The Reiki Cafe 

The world has some rather dumb alternative medicine practitioners. Don't be one of them.

http://westtexas.cox.net/cci/newsnational/national?_mode=vie...

Dave,

Hi.

The practitioner has not been convicted of anything.

As for dumb? People who grasp at straws (as the woman in question may have been doing) are not necessarily dumb - just desparate.

If the woman died from breast cancer 6 mos after diagnosis and starting with the alternative practitioner one might imagine the cancer was already in advanced stages. Besides, she refused the chemo, etc.

That he may have been 'practicing' without a license in Utah is, perhaps, a rather separate issue to the patient's choice to forego standard allopathic treatment. If he advertised a "cure" for cancer this is also a somewhat different matter than her choice to go to him but would fdactor in more closely I suppose.

I would also offer, somewhat sadly, that patients can make dumb decisions out of desparation.

But, having this story to follow may be interesting if "all" the facts are brought to light. If he is convicted of anything it will be interesting and perhaps educational to hear of what and also how the appeals go.

lol

:)

Cheers,

RC

Many thoughts on this issue. First, it points to the fact that alternative practitioners need to be wise in wording beliefs and know how to cover themselves.....with such tools as waivers which clients sign saying that they understand the services are "for educational purposes only." We must be careful never to diagnose or offer "treatment" for a condition.

Second, it raises the question of exactly how effective chemotherapy is.....if one really studies outcome studies, the case is generally not terribly convincing. I suggest reading "Reclaiming our Health" by John Robbins as a mind tickler.

Licensure is a complicated and often political issue. It often does not protect the public, but protects the turf of some group that needs/wants power. In my profession, I know of some pretty incompetent, yet licensed practitioners. They pay their dues, get their continuing ed, and as long as they don't kill anyone, they can give poor advice or treatment as long as they wish.

I am not defending this poor soul in Utah, but I urge us not only to be careful, but to encourage thinking outside the box. The being careful and wise the most important immediate concern, however.

Feather

No he hasn't been convicted. Whether he is found guilty or not is really irrelevant to the point that he advised her to not take her doctor recommended treatments. Sure a doctor can be wrong too. But they are still more qualified legally and in terms of education to be able to make such a suggestion.
Furthermore , as I understood the article, he told the woman that the cancer may be due to something going on with her teeth i think it said. And some other problem ta boot.Unless he is a dentist he cannot make a diagnosis of that nature. Not to mention, the dentists that examined her discovered this was not the case.
Specifically he advised she see him for cancer treatment, as opposed to her doctor. That too is a big nono.
Yes she had a choice, but she also might not have understood that he was not properly qualified to make those diagnoses. Desperation may have brought here to try alternative treatments. But he obviously presented himself as having qualifications he does not have legally.

I do agree that is some ways it's about protecting "turf".
And I am not saying that he is bad for disagreeing with things being like that. However, to me the way in which he gripes about this is unimportant and a shift of focus from him way overstepping his bounds. It's like harping on an issue with no relevance.
Even if chemo isn't usually successful, the issue remains that he went way out of bounds. He simply had absolutely no place in making the suggestions he did. While it does not say that he did or didn't in the article, the tone of the article lead me to believe he did not just suggest she seek alternate treatment. He specifically said she should come to him to handle it.

Well, if we are lucky enough we don't have to live and learn; we can watch and learn!
Feather

Dave,

Hi.

If he was not licensed in Utah that is certainly a problem (but does not mean he has no expertise in the areas for which he may be licensed elsewhere). And, what he actually advised the woman is not necessarily the same as 'diagnosing' anything. What, exactly, he actually advised her is not clear from that article either. To suggest that he 'diagnosed' beyond his expertise is, I woud say a matter for the evidence and whatever legal investigation there will be.

However, I am not about to charge and convict him here based on one internet article.

Cheers,

RC