Jul 2, 2026 06:11 PM
Just part of post-Westernism or the decolonization of knowledge. Going back to pre-colonial, indigenous routines and beliefs of the regions.
- - - - - - - - - - -
WHO and the death of evidence-based medicine
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/who-and...-medicine/
EXCERPTS: I have long been critical of the World Health Organization’s promotion of dubious treatment methods under the banner of “traditional medicine”. It now has a global strategy to promote what is calls “traditional, complementary and integrative medicine” (TCIM). In my opinion (shared by at least some others) the document is a master class in how to promote medical pseudoscience with the language of evidence-based medicine.
It is very similar to RFK’s use of “gold standard science”. Superficially, it sounds fine, but in context, it is a weaponization of the weaknesses and misunderstandings of evidence-based medicine.
The goals sound reasonable, such as this paragraph [...] But the document gives the game away in several critical ways, including what it says and what it doesn’t say...
[...] the unstated major premise of the entire document is that there are safe and effective treatments that are not being used by mainstream medicine systems for some reason. This is unlikely because how would we have rigorous evidence of safety and effectiveness if a modality were not already incorporated into mainstream medicine? Who did this research, and why? Are doctors leaving effective treatments on the table? (MORE - details)
- - - - - - - - - - -
WHO and the death of evidence-based medicine
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/who-and...-medicine/
EXCERPTS: I have long been critical of the World Health Organization’s promotion of dubious treatment methods under the banner of “traditional medicine”. It now has a global strategy to promote what is calls “traditional, complementary and integrative medicine” (TCIM). In my opinion (shared by at least some others) the document is a master class in how to promote medical pseudoscience with the language of evidence-based medicine.
It is very similar to RFK’s use of “gold standard science”. Superficially, it sounds fine, but in context, it is a weaponization of the weaknesses and misunderstandings of evidence-based medicine.
The goals sound reasonable, such as this paragraph [...] But the document gives the game away in several critical ways, including what it says and what it doesn’t say...
[...] the unstated major premise of the entire document is that there are safe and effective treatments that are not being used by mainstream medicine systems for some reason. This is unlikely because how would we have rigorous evidence of safety and effectiveness if a modality were not already incorporated into mainstream medicine? Who did this research, and why? Are doctors leaving effective treatments on the table? (MORE - details)