Jump to content
Acne.org
Search In
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Leigh2810

QUESTION/SEMI-SURVEY- Holistic vs. RX

Recommended Posts

or chemical, etc. and then decided to try the natural route. just curious. i had a derm appt today (1st one in 10 years) and i got an RX for spiro something or other, clina something or other and differin. for the past 2 weeks i have just been taking supplements and drinking ACV x2 a day (and noticing some improvement!) - i have mild acne (but persistent!) i am hoping to mb try for kids in a year... (i am 34 now..god does time fly!) sooo i am extra paranoid (def won't be taking the spiro after researching...) but differin ?? have any of you 'been there and done that' and really really really believe holistic is the way to go???

thanks all! :think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for me it was the opposite, i tried a lot of diet stuff, plus zinc and fish oil when i first started getting acne a couple years ago. as well as some "home remedies" but i ended up needing treatment from a derm to get my acne under control. i definitely recommend the differin, and the spiro should be very effective if your acne is hormonal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. if you do get pregnant, you can't use spiro, or differin (as far as i know)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to 3 dermatologists. The last one was educated at Harvard and got his graduate degree from Tufts. I was very confident that he would clear up my acne.

All three saw me for 10 minutes and put me on medication. The medication would make me vomit so much after taking it for 3 day. I still use a little topical Retin-A cream (if I get a really bad infection to increase cellular turnover)... but the oral medication had to go out the window.

I did get a new prescription in Canada (Stevia-A) for a topical cream, however, after using it for three days (just lightly rubbing it into a zit)... I would become naucious and very fatigued.

The only option for me is Hollistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw derms for about 10 years and was given all kinds of antibiotics, topicals and even accutane. They did nothing. My skin is clear from diet and supplements.

The only thing a dermatologist did that was ever the slightest bit helpful was the one who diagnosed my rosacea when I developed it too and the topical he prescribed was helpful. But, so is aloe vera, vitamin C and an anti-inflammatory diet. I haven't used a prescription for rosacea for years.

However, it doesn't have to be either/or. A derm can give you medications to treat your symptoms while you worry about your health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
have any of you 'been there and done that' and really really really believe holistic is the way to go???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'VE BEEN GOING TO DERMATOLOGISTS FOR A LOOOOOONG TIME, AND I'VE SEEN SOME IMPROVEMENT, BUT AFTER A FEW WEEKS AFTER I HAVE FINISHED MY TREATMENT, MY SKIN GOES BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS :( . I'VE BEEN TRYING FOR SOME WEEKS NATURAL METHODS (ACV, SUPPLEMETS AND JOJOBA OIL) AND SO FAR I'M PRETTY HAPPY WITH THE RESUTLS. I RECOMMEND TO GO TO A DERMATOLOGIST IF YOU HAVE SEVERE ACNE, BECAUSE ACCUTANE WORKS WONDERS, BUT IF YOU HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF ACNE AS ME (I DESCRIBE MINE LIKE YOURS: MILD BUT PERSISTENT), YOU SHOULD GIVE NATURAL TREATMENTS A TRY. MY DERMATOLOGIST PRESCRIBED ME CLINDAGEL, DIFFERIN AND MURAD FACE WASH, AND IT WORKED FOR A WHILE, BUT AFTER A MONTH OR SO, IT STOPPED WORKING.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
have any of you 'been there and done that' and really really really believe holistic is the way to go???

Think of traffic jam

What causes traffic jam?

There are many factors.

Let's say a group of experts is called to understand and solve the traffic jam problem.

One expert will research the streets (just to find out they're in perfect conditions)

One expert will research the traffic-lights (just to find out they're working properly)

One expert will research the cars (just to find out nothing is wrong with them)

One expert will research the signs (just to find out they're at the right place)

Traffic jam is not caused by the parts and their flaws but is created by the interaction of the parts. This is what holistic means.

Holistic in medicine means looking at interactions of the parts and not at the parts.

There are dozen of examples.

In fibromyalgia the taken-singularly parts involved are healthy and working properly, what is messed up is how they interact. In reactive hypoglycemia the taken-singularly glands are healthy and working properly, it's how they interact which is screwed up. In Myalgic Encephalopathy the brain and the nerves are in good conditions, it's how they interact which doesn't work. In vasodepression the heart and its valve are healthy it's how they interact with circulation that is not working. In nutrition the single foods are rather healthy/harmless per se, it's how the long term eating interact with the long term function which is relevant.

Most of the time the majority of physicians tend (in spite of compelling evidence) to dismiss the existence itself of these serious and life-impairing diseases. Many claim vasodepression is just anxiety, M.E is just hypochondria, reactive hypoglycemia doesn't exist and that nutrition is irrelevant to health or disease prevention (not to mention that they often claim the people claiming otherwise and not accepting the "wise" diagnosis should see a shrink)

According to Dr. Schwarzbein the problem is that doctors are used to identifying diseases with known causes and organic impairment; in other words they're not trained to think, diagnose and cure holistically.

According to Dr. Weiss doctors take seriously only those conditions that correspond to already statistically defined (unindividual constants) identifiable organic defeacts (inborn or aquired) Behind this view (based on a pure leap of faith) which is often called allopathic or orthodox is the outdated assumption that the world/existence rather than being organic and fluid is mechanistic (like a clock; as a matter of fact the invention of the clock was the most important fact in the history of humans, shaping their preconceived views about reality in irreversible ways) and that everything is nothing more than the sum of its parts and everything can be understood by breaking it down into its smallest parts and whatever problem can be understood by looking at the condition of each part.

Unfortunately when things are broken down into smallest parts all the interactive factors are lost (probably the most important aspect of any entity in this world) and all the individuality is lost. Many espistemologists of sciences have pointed out how orthodox medicine was necrophilic in its true essence. That is, once dead, once cut open, beings become all identical and interchangeable ruled by a bunch of constants. Unfortunately allopathic medicine is still infected by this flawed view blinded by a filter they themselves artificially created in laboratory but which has nothing to do with interactive, circumstantial, individual and unstatic conditions of health or sickness, in fact nothing to do with real life itself.

So you see, for me choosing "holistic" over "allopathic" is not a matter of "alternatives to the official way" but of realizing that one paradigm may enterily be inadequate not only to treat many conditions but even to detect and diagnose them, and may be used to give a lot of false positives.

Such flaws are also subtle in that as long as the perspective focuses on one limited aspect of the whole, the otherwise flawed and plain wrong conclusions may even appear as perfectly explaining truths and facts; it's when the singular part (and its limited framework, the only place within which certain wrong theories keep "being" or "appearing" right) is reconciled with the whole that the entire structure of evidence (and objectivity) collapses.

Another problem with the flaw of this perspective is that therapies may seem to work while what they're actually doing is manipulating entities within certain isolated frameworks. One example that comes to mind as an analogy is removing letters that could make up curses from one's alphabeth and claiming that the clear and objective new lack of curses within such manipulated vocabulary is the proof that the letters-removing was a sound cure against cursing. (the fact that this kind of solution prevents many other useful words from being said is an analogy for what happens in allopathic psichiatry)

In my opinion acne (like M.E, NMH, reactive hypoglycemia, etc...) is a candidate for being especially of holistic nature and requiring an holistic perspective. The clues are many (people's success, huge amount of factors, vast individual responses, an absence of clear constant disfunctions of the parts, evidence of interactive disfunctions, links with the whole of the individuality of a person including his/her attitudes; fears; emotions; stress, links with another ENTERELY HOLISTIC aspect of life: nutrition ...)

Really think deeply about this because the issue is not as simple as "natural vs chemical" but between a perspective of life and conditions that may appear as true and factual only as long as the evidence and facts are kept within the limits of certain specific (and often artificial) limited frameworks versus a global view that appears to better grasp the real nature of diseases and of healing once the first view, brought outside of its narrow framework and artificial premises, collapses and stops making any sense or being consistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all really good replies. thanks. Maybe my being a westerner has really conditioned me into my either/or attitude. i don't necesssarily live my life that way tho. i guess after visiting the dermatologist after 10 years i shouldn't have expected anything else (a bunch of RX's) - i guess too that i have a romantic idea of treatments...natural, thru foods, exercise and supplements--and healthy thinking maybe... i might go back to my accupuncturist. i visited him twice and don't know if i gave it enough time. i will say, that i was highly highly impressed with my first visit..as we sat for almost a 1/2 hour talking about me and my health and mindset. i guess western medical doctors like to have you fill that part out in the waiting room w/ a bunch of either/or / YES/NO questions... savs them time for sure to move the conveyor belt of sick people right thru...always looking for a cure or treatment and never addressing the cause or promoting preventive healthcare.

so interesting how we are such products of our environments...

on a side note, have any of you seen SICKO yet? i did... worth seeing for sure- frustrating tho, esp if you live in the US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Personalized Advice Quiz - All of Acne.org in just a few minutes

×