Without getting too far out there, consider this. "Standard medical procedure" is always changing, evolving, and in some cases devolving when we don't even know it. So many of these changes are determined by political and economic forces; You gotta wonder.
Back around the early 1900's there were a few competing "philosophies" of medical care, including Chiropractic, Osteopathic, Homeopathic and Allopathic. Chiropractic/Osteopathic deals with the nervous system, more specifically the spinal column and it's alignment and relationship to nerve pathways. Homeopathic deals with the body's own immune system. Allopathic modalities use drugs and surgery as intervention.
There were wars for domination. The AMA had superior organization, developed an advertising arm to attract more practitioners (the Journal of the AMA) and had tremendous financial backing through accepting that advertising from any Quack with a buck!
They won and then began what some people would consider vicious smear campaigns against their competitors. One example here from the AMA itself:
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]
JAMA. 1961;177(11):779. [/FONT](
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/summary/177/11/779)
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]
"Heretofore, in resolving problems concerning relations between doctors of medicine and doctors of osteopathy, the Judicial Council and the House of Delegates have maintained that osteopathy as promulgated and originally practiced was a cult system of healing."[/FONT]
That was an admission in 1961.
If you want to read how that system assaulted a series of cancer treatments that literally saved THOUSANDS of lives, check this out; it gives a great early history of the AMA and how it ascended.
Ausubel, Kenny (2000).
When Healing Becomes a Crime.
Rochester, Vermont: Healing Arts Press. p. 480 pages.
ISBN 978-0892819256.
(Wikipedia, from today's vantage point, lists a litany of studies debunking the treatment. The book's real value is in showing how the AMA, at the time, suppressed any attempts at real study and literally hounded the opposition to death.)
If you listed the litany of "cures" that cured thousands, then were debunked, you'd fill up a Bible-sized book. So many things have been described as "placebo effect" but it doesn't matter, they worked. Perhaps the biggest variable that the scientific community is ignoring is the individual's belief system and connection with the individual providing the treatment. Scientifically this stuff doesn't work, but that doesn't stop a lot of it from working.
We are beings created from fuzzy thinking as well as scientific principles.
A significant number of therapies I used back in the 1980's in the field have been debunked. I've seen all the flak MAST gets here and you know what? I feel confident that it "helped" to stabilize blood pressure on people bleeding out. I can't verify that scientifically, but my patients were functionally dead when I got there and alive by the time they got to the hospital and it wasn't the IVs because I couldn't get anything larger than 20 gauge needles in due to vascular collapse. In one case, a young man with a traumatic leg amputation, negligible BP on arrival was trwsted with small bore IV and MAST, had a pressure of about 80/50 on arrival and the receiving orthopod ripped the trousers off the patient to see the wound. End of story for the kid and my rant.
) of inactivity and because you have an overabundance of calories, won't it be stored? Therefore after breakfast you would need to burn your caloric breakfast intake in order to reach your dinner, which has become absorbed?
