Is it possible in this app, or any other, to upload live? This is a function that would be incredibly useful, as there have been reported cases of the phone/recording device itself being destroyed on site.
"Taylor, the director of the Newcastle Magnetic Resonance Centre, had the idea for the study after it was shown that diabetes was reversed in people who had undergone stomach stapling or other forms of bariatric surgery because of obesity."
In my opinion, physicians are no different from any other profession. They feel that input from those outside the profession on matters of the profession are irrelevant, and in most cases this is probably true. There is a push in the evidence-based medicine movement, however, to recognize the influential power physicians have in the doctor-patient relationship and the ways this influence might effectively ignore the patient and their right to dictate their own treatment path. It's called "Informed Patient Choice," and is something I personally believe should be emphasized much more than it is today, because the truth is for most diseases there are multiple treatment routes, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. The job of the physician should be to, without bias, present these options to the patient and ultimately allow them to choose.
As for dismissing alternate treatments, I feel it's perfectly acceptable to dismiss treatments that lack basic scientific validity (Mind you, I include in this bunch treatments prescribed by physicians today that lack proper evidence, of which there are more than a few). There are an increasing number of physicians interested in CAM, however; some hope to discover new medical treatments hidden within; some use them as a rich source of evidence related to the placebo effect; or, as was mentioned earlier in this discussion by another poster, some seek to stake their share in the increasingly lucrative market of quackery.
The truth is, quackery is even more lucrative than medicine. All that is needed is invention of a treatment that doesn't hurt people, at least not immediately (Think water soluble vitamins, fruits, vegetables, etc...), and clever marketing. No grants need to be written to conduct the basic science research. No costly clinical trials need to be conducted. The FDA doesn't regulate "alternative therapy" because most are categorized as supplements, and so efficacy data does not need to be provided. All of that costs a great deal of money, which of course eats into profit. In addition, as proponents of CAM can't point to a single treatment that has been effectively "taken off the market" due to lacking efficacy, it's quite clear that not only are these treatments 100% quackery, but they hold amazing long-term revenue potential, Potential that exists because patients are taken advantage of and claims are made by peddlers that aren't supported by a shred of evidence.
Max Gerson believed that cancer was a result of an individual lacking production of "cancer digesting" pancreatic enzymes - aka he was a complete quack.
As a medical student dedicating the overwhelming majority of my spare time fighting conflict of interest infringement in the Pharma/Device-physician relationship, and in addition attempting to permanently establish evidence-based standards for patient care, its advice like yours that take the whole fucking thing two steps back.
Do sick people a favor, and keep your ignorant statements to yourself.
No, it means that he invented treatment regiments that weren't supported by any scientific evidence, and did so while failing to document or properly control any of his "studies," some of which were repeated and found to be not only no better than placebo, but actually harmful to patients.
If I call Dr. X a fraud because he claims coffee enemas are a great way to clear the body of cancer (Such as, say... Max Gerson did), yet Dr. X also believes that drinking water is necessary to sustain life, it doesn't follow that I don't believe drinking water is a great way to stay alive.
It's a reversal. Cure implies that a disease cannot, under most circumstances, come back due to the treatment regimen (whether that be diet, drugs, radiation, etc...). The reason it's a reversal and not a cure is that if a patient were to "stop treatment," which in this case means revert to a diet far above daily caloric needs, it is likely insulin resistance will return.
There are instances in which chemotherapy is the only option, as advised by sound evidence-based medical research, just as there are instances in which diet is a completely acceptable treatment, and those instances must abide by the same strict evidence-based guidelines.
However, when people go around claiming that diet can cure the majority of disease it plants a seed in the minds of patients that have no option, patients that should be discussing palliative care with their physician, that all they need is a pot of "herbs" and a low-fat, vegan diet to cure their terminal illness. Then the physician has to spend an exponentially larger amount of time than it took to plant that seed to dig it up and move on, time s/he could be spending discussing palliative treatment or even working with other sick patients.
I hate to rain on your parade, I do... But, you simply couldn't be further from the truth. Diet can only be considered a "cure" in an extremely small subset of all disease; and, furthermore, the word "cure" is practically never used to describe the effects of diet in any treatment scenario.
It's true that there is no money to be made by Pharma, and that's why they aren't funding this study. My words may be harsh, but it's people like you, spreading pseudoscience, that lead to desperate patients being taken advantage of.