The subtitle of the article is very telling:
Study Prompts Critics to Warn of Therapies' Risksof course, these would be men who are employed to critique natural remedies.
Here is a list of the 'expert' line-up:First up, a credentialed man with one neutral comment on the survey~
David Eisenberg, director of the Harvard Medical School's division for research and education in complementary and integrative medical therapies. "I think the news is complementary and alternative medicine use by the U.S. public is here to stay." ...and then the author brings out the critics
"They are either unproven or disproven," said Wallace Sampson, founding editor of the Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine.
Seth Asser, a pediatrician and consultant to Children's Healthcare Is a Legal Duty, a nonprofit group that opposes faith healing and other nontraditional medical practices.
Stephen Barrett, who runs Quackwatch
But I love this part:
Adults were most likely to use alternative therapies for pain, including in the back, neck or joints. Women were more likely to use them, as were those who are more educated and more affluent.
And the summary of the article:
the gov't employee who is reporting the results of this survey says:
But Nahin said government-funded research into such therapies is useful, citing a federal study that concluded that St. John's wort was ineffective. After the results were released, use of the herbal remedy dropped sharply, he said.
"The research is working," he said. "It's doing what it's supposed to do, which is provide reliable information to the public so they can make decisions."
So, you see...the government is just trying
to help. Where is your appreciation people! I mean, this is your tax dollars at work. (please read this paragraph with heavy sarcasm.)