Best Countries in the World for Holistic and Alternative Medicine
Mark Sircus And "natural Allopathic Medicine"? Now I've Heard Everything From Quacks
"Allopathy" or "allopathic medicine" is commonly defined as "system in which medical doctors and other health care professionals (such as nurses, pharmacists, and therapists) treat symptoms and diseases using drugs, radiation, or surgery," with synonyms including—but not limited to—terms like biomedicine, conventional medicine, mainstream medicine, orthodox medicine, and Western medicine. Regular readers, of course, will immediately see the problem with this definition, as well as the synonyms, most of which are favored by quacks, but what many people don't realize is where the term "allopathic medicine" came from in the first place. The term "allopathy," and hence "allopathic medicine," was originally coined by the inventor of The One Quackery To Rule Them All, homeopathy, in order to distinguish homeopathy from conventional medicine. According to Hahneman the word "allopathy" derives from the Greek word allos, meaning other or opposite. Hahnemann meant it to describe what he viewed as a medical system that treats a symptom with something that causes its opposite, as in using a laxative to treat constipation. In comparison, his quackery homeopathy was based on the Law of Similars, which is often phrased as "like cures like" and states that to treat a disease you should use massively something that normally causes the symptom being treated (diluted to nonexistence according to the Law of Infinitesimals, of course). Basically, because Hahnemann viewed homeopathy as superior, his use of the term "allopathy" was coined with an implied denigration of any medicine that wasn't homeopathy.
Unfortunately, over the following two centuries, all too often practitioners of science-based medicine have been wiling to ignore the origin of the word "allopathy" and accept the false dichotomy originally posited by Hahnemann, calling conventional, science-based medicine "allopathic medicine." You can even find its unironic use that accepts the false dichotomy used to coin the term in many papers published in PubMed. Stamping out the term "allopathic medicine" for its implication that such medicine is inferior to the quackery that is homeopathy is, sadly, a battle that was lost long ago. If you want to see just how lost the battle was, I refer you to a doozy of an article by Mark Sircus, Ac., OMD, DM (P) (acupuncturist, doctor of oriental and pastoral medicine, whatever "pastoral medicine" is) entitled Natural Allopathic Medicine is Brilliant.
Before I get to the article itself, which, while an obvious rebranding of "natural medicine," is also a rather clever rebranding, I note that I haven't really written about Mark Sircus much here on SBM, although I have written about him on my not-so-secret other blog.
Who is Mark Sircus?As I wrote above, Mark Sircus bills himself as an "acupuncturist, doctor of oriental and pastoral medicine." Regular readers will realize that, contrary to the claims of acupuncturists, acupuncture is quackery based on a prescientific understanding of how the human body works whose popularity in the "West" is based largely on a clever retconning of the history of traditional Chinese medicine by China's Chairman Mao Zedong in the 1950s through the 1970s, while TCM is mostly quackery. As for "pastoral medicine," I decided to look it up. It turns out that "pastoral medicine" is a form of quackery that claims to be medicine based on the Bible, although now its definition has broadened to be basically any religion-based "medicine." A pseudomedical group known as the Neuroscience Institute of Pastoral Medicine describes "pastoral medicine" thusly:
Pastoral Science and Medicine (PSM) is the term devised by the Pastoral Medical Association (PMA) to describe the system of natural approaches founded upon spiritual principles used by PSM practitioners for promoting and improving physical, mental and spiritual health. Health improvement results from making positive lifestyle changes and following other natural procedures that are biblically sound, science-based and professionally administered pursuant to acceptable standards of care.
Personally, my favorite post on the Pastoral Wellness Alliance is entitled Are Your Holistic Services Legally Protected? And describes how to avoid getting in trouble with state medical boards and the law and how to have a ready legal defense if you ever do. In any event, notice how "pastoral medicine" is careful to use the weaselly language about "natural procedures that are biblically sound, science-based and professionally administered pursuant to acceptable standards of care." Of course, if that's all pastoral medicine practitioners did, there would likely be little trouble, but one look at Sircus' website shows that he, at least, does not follow anything resembling science-based standards of care.
For one thing, Sircus is a big fan of treating disease with bleach. For those not familiar with what I'm talking about, he very much advocates treating various diseases with Miracle Mineral Solution, which is a form of industrial bleach used for water purification and cleaning. For example, he advocates treating COVID-19 with MMS—as an alternative to vaccines!—as well as treating COVID-19 "vaccine-induced" cancers with MMS, as well as using "voltage healing" to treat cancer and a number of other diseases, while a brief perusal of his website uncovers a whole lot of quackery, particularly with MMS being advocated to treat a host of other diseases. Moreover, the very first time I ever encountered Sircus was in 2011 in the context of his advocating the killing of CDC scientists in a post charmingly titled String the Bastards Up. This was a precursor of the violent rhetoric of the antivaccine movement that science advocates have become all too familiar with since the pandemic arrived four years ago.
Basically, Sircus is a quack who's been around a long time. But what about "natural allopathic medicine"?
Mark Sircus and "natural allopathic medicine"In retrospect, I can't believe that I haven't written about this topic before, given that the first time I ever encountered Mark Sircus and his "natural allopathic medicine" was nearly a decade ago, when he was advocating it to treat Ebola. (You might remember the Ebola outbreaks of 2014 in Africa and the fear mongering that accompanied it.) Back then, Sircus described "natural allopathic medicine" as a "new therapeutic principle that revolutionizes both allopathic and naturopathic medicine offering a radical shift in medical thought and practice" focusing on "pH management, cell voltage, magnesium and iodine medicine, cannabinoid medicine, carbon dioxide medicine, re-mineralization of the body, increasing oxygen transport and oxygenation of the tissues, opening up of blood vessels, saturation and healing of cells with concentrated nutrition via superfoods, breathing retraining, emotional transformation processing, detoxification and removal of heavy metals and radioactive particles."
This is, as I like to call it, "biobabble." Remember "technobabble" from Star Trek: The Next Generation? Basically, technobabble is usually a word salad of real scientific terms thrown together almost randomly, often mixed with made-up "science-sounding" terms or acronyms, the result being impressive-sounding nonsense—impressive-sounding, at least to those without the scientific background to recognize it as nonsense. "Biobabble" is the same concept, just about biology. Unsurprisingly, quacks and antivaxxers are masters of biobabble and use it to provide impressive-sounding nonsensical "mechanisms" for whatever it is they are advocating, be it highly implausible treatments or how vaccines supposedly cause autism, cancer, or whatever, and Sircus appears to be no exception.
So what is he saying about "natural allopathic medicine" now? He begins:
Natural Allopathic Medicine is a form of medicine brilliant in its simplicity. It is as simple as surgeons washing their hands before surgery. It is as apparent as giving water to a person coming out of a desert who is severely dehydrated. It is brilliant because it prescribes magnesium as the first medicine for patients who are magnesium deficient, which is just about everyone. Meaning magnesium is applicable in all medical situations. However, because mainstream doctors do not know how to reason about medicine and health, they never prescribe it.
The value of surgeons washing their hands before surgery came to be appreciated through science, basically a combination of the work of Ignaz Semmelweis plus Louis Pasteur's germ theory, which provided the mechanism by which handwashing could decrease the incidence of postoperative infection. I have to wonder whether Sircus also considers wearing sterile rubber gloves to operate is "natural allopathic medicine." I once described how in the late 1800s surgeons demonstrated that wearing such gloves greatly diminished the chance of infection after surgery and how they came to be the standard for surgery. As for giving water to someone who is severely dehydrated, it's clear that Sircus is definitely not-a-doctor. For someone who is severely dehydrated, it's not enough to give just water. Solutions containing salt, such as saline, are much more efficient and effective in reversing dehydration and expanding intravascular volume.
As for Sircus' fixation on magnesium, I wondered what the heck he was talking about. Sure, magnesium is an important mineral. It's essential to cardiac function, for instance. But how does Sircus claim that "everyone" is "magnesium deficient"? Because that's just plain not true.
Sircus' very premise is also, of course, a false dichotomy. Is it actually "natural" to wash one's hands before doing surgery? I could make a plausible claim that doing so might remove beneficial bacteria whose presence can actually help the patient. How can we know which is the more accurate claim? Obviously, the only reason that we know which is true, whether handwashing by surgeons is good or bad for the patient, is science, at which point the distinction between "natural" and "not natural" is nothing more than branding.
I admit, though, that I was amused by this passage:
If one's motive is to treat and heal people of their disorders, the first thing to think of and do is to give the body what it needs. It is fundamental medical reasoning. Even the best doctors who are brave enough to confront the mainstream narrative on COVID-19 vaccines cannot bring themselves to address the real needs of their patients. They always have their favorite drugs, even if they are repurposed pharmaceuticals deemed safe. Doctors' biggest mistake is prescribing medications before meeting patients' basic physiological needs.
That's a dig at physicians falsely claiming that repurposed drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine can cure COVID-19, which amused me. That being said, much of medicine actually does involve giving the body what it needs. Indeed, anyone who's taken care of patients in an ICU setting knows just how much time and effort are expended making sure that deficient electrolytes and nutrients are repleted, for example, and that the lungs are receiving sufficient oxygen and that the blood is transporting that oxygen to the tissues that need it. There's a whole specialty devoted to "giving the body what it needs" in such a way as to improve health. It's called nutrition, and its practitioners are called dietitians.
Next up is a passage that provoked much facepalming:
Add iodine, selenium, glutathione, and sulfur to the list of essential medicines for the chronically ill. Zinc. Vitamin C and D and copper, too. One can also legally obtain and use chlorine dioxide if you pretend not to treat disease with it. Dentists, campers, and public water experts use it, so why shouldn't you? There is nothing like cleaning the blood and treating red blood cells with it.
Notice the clever trick here. Yes, iodine, selenium, glutathione, and sulfur are essential compounds. (Note that glutathione contains sulfur.) However, most people get enough from their diets. However, MMS (chlorine dioxide) is not a nutrient or an essential mineral. You don't need it. Sircus, however, throws it in there as though it is an essential nutrient, mineral, or vitamin. There is no evidence that it "cleans the blood" (whatever that means) or that the blood even generally needs "cleaning"; that is unless you're talking about "cleaning" it with hemodialysis in the presence of kidney failure, which Sircus most assuredly is not.
Sircus is just getting started, though:
Natural Allopathic Medicine treats cold conditions with infrared heat. Why can doctors not see and do this? It is smart enough to give oxygen in intense ways to hypoxic patients. It is innovative in administering hydrogen inhalation therapy to people suffering from inflammation and oxidative stress, which describes 100 percent of the chronically ill.
Natural Allopathic Medicine offers a path to medical simplicity and the brilliance of medicine sometimes found in ambulances, emergency rooms, and ICU wards, where some of the best medical practices are found. Did you know sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) is commonly used as an emergency medicine? Or that injected magnesium is the best medicine for cardiac arrest when people are at death's door.
In the emergency room, medicines must be safe while delivering instant life-saving healing power. Most of the above-listed medicines are already used in the best hospitals. If they are safe and robust enough for emergencies, they will also help us with chronic and acute diseases. Thus, what is presented is astounding regarding safety, low cost, and proven effectiveness.
It's been a while since I've done ACLS (advanced cardiac life support), but even so I looked askance at this claim about magnesium. So I looked it up. It turns out that in the latest ACLS guidelines it's recommended for the treatment of treat polymorphic ventricular tachycardia with a pulse, acute coronary syndrome with hypomagnesemia (low magnesium), life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias due to digitalis toxicity, and atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response. It's not generally recommended for cardiac arrest unless hypomagnesemia is suspected or the arrest occurred after a specific arrhythmia, Torsades de pointes, which can be caused by low magnesium.
As for sodium bicarbonate, well, yes, it has a number of uses. It has also been overused. I still remember the debates in the ICU when I was a resident over when it was appropriate to administer bicarb in the setting of severe acidosis. In cardiac arrest, earlier ACLS guidelines recommended routine bicarbonate administration as part of the ACLS algorithm, but more recent guidelines no longer do. While it is true that the debate in the literature continues, right now SB administration is only recommended for cardiac arrest related to hypokalemia (low potassium) or overdose of tricyclic antidepressants. Indeed, there has been a trend over the last decade against routinely using sodium bicarbonate to treat cardiac arrest, a trend supported by guidelines published by professional societies and organizations, with one recent article about bicarbonate in cardiac arrest arguing it's "time to put it away."
Funny how complex medicine is, isn't it? It goes beyond just what's "natural" and what is not, and it's certainly more complex than just "giving the body what it needs." None of this stops him, however, from opining:
Modern medicine poisons people with drugs when patients already have high levels of toxicity. To top off their madness, they give medicines that make patients' nutritional deficiencies worse.
The best natural medicines are the ones you must have—no matter what—to continue your life. Nutritional law is vital to resolving disease—not pharmaceuticals damaging cellular environments. Our cells need the right conditions for health and recovery from disease. There is no substitute for a nutrient that is lacking in the body. No pharmaceutical can make up for a nutritional deficiency.
Today, we need more nutrients, not less, because toxicities of too many types are a plague affecting the entire biosphere. We consume extra nutrients in the process of detoxification. However, over the last fifty years, the nutritional values of foods have been dropping, so we get less, we get sick, and we die. Superfoods help us make up the slack by addressing profound dietary deficiencies.
That's truly some amazing biobabble, isn't it? I mean, "nutritional law"? What th heck is that? Unlike physics, there are few "laws" in biology; rather, there is science and scientific theories. Quacks like Hahnemann do love to label their quackery as some sort of immutable "laws" of nature, though. Also, the biobabble has all the buzzwords, including "superfoods," a meaningless term, nothing more than marketing nonsense. So is "detoxification," a concept that vague, poorly described, or even unnamed "toxins" cause disease and need to be "detoxified," which has become fashionable nonsense and ritual purification.
My favorite rebranding, though, has to be "natural chemotherapy."
"Natural chemotherapy" vs. "regular chemotherapy"?Sircus starts this discussion the same way that so many cancer quacks discuss cancer and chemotherapy, by demonizing chemotherapy:
Chemotherapy is like a battering ram; it feels like a battering ram with apparent harmful effects that patients have to suffer through. No one should have to endure harsh treatment's avoidable impact, but that is not how oncologists see it. Most oncologists push the dose of chemo agents as high as they can. Dr. Patricia LoRusso, who leads drug discovery at Yale Cancer Center, said, "You get side effects, and then you have to stop the drug to recover from the side effects, and the tumor can grow."
Adding:
I do not know what doctors are doing, but they are not practicing rational medicine. When it comes to cancer or any other disease, if the first thing recommended is not magnesium, then they are guilty of medical malpractice. On that same list of essentials would be bicarbonates.
Oncologists who use chemo and radiation but ignore magnesium are committing their patients to much higher incidents of death. Surgeons not using magnesium before, during, and after operations also make surgery more dangerous. Cardiologists who prescribe Statin drugs and ignore magnesium, which most still do, are dooming their patients and societies to extremely high death rates via cardiac arrest.
What is it with this obsession with magnesium as a cure-all, even for cancer? None of this is evidence-based. Indeed, elsewhere Sircus lists his reasons and the evidence for claiming that magnesium (and bicarbonate) should be used to treat cancer, calling it "nontoxic natural chemotherapy":
Magnesium deficiency seems to be carcinogenic, and in case of solid tumors, a high level of supplemented magnesium inhibits carcinogenesis.[v] Culture of lymphocytes from humans in Mg-deficient media, resulted in morphologically and functionally abnormal cells. Mg is strongly related to the immune system in both nonspecific and specific immune responses, also known as innate and acquired immune responses.
Some medical scientists believe that mitochondrial problems may be at the heart of all chronic diseases, including cancer. People's health and energy largely depend on how much oxygen they have and how well their mitochondria utilize it.
I can't help but note that the articles that he cites date back to 1986 and even, later in his article, to 1930. Naturally, I looked up the articles. The 1986 article abstract states:
It is known that carcinogenesis induces Mg distribution disturbances which cause Mg mobilization through blood cells and Mg depletion in non-neoplastic tissues. Mg deficiency seems to be carcinogenic in cases of some particular haemolymphoreticular diseases only, more often, in cases of solid tumors, it inhibits carcinogenesis.
Oops! So, according to Sirucs' own reference, low magnesium isn't usually carcinogenic—just in a small subset of cancers—and actually inhibits the development of the more common solid epithelial malignancies. Seriously, do these quacks read even just the abstracts of the articles they cite? As for treating cancer with sodium bicarbonate, that is a longtime favorite bit of cancer quackery, often paired with some truly outrageously stupid claims, such as the claim that all cancer is a fungus.
I might have to do a post just on that article, and all the "natural chemotherapy" touted by Sircus, but for now, I'll leave with an observation before moving on. The broadest definition of "chemotherapy" for cancer is any chemical administered to treat the disease, or "the treatment of disease by the use of chemical substances, especially the treatment of cancer by cytotoxic and other drugs." Colloquially, the term is rarely used outside of the cytotoxic chemotherapy of cancer, the sort of drugs that do indeed range from toxic to very toxic and that tend to target the replication of tumor cells. The amusing thing, though, is that we already use a number of "natural chemotherapy" agents according to this very definition. Taxol, for instance, is derived from the bark of the Pacific yew tree. In addition, many other plant-based antitumor drugs remain in clinical use, such as vinblastine, vincristine, and podophyllotoxin analogs, and screening natural products for anticancer activity is a very active area of research. In other words, it's not as though science- and evidence-based oncology ignore "natural chemotherapy." Scientists and oncologists just require that a drug work, while not caring so much where it came from.
"Natural allopathic medicine": A meaningless buzzwordNear the end of his article on "natural allopathic medicine" and how "brilliant" it supposedly is, Mark Sircus claims:
It took me twenty years to develop Natural Allopathic Medicine, yet professionals and patients alike can learn how to practice and think about its basic tenets in a few hours. Until this year, one had to navigate through drsircus.Com's 1800 pages or do private consultations with me. I have now developed a multi-media course that aims to quickly get patients up and running the protocol.
Perish forbid that knowing how to treat disease takes years and years of education. You can be up and running treating yourself with "natural allopathic medicine" in a few hours, or so Sircus seems to be claiming; that is, if you pay for his multimedia course. But don't worry, the price is a low, low…well, this:
The first course is tailored to cancer patients with no time to lose in starting their treatments. The course can be purchased as a standalone or with consultations, as well as my 99-lesson cancer course. It will be offered free to anyone signing up for an hour consultation, but when it is officially published, the standalone course will cost 275 dollars.
Only $275? What a bargain! Only $25 more than a one-hour consultation, too! Truly, the grift is strong in this one.
Circling back to what I originally said about "allopathic" medicine versus homeopathy, though, I can't help but be amused how a quack like Sircus, who obviously desperately wants to be taken seriously, thinks that branding his quackery as "natural allopathic medicine" will do it. While it's funny how thirsty he is for the apparent scientific cred that comes from associating himself deceptively with conventional medicine, it's kind of depressing that Hahnemann's 200 year old disparaging term for conventional medicine has become so ubiquitous that almost no one knows its origin or realizes that it was not meant as a complement when it was coined, so much so that even quacks seeking to rebrand their quackery as scientific try to coopt it.
Quacks like Mark Sircus.
The Best Natural Ways To Strengthen Bones According To Doctors
As we age, our bones can become more fragile, leading to conditions like osteoporosis. While medications exist to help with bone density, many doctors advocate for natural ways to strengthen bones and improve overall bone health. From dietary choices to lifestyle modifications, there is an array of natural strategies that can benefit your skeletal system.
Firstly, it's widely accepted in the medical community that calcium is crucial for building strong bones from childhood through adulthood. Adults should aim for 1,000 mg per day, which jumps up to 1,200 mg per day for women over 50 and men over 70. Dairy products like milk, cheese, and yogurt are traditional sources of calcium. However, plant-based options such as kale, almonds, and tofu also pack a potent calcium punch.
In addition to calcium, Vitamin D is another essential player in bone health. This vitamin helps your body absorb calcium effectively. Sunlight exposure is the most natural way to get Vitamin D, with supplements recommended for those living in less sunny climates or for individuals with confirmed deficiencies.
Doctors also stress the importance of magnesium and vitamin K2 in maintaining bone health. Magnesium supports the conversion of vitamin D into its active form which assists in calcium absorption while Vitamin K2 ensures that calcium is directed into the bones rather than arteries.
Physical activity is highly recommended for bone strengthening. Weight-bearing exercises such as walking, running, or lifting weights can stimulate bone formation and preserve existing bone tissue. Resistance and balance activities not only strengthen bones but also enhance muscle mass and coordination which can prevent falls— a common cause of fractures in older adults.
Another natural approach is incorporating more protein into your diet since it's an important nutrient for bone health. Adequate protein intake helps repair bone microdamage and promotes new growth.
Moreover, limiting certain substances that promote bone loss is necessary. Doctors advise against excessive alcohol consumption and smoking since both have been linked to reduced bone density. Reducing caffeine intake is also recommended as high caffeine levels can interfere with calcium absorption.
Lastly, maintaining a healthy weight is beneficial for your bones. Being underweight increases the risk of osteopenia and osteoporosis, while carrying excess weight puts unnecessary stress on your skeleton.
In summary, a balanced diet rich in key nutrients like calcium and vitamin D combined with regular physical activity are among the best natural methods for strengthening bones according to medical experts. Avoiding detrimental lifestyle habits further protects your skeletal health as you age.
Remember to consult with healthcare professionals before making significant changes to diet or exercise routines to ensure they are suitable for your individual health needs.
9 Best Natural Erectile Dysfunction Treatments For 2024
The best erectile dysfunction treatments can include natural remedies, like changes to diet and alcohol consumption, and doctor-prescribed medication.
Erectile dysfunction (ED) occurs when someone with a penis can't have or maintain an erection. The condition affects around a third of men, according to research from 2018.
ED is more common in people who:
The treatment for ED depends on the cause. It may include prescription medications, vacuum devices, or surgery. But lifestyle changes and other natural treatments can also help improve ED.
There are many natural treatments for ED. They can include lifestyle changes like modifying your diet and getting exercise, as well as seeking mental health or relationship counseling.
It's best to talk with your doctor before trying a new treatment. They can help identify the cause of your ED and recommend effective ED treatment options, whether conventional, natural, or a combination.
1. DietEating a balanced diet may help maintain sexual function and decrease your risk of ED.
A 2020 study found that men who more strictly followed a Mediterranean diet or Alternative Healthy Eating Index 2010 diet had a reduced risk of developing ED. In particular, they consumed less red or processed meat and primarily ate:
Research from 2017 similarly found that eating more fruits, vegetables, and flavonoids (compounds found in produce, coffee, and other foods) lowered the risk of ED in men ages 18 to 40.
These foods are important for your overall health, so helping maintain or improve your sexual function as well is a win-win.
2. ExerciseResearch indicates that physical activity may help protect against and improve ED. It may be particularly effective if obesity, inactivity, or cardiovascular disease, among other conditions, contribute to your ED.
Research from 2018 found that moderate-to-intense aerobic exercise for 40 minutes a day, four times per week for 6 months helped reduce ED. This includes exercises like:
Physical activity helps improve blood vessel health, lower stress, and raise testosterone levels, which can all help with ED.
3. SleepGetting enough sleep each night is important for your overall health. Sleeping regularly may also improve your ED.
A 2017 study found that men working night shifts who reported worse sleep quality were at higher risk of ED.
Research from 2019 also indicated that people with a sleep disorder had a greater risk of developing ED. Other research has linked obstructive sleep apnea to an increased risk of ED.
Not getting enough sleep can lower your testosterone levels, which may contribute to ED. Sustained lack of sleep is also associated with conditions related to ED, like diabetes and high blood pressure.
4. Weight lossWeight may be another factor in ED.
According to research from 2020, ED was significantly more common in men with obesity, who were overweight, or with a larger waist circumference.
A small 2014 study indicated that gastric bypass surgery improved blood vessel health and ED among men with obesity. In addition, research from 2017 similarly found an improvement in ED after bariatric (weight loss) surgery.
If weight contributes to your ED, exercise and a balanced diet can help you lose weight and improve your ED.
In addition, such as semaglutide (Wegovy, Ozempic) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro) are now available. Speak with your doctor to see if they may be right for you.
5. PsychotherapyIn some cases, ED results from a combination of physical and psychological issues. These may include fear of failure, religious beliefs, and sexual trauma.
ED can lead to additional mental health issues, including emotional distress and lower self-esteem, which can further worsen ED. Therapy may help address these issues to improve ED.
According to research from 2021, psychological interventions like cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) were especially effective when paired with ED medications. Mental health interventions may also be effective, but more research is needed.
A small 2018 study involving 4 weeks of mindfulness-focused group therapy indicated that this type of therapy may help improve ED and sexual satisfaction.
More research should be done to determine the most effective types of psychotherapy for ED.
6. Sex therapy or couples counselingAround 10–25% of men with ED have no known risk factors. This condition, known as nonorganic ED, may be caused by a mental health condition like depression or by experiencing anxiety when having sex.
A small 2020 study found that cognitive behavior sex therapy (CBST) and medication were each effective on their own at reducing nonorganic ED. In addition, CBST was more effective at lowering anxiety among study participants.
It may also be helpful to attend counseling with your partner to help them understand your condition and discuss ways to support you.
The American Urological Association created a guideline for treating ED based on a review of studies. The association recommends talking with a mental health professional, especially with your partner, and says that therapy can improve communication between couples and help them integrate ED treatments into their sexual relationship.
7. Stress reductionStress and anxiety are often linked to ED.
A 2019 study found that stress was one of the main predictors of ED, in addition to anxiety and depression. The study suggests that chronic stress may affect testosterone or cause sleep deprivation, which may contribute to ED.
Still, other research indicates that the effect of stress on ED is still unclear. A 2020 study found no association between stress and ED.
Another small study from 2014 found that an 8-week stress management program alongside ED medication was similarly effective for improving ED, compared with the medication alone.
Until more is understood about stress and ED, it's still beneficial to reduce stress in your daily life to improve your overall health.
8. Alcohol reductionStudies have shown mixed results for the effects of alcohol on ED.
Research from 2018 found that drinking moderate amounts of alcohol (fewer than 21 drinks per week, as defined by the study) was associated with a lowered risk of ED. On the other hand, regular and high consumption didn't significantly affect ED.
Still, other research has linked alcohol use with ED. A 2018 study found that sexual dysfunction, particularly ED, was common in people with alcohol dependence syndrome. In addition, research from 2020 also identified alcohol as a risk factor for ED.
More research is needed on the role of alcohol in ED. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend that men consume two or fewer alcoholic drinks per day.
9. Smoking cessationSmoking is another behavior that likely contributes to ED. This may be caused, in part, because smoking can damage blood vessels and prevent enough blood from reaching the penis for an erection.
Smoking may also reduce nitric oxide availability in the body, which is needed to cause involuntary muscle relaxation and increased blood flow that play a role in erections.
According to research from 2015, more frequent smoking was associated with an increased risk of developing ED and more severe ED.
Some damage from smoking may not be reversible. Still, the review concluded that quitting smoking, especially for men under age 50, may help improve ED.
It's challenging to quit smoking, but there are many resources available to help. Stopping smoking has the potential to help ED and benefit many other areas of your overall health.
Note that quitting smoking also includes avoiding vaping, which is a source of nicotine.
Depending on the cause of your ED, natural remedies may not be effective for you. If this is the case, your doctor may prescribe you a proven ED medication. These medications are only available with a prescription.
However, if you're looking to avoid an in-person meeting with your doctor, you can be evaluated online by a healthcare professional through companies like Hims.
Here's a quick look at some of the erectile dysfunction treatments available through Hims:
Viagra is likely the most popular ED medication and is available only by prescription. You can meet with your doctor in person to evaluate your ED symptoms. They can prescribe you Viagra, or you can connect with a doctor online through a reputable online service like Hims.
Since ED medications like Viagra require a prescription, Hims can help connect you with a healthcare professional in your state who can evaluate your ED symptoms and write a Viagra prescription for you, but only if they believe that you could benefit from taking Viagra.
It's worth noting that since Viagra is a brand-name drug and isn't typically covered by insurance, the price per pill can be very high and outside of your budget. There's a generic version of Viagra, known as sildenafil, that contains the same primary ingredient as Viagra but at a fraction of the price.
Pros & consSildenafil is notable because it contains the same active ingredient as Viagra, is considered to be just as effective as Viagra, and is available for only a few dollars per dose depending on where you purchase it. Viagra and sildenafil prices can vary based on location and pharmacy.
Hims offers both sildenafil and Viagra online. After receiving your prescription, Hims will send the medication that you choose directly to you in discreet packaging.
If you find that you're not benefiting from taking sildenafil, talk with your prescriber about changing your dosage, or consider one of the other ED medications offered through Hims.
Pros & consSide effects of these medications may include headaches, indigestion, and dizziness. Don't use these medications if you're also taking nitrates or medications for chest pain.
Due to the long history and research around these medications, specifically sildenafil, and tadalafil, these medications are generally considered very safe, especially when taken as directed by your doctor.
Additionally, many of these medications are available online through reputable services like Roman, Hims, and the Optum Store that can all connect you with a doctor and — if prescribed — can ship the medications directly to your door.
Comments
Post a Comment