As a psychology/pre-med student who has recently visited NCNM and seriously considering nat. med school, I am just completely enamored with the philosophies of nat-med. Not too long ago, I talked to an MD about medical school and when I told him about my wanting to apply to a nat med school the MD told me that if I wanted to be in a position of power I should go to an allo school. I was rather offended by his comment, because the underlying goal of medicine is to treat the human body when it is threatened by foreign agents and or natural conditions of the body (diabetes, leukemia, etc.), and not to consider oneself as a better healer than the other.

What's funny is that MD's and other conventional practitioners say that nat. medicine is just a bunch of hokus-pokus, brewing herbs and frog legs in a cauldron. But do Indians and Chinese who rely on natural medicine die sooner than Westerners who rely on allopathic means? No. As a matter of fact, people of Western societies suffer from illnesses not common in India or China. Alzheimers is not at all common in India, and in Easter Asian countries breast cancer is not as common because of the consumption of tofu.

As a psychology student, there are several theories about personality - why we do what we do and why we are who we are. All psychologists generally are faithful to one of the major six theories, but as is easily evident rather quickly, all the theories compliment each other. Allo and Nat med's are compliments of one another, not opposites.

If man can generate SSRI's (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) in the lab then nature has its equally potent equivalent, St. John's Wort.

All healthcare practictioners should appreciate one another's contribution to health care and the well being of all humans.

Post New Reply

Name/Nickname:
Subject:
Message:
Enter combination shown above: