(I created this article from a reply I made on a closed forum discussion.)

I'll just make a few statements, hopefully that point to the fact that there are no perfect answers for many aspects of this debate although there is a general guidance we all know to follow that even common sense points out to us.

Licensed medical practitioners obviously are those called to heal and treat people who have illnesses and to keep them well (preventative). The first line of reasoning is to see a doctor when you need medical treatment. Conventional medicine and pharmaceutical drugs have saved lives, extended lives and restored quality of life.

Natural remedies have had miraculously positive and healing effects on some people as well, that conventional treatments failed to resolve. Some natural supplements are far safer than others and just as with pharmaceuticals, they do not have the same effect on each individual. Some people have been known to have severely adverse effects from naturals and others have died from them.

The same is true of some pharmaceuticals. SSRI antidepressant labels for example are now required by the FDA to include mention that some people have become suicidal when taking the drugs, especially younger people. I know for a fact cases of suicide have occurred in those prescribed the drugs but is rare. Does this mean SSRI's should be sluffed-off as harmful? Absolutely not some, people could not survive without them.

On the other hand, naturals cannot be sluffed-off either and in fact, they were placed here by God or nature if you prefer for the very purpose of healing and keeping things well. Pharmaceutical drug-evolution actually came from natural remedies in many cases.

Now, in regard to articles on health treatments, both natural and prescribed; there are simply too many “ins and outs” for any one side of the argument to claim they have the best answers on all aspects. That’s almost like saying there is only one correct or perfect political or religious view on all aspects of those controversial subjects. It is simply not going to happen.

Even in the medical field, certain types of MDs do not see Osteopath doctors as being as legitimate as other types of MDs and others do not recognize naturopaths as being legitimate at all. This despite the fact that they can be legally accredited after required studies to practice with a license in those fields. As far as “quacks” go, and I say this respectfully, there are quacks in every field, including MDs, Natural Remedy people, police officers, ministers, dentists, article writers, etc...

Never should this fact cause us to see everyone in light of the bad apples that exist in their fields. Moderation should be done, in all of these fields. MDs have to answer to medical boards, ministers to the clergy of their denomination and article writers, to the website they write for.

What’s my point? Well, I first of all feel it doesn’t hurt to have these type discussions in-balance for perspective-sake. I do believe however that there are and never will be perfect answers for every aspect of this subject. I wish there were definitive answers for but this is simply not true in many cases. That’s life and the world we live in and also why we have to maintain our individuality and make thoughtful decisions the best we can and then pray (or hope) for the best outcome.