From SBM – Why Unproven Does Not Mean Harmless

This post examines a study suggesting that CAM use may decrease the success rate of in vitro fertilization efforts. It is similar to a previous study suggesting CAM use is associated with shorter life expectancy in cancer patients in that it is not definitive, but it raises the real concern that inadequately researched therapies may not be benign. It is common for veterinarians and other health care providers who do not use CAM themselves to be apathetic about it’s use by others because they assume that even if it is ineffective, it probably isn’t harmful. More and more evidence is accumulating that this is untrue, and when even a low risk is balanced against no benefit, the rational and ethical choice is to avoid the therapy.

This entry was posted in General, Miscellaneous CAVM. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to From SBM – Why Unproven Does Not Mean Harmless

  1. gwen says:

    Some of the CAM treatments, especially the herbals are essentially drugs that can interfere with the action of the prescribed medication. Homeopathy is just plain ineffective, unless (like Zycam) it is not really Homeopathic! It also makes sense in that patients may have a shorter life span because they take the homeopathic ‘equivalent’ of a prescribed medication, because they do not like the ‘side’ effects of the prescriptions, not understanding that no side effects usually equals no effect at all!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This blog is kept spam free by WP-SpamFree.