Steeleworks

Believe it or not, there is probably a treasure trove of research on what you do. Finding it is the challenge. Most will be outside the US. Learn it and become a source of knowledge anyone can go to find information. Then, learn how to incorporate what you know into the current standard of practice. For instance, a common cardiac drug is a chemical version of a natural element we need to live. Once finding the research, it was easy to go to doctors and say, consider this as an option because it made sense. Get training where ever and when ever you can. In the case of Bloodless, I got in on training that was only for doctors in the early years, when it was just getting started. I knew both the standard of care with regard to blood transfusion as well as the limitations. Once knowing the limitations, it was possible to show why bloodless was a better option as it addressed the problems and provided a better solution. Learn how to become quietly assertive. When talking to a hemonk regarding a patient with a Hgb of 2.9 and making suggestions, his response was my suggestion would not help. I asked if it would hurt which he said no. Got to love disbelief. To that I suggested an order be made. Once written, I suggested it be stat, since the blood count is not considered compatible with continued living. To everyone's surprise (except me and the 3 docs who asked me to consult on the case), his count came up from 2.9 to 3.9 in 12 hours. While outside the science as to why it works, there was research that showed it was possible, only not with the TX recommended to and ordered by the Hemonk. Find Champions smarter than you are and connect with them. In the case of hydration, I also found everyone who was in the pro-natural salt camp. I am aligned with a Chief of Epidemiology at a prestigious East Coast medical school. Think beyond the basics. Beyond being an expert, I can postulate the various ways water and salt work as co-factors and co-transporters to numerous supplements and medicines, even though there is no specific research. The problem, how do you create a placebo of water or salt, especially when the salt is taken orally and is taken in the mouth where it is tasted. However, there is research on vitamin C. There is research on sodium bicarb. So, it is not hard to see the benefit of sodium ascorbate. So, take epilepsy...add the search term 'fluid and electrolytes' without quotes. There are 136 papers on NCIB (Pub Med) dating back to 1972. Interestingly, there is a possible correlation with strokes. Also, Seizure following oral rehydration of hypernatremia with water. Now add this info to the foods you recommend....some have a little salt and many have various kinds of sugar (hypertonic vs hypotonic and a natural food-based dextrose). There is your connection and the research to show why it works, only not with the various foods you use. It is not a very long stretch to connect the dots and make your case. Know both sides of the issue for and against use. I found research showing taking unprocessed salt lowers BP, although not the focus of the study. I also know why the various salt and BP research is flawed and the research that shows low salt intake results in increased cardiac issues (both CDC and JAMA say low salt is bad although they promote low salt intake). Know why it works and why it does not. When natural salt fails to lower BP (11 times for us out of over 10,000 clients) , I can with a reasonable amount of certainty say why and what to do to fix it. More importantly, I can teach those I contact to do it right so they will not have a problem and further disrupt our numbers. Don't be dogmatic. Once when lecturing, a doc came up and asked me in front of several other docs about outcomes. I said we were experiencing an 80% success rate in the practice. He said, "I can believe that, had you said your numbers were any better, I would not have believed anything you said." (actually, in the thousands of patients I personally case managed, not one died and especially for not having a blood transfusion Hgb 2.9 my lowest managed. Hgb 1.9 lowest in literature last I looked also survived). The Advanced Transfusion Practice / Bloodless modality number however is in the 80% success rate. Hope this gets you on the path of credibility.

If you have not, get and read the book, Jonathan Livingston Seagull. It best describes, be it metaphorically, the world you will be leaving and the one you will be entering. One word of advice, become an authority in the care you provide. I garnered the respect of MD's and even Hematologists early in my holistic career (in the mid to late 90's), even before I knew there was such a thing as holistic, although practicing the art. It only happened because I became an authority on the care I provided. You will need to become more than just an expert. Even recently, I just spoke to a MD about a client who was not responding to ABX and how increasing sodium intake (the unprocessed kind) and vitamin C (sodium ascorbate) would solve the problem and how switching to natural iodine would solve another problem at a fraction of the cost of the current med. He gave his blessing and changed the treatment. What Doc was doing was not working and so, what did he have to lose other than a patient if it was not possible to get him better. BTW, you might enjoy checking out The NNT for various ABX and drugs. Oh yes, it was a success. As Jonathan the seagull responded to his banishment....Irresponsibility? My brothers!” he cried. Who is more responsible than a gull who finds and follows a meaning, a higher purpose for life? For a thousand years we have scrabbled after fish heads, but now we have a reason to live — to learn, to discover, to be free! Give me one chance, let me show you what I've found ...” They turned their backs as they banished him. On leaving his flock, flying farther and higher, he came across others....who greeted him with.... We're from your Flock, Jonathan. We are your brothers.” The words were strong and calm. We've come to take you higher, to take you home." Sonicleese, We are your brothers and sisters. We are going to take you to new frontiers of nursing knowledge, new heights of care. Welcome home.

A number of people smarter than me thought there was a need for a specialty. Then another number of people, also smarter than me and who are the governing body of nursing standards and practice agreed that there was a need. Thus we have a specialty. It was said above,"When appropriate that is the standard response by any nurse." While that is a nice thought and hopefully that would be the way it should be, it sadly is not. Let me give an example from my past. Late in the night, taking blood sugars of two patients in the same room, their numbers are 45 and 43 respectively. Both feel fine and have no complaints. I assume that two numbers that close and that low is something wrong with the machine. Rather than checking the machine, I get another and repeat. The values are similar. I order stat blood draws to make sure. The numbers for both are off by only 1 or 2 again. I mix some orange juice, milk and sugar and give to each. This is a slow, medium and fast sugar that brings the sugar up fast and then holds it. I got wrote up twice by one of my colleague for not giving IV push which was the protocol. The doctor came in the next day and thanked me for not giving the IV push and my manager said not to worry about the write ups. I was not worried as there was an empowerment policy that I used to justify my actions. Why would I want to put the patients at risk of an IV push when there was a safer alternative available. Sadly, this is the norm in the hospitals where I have worked. Or the nurse who draws up APAP for an aphasic patient with contracted hand pain. As a manager, I asked why. She said that was all that was ordered. I reminded her it was her job to question the orders when lacking or not appropriate. At the time, there were two double blind placebo studies that showed placebos worked better for arthritis pain. The question, if this was a common complaint as she said, which it was not documented, why wasn't something done about it in terms of solving the cause. Calling the doc, he asked what I would recommend. Was he testing or curious, I did not know. I suggested siniment and baclofin. He thought it a good solution and it worked. Relieve the contracture and relieve the pain. Sadly, this is not an isolated case. Maybe this is just in one hospital but these happened in facilities 2/12 hour apart. I kept seeing this over and over. What should be and what is, the are two different things. I respectfully disagree. Most nurses are not holistic. Most follow an allopathic model of nursing. While a recent study found that 60% of schools are including the definition of holistic in their practice. If it always was a part of nursing practice, why is it only in 60 percent of schools. While there is a shift toward this, the world nurses operate in is mostly allopathic. And think about it, if someone breaks their leg, the doctor set it. Nurse helps. Job done. I have yet to find someone who got dietary exit teaching on how to heal in my part of the country, even in 2015. I would be curious what others think?

The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing said (Volume62001/No2May01) .... "Precisely because holistic nursing recognizes the body-mind-spirit connection of persons, holistic nurses often practice complementary/alternative modalities. " It went on to say that holistic nurses use 'complementary and alternative' as well as allopathic modalities. "Holistic nursing cannot and should not be defined as use of modalities defined as 'alternative'." It also pointed out that while all nurses could be holistic, not all are. It is a specialty of nursing with practice standards and a certification.

Ixchel, Thank you for that. I have been out of high tech peds as well as vent trach nursing in the ICU for over a decade now. I started on a Seamons (I think that was the name) and ended with the Gerber (the one the size of a telephone book). It has come a long way since I started in it and since I left that field.

Perhaps I did not word it well. I said, "The aid thought that she was going into respiratory arrest." Lets see...patient is having an anxiety attack. Looks to the aid like the patient is in respiratory arrest but it was an anxiety attack. Yep. The aid called a code blue on an anxiety attack. I did not know it was an anxiety attack until I came into the room and looked at her. As soon as I saw the patients face, it was apparent that it was not respiratory arrest. How did I know this. The science called 'body language' (which is a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results) and, I don't know, maybe a my vent trach experience. The treatment that brought the patient out of the anxiety attack, a hug...(treating the whole person thing we have been talking about here). You tell me...was she wrong calling a code. She made the right call based on her limited knowledge but she was still wrong. When you say things like, "Do you listen to yourself before you speak????," it just feels like it is an attack on me. First, if I offended you in any way personally, I would like to apologize. But attacking what I say, help me understand how this contributes to the discussion? How does this show that holistic is either good or bad? Is this about me or the modality and the treatments that are given? We need to stop attacking fellow nurses and we need to start looking at how we can make health care better. Nitpicking words, that is not helping. It only detracts. And, by the way, to answer one of your questions, well, I am writing. Did I read what I wrote before I hit post...yes. Again, why would anyone want to post to this thread if they are going to be bullied for what they say? To answer the question at the start, Where are the Holistic Nurses....yes where are they? Why would they want to post here? Oh wait, I know....."Throughout the history of medicine, iconoclastic thought processes and new evidence suggesting novel treatments of disease mechanisms, such as the holistic treatment of health conditions clash as they are met with controversy, resistance, and sluggish knowledge translation."

Dear Paleo, You said, "I'd love to connect with other like-minded nurses!" Unfortunately, as you can see, this kind of forum brings out people who have nothing meaningful to contribute, do not offer sound and well thought out arguments (if they are against it) and have to resort to bullying and snarky comments. With all due respect, I have been given way more intelligent arguments against my practice by doctors. The flaming mostly comes from other nurses. Sad, but this is the world we live in. Why would someone want to come on here and tell the wonders that they are enjoying to be treated this way? Interestingly, when nothing else works, these same doctors send the people they cannot help to me. Here is something I found on peer reviewed journal....it has been massged to be more focused on holistic health care but I believe it to be true about the resistance to change. "Despite extensive clinical evidence to support the accuracy and conformity of many holistic treatments, many in the medical community are unwilling to accept these treatments as effective, efficient and safe." "Throughout the history of medicine, iconoclastic thought processes and new evidence suggesting novel treatments of disease mechanisms, such as the holistic treatment of health conditions clash as they are met with controversy, resistance, and sluggish knowledge translation." I do believe, we have a marketing problem, not a modality problem. People would not keep coming to us if we were not helping them. People are stopping seeing the medical profession because of the outcomes. While we will always go to doctors with broken bones, cuts and burns, there are some things that can be treated better without chemicals and invasive procedures. Because of the readmission rules, there is now a huge opportunity to take holistic into the mainstream of hospital care. I started out practicing holistic in the hospital. I have seen vary few nurses actually practice holistic nursing. They are there but they are few. How can I say this? Consider just the Blood Transfusion Issue...the common disdain from almost all nurses would be, "I don't believe in it." Wait, bloodless medicine is not a religion, it is a modality that met the needs of my patients, mind, body and spirit. In the thousands I case managed, none died. None of my patients or clients got AIDS as did over 50,000 in Canada. None of my clients got Hep C (oops, we got the test wrong but it is fixed now). As to the "do you know what holistic means? comment, once an aid called a code on a patient with lung strictures due to drug use. The aid thought that she was going into respiratory arrest. I got to her first, put my arm around her and held her. In 15 seconds I had her breathing and avoided intubation. The team was not happy. The aid made a good call but wrong. My patient was treated in an alternative way that saved her any additional pain and suffering. One hug that day actually kept the doctor away. This list of why most are not holistic could go on. We have a long way to go.

I am so sorry. I thought this post was to encourage a discussion on the challenges of holistic healthcare and how it can be introduced to more people. I did not know that it was about challenging whether alternatives work or not. Please note I am not anti hospital or anti doctor. I still work with main stream doctors and nurses. Some of them are coming on board with holistic treatments. Some have even adopted increasing salt intake and drinking water (the Water Cures Protocol) and are finding incredible results. As to the negative comments, well, we could go back and forth on this all day. There are greedy people in both in the pharmaceutical industry and in vitamins and supplement industries. Lets agree that we disagree on the making profits helping people. You need look no farther than pharmaceutical study bias and fraud, medicare fraud, chemotherapy fraud and more to see that medicine is more than a flawed system. There was a time I made more as a hospital nurse than hospitalists (after they paid dues and medmal). I don't understand...it is OK to make a living as a nurse and now, as a holistic nurse it is not OK. Is it OK to make a living as a MD but not as a ND? As a holistic nurse, I am making far less but helping thousands more annually. In the US, we have the #1 health care system in the world...when it comes to being most expensive. We are over the 70 percentile when it comes to how bad...yep, we are way beyond flawed. But...to be sure...here is some of the research on the natural treatment that was found to be more effective than chemo....and improve the quality of life. BTW...did you ask about false hope? Prey on vulnerable sick people by subjecting them to unproven treatments, taking thousands and thousands of their dollars, giving them false hope...? Did you think about the following in your summation? This first one is over 20 years old and is still not used in main stream health care....Why....oh, wait, there are not billions to be made? Five-year survival rates of melanoma patients treated by diet therapy after the manner of Gerson: a retrospective review. Five-year survival rates of melanoma patients treated by diet therapy after the manner of Gerson: a retrospective review. - PubMed - NCBI And what about this.... Study Accidentally Finds Chemotherapy Makes Cancer Far Worse | Natural Society Reporting their findings in the journal Nature Medicine, scientists reported their findings were ‘completely unexpected'. Evidence of significant DNA damage due to chemo. In other words, it does not work. But wait. Don't some people get better? How do we know that they did not get better in-spite of the chemo. There are more...a lot more. http://www.cell.com/cancer-cell/abstract/S1535-6108%2811%2900447-8 Whatever manipulations we're doing to tumors can inadvertently do something to increase the tumor numbers to become more metastatic, which is what kills patients at the end of the day,” said study author Dr. Raghu Kalluri. We can go all day on the merits. Lets agree that we disagree. I know alternatives work. We can both find papers that say what we both promote does not work and that it does work. Look at any of the rescued from the grave testimonials on my site and you will find dozens of people who will tell you alternatives work. The question, what are you doing to make the system better.....challenging holistic? Sorry, but we have too much evidence that is not bought and paid for proving what we do works. The world is shifting its desire toward holistic. Now, the question for everyone else, how can we make it better. How can we make it main stream. How can we improve the health of even more people?

One comment mentioned the need for science before nursing will back us. One of our biggest challenges as holistic nurses is trying to fit into a world that demands science, even if it is bought and paid for biased commercialism. There is science to back most of what holistic nurses are doing. There is common sense too. Cows, antelope and deer have strong bones but do not drink milk once weaned. Now the science says milk is not good for strong bones, rather, for protein and low fat milk will even decrease bone density. Yet there is the mind set the advertising has created that we have to overcome. Raw cruciferous veggies have cysteine that our bodies turns into glutathione (GSH). There are over 80,000 studies on glutathione and what it does. And the studies say it can be made inside us or taken. If you cannot afford an IV GSH or don't want a DIY GSH suppository or cannot afford the 'Totally Awesome Clinically Proven' $79.95 - $600 a month 'MLM GSH Boosting Product,' then simply eat right. Do we really need a study to say "Eating Right Improves Health?' No question, the MLM stuff works. If you can afford $600 a month, it will even reverse your leukemia or possibly end your AIDS as it did for 10 of 16 pediatric AID's patients in McGill Hospital according to one study over 10-15 years. What we are missing about this, they have an incredible marketing machine, solidarity, a culture and a network which is why they succeed and many holistic nurses are struggling. We are competing with commercialism and at the same time, non-consumption, not science. Ironically, there is science to back up everything we do in the holistic field. It just requires digging, turning over some books and occasionally, simply thinking. There is even research on the spiritual side of healing too. It is there. It took almost 30 years for Dr. Lind to get lemons as a treatment for scurvy. Today it takes at least 15 years for change to take effect in healthcare. Lets see, I started in 98 (when still a LPN) introducing holistic nursing in the hospital. I heard just last year that a college in my state started to study one of the treatments that I started promoting in the hospital almost 18 years ago...black strap molasses and peanut butter (now almond butter to avoid the risk of mold) to increase the TIBC and avoid blood transfusions in those who did not want it for 1) religious reasons, and 2) scientific reasons (mostly doctors, health care professionals, PHD's and police officers according to one study). None of those I case managed (most were not Jehovah's Witnesses by the way) ever died even with my lowest blood count Hgb 2.9.Oh yea, and the ads, Blood saves lives. Well, "Not according to the science," says Dr. Richard Spence, an expert on bloodless medicine and surgery. "All the high level studies show that any to the more blood you get, the greater the morbidity and mortality," he said, not to mention immunomodulation (decreased immunity) for life. My point, we are competing with a commercial system, not science. And one last point...When I suggested gum chewing to decrease post op illus risk, you know who gave me the most grief? Not doctors. It was other nurses. The docs to a one said, Why didn't we think of this? Maybe we have to also compete with thinking or a lack of it, too. There is a saying in marketing. Give people what they need and you will make a living. Give people what they want and you will make a million. We need to get people to want health.

Sorry for the confusion. We were taught in school that the world of the time of Christopher Columbus believed the Earth was flat. While we were taught that they believed that, that is not what they believed. Most people of the time knew it was round, as did Christopher Columbus. But, I'm curious as your words do not seem to have the compassion or at the least, the respect I would expect from a fellow nurse. And you make my point. Rather than ranting on the words, lets have a dialogue on how to make things better. I'm sorry, did you have any suggestions on how to improve things? Your rhetoric is brilliant. I cannot hold a match to you. You are surly the superior mind here. You should be very proud of yourself as I am sure you are. You might want to look up what flaming is. It is a form of bullying with words, sometimes over minor differences. For instance....what is evidence based medicine (and yes, I think I know what it means and is, correct me if I am wrong, but it is... "an approach to medical practice intended to optimize decision-making by emphasizing the use of evidence from well designed and conducted research." I remember reading one of the first articles on it over, and I may be wrong, 20 years ago. I started using the term in lectures to doctors in numerous countries in this half of the world (North, Mexico, Central and South America). I have to say, Doctors constantly challenge what I say. They are tough too. But they and their words are always framed in a way that shows that they are interested in the science and making things better, not attacking or flaming me the speaker. And I must say, I have never been treated with such lack of respect by a doctor as you are showing me here, you a fellow nurse. You no doubt are aware of the risk of distortion of evidence based by vested interests....I think, when these studies go awry, they are sometimes referred to as scientific fraud. They ultimately promote drugs / treatments that profit businesses but offer no real health benefit or may harm people. Of course, you could accuse me of bias, but this and more, actually much more was written by the BMJ. interesting point it made about the problem with the evidence. So much of it is biased and bought and paid for, it waters down your argument a bit. Also, do you know how much of what we do in the hospital is actually based on evidence based medicine?...more on that in a moment. And just curious...you spoke of trying to damn all evidence based medicine based on the shoddy work of a few though. You took that a bit out of context, seeing that it was the first clinical trial in history. Your right, clinical trial fraud should not call into question the rest of the science, even if it is bought and paid for by a special interest group. And the about (I stopped counting at) 1000 fraud cases in the past 10 years in the US alone should not call into question the rest....although the BJM suggests otherwise. Of course, like the recent Monsanto Shill Scandal (NY Times), (one even said, "nice shilling for you.") how many get by without ever getting caught. Second, you speak about CAM like you are a, well, religious zealot. I don't condemn you for your beliefs. I still believe in the doctors I know and work for. They are awesome healers. They are wonderful human beings too. They are also open minded and consider the possibilities. There are things I cannot do that I refer to regular doctors. Yet it seems like you mock me for my beliefs. When I started in bloodless, there were hundreds of studies if not thousands. Interestingly, Dr. Richard Spence, one of the pioneers of Bloodless said, "There are no high level studies showing blood saves lives. From the early 1900s to the present, there is not one high level study that showed a blood transfusion saved a life. The high level studies showed the opposite. From any any blood to the more blood given, there was a greater morbidity and mortality." He said that back then, over 20 years ago. Why would doctors refuse to look at the best evidence, what was called back then as the Gold Standard. I'm just curious as you seem to have the answers. Also, why would JAMA, back then, say every hospital should consider this if it was not....."the best evidence available at the time" and it was not the safe and responsible thing to do?" Maybe Jama did not know what evidence based medicine was? No, that is where I first read about it. No, no, no, the science was there, few were willing to embrace it because of health care politics. When I started, the hospitals I worked at still followed the 10 30 rule for giving blood. Numerous doctors came up to me asking me to speak to other doctors about what was happening in the rest of the world. Sloan Kettering was not transfusing till Hgb of 6 back then. Did Sloan Kettering have different or even better evidence than we did in the middle of nowhere? The point is, things have not changed much since Dr. Lind's time, well, except that rather than taking 30 years to make a change, the interval has been cut to 10 to 15 years. And instead of the 10 30 rule which was not based on evidence, it took almost 10 more years to get the triggers to be decided on a case by case basis in hospitals that give transfusions, but it is still 8 in most places. However, a few hospitals in the US almost never give transfusions now because the outcomes are so much better. So yes, lets get together. According to the European Science Foundation, "New ideas for improvement of clinical treatment are generated in everyday clinical life, and from basic science." What we in the holistic arena are proposing is simply consider the basic science. Since Bloodless is somewhat mainstream now, I have moved on to one of these new ideas. BTW...there is a documentary from another country on what I do. It interviewed several of the people helped by the alternative treatments I teach, a variation of what is done in the hospital. One who exceeded his expiration date by 15 years and one more recent, sent home with inoperable brain cancer, given 6 months to live. He has exceeded his expiration date by 3 1/2 years so far. His headaches stopped the first night I visited him. He was able to sleep the second night. His eye sight came back 4 days after that and he was able to drive. I would be curious how you would speak to them. As far as they and the thousand we have helped are concerned, they would not have the quality of life they have, if at all, had it not been for the alternative care. And as far as combining CAM and Modern Medicine....we are already doing it and seeing dramatic results. We are catching up with other countries who have been doing this for years. So, are we going to debate words or make a change. I would prefer to help make the world a bit better rather than tear down someone because they think different than I do. But the point of this post was to answer the question of becoming a Naturopathic Nurse or a Doctor. As to the original poster, the Doc I work for is a Naturopathic Doctor. I met him when starting work at a 1000 Bed Teaching / Class III Trauma Hospital. There are only a few in the world this big and he treated patients there. The exciting thing, seeing cancer patients doing chemo without loosing their hair. And they completed the treatments in half the time combining his treatment with the chemo. On doing more and more holistic nursing, with the incredible outcomes and unlike medical care, there are a lot of studies to back what you do. This is because you will be treating the whole person and not just the symptom. You will not be seeing patients with 10 or more meds (24 was the most I ever saw) where we know that over 10 medications results in 100% having some kind of effect on the others. You will not see doctors take them off all but three and ask, how long will this last? The reply, about six months until they see the various specialists who treat their symptoms. (per a hospitalist) Mind you, this was the same hospital where doctors called me, a nurse, and had me consult on challenges that current treatments were not working on. They were quite open minded. Where there was not a specific study, there had to be at least common sense science to back the suggestion. It was awesome having doctors ask me how to treat using alternative treatments. I even consulted to hemonks on patients when EPO was not working. And the solution, giving the patient peanut butter and black strap molasses. We now use almond butter instead of peanut butter. We also give vitamin C, B6, B9, and B12. Funny, the latter was on the package insert of EPO...yep, from 20 years ago. For those concerned about giving black strap molasses without a study, it is an old doctor treatment and a college contacted me as they are doing a clinical trial on it. Interestingly the ESF said in 2010...."the percentage of medical treatments being evidence-based has been growing over the last 50-100 years, but still a great percentage of clinical practice is not fully evidence-based." So, become a doctor and improve lives and get the studies done so we can move on. This is an exciting time to be getting started, which ever you choose. Clinical trials are providing new holistic treatments that are quite exciting. One such, fasting, has a few studies that show it has incredible promise for cancer treatments. Both chemo and natural treatments. Best wishes.

I will not go so far to say that those who do not believe in natural treatments are ignorant. There are a number of things that can only be done with modern medicine. A better health care model would be for us to join and not be opposite ends of the health care spectrum. What if, in doing so, we could have the best health care system in the world. The US is currently the 72 worse and the most expensive. As a holistic nurse, practicing in the hospital and now in private practice, I applaud the passion of the naysayers. It is the much like the passion teachers taught us that the Earth was flat in grade school. Yet for over 2000 years man has known the Earth was round or even much longer if people were readers of the Bible. Yet the fiction (Washington Irving's the Voyages of Christopher Columbus 1893) became the global urban legend that became a truth in our text books. And we all believed because that is what the books said. Were we ignorant? Consider Dr. Lind, 1716 -1794. The first to do a clinical trial, discovered and nearly lost his license over trying to help end scurvy. There were those who had similar objections to those found here. Those who repeated his clinical trail and said it would not work, boiled the lemons, destroying the vitamin C. Ooops, a clinical trial / evidence based medicine fail. But, eventually limes became the cure. Were they ignorant or just closed minded? Lets move ahead to 1977 when Denton Cooley did the first bloodless open heart surgeries. Then Dr. Lapin turned it into a medical specialty. In the late 90's, when I got into it, it was not uncommon to hear nurses and doctors say, "I don't believe in it (bloodless medicine and surgery)." Yet JAMA and several other publications said every hospital should consider this modality. For me, in case managing over 1000 patients, not one died even with blood counts as low as 2.9 and they got discharged 1/2 to 3 days faster than those who got blood. Evidence based medicine finds that if you get 10 units, you have a 50/50 chance of dying. Is it ignorance, religion or maybe those who do not believe are just Flat Earthers. There was the science this time. Based on my experience as a bloodless medicine and surgery coordinator and case manager, medicine has become a religion. Thus, the reason for some of the various emotional expressions rather than a honest and critical discussion. Either those who do not want to consider alternatives are looking at medicine as a religion, they still believe the Earth is flat or they have become like the five blind scientist looking at and describing an elephant. Dr. Goodenough, one of the most prolific writers on blood transfusions in the 1980's became one of the greatest authorities on bloodless medicine and surgery in the 90's. Why did he switch? Was he ignorant before and now saw the light? Or, rather, did he look at the possibilities as a scientist and adjust his thinking? Now as a holistic nurse (and please note, I was a holistic nurse in the hospital too), I am finding greater success in private practice. If I was a part of helping hundreds then, I am saving lives of thousands today. And yes, everything I do is evidence based. Someone asked where are the studies. They are there just like the thousands of studies on bloodless medicine and surgery. You will find them if you look. Rather than being closed minded and critical of anything different, why not like those doctors in the 1700's of Dr. Lind's day, those in the 1990's who became the pioneers of Bloodless Medicine and surgery and now those nurses who are pioneering Holistic (and possibly Naturopathic Nursing), consider, "what if." What if the 5 blind scientists could all of a sudden see. What if Holistic / Naturopathic and Modern Medicine merged. What if we could make our health care system, the most expensive in the world and ranked the 72nd worst, what if we could make it the best.

Sorry I missed this post. I have been a member for some time but never thought to look here. I got into holistic nursing when working as a Bloodless coordinator (managing people without blood transfusions). We used things like black strap molasses and peanut butter (now almond butter) to increase blood counts. My lowest was 2.9. Never lost anyone in over 1000 who refused blood, the majority being doctors and nurses. Then one day several years ago, at a B2B meeting, a girl introduced herself as a holistic nurse. After, I asked what in the world that meant. Turns out, I have been practicing it for over a decade in the hospital. As an agency nurse, I worked in several hospitals. In 5 different ones, I introduced gum chewing to decrease post op ilius and related problems. Helping doctors treat anemia's and pain management were my specialty. The ones who gave me the most grief with implementing holistic were nurses. The doctors loved it and said, to a one, why didn't we think o this. So, I quit hospital nursing and never looked back. It has been rough and the money is not as good, at least so far. I have been in a Korean documentary on the topic. They also had one of my clients (the word patient implies medical treatment). He has exceeded his expiration date for inoperable brain cancer by 2 years now. We are currently working with a young girl mid teens with metastatic liver cancer. She too was sent home to die. She is now 6 months and the mets tumors are almost gone. Headaches, prostate cancer, cramps, heart attack, high blood pressure, chest pain and MS put in remission and the people getting out of their wheel chairs....well, the lack of income is more than made up with this being priceless having been able to be a part of this. I will be back. Thanks for starting this post.

First, Avoid International Nursing Association Like a previous poster, I do not believe this to be a scam. I do believe what they are doing is unethical and they are taking advantage of the title 'nursing.' But in the end, it comes down to Caveat Emptor [Latin, Let the buyer beware.] Is it legit? Well, what are they promising? To put your name in a book and publish that book. They claim you can gain access to other leaders. They charge a sign up fee and a monthly fee. Many nursing associations have a membership fee. The question, do they provide real value? Do they advocate for nurses? (no claim for that). Do they provide any value to you as a nurse with their title or designation? (they do not appear on any lists of nursing associations so have no creditability). This claim is the only area where they could be considered a scam. Bottom line, they are worthless to our career as they do not seem to provide any real value. Saying I am listed among them (and I have to pay at the minimum about $400 a year for being able to say I'm listed) is no real value. For instance, in another association I belong to, the idea of creating a study came to me. I called and was given a few names of people who were interested. Also, the Association was interested in doing the study. They are a resource for me and others in that field of nursing. For those who got taken (I have been taken in the past by other such things and fortunately got out), I have a simple policy. Simply say, "Send me the information in writing and let me get back to you." Good marketers are taught that if you don not sign now, you never will. If they are trying to sell you, they will not want you to leave till they get the sale. My agent went all the way down to free with 4 different offers, each me saying in response to, "Sounds great, let me talk it over with my wife and get back to you." Then she pulled the Publication Date ploy...in marketing it using time sensitivity. In a company that always has a sale, using it is unethical and dishonest. For a company like Groupon where it is on for only 24 hours, it makes them a lot of money and is a great tool. The problem, had she not kept lowering the price, I too might have bought into this. But, my "let me think about it for 24 hours" response has always saved me. Please note, not all things like this are scams. I bought a program on 'selling' and it employed many of the techniques INA used except for the high pressure tactics. The course cost $2000. It produced as it claimed and my sales more than paid for the course in one month. The interesting thing, the course offered enough of the info for free for me to test it out and see that it would work. So, If INA had the list of top nurses available online where I could preview or contact those nurses, where I could test the value, then it could be more easily tested as to the quality of their product. But, if only those paying for get the publication, then it does not have a wide circulation and its value is reduced.

I have to say, the nursing boards were a breath of fresh air. The tests were grammatically correct. I was done with the LPN in the minimum number of Questions. A few months later when I sat for the RN (I did classes back to back where I could) it ran me through all the questions. I thought I had aced it but the questions kept coming. We were told that a percentage of tests would be automatically the full number. I passed either way. Those tests were the only bright spot for me.

Wow, I did not know you went to my school. Oh wait, it was almost 2 decades ago that I got my degree. It could not have been the same school. While I agree with you, there is a problem with this thinking. Let me explain. I do believe it is a multifaceted problem. Precepting those coming out of schools, it is apparent that many were not taught critical thinking. This is a problem that goes back to high school. Forget critical thinking, we were not taught to think. It seems obvious that we all know how to think but as a professional, do we really. Once when managing, I saw a patient with pain in his contracted hand, most likely arthritis as it only appeared when it was raining. The relatively new nurse in a SNF, on being told of the pain, drew up some acetaminophen. On asking why, she indicated that it was all that was ordered. On asking if she questioned the doctors orders, she said no. Forget questioning the doctors orders, even questioning whether acetaminophen even worked (three studies show placebos work better) was the bigger issue. A quick call to the MD and on his request, a suggestion, (yes, become an expert at something and doctors will ask your opinion), we put the patient on a combo of siniment and baclofen. It worked. I learned this because when things did not work, I started asking what would. Here is the problem. How did some of us get to the point where we are even though we went to the same schools. At some point, it is up to us as students. Although I did have a pilot program called Critical Thinking in High School, there are others nurses who went to the same nursing schools and in spite of the school,became incredible clinicians. They learned to think. How did they / we do it, in spite of the school.