Holistic Review R: research sharing for open and free health information.

    1. We hope to encourage "conventional" doctors to recognize better that every "proven" method started as unproven. 

Modern scientific standards, such as the "double blind study", are very helpful. However, this standard is not infallible, is often impractical, tends to emphasize drugs with serious side effects, and has clearly retarded the use of some superior health treatments, such as glucosamine for the joints.

    2. On the other hand, we hope to encourage "alternative" practitioners to invent new ways of testing their ideas. 

There seems to be an attitude that the only choices are conventional standards, and no standards. Much can be done simply by a free database with open discussion. Too often, all we hear are "success stories" without the failures.

    3. Extreme objectivity and extreme subjectivity can be equally impractical. 

Many health books and websites focus on a few ideas which they seem to think hold the cure for everything. At the other extreme are "phonebook style" sources that give equal emphasis to every possible idea. We try to encourage open discussion, but we also try to present thoughtful summaries. This necessarily must include our own "unproven" opinions. However, we believe that the goal is not always to have the right answers, so much as to ask the right questions, and to inspire a practical starting point in your own research to meet your needs.

Please click here to join our free forum below. You can then discuss this chapter, or anything about holistic health, natural cures, alternative medicine, vitamins or supplements.

Holistic Review R: research sharing for open and free health information. All website images and content copyright © 2010 by HolisticReview.com administrators & licensors. No copying is allowed without written permission.