Does anyone know anything about this?

[Pooka1]

Although I hate seeing adults suckered into nonsense treatments, the thing that make me vomit is when parents go to these treatments for their kids.

[rohrer01]

As I know, alternative methods are those not belonging to the medical protocol, so if you are an adult with scoliosis and you want to vomit when you hear about alternative methods, you have only two options: Doing nothing (they call it watch and wait) if you are under the surgical range and fusion, if you are in that range. Also in both cases you can use meds, drugs.. Good luck with those options!.

Flerc,
From reading this post I have a very strong feeling that you are not understanding what we mean when we talk about "science" or "medicine".

The scientific method takes a hypothesis, no matter how old or what it's called, and puts it to the test. If there is strong "belief" that it will work based on the information gathered about it, it becomes a theory. If it is reproducible EVERY time it becomes fact. It may or may not be "relabeled" depending on the connotation and religious aspects behind it.

I, for one, will not do Yoga classes because they still call it Yoga and most of them still teach mantras, although you can choose whatever you want to repeat. That, to me, is religious. I'm not anti-religion. I'm anti-THAT religion for myself on a personal level. However, I would do specific poses as part of PT if they were proven to help with pain and/or progression if it isn't presented as Yoga. I don't care if they say it came from Yoga as long as they don't present it that way.

Honestly, when I had acupuncture I went to a legitimate medical facility and was SHOCKED when Chi and meridian garbage was presented to me. I felt EXTREMELY uncomfortable as I know that there is absolutely NO evidence that meridians exist and certainly Chi does not flow through these imaginary channels that don't exist. That's the garbage pseudoscience part of acupuncture. The scientifically proven way that it works makes it a legitimate therapy for SOME things, but not all that it claims to do.

So your interest in "alternative" therapies is totally legitimate IF you are separating out the junk from the fact. There may be a non-surgical way to help scoliosis. We just haven't found it, yet. It seems to be your mission to find it. Good for you and better for everyone else you share it with if you do! It just has to be repeatable and thus become fact. Then it will become mainstream science.

[flerc]

Although I hate seeing adults suckered into nonsense treatments, the thing that make me vomit is when parents go to these treatments for their kids.

What make me vomit is to see people dedicating their lifes to convince people to take surgery. What may be more putrid? I cannot imagine really.

[Pooka1]

What make me vomit is to see people dedicating their lifes to convince people to take surgery. What may be more putrid? I cannot imagine really.

I am following the evidence. That is all I am doing. You interpret that as advocating for surgery. You can't seem to grasp that the reason I seem pro-surgery to you is because that is where the most good evidence is. You are not focused on evidence. This is what I think Rohrer means when she suggests you do NOT appear to understand how science works. It is very obvious you are not willing or able to follow along in any of this. You are not playing the game rationally.

You are certainly not alone in your wanting to believe that there are effective non-surgical treatments for progression. Hope is rational. People can try these non-surgical treatments despite having little evidence. But rational people do not claim there is good evidence for these treatments. Rational people admit the most evidence of efficacy for treating progression is for surgical techniques. And they focus on evidence and not emotion. Please try that.

I have been floored several times by people coming on here just assuming there MUST exist a non-surgical treatment for progression just because, well there MUST be. That is a hope, not a scientific claim. Some folks clearly do not understand the difference.

Think about why people get surgery. Nobody would get surgery if there was evidence for effective non-surgical treatments for progression. Insurance companies wouldn't pay out on expensive surgeries if cheaper treatments existed.

Do you see how you can use logic to help navigate this area? You only use emotion which is never going to help you.

[Pooka1]

What make me vomit is to see people dedicating their lifes to convince people to take surgery. What may be more putrid? I cannot imagine really.

I will make this simple... I am interested in evidence and my comments follow from that. That is science.

You don't want to accept that there are no effective non-surgical treatments for progression. That is emotion.

We are playing two entirely different games. That's why you have always struggled with understanding what I am doing in my comments.

[flerc]

We are playing two entirely different games.

Yes, it's a fact, we are playing two entirely different games since I'm here because I need to solve a complex problem, not to convince anyone about nothing I have not time to sterile discussions, unavoidable among people with different purpose and different kind of thinking. For people with a mathematical thinking is impossible to accept the adapted terminology and concepts in order to conform a dogmatic vision trying to show the medical protocol as the only one choice. Science has nothing to do with this. You say that there is no evidence that non surgical treatments works. How can you know it? Evidence means proof, which is the proof you may show about it? It would be different if you would be saying that there is no evidence showing that non surgical treatments don't work, we may agree about the logic behind that claim, but you use a deformed definition about what evidence means. It took me some years to understand that kind of thinking, not really logical thinking and followed by most physicians (fortunately not all). I should need to born again to don't refuse this way to analyze problems, I can think by myself in a rational way.
If you would have enough background in hard sciences you would have a mathematical thinking and if you had ever led a complex Project in your life, you would understand what solve a problem really means and then you realize that a problem so complex as having scoliosis is does not admit a so simple vision as you are promoting here.

[flerc]

Rational people admit the most evidence of efficacy for treating progression is for surgical techniques.

Rational people is not only focused in a part of the problem and a part of the options. It would be against logic and Problem Solving principles. They also realize how much difficult is to give a general solution to a complex problem with so many different cases. They also never discarded none option at least be sure there are other better in every sense and also understand that some options may be the best in some cases but not in others. It would be good you'll try to consider this concepts before doing your categorical claims.

[Pooka1]

I'm here because I need to solve a complex problem

A lay person who is not familiar with how science works who cataloged one wacky treatment after the next from .com websites like you have done is not likely to solve a complex problem. Any complex problem.

Similarly, people with no science training who are doing armchair biochemistry by doing 5 minute google searches are not likely to solve IS.

The people most likely to solve a complex medical problem are MDs and PhDs trained in a specific field of science who use the scientific method to figure out what works.

When lay people try to play the game they often fail. Like Schroth whose MD grandson couldn't make it work. Or chiros working with imaginary concepts.

It seems likely to me that the way IS will be solved is by the PhDs in one of the few research groups. They will figure out how to interrupt the process such that no treatment, surgical or non-surgical is needed because the curve will never be allowed to develop.

Within the field of non-surgical techniques, the better papers are not by lay people but by lettered people including McIntire, Hawes, etc.. I do not include Weiss here because I think his papers are sometimes misleading. Just my opinion.

I understand the need for lay people to want to step and and speed the process of solving IS. But I am not sure it is ever going to be fruitful.

[Pooka1]

If you would have enough background in hard sciences you would have a mathematical thinking and if you had ever led a complex Project in your life, you would understand what solve a problem really means and then you realize that a problem so complex as having scoliosis is does not admit a so simple vision as you are promoting here.

Watch this folks...

Are you as sure that I don't have a background in hard science and that I don't use math and that I have never lead a complex science project as you are sure of all your other claims?

I'll wait for your answer.

[flerc]

Watch this folks...

Are you as sure that I don't have a background in hard science and that I don't use math and that I have never lead a complex science project as you are sure of all your other claims?

I'll wait for your answer.

So sure as you seems to be are sure I'm a lay person don't knowing what science and rational thinking is. But to be absolutely sure I should to really know why you filled this forum with pseudo rational reasonings, maybe only because you decided it would be the best for your purpose. I'm more sure that you are not a good person and absolutely sure you are at least a virtually bad person. To be absolutely sure you are really a bad person, I should to know you, to really know what is leading you to do what you are doing here and I cannot do that.

[flerc]

Are you as sure that I don't have a background in hard science and that I don't use math

To use Math and to have a Mathematical thinking is not the same, is full of people using statistics or equations, or some outcomes of Math Analysis but don't having such kind of thinking, that you have proved here you don't have.. supposing you were really honest in what you said. I can quote thousands of evidence about this, you cannot do the same about me.

[rohrer01]

I will make this simple... I am interested in evidence and my comments follow from that. That is science.

You don't want to accept that there are no effective non-surgical treatments for progression. That is emotion.

We are playing two entirely different games. That's why you have always struggled with understanding what I am doing in my comments.

Sharon,
I will defend Flerc here for this statement. You cannot PROVE that there exists no non-surgical treatment for progression in scoliosis. Therefore the bold (mine) statement is false until it can be proven true. You cannot say that something doesn't exist if you can't prove it doesn't exist (math logic). I know you can get into a bunch of hypothetical nonsense here.

There exists all kinds of things that the human race had no understanding of in the past. There still exist many things that the human race has no understanding of. When you get into quantum physics it is just mind blowing. The average person can not comprehend even the basics of what these physicists are doing and studying.

Just be careful of how things are phrased. Flerc is hopeful that a non-surgical cure will be found. He bases that hope on something. He may not be basing hope on emotion. He does need to understand the scientific method and that it is used on all kinds of what we may believe to be wacky ideas. Remember, people used to believe in spontaneous generation until it was tested by putting rotting meat in a jar and covering the jar with a cloth. The maggots appeared on the cloth and not in the meat. People really believed that rotting things created maggots and flies. They probably thought that the guy (I can't remember which one) was nuts by trying the scientific method on his hypothesis that maggots come from flies and not rotting things. He PROVED that the flies lay eggs and don't spontaneously appear. It was also widely accepted that the world was flat, wacky indeed, and proven wrong.

On the other hand, Flerc, SHAME on you for calling Sharon or anyone else a "bad person" and then trying to qualify it by saying that you can't say for sure she is unless you meet her. It is not for us to determine who a bad person is. Yes, there are bad people out there. But I'm certainly not going to go around saying someone is bad, especially if their crime is in contradicting my thoughts and ideas. I would just not associate with a person that makes ME feel bad.

[Pooka1]

Sharon,
I will defend Flerc here for this statement. You cannot PROVE that there exists no non-surgical treatment for progression in scoliosis. Therefore the bold (mine) statement is false until it can be proven true. You cannot say that something doesn't exist if you can't prove it doesn't exist (math logic). I know you can get into a bunch of hypothetical nonsense here.

Yes of course. I said nothing to disagree with what you said.

I meant there are no proven treatments now that we know of. I never assume there won't be in the future. You can't prove a negative.

People can't just KNOW there is a proven treatment. They have to SHOW it. That hasn't been shown to date.

[rohrer01]

I understood what you meant. However, math logic was brought up. We have to remember not to let emotion get the better of anyone whether they spout nonsense or not. I think your second comment made it more clear. I think Flerc is determined to find a non-surgical method for successfully treating scoliosis. If he does, a lot of people will applaud him.

But I think the, "you are a bad person", statement will get this thread closed when Linda gets up and sees it. You don't seem to be a bad person to me. You could have quit this forum YEARS ago. Yet, you persist. Your girls are grown and in college. Thanks for sticking around!

[flerc]

I'm more sure that you are not a good person and absolutely sure you are at least a virtually bad person. To be absolutely sure you are really a bad person, I should to know you, to really know what is leading you to do what you are doing here and I cannot do that.

I have never said "you are a bad person" and I explained why I cannot say that.