Doug and Mel,
Thanks for your comments (enjoyed the house story).Can't say that I do not
agree with you. I believe we are probably on the same page, just expressing
it somewhat differently.As an aside, I am not against quantitative
research. I believe there are other research methods (i.e. qualitative
methodologies) that may provide answers to the questions we seek.
Rege
At 08:36 AM 8/30/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Rege:
>
>I offer the following for discussion.
>
> If that means I am against egoism, power, control,
>| domination, and manipulation that has been perpetuated by western
>| philosophy for the past century - then that is me!!
>
>I do not think the west holds exclusivity in this area.
>|
>| I don't think there is anything wrong with reductionist thinking. I just
>do
>| not think it is the only way.Just like I don't think that quantatative
>| research, RCT's, or evidence-based research is the only way.
>|
>I agree to an extent, at what point do you support the use of quantitative
>research and when do you not? When is it appropriate and when is it not? Too
>often I have seen people enthusiastically promote the results of a RCT when
>it supports their point of view. Those same people will then trash the RCT
>when it doesn't fit their view or it challenges their belief.
>
>| I got into this frey to suggest that there are other ways we need to look
>| at the things we say that do not work (based on traditional research),
>when
>| in actuality there are those practitioners who know they work but are
>| unsure why. That's all.
>|
>I am struck by the frequent pronouncements by many of my colleagues that
>they "know it works" yet do not have evidence beyond anecdote. I would offer
>that we do not "know" anything until we do the research, even then we only
>"know" more than we did, not everything.
>
>Yesterday there was a piece in my local newspaper about a mansion in town.
>The mansion was built by a wealthy physician in the late 1800's. He made his
>money by selling a concoction called "Dr. Miller's Discovery." Claims it
>could treat most things. In one sense over the last 100 + years we
>(medicine) have come far from the days of Dr. Miller. In another sense we
>haven't. Medicine has shown that on the whole when research is applied
>morbidity, mortality and disability are reduced. I would hope that if Dr.
>Miller were alive today he would take some of his millions and do the
>research. The sad truth is that he could still sell his concoction and make
>millions because he "knows" it works.
>
>Perhaps we should set a time line for practitioners to follow. For every
>"new" treatment that is promoted the promoters has five years to do/fund the
>research or stop promoting the treatment. We as a profession should have no
>tolerance for our colleagues getting rich on the speaking circuit year after
>year without the research to support their beliefs. Nor should we have
>tolerance for academic physical therapy institutions who promote treatment
>approaches that have been shown not to be efficacious.
>
>If you "know" it works prove it.
>
>Food for thought.
>
>*******************************************************
>Douglas M. White, PT, OCS
>Physical Therapist, Consultant
>191 Blue Hills Parkway
>Milton, MA USA 02186
>P: 617.696.1974
>[log in to unmask]
>http://DouglasWhite.tripod.com
>
>| >
>| Rege Turocy, DHCE, PT
>| Assistant Professor
>| Department of Physical Therapy
>| Rangos School of Health Sciences
>| Duquesne University
>| Pittsburgh, PA 15282
>| 412/396-5545
>
>
Rege Turocy, DHCE, PT
Assistant Professor
Department of Physical Therapy
Rangos School of Health Sciences
Duquesne University
Pittsburgh, PA 15282
412/396-5545
|