do when I have the money to set it all up is a controlled breeding environment for various plants - to selectively breed some of my own unique strains of tomatoes, melons, corn, strawberries, etc. To also have fun playing around with different hybrids and grafts (where you take the stalk/stem of one plant and merge it to the root of another plant - has some of the most odd effects, sometimes).
I'd even like to dabble in some home-brew genetic engineering (such as creating a desert banana that can grow and ripen here in the midwest... because I want tree-ripened bananas that are also edible).
But... of course... I have a lot of "things I'd like to do." My dream home is a survivalists' paradise complete with multiple sources of self-sufficient power generation, metal forges, machine shops and direct CAD-to-Structure machines (Direct Metal Laser Sintering and some of my own solutions developed because top of the line industry products aren't quite as advanced as I like them to be), greenhouses and hydroponics out the whazoo, various silicon processing/manufacturing systems (got to be able to make my own circuits in the post apocalypse)....
A hundred million dollars later... I have only a fraction of the setup I want....
Again, credit to you, you certainly know what you're talking about but:
So the 350 different strains of Penicillin don't work on this new strain of staph causing infections? Cute. Hit it with Cefadroxil. Growing resistant to that? Slam it with a dose of clavulanic acid-reinforced Penicillin derivative and toss in Clindamycin for good measure.
Again, if a bacteria gains resistance to penicillin, it's highly likely it will be resistance to most beta lactams, as they all have the same mechanism of action (inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis). You'd have to hit it with something completely different. I had an UTI which was treated with doxycycline ( 1 week), didn't do it, then went on a month of ciproflaxin, still didn't get rid of it completely, finally was given sulphamethoxazle/Trimethoprim, another month. Completely screwed my immune system, pretty much reduced it to nothing. Last cold I had before taking the antibiotics was about 4 years before. Caught the flu straight after finishing the second month.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that I wouldn't take antibiotics unless I absolutely need to, and with antibiotics being in animal feed anyway, people are exposed to it way more then they think (in europe at least up until recently).
I look forward to the work they are doing in scandinavia on treating bacterial infections with broths of bacteriop-hages. Interesting stuff.
To look at 'natural' remedies versus 'pharmaceutical' remedies as a mutually exclusive decision is just silly.
It's like asking your doctor whether surgery or lifestyle therapy is a better solution. It depends upon the person, the nature of the illness/problem, and the personal standpoint of the individual.
For starters - the main thing that started pharmaceutical industries was the synthesis and standardizing of medications frequently found in plants, bacteria, and fungi. Pharmaceutical companies fund expeditions to and studies of native peoples to see how they go about treating various illnesses and infections - then to take samples of plants, animals, or whatever is used in the treatment process to try and find a biochemical reason behind the treatments' effectiveness.
The goal of the company is to then devise proper ways to administer the drug, the safety/effectiveness of it, proper dosages, etc; as well as ways of synthesizing the drug (found in nature) in a manner suitable for mass production at effective dosages.
The reason behind this is because 'natural' substances are not really 'safe' substances... or 'better' for you.
I'll run through a list of some of the more common ones:
Foxglove (The Genus Digitalis):
All species within the digitalis genus produce a chemical compound known as Digoxin. Digoxin is a glycoside that particularly affects the cardiac system and is useful in treating various heart conditions:
You must be registered for see links
. Digoxin, however, has fallen out of favor because drugs with less volatile dosages have been developed leading to better treatment regimens.
Digoxin concentrations vary so greatly from plant to plant that it is nearly impossible to use in its natural form (unless one were to commit to developing very tight hydroponic systems that allowed strict monitoring of Digitalis phenotypes for compound variation). However, some people use the plant in teas and other such things - which is usually not a high enough concentration to cause problems - but seasonal changes in growing conditions can 'fix' that.
This is a fun plant. We're taught, in SERE (Survive Evade Resist Escape) training to recognize some common poisonous plants (and encouraged to familiarize ourselves with nasties in new regions) and dig them - whether to use them in a trap or simply to make tracking teams slow down and watch more carefully for traps. Mandrake sits as one of the "plants that will **** you up 101" training items.
To be clear - ALL members of the Solanacaea family produce a myriad of toxic and/or useful alkaloids. Mandrake just takes the hazard level over 9000 by having a very large root that serves to store all of these potent drugs. It's a plant that is flat-out legendary:
You must be registered for see links
There's some beneficial stuff in there - but it is almost impossible to use without processing. Unless you fancy playing some D&D by rolling the dice with your life.
This plant should require no introduction and should be one of the first things shoved in the face of any "it's natural therefor good" parrot. It is commonly referred to as -deadly- nightshade. Merely handling this plant has killed people. It's such a potent plant that society enacted self-preservation measures by including "deadly" in the name of the plant.
To be fair - Atropine, one of the most important drugs on the planet:
You must be registered for see links
- considered a core drug by the WHO for establishing basic healthcare.
But it's in such concentrations within most of the plants that produce it (along with other 'fun,' natural compounds) that it's insanely hazardous to use in a natural remedy.
Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum):
I'll be frank. The first couple decades of the post-apocalypse are going to see a lot of idiots claimed to stuff like this.
Potatoes, like all Solanacaea, produce toxic alkaloid compounds. Wild potatoes conatin unacceptable concentrations of solanine and chaconine. The domestic varieties we eat are controlled through breeding programs to contain less than 200mg/kg at maturation. In practice - it's usually far lower than that. However - potatoes that have turned green can contain up to 1000g/kg of these substances with certain regions of the potato containing concentrations even higher.
While the fatal dose of those compounds is relatively high in humans - the fact that a potato is a tuber and often concentrates many of these things into the root systems means that potatoes can easily become a problem if/when the controls and regulations we've enjoyed to this day give way to more 'natural' systems and put potatoes at a much more central place in our diet.
You must be registered for see links
Of course, you know there is going to be some retard who thinks the little balls growing off of the potato plant are supposed to be the potatoes (that's how it works in the Sims 3, you know). Eating any 'meal worthy' number of them would probably kill you.
The fact of the matter is that a lot of doctors 'back in the day' killed their own patients because of the natural remedies they were using. It wasn't their fault - it was just that there were many factors that were far beyond their ability to control. In most cases - the risks of the natural remedy were equal to the consequence of opting out of treatment.
People were -filthy- 'back in the day.' You were in a city, you utilized the bathroom by squatting over a bucket, and then you tossed it out the window (quite possibly without looking to see if someone was about to get shit thrown on their head). It was a considerable upgrade to society when dedicated guttering systems were built so that people could throw their shit into a trench and let the rain wash it away. Bathing was relatively infrequent (that was a lot of friggin' water to carry from the pump to your home) - and many general concepts of hygeine were only enjoyed with any kind of frequency by the nobility.
That's why cuts could be quite lethal - and is actually a huge reason behind the painstaking development of chainmail. Broken bones could be set, even internal bleeding could be dealt with by many in the older days.... but when the skin was broken - all kinds of crazy things started to happen, and people didn't exactly know why. Thus - under-armors that prevented the skin from being broken (chainmail) were developed (and quite painstakingly - rivets were driven through each ring to ensure it stayed linked).
Things improved for Americans during the colonial era (unless you were a native - then you were dealing with all kinds of insane pathogens that were literally developed in a giant cesspool called a city) - the increased elbow-room and relative abundance of resources (including running water) really improved the quality of life and reduced the lethality of many infections. Though there were some problems caused by early puritain doctors who held the belief that God made each plant look like the part of the body it was meant to 'fix.' That probably did not help patient survivability very much. Thankfully, that nonsense was largely abandoned.
Anyway .... this has all been one very long way of saying that "natural" doesn't necessarily mean "better."
By all means - there are a million and one suggested remedies involving Garlic, Onions, and other stuff along those lines. You're probably not going to go wrong with trying one of those remedies (provided it's a minor issue that does not represent the need for serious/immediate medical treatment). And if it works for you - awesome.
That said... be careful venturing into the world of "natural cures." See what studies have been done on a given cure - and definitely be sure to read up on the plants that it suggests using. Also - compare how cost-effective it is... not all 'natural remedies' are cheap, 'easy to use' or able to be bought in bulk. Further... suppliers of some of the more exotic plants espoused in natural remedies can be finicky. Chances are - if they are selling something like Gensing - it's a flat-out lie (and they contain no gensing). Gensing is ridiculously expensive as only one group of farmers has figured out how to farm the stuff and it must be harvested naturally elsewhere (and, ironically enough, China's natural reserves have been largely depleted).
So... really - the whole "natural" versus "pharmaceutical" thing is just silly. Most people out there seek some form of medical treatment far too frequently. They want a pill to fix the problem - or, now, some of them want to know what kind of compress or tincture they can make that will have them in tip-top shape in no time... and that's just not the way medicine (of any variety) works.
You always do have intelligent responses, it's refreshing to find among a sea of pure, unadulterated stupidity. rofl
See, I agree with this actually, to an extent. Yes, doctors have developed some really good cures to things, but the only safe and effective ones are those derived from a natural substance. What I'm talking about is when a lab makes something like Lunesta, or that really stupid anti-depressant shit that makes people go suicidal.
"Doc, I'm really depressed, help me out."
"Here, take this, you'll be find in a few days."
*days later*
"See, I told him he'd be fine. He won't be dealing with depression any time soon, coroner."
If you want an anti-depressant, smoke some weed, clears it right up no problem and THC is absolutely harmless with only health benefits, nothing else. Need to go to sleep? Don't get Lunesta, drink a RelaxXxer instead, best sleep you'll ever have and at least you know you'll wake up tomorrow. ^_^
What I'm talking about are the crazy drugs that pharmacies are making so that people can be lazy and get a quick fix. Maybe instead of Lunesta or RelaxXxer, they should get some f**king exercise, the fat f**ks. lol
I needed a relaxXxer last night, I just didn't realize that it would knock me on my ass. Whatever you do, don't drive after one of those...not because it's difficult, but because you can't. It's a muscle relaxer among other things, and I do mean muscle relaxer, like there was a moment those suckers couldn't move. It's still safer than some meds a doctor wants to prescribe me for sleep issues, I know that much.
All I'm saying is that people trust their doctor...what they should do is avoid anything that comes with a warning that takes up most of the commercial. That's my point. If 90% of the ad is a warning that basically says "don't take this product or you will be really f**ked up for life", then it's best to just steer clear, who wants that? The thing it's supposed to cure is a runny nose...I don't look forward to gas with an oily discharge or slitting my wrists because I'm suicidal, thanks. ^_^
I know a person who beat cancer by eating ginger/turmeric daily.
All cures can be found in nature. Chemical prescripted medicine by pharmacy will only trash your immune system making you sick and a customer on the long run.
Well said, my friend. This imo is "the pharmaceutical industry" in a nutshell. They only offer temporary solutions rather than a permanent (and safe) solution. It's messed up, but the more sick/diseased people there are, the more money those greedy bastards get. (prescription pills, treatments, rehab, therapy. the list goes on)
Not to mention that knowledge of Human Physiology is generally unknown or unappreciated by the general public. Another issue is the unfathomable complexity of the Human Psyche. We still don't even fully understand the "soul" and "mind". Much corruption in this chaotic world.
Again, credit to you, you certainly know what you're talking about but:
So the 350 different strains of Penicillin don't work on this new strain of staph causing infections? Cute. Hit it with Cefadroxil. Growing resistant to that? Slam it with a dose of clavulanic acid-reinforced Penicillin derivative and toss in Clindamycin for good measure.
Again, if a bacteria gains resistance to penicillin, it's highly likely it will be resistance to most beta lactams, as they all have the same mechanism of action (inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis). You'd have to hit it with something completely different. I had an UTI which was treated with doxycycline ( 1 week), didn't do it, then went on a month of ciproflaxin, still didn't get rid of it completely, finally was given sulphamethoxazle/Trimethoprim, another month. Completely screwed my immune system, pretty much reduced it to nothing. Last cold I had before taking the antibiotics was about 4 years before. Caught the flu straight after finishing the second month.
What's with all of the double-typing of words, there?
I ask because I like to try and figure out what a person is doing or what technologies went into drafting their posts. You can tell when someone is using predictive word tech on their phones (or fat-fingering a lot of their keys), when a speech translation machine is throwing in the wrong homophones, if they are a hunt-and-pecker, or if they are just illiterate... and that one doesn't quite fit with any of those.
Anyway - while bacteria that produce Beta Latamase tend to have -some- increased effectiveness against beta-lactame based antibiotics in general - it depends upon the specific strain:
You must be registered for see links
. Cefadroxil (
You must be registered for see links
) has demonstrated itself resistant to beta lactamase (though some resistance has developed - it is a considerably different mechanism). When you switch in a different beta lactame antibiotic and throw in a beta lactamase inhibitor (such as clavulanic acid) - you're going to be suppressing the mechanism of defense while using two antibiotics that require considerably different evolutions of beta lactamase to counter.
Clindamycin (
You must be registered for see links
) functions differently, binding to the rRNA of many forms of bacteria. A similar class of drug can be swapped in to work for whatever variety of infection is present (assuming a biopsy is done). The ironic thing, here, is that developing a resistance to this drug in combination with a resistance to beta lactame antibioitics is higher than developing resistance to two different beta lactame antibiotics as it requires a simple 'switching' of two different segments of code rather than the copy and mutation of a single segment used to produce beta lactamase (and then the cell's resources get wasted producing a counter to antibiotics - slowing division rates when antibiotics are not present).
As for your specific case... I honestly can't comment too much. Different doctors have different philosophies. While a fairly educated person who makes a quick study of most material, I'm not a doctor. However - my strategies in dealing with things would be exceptionally aggressive. I think a lot of doctors take the 'do no harm' ideology to the point that they often do too little harm to the pathogen causing problems. I look at treating an infection the same way I look at fighting a war - run a blitzkrieg campaign with a combined arms program. Pump up the host's immune system (prescribe diet, exercise, comedy, and in some cases immune steroids) and then slam it with a host of antibiotics that work in different ways. Run the concentrations high and to the limits of what the host can withstand. If you go to the doctor for treatment - it should be for something serious enough to knock you out of work for a few days.
[insert rant about rising costs of healthcare because everyone needs to go to the doctor for piddly shit that a pharmacist can deal with more directly]
And the flu is a virus - which antibiotics have no effect on (though your immune system does).
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that I wouldn't take antibiotics unless I absolutely need to, and with antibiotics being in animal feed anyway, people are exposed to it way more then they think (in europe at least up until recently).
People do use antibiotics far too much, and a lot of doctors tend to prescribe them in cases where they really aren't necessary (an immune steroid would be preferable in these cases - to put it in MMO terminology; "Buff and heal your tank rather than rely upon elemental mages to out-DPS the mob, only to run into stuff that's immune to their element.") - but usually a better attention to hygeine (with or without antibiotic soaps) and making sure to improve your diet and physical health can cure up a lot of things.
Though people aren't really exposed to antibiotics from cattle in any appreciable quantity. The main reason that's an issue is that the broad spectrum antibiotics used in cattle farming tends to develop various resistant bacteria that then find their way into human populations that find a lot of similar antibiotics are now not nearly as effective.
But if we went away from antibiotics in livestock... there'd be a world wide shortage of most meats and animal derived products as there'd be epedemics of bacterial infections in livestock.
I look forward to the work they are doing in scandinavia on treating bacterial infections with broths of bacteriop-hages. Interesting stuff.
There's a lot of research into using viruses and even bacteria that 'feed' on other bacteria. It's some pretty interesting stuff - though I think we'll see it play a larger role in industries where classical antibiotics are more difficult to apply (such as in livestock farming) and where they can more freely undergo Red-Queen evolution to counterbalance the natural populations of bacteria within those industries (that are currently needing to be kept in check by antibiotics because there are very high concentrations of resources for them to feed on - a 'natural predator' would go a long way to keeping those populations in check).
I think for human treatment - the bacteria-specific viruses are a bit more promising - but classical pharmaceuticals are likely to remain the typical treatment - we'll just be using more complex treatment regimens that throw varying mixtures at the problem while key development will be on various ways to boost our immune system.
You always do have intelligent responses, it's refreshing to find among a sea of pure, unadulterated stupidity. rofl
See, I agree with this actually, to an extent. Yes, doctors have developed some really good cures to things, but the only safe and effective ones are those derived from a natural substance. What I'm talking about is when a lab makes something like Lunesta, or that really stupid anti-depressant shit that makes people go suicidal.
Tracking the brand-name Lunesta back - it is a modified form of Benzodiazepine, originally developed out of a program to create tranquilizers. The compound acts by enhancing the bond of gamma-Aminobutyric acid to its receptor and strengthening the reaction.
You must be registered for see links
I'd have to do much more digging to see where the idea to use this class of compounds originated (as I highly doubt it was a brute-force "keep trying different random chemical concoctions until a solution is found" methodology). Some observation had to prompt a theory of operation and where to start.
"Doc, I'm really depressed, help me out."
"Here, take this, you'll be find in a few days."
*days later*
"See, I told him he'd be fine. He won't be dealing with depression any time soon, coroner."
If you want an anti-depressant, smoke some weed, clears it right up no problem and THC is absolutely harmless with only health benefits, nothing else. Need to go to sleep? Don't get Lunesta, drink a RelaxXxer instead, best sleep you'll ever have and at least you know you'll wake up tomorrow. ^_^
THC isn't absolutely harmless - and it's not going to 'solve the problem' of everyone. For most dealing with depression - the causal factor is lifestyle and perspective. That's why the drug, predictably, doesn't work all that well. Psychological issues are not a bacterial infection that can have its existence threatened and even eliminated by a drug. But that's what people want - a quick fix to their ailments.
The other thing is that most 'natural remedies' suffer from the same (if not worse) side-effects as pharmaceuticals. The thing is that most of these herbal and natural remedies have not undergone nearly the scientific scrutiny that only a single chemical compound has gone through (to be compliant with government regulations). A whole plant full of various compounds subjected to the same scrutiny is going to be all over the place in its effects on people.
I mean... hell - Opium is natural. Cocaine is natural. Risin (a fun extract originally developed by the soviets for assassinations) is natural. Niccotine is natural.
Some people have deathly allergic reactions to peanuts, shellfish, -wheat-, citric acids, and other shit most of us eat without thinking. Hell - most asians cannot properly digest milk within a few years of being born (many europeans and middle eastern people developed the ability to digest lactose due to the rise of livestock farming).
If you listed all the 'possible side effects' of eating food that populations of people had tested on them - the list of side effects would be just as long as any prescription medication's.
But we don't subject those things to the same scrutiny.
What I'm talking about are the crazy drugs that pharmacies are making so that people can be lazy and get a quick fix. Maybe instead of Lunesta or RelaxXxer, they should get some f**king exercise, the fat f**ks. lol
There are legitimate theraputic uses for these drugs. The problem is that people (including psychiatrists) tend to treat these problems like a bacterial infection - which is the root of modern pharmaceuticals - treating and curing infections.
But you can't treat these problems the same. Drugs should only be administered when the person -needs- a temporary aid to overcome the symptoms of the problem that prevent them from fixing the problem (to 'break the chain') - or in the case when their is evidence that the problem is being reinforced with a physiological/biochemical problem endemic to the patient (something isn't working quite right in there). And a person on these drugs should always be monitored for adverse side effects (as with any drug - but because we're dealing with the mind - it's much more difficult to accurately monitor the person... you see them for fifteen minutes and they can and quite probably will act as if the treatment is working - because they don't want to disappoint you, the psychiatrist - or be seen as being even more broken than you've already certified).
You'd see the same problems arise in herbal remedies for psychological problems - and you do see them in current lifestyle/behavioral therapy treatments.
I needed a relaxXxer last night, I just didn't realize that it would knock me on my ass. Whatever you do, don't drive after one of those...not because it's difficult, but because you can't. It's a muscle relaxer among other things, and I do mean muscle relaxer, like there was a moment those suckers couldn't move. It's still safer than some meds a doctor wants to prescribe me for sleep issues, I know that much.
Honestly - I haven't had much experience with these classes of medication. About the craziest stuff I've ever been prescribed is Oxycodone for when I had my wisdom teeth extracted in boot. I know some people claim that stuff made them a little wonky... I took them as prescribed and slept like a baby (waking up only to shift the portion of blood-drool towel I was sleeping on). I think I slept right through a couple meals.
One guy saved all of his up and took them all at once. We all woke up in the morning with our boots having been switched around and people having various memories of someone waking them up with weird antics during the night (apparently night-watch was a pretty entertaining duty to have, that night, and no one saw fit to put a stop to the entertainment).
Though I still have my doubts regarding the vaccines we were given... I swear they said they gave me Twinrix at three different stations during the "cattle-injection" phase of medical. Which makes me wonder what the hell was really in them (side effects may include glowing irises, flourescent nasal discharge, and spontaneous antigravitational phenomena).
All I'm saying is that people trust their doctor...what they should do is avoid anything that comes with a warning that takes up most of the commercial. That's my point. If 90% of the ad is a warning that basically says "don't take this product or you will be really f**ked up for life", then it's best to just steer clear, who wants that? The thing it's supposed to cure is a runny nose...I don't look forward to gas with an oily discharge or slitting my wrists because I'm suicidal, thanks. ^_^
Garlic has a number of uses - a topical antibiotic is one of them. However, the application of an effective garlic-based compress is much more troublesome when Neosporin (or some antiseptic ointment) will do just as well and also contains various compounds useful in rebuilding the original tissue (rather than scar tissue).
And it's not really more effective than most antibiotics.
That said - Garlic is pretty much legendary for its history in herbal remedies. There's no lack of solutions that start out with "puree garlic..." - and there's little evidence that suggests diets high in garlic pose much of a health risk (though irritation and inflammation can occure with the concentrations commonly used in tinctures and some compresses).
All solutions super-saturated with sugar tend to have antimicrobial properties. Honey is noted as being particularly effective because of the natural enzymes that metabolize the sugars into peroxide groups. Unfortunately - these enzymes are destroyed during the pasturization process that most commercial honey undergoes (in order to prevent crystalization on the shelf). Honey is also filtered of polen and other foreign matter to limit allergic reactions that are common when using free-range honey.
... That's one I'm not familiar with. Give me a few minutes.
Ah, okay, Nigella Sativa - or "Black Cumin." That, I'm more familiar with.
Most plants used as spices have antimicrobial applications... A puree of habaneros would likely kill a lot of different nasties - but have fun using that to treat a urinary tract infection (or a yeast infection.... *shiver* ). The same goes for a lot of these spice-derived treatments.
You must be registered for see links
If things like garlic compresses, neosporin, and teas/tinctures were "Tier One" solutions - this would be a "Tier Two" solution, with prescription medications/antibiotics being a "Tier Three" solution.
If available and it solves the problem - cool. But you're playing with toxic and paralyzing compounds within the oils of this seed. I'd not recommend extended or high-intensity use of it.
ect ..............
Pharmaceuticals crap are business,economy, and concurrency, it's more control and marketing than anything else.They like us consume more their crap.
If you subjected natural cures/remedies to the same scrutiny that pharmaceutical compounds are - the same trends would exist... and most herbal/natural remedies would actually appear worse-off because of the difficulty in using consistent dosages, the host of compounds contained within the plant that also trigger actions/reactions within the patient, etc.
If you were to allow pharmacists more freedom and actually allowed them to do initial diagnosis and treatment of patients before referring them to a doctor (invert the process, basically - send them to a doctor when a simple: "here, try this" is what the doctor will do... and he's -not- always up-to-date on pharmaceuticals) - many pharmacists would begin prescribing a number of 'herbal' solutions to people before going to the shelf of various drugs. There's just as large of a market for it - and you weed out a lot of your hypochondriacs without completely disregarding the possibility that something could be wrong ("Here, apply this garlic compress for at least an hour once every eight hours for three days and let me know if you still have problems." - worst that happens is they smell strongly of garlic and their problem was all in their head... but in case it wasn't - you weren't limited to prescribing them a sugar pill or the real thing complete with side effects and ability to make resistant diseases).
A lot of the problems are systemic problems because we've expanded the "tribal system" where the doctor -was- the pharmacist well beyond the scope of where it is practical.
I just thought I'd clarify if it wasn't blatant before, to make sure there's no misunderstandings. I'm talking about the drugs that allow people to maintain their unhealthy lifestyle, and the ones they use to remedy minor problems that have a simple herbal solution. Also there's plenty of plants that have healing properties, but they can't be studied properly because a gang of thugs known as the government decided they had the authority to make them illegal.
I have some giant cojones myself, but I'm not that ballin'.
Mainly I'm talking about the ads I see on TV about this stuff. They spend a few moments telling you what it will do for you, then the rest of the ad is about what kinda' crazy f**ked up shit it will do to you. That's my problem. If a doctor wants to prescribe me something that has a page full of side-effects, it's not gonna' happen, believe that. I'll smoke some weed, that cures just about anything from what I'm seeing. ^_^
