• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Woo in my textbook!

Faustina

JREF Kid
Faustina
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
78
I'm in surgical technology school right now. Most of what I'm learning has a hard scientific base, germ theory, asepsis, drug effects etc.
But while reading through one of my texts, Alexander's Care of the Patient in Surgery( a long time standard in the field), what do I find tucked away in the back? Ahh, a chapter on "Complimentary and Alternative Therapy" or as I like to think of it, crystal-waving B.S.
Let's see, there's talk of qi, Ayurveda, homeopathy (!!!), energy therapy, laying on of hands, and on and on. All treated in the same calm detached textbook manner as oh, say chapters on anesthesia, anatomy, surgical procedures, sterile fields and whatnot.
Am I overreacting? Because I'm seriously disturbed to find this in a textbook for a critical health care profession.
 
I think it's good to have an idea of what this stuff is so when (if) a patient asks about it, you can at least discuss it intelligently. The alternative is staring blankly at said patient, blinking and uttering: "What the hell are you talking about?" whereupon, the self-fulfilling prophecy of the ignorant professional comes to fruition.

I think it's bad if it's being presented as a serious alternative to the remainder of the book.
 
I think that's what bothers me the most. It's not like the book says, "A lot of patients will be interested in these alternate therapies, but there's not a iota of evidence to support them". It's that they are written about as if they are as valid as scientific medical practice. F'instance:

"A human being is an open energy system. This assumption implies that the transfer of energy is natural and continuous. When a healer transfers energy to a healee using TT (therapeutic touch), it is without effort and guided by conscious, mindful action. The healer adds intentionality within a compassionate context.
Illness is an imbalance in an individual's energy field. With TT, the healer manipulates the energy field by directing or modulating using the sense of touch much like the other four major senses of the body. All of these senses are able to act from a distance without direct connection. The human energy field extends a few inches away from the body surface, and the practitioner senses fine energy cues such as changes in pattern."

Alexander's Care of the Patient in Surgery, Rothrock, et al.
 
:jaw-dropp
Dear...God...
Well, is there any wonder why people get so upset over woo?
If I go to a doctor, shell out lord knows how much $$$, and have it explained to me that my "energy field is out of sync," I think I'd probably be very, very unhappy.
 
You should probably also voice your concerns to your instructor and department chair. There's probably a wide variety of texts out there that are just as good, just as expensive, and lacking the woo factor. Good luck!
 
I found woo in my textbook last year too! Not much, only a couple of pages. After fuming the whole way through it, I found that it was mentioned that there was no evidence for it, bar placebo stuff. Kept me seething that there was even mention though, as I couldn't see the relevance of it. Mind you, I couldn't see the relevance of a whole lot that was in there. As part of the course I have to do these sociology parts, and it's not my bag, baby.
 
Faustina said:
I think that's what bothers me the most. It's not like the book says, "A lot of patients will be interested in these alternate therapies, but there's not a iota of evidence to support them". It's that they are written about as if they are as valid as scientific medical practice. F'instance:

"A human being is an open energy system. This assumption implies that the transfer of energy is natural and continuous. When a healer transfers energy to a healee using TT (therapeutic touch), it is without effort and guided by conscious, mindful action. The healer adds intentionality within a compassionate context.
Illness is an imbalance in an individual's energy field. With TT, the healer manipulates the energy field by directing or modulating using the sense of touch much like the other four major senses of the body. All of these senses are able to act from a distance without direct connection. The human energy field extends a few inches away from the body surface, and the practitioner senses fine energy cues such as changes in pattern."

Alexander's Care of the Patient in Surgery, Rothrock, et al.
Click to expand...

Since TT was thoroughly debunked by a young girl as a science project about six years ago, might I ask how long ago that crap was promulgated?:mad: :mad: :jaw-dropp :mad: :mad:
 
fuelair said:
Since TT was thoroughly debunked by a young girl as a science project about six years ago, might I ask how long ago that crap was promulgated?:mad: :mad: :jaw-dropp :mad: :mad:
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I don't think that convinced a single believer. I mean wasn't Randi or somebody similar involved at some point at some time? And we all know how that affects things. :boggled:
 
Faustina said:
I'm in surgical technology school right now. Most of what I'm learning has a hard scientific base, germ theory, asepsis, drug effects etc.
But while reading through one of my texts, Alexander's Care of the Patient in Surgery( a long time standard in the field), what do I find tucked away in the back? Ahh, a chapter on "Complimentary and Alternative Therapy" or as I like to think of it, crystal-waving B.S.
Let's see, there's talk of qi, Ayurveda, homeopathy (!!!), energy therapy, laying on of hands, and on and on. All treated in the same calm detached textbook manner as oh, say chapters on anesthesia, anatomy, surgical procedures, sterile fields and whatnot.
Am I overreacting? Because I'm seriously disturbed to find this in a textbook for a critical health care profession.
Click to expand...

Fight the good fight.
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Unfortunately, I don't think that convinced a single believer. I mean wasn't Randi or somebody similar involved at some point at some time? And we all know how that affects things. :boggled:
Click to expand...

Happens all the time.
People still believe Televangelists, Uri Gellar, Congress, etc.
Seems no matter how many times these losers get busted, the willfully ignorant will take up their cause and go right on acting like buffoons.
Seriously, write to the book's publisher and/or author(s) and make your displeasure known. It can't hurt.
 
desertyeti said:
Seriously, write to the book's publisher and/or author(s) and make your displeasure known. It can't hurt.
Click to expand...


I think I am. And I was going to speak to my instructor today but I didn't see her since I was in clinicals all day. But I'll track her down tomorrow!
 
I might have woo in my textbooks, but since they're mostly on quantum physics it's hard to tell.
 
I'm not surprised by this at all, Faustina. The college I teach for has a thriving Nursing department that is, like most, rife with pseudo-science and nonsense. Courses include homeopathy, acupuncture/acupressure, Therapeutic Touch therapy, and a whole host of other "complimentary and alternative medicine" subjects.

As is the case with laws, it's easy to get one passed and nearly impossible to get rid of it. Our Curriculum Approval Committee is made up of volunteers from numerous disciplines, but they really don't have the expertise to critically assess each and every course. They pretty much leave that up to the Faculty who create the new class; as a result, if something seems to have any merit whatsoever, it gets approved.

I'm currently working on investigating the process and will publish the results (to expose its ineffectiveness), but change is slow. The same is true for text books, and in that case it's even worse because market trends are really all that matters. In other words, if it sells, it gets printed. It's not in a publisher's best interest to refuse to print something marketable simply because it's not true; the gatekeepers for truth are the Faculty, and THAT'S who you should be making your complaint to! (After you get your grade, of course!).

Good luck with it.
 
Remember:
"If you don't do it, nobody will. If you don't do it today, it'll never be done" ;)
Good luck. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom