New Journal/Magazine - How about this then?

[puddicat]

Er. no not quite what I was trying to say. I have no view on anybody's education other than people who get paid money to things and do things they claim to know something about. So I wasn't referring to readership, horseowners etc etc when I was talking about education - I am only concerned with the quality of the knowledge offered by 'people offering therapy services' there, lets generalise.

The point I was trying to make was along the following lines, if you want an authoritative article on piano playing you ask a concert pianist not someone doing their grade 3 piano exam. The concert pianist does not need to ask the grade 3 student for their comments or advice because in the course of their training they've been there, got the T shirt and moved on. So the point is 'people offering therapy services' have a simplistic knowledge of what they are doing which is (1) not scientific and (2) superceeded in detail by a professional medical training. So who do you get to write the article?

 

[baybeejay01]

[ QUOTE ]
so who do you get to write the article?

[/ QUOTE ]

All of the above for an open minded viewpoint on peoples differing findings, viewpoints and experiences? Then, as a summing up, the scientific (or unexplainable) facts and figures etc. that let us make our own minds up.

 

[tuscanyD]

Often maestros of a particular craft cannot teach well because they are unable to explain what they do or why!

Sometimes even a rank amateur can offer a phrase or idea that creates a breakthrough to the next learning curve.

I am of the belief that everyone has something to teach you [us, not you personally] if you'd only listen.

"So the point is 'people offering therapy services' have a simplistic knowledge of what they are doing which is (1) not scientific and (2) superceeded in detail by a professional medical training. So who do you get to write the article?"

A vet from a scientific magazine for the average horse person! Precisely to investigate the theory/practise scientifically as mentioned above.

Their knowledge may be simplistic but many people believe the evidence of their own eyes- so educate us otherwise by evaluating that evidence

 

[puddicat]

So I would hope that if this, or any other, magazine were to run such an article they would have the courage to report their findings objectively and, as we have both said, be honest if they cannot find evidence against or find evidence that contradicts their theory.

Its probably worth saying again at this point that the magazine idea I started the thread with has nothing to do with the views I've expressed on the bit of the thread on science and back people.

 

[baybeejay01]

 

[puddicat]

Their knowledge may be simplistic but many people believe the evidence of their own eyes- so educate us otherwise by evaluating that evidence

Noooooooo! the evidence doesn't exist, that's the pointl. The thing to do is explain really really clearly why you can't belive the evidence of your own eyes! !!!

 

[puddicat]

I am of the belief that everyone has something to teach you [us, not you personally] if you'd only listen.

yeah true in general but not about subjects where someone is an expert an the other person isn't. The chance of it happening is so small it becomes insignificant. I agree you shouldn't stop being receptive to the possibility.

 

[baybeejay01]

How can you say "the evidence doesn't exist"? If we see it with our own eyes - it's there! If it can't be explained scientifically, that's your problem, if a blind man can't see something - is it not there??

 

[tuscanyD]

Yeeeesssssss - thousands of people believe they have the physical evidence of a sound house after treatment where before they had a lame one!
You can't just say it doesn't exist! Explain it yes but back it up with physical examinations, x-rays, photos and independent eye witness reports

 

[baybeejay01]

Sometimes these so called experts get blinded by their own knowledge and aren't receptive to any changes. Look at the so-called expert witness in the recent cot death cases.

There is a lot to be said for being open minded - only when you have taken into consideration all the facts and experiences presented and changed your own views (if need be) can you call yourself an *expert*, otherwise you are just another fuddyduddy!

 

[tuscanyD]

Blimey - philosophy too!
What is real? Is it merely an individuals perception?

I'm really enjoying this discussion...
Hope everyone else is

 

[baybeejay01]

Loving it!!

 

[puddicat]

How can you say "the evidence doesn't exist"? If we see it with our own eyes - it's there!

No, not true I'm afraid people like Derren Brown and magicians over the centuries have show how easily we can be fooled into believing we've seen something we haven't! There are several layers of explanation to this but it starts with the idea that our eyes don't work as camera transfering an image of the real world to our brain the image we see in our head is a combination of information from the eyes plus what we expect to see - thats why optical illusions work.

 

[puddicat]

Yeeeesssssss - thousands of people believe they have the physical evidence of a sound house after treatment where before they had a lame one!
You can't just say it doesn't exist!

No this is wrong too, it is possible for thousands of people to believe something works when it has no effect. Most quack remedies 'work' in this way its due to a negative consequence of our very useful human habit of associating cause and effect. Brielfy it goes like this. (1) Most musculoskeletal injuries get better on their own anyway. (2) many people go out and by a quack product 'in case it works' and use it (3) animal inevitably gets better and owner assumes it was because of the quack product.

 

[puddicat]

Loving it!!

me too

 

[baybeejay01]

Everyone knows that the magicians are very clever in deceiving our eyes - that has been scientifically proven! One day scientists may have some proof and explanations re the back man and other alternative therapies and good for them, but I bet they prove how they work and not that they don't - again Puddicat, you are trying to treat us like fools with your comments!

 

[tuscanyD]

But Deren Brown is a silver tongued showman.
The couple of alternative back people [ie not chiro's or osteo's just 'back' people] I encountered were plain, gruff Norfolk locals.
There was no show - the horse was stood squarely on level ground and I felt and saw one hip lower and after I felt and saw them level.

I'm a skeptic - I don't believe it but I can't deny it...so please explain it!

 

[Ginn]

[ QUOTE ]
How can you say "the evidence doesn't exist"? If we see it with our own eyes - it's there! If it can't be explained scientifically, that's your problem, if a blind man can't see something - is it not there??

[/ QUOTE ]

Ever heard about a dude called schrodinger? Cat in a box theory? Hehe! The beauty of quantum physics - it all boils down to probablity. No-one can ever be truely 100% certain of anything. If you put a cat in a box and can't see inside is the cat still there?

 

[baybeejay01]

May I also just say that I can understand some of the mental blockage that scientists have with alternative therapists as I have come across a few charlatans out there who are very obviously (or not so very obviously!) fleecing desparate people and giving the genuine ones a bad press!

 

[puddicat]

One day scientists may have some proof and explanations re the back man and other alternative therapies and good for them, but I bet they prove how they work and not that they don't - again Puddicat, you are trying to treat us like fools with your comments!

Eh? really? which comment in particular ? The information to expalin many of these things including our friend the back man is there now and it is taught to vets and medics. That's the point I keep trying to get across about education. There are experimental studies that could usefully be done to make things clearer - there always will be but in many cases its just a matter of studying what is already known.

 

[puddicat]

If you put a cat in a box

your not aiming that suggestion at me are you ???

 

[baybeejay01]

Exactly! - (I think!) No never heard of him but the theory you are suggesting works both ways, prove it or disprove it - but don't dismiss it out of hand!

Welcome to our debate Ginn, it has been a little insular in here! (No offence you 2 guys but the more the merrier don't you think?)

 

[Ginn]

Of course not!

Bad example

I'm yet to see an object pass straight through a thick layer of concret without doing any damage to that object or the concrete but statistically it is possible, highly unlikely but possible. But I guess that is what would be deemed a "miracle". Its not something you can force to happen, merely a freak incident in nature and I guess thats the difference between "quack" therapies and genuine ones - you can't control the exceptional and sometimes, on exceedingly rare occasions, the impossible may happen - but to capture it, bottle it and sell it? I don't think so!

 

[baybeejay01]

[ QUOTE ]
Which comment in particular?

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep throwing the education bit at us - I would rather be open to alternative, thought out ideas than the "if it isn't in a book, it can't be right" theory of most education.

 

[puddicat]

There was no show - the horse was stood squarely on level ground and I felt and saw one hip lower and after I felt and saw them level.

I admit that in generalising I'm misreprepresnting people. I think there are some things that some therapists can do that are probably useful. Looks to me infact that they are almost certainly useful but I'd like to examine whats going on a lot more closely before I'm convinced. So I'm certainly against all therapists all of the time. I also think as TuscanyD suggested that there are some things like "putting hips back in" that do deserve scientific study, however it doesn't alter the fact that most of the things I see or hear about are er. quite clearly nonsense.

 

[baybeejay01]

Hoooraaayyy! Now that is more like a proper scientific viewpoint - maybe there is something in it

Yes, I agree, as mentioned above, there are far more dishonest therapists out there than genuinely talented people, maybe if this new mag was to do some more research into the talented ones and agree there is something in it, we could lobby for a register or governing body and stamp out the frauds? What do you think?

 

[Ginn]

Surely physio's too are "experts" within their own right? They also require high accademic achievemens before being accepted into uni, followed by years of training before they can even consider specialising. Also, it doesn't take an expert to feel tension along a horses back and I would hope that most of us as horse owners would recognise tight muscles in the same way we would notice small areas of heat or swelling. Sadly I feel the like of back specialists simply use this common sense and some basic skills in massage etc to identify and help rectify the problem and that is where I feel the discrepency is - having had my own pelvis realigned by 3 very qualified physios (and im not talking bone - im referring to muscle) I know that its is possible for a highly trained expert to detect serious problems and help correct them. However I also remember well pulling my pelvis down - it involved 1/2 a tonne of horse and gravity pulling one way on my leg and friction and a tree pulling the other! And involved similar forces (hence 3 people) and pain to sort it out again!

However, the general horsey public often seem to confuse the different types of experts out there - thats not to say that all highly trained proffessionals get it right all the time - you'd have to be super human to do that - but equally the vast majority of lesser trained therapists just combine common sense and fancy language to fool the client into believing that they really know what they are on about. Sadly, this very often isn't the case.

I think for this reason a magazine which illustrates the science behind all different types of therapies, whether proving, disproving of merely offering a different perspective would be invaluable. However, on the basis that it would by examining the science across a whole variety of areas I cannot see how it should publicise or support ideas which science itself contradicts. An explanation as to why science contradicts yes - this doesn't necessarily say that the theory is totally incorrect, merely why current understanding does not support it, and in turn allows the reader to make a better educated opinion on it. Of course, such a magazine would also offer practical explanations on why things do work and how to make the most of products on the market which the explanation supports. For example, studies show that chondroitin sulplate and glucosamine have had positive effects on cartilage and joints - however it also shows that they must be used in sufficient doese to have any effect. So why then do so many people use products containing insufficent levels of these chemicals to have any effect? Because nobody has told them as much!

 

[tuscanyD]

I could discuss this all day. Sadly only have net access at work [have done very little today though!] so will be off soon. Will check in on Monday and see how it's going though.

re the quantum cat:
I believe the idea is that one imagines a cat in a box with a pellet of poison that may or may not break and kill the cat. The cat exists in a quantum state of being neither alive nor dead until the box is opened and the cat observed. Or something...
Terry Pratchett suggests the cat will be found inexplicably in a corner of the room somewhere where it willhave widdled nervously on the wiring.

 

[baybeejay01]

I agree, as you will see from my responses above, I also agree that there are fakes out there too and call for a governing body to halt this. I am in favour of a mag that is honest and doesn't tell us *it can't* just cos they don't know how it *does*.

 

[baybeejay01]

Now that's what I call philosophy!!

I too must go do something but could quite happily sit and debate all weekend etc. See you Monday and have a nice one everyone.