|
|
 |
|
 Beyond a Second Opinion Into a Different Paradigm Part Two - The Naturopathic Advantage By Alex Vasquez, ND, DC, Editor, Naturopathy Digest In the first section of this two-part article1, I exploded the myth of the "second medical opinion" by revealing it for what it most commonly is, namely, the same opinion from two different doctors trained in the same paradigm from the same research and same textbooks. While details and nuances of a second opinion might vary between the first doctor (who prescribed drugs A, B and C) and the second doctor (who preferred drugs A, D and Z), both doctors limited the range of considerations to drugs, drugs and the eventual consideration of surgery. Because the training of most allopathic doctors is limited to drugs and surgery, they don't offer "alternative" treatments to their patients because they have no knowledge of such treatments, their merits, applications and integrated implementation based on the web-like interconnection of physiologic processes. Further complicating this issue is the common error of confusing "naturopathic medicine" with "natural treatments." The three problems I just listed each require explication: 1) lack of medical training in natural treatments; 2) failure to appreciate the interconnected nature of physiologic processes and organ systems; and 3) confusion of naturopathic medicine with natural medicines, which is to say, confusion of a paradigm with a therapeutic.First, it's a rare physician who has the courage, confidence and integrity to admit his or her own ignorance to a patient. Thus, not surprisingly, it's common for allopathic doctors to disparage and denigrate natural treatments, in general, and chiropractic/naturopathic medicine, in particular, because they don't have any training in these topics and therefore don't have an understanding of the mechanisms and merits of each.2 Not only are holistic/natural treatments shunned by such doctors under the pretense that, "If this were an important topic, surely I would have learned about it in medical school," but by extension, these treatments also are not offered to patients that need them if the doctor has no knowledge of them. If, for example, a patient sees a doctor ignorant of vitamin D's therapeutic benefit in the treatment of hypertension, depression, epilepsy and inflammation, the patient easily could walk out of the doctor's office with four different prescriptions for various chemical drugs - none of which has the potential to cure the underlying problem: nutritional deficiency.3 Far beyond this simplistic example lies the treatment of complex diseases such as autoimmune disorders; such diseases are notably recalcitrant to anti-inflammatory drug/medical treatments, which, by definition, generally fail to address the underlying hormonal, toxicologic and dysbiotic components of these conditions. Such conditions often respond brilliantly to naturopathic intervention, even when no anti-inflammatory drugs are used.4 One of the main advantages naturopathic physicians provide is their broad-based perspective from studying minor surgery and pharmacology, in addition to natural/holistic interventions such as nutritional medicine, botanical medicine and functional medicine. Second, the failure to appreciate the web-like, interconnected nature of physiologic processes and organ systems5 condemns patients to lifelong medicalization, based on symptom-suppressing drug treatments assumed to be the only solution when doctors fail to appreciate and address the underlying causes of disease.6 Is the cause of depression a deficiency of Prozac? Is acne a manifestation of tetracycline deficiency, to be cured only with long-term use of broad-spectrum antibiotics? Do people benefit from calcium channel-blocking drugs because they have an inherent postnatal need for such synthetic chemicals, or might such "intracellular hypercalcinosis" be due to combined epidemics of magnesium deficiency, fatty acid imbalances, an acidifying Western diet, excess stress and secondary hyperparathyroidism due to the aforementioned vitamin D deficiency?7 Third, as I've mentioned previously,8 a common misconception by the public and other health care professionals is that the main difference between allopathic and naturopathic physicians is that naturopathic physicians use natural treatments, rather than drugs, to treat disease. While it's true that naturopathic physicians prefer and emphasize the use of natural treatments over ones that are synthetic or surgical, it's an oversimplification of our professional training and philosophical foundations to say the only difference is the "natural versus synthetic" origin of our treatments. While naturopathic physicians employ condition-specific treatments for certain conditions, the overall clinical goal is that of health optimization, rather than disease treatment, per se. Further, whereas allopathic doctors are experts in prescribing drugs and combinations of drugs to suppress manifestations of a disease or physiologic dysfunction, the specialty of naturopathic physicians is that of investigating and addressing the underlying cause of disease so that such symptomatic medications become largely unnecessary. In bringing closure to this article, I wish to clarify, and in this case dissolve, at least in part, the "we/they" generalizations included by necessity of language and expediency in my articles. My wish is not to see antagonism between our professions escalate; rather, I hope to facilitate a better appreciation of the general differences between our professions and defend naturopathic medicine from the barrage of unscientific criticism and biased denigrations hurled at us daily by our fellow health care providers in "conventional," allopathic medicine. Further, I appreciate that many "conventionally trained" allopathic doctors are truly excellent clinicians, in the use of both pharmacologic and natural interventions. One of my closest colleagues and mentors, Gilbert Manso, MD, has shared much with me over the years of our working together, and likewise, many experts and pioneers in natural medicine were firstly trained in allopathic medicine, namely Drs. HL Newbold9, Robert Heaney10, Alan Gaby and Jonathan Wright11, just to name a few. Perhaps someday, health care professionals will spend less time attacking each other and more time focusing on their primary objective: helping patients. References
|
|
|
Archives |
Contributors |
Current Issue Other MPA Media Sites: Policies: |
All Rights Reserved, Naturopathy Digest, 2011.
Date Last Modified - Friday, 17-Oct-2008 12:10:40 PDT
About the Author: Dr. Alex Vasquez graduated from Western States Chiropractic College in Portland, Ore., in 1996, and then enrolled in the naturopathic medicine program at Bastyr University. By the time he graduated from Bastyr in 1999, Dr. Vasquez had published 13 articles in magazines and peer-reviewed medical journals and was a recognized authority on disorders of iron metabolism. Dr. Vasquez was later appointed to teach rheumatology, orthopedics, and radiographic interpretation at Bastyr. For family reasons, Dr. Vasquez returned to his hometown of Houston in 2002 and started a new private practice of natural medicine.