Why I Think What I Think

Today I began my second post-secondary program (my first was an Honors BSc in Nutritional Science from UWO) at the Academy of Natural Health. I am currently studying towards my registration as a Certified Holistic Nutritionist. This may seem to some a step backwards, receiving a less known albeit less credible designation behind my name directly after spending four years on an undergraduate degree at a well known University. I've chosen this path because I believe in holistic health care and I'm positive there is much for me to learn. So why do I subscribe to this alternative to conventional medicine?

Holistic health care is simply an approach to well-being that is achieved by natural means, taking into account the whole body (not just symptoms and ways to eliminate them), and focusing on prevention rather than treatment. It is one that I've found encourages self-study, a partnership between practitioner and patient, and supporting the body to heal itself. On the other hand, allopathic medicine sees medicine as a means to reduce problems, generally with no great amount of time spent on root causes, and ultimately ignoring systemic balance for the sake of treating single parts.

Stats Can recently found that 20% of Canadians use alternative health care and the rates are on the rise. There are now 25,000 Canadians employed in natural health with 42,000 products available and $2.5 billion spent per year. It is an industry that I intend on being a part of for a long time and one that I plan on endorsing and assisting in the growth of within my city.

I'm simply disenchanted with the conventional system. The Journal of the American Medical Association is now 75% funded by pharmaceutical companies. Two-thirds of allopathic research this year will be done at for-profit companies' facilities, instead of Universities. An independent watch-dog organization found that studies by drug companies are 3 - 5 times more likely to recommend a drug than studies by nonprofit researchers, despite gathering the same data. A famous study by the New England Journal of Medicine in 2006 tested the effectiveness of arthritis medications. It was found that the natural remedy (glucosamine chloride with chondritin) offered a higher overall pain decrease in participants than the prescription drug (Celebrex). A placebo was also included. However, because in the area of "20% pain reduction" the Celebrex had a 70% response rate and the glucosamine had a 66.5% response rate the study authors concluded and publicly reported that the natural remedy did not reduce pain effectively. Subsequently the New York Times reported that no effect was found with patients using the natural remedy. It is interesting to note that 11% of the researchers were on pharmaceutical company payrolls.

This is not to say that I would slather a severed limb in calendula salve and hope to live, or even that this past week when I suffered from a severely painful dry-socket from a wisdom tooth extraction that I didn't dabble (for the first time) in the world of codeine, but in general I use and promote natural remedies and health care philosophies.

You are welcome to post comments below. I encourage it. Let's talk about what you think on the topic.