Taking Care

07 Dec 2011 08:11p.m.

Noah Berkowitz wrote:

Nice post. Thank you.

25 May 2010 07:32p.m.

Michelle wrote:

Ruth may well be a nice person, but the (alleged) failings of medicine don't provide evidence that her practice is worthwhile, or that naturopathy or iridology actually are valid forms of diagnosis or treatment. What's really scary is that the iris is more unique and unchanging than our fingerprints and then we are expected to believe that you can see changes in them that correspond to organs in the body consistently in order to diagnose illness. I'd like to know not what she herself charges (that may well be little) but what those supplements cost and what the mark-up was on them, there were boxes and boxes of them and I very much doubt they were supplied free. In addition, I wonder what the supposed difference is between a naturopath and a so-called pill pushing doctor. At least a doctor will only prescribe for a recognised illness or health issue and makes no money off prescriptions but naturopaths "prescribe" supplements that they then directly profit off. In fact she did herself and her patient a great disservice by not recognising that the lesion she claimed was a cyst was beyond her capability to treat or even diagnose and did this even in the face of it's obvious spread. It's a common problem with the so-called alternative health industry and that's before you get to the issue of the lack of evidence for what's offered, there was another recent case of a breast cancer victim who has since died who had the cancer erupt into a huge weeping lesion after being treated with lights. That's why regulation is needed, these people need to be regulated out so that health care can only be offered by properly trained and registered professionals who work to set standards of practice and understand their limits and when to refer on. Lots of double standards here. http://whatstheharm.net/naturopathy.html lists many more cases of harm.

25 May 2010 01:01p.m.

E.Nicol &M.I.Thomson wrote:

We found your programme on last Wednesday 19th May regarding Mrs main and Ruth Nelson, the naturopath, unjust towards the latter.
Our associaion with Ruth Nelson goes back more than 20 years and we have found her to be a person of the utmost integrity. She has become a very good friend on whom we can always rely.
Over the years she has treated us for various conditions with great success. Therefore we find Mrs Mains story of her head cancer and the treatmentshe says she received from the naturopath, unbelievable.
In our opinion it was a great pity more time was not allotted to Ruth's side of the case.

25 May 2010 12:08p.m.

Miira Jaffray wrote:

I am in total agreeance with Helen (above), however the point I would like to make is about the reporter. She clearly gave a one sided opinion and it was quite obvious to me she was picking sides ,and who's side she was on. I am also suprised the lady with cancer's family did not step in sooner as she was clearly making irrational decisions- possibly something to do with the cancer so close to her brain?

I was even more angry at Mike Munroe of the Australian 60 minutes when he hosted the debate on vaccinations last year. Another case of a reporter clealy taking sides. It was disgusting and showed poor poor journalism. You would expect better from a leader in the industry. Shame on you 60 minutes.

23 May 2010 08:05p.m.

Diane Connal wrote:

what a sad situation Yvonne Main and Ruth Nelson find themselves.
Ruth has a great reputation in the Kapiti community. She has been practising for many years and charges very little.
I went to Ruth years ago, not for any one thing, but to improve my general well being. She uses iradoligy and pickied up a couple of things for me that I then worked on. It is always hard when things go wrong and we feel let down by the medical people we have put our trust in. The fact is that humans make mistakes and lets not forget, there are alot of mistakes made in the conventional medicine world. Six years ago I was ill, and have since had 10 surgeries. That is many more than anyone should have to fix any one problem. While I was lucky enough to have some of the best and most dedicated surgeons in their field who worked miracles for me, they would not have always had to if it wasn't for one surgeon who was not up to the task. That is all it takes. After the surgeries I developed cancer and while it cannot be proved I have no doubt that the number of operations and the huge amount of anisthetic and drugs I needed, caused this in my body. I am still going through the medical system, once again with a fantastic surgeon. My point is that things go wrong in both alternative and conventional practises, and while it is unfortunate, the conventional are not personally held responsible. It is hard to see why then we should hung up someone like Ruth Nelson who has spent her whole career helping people. I know many people who, having not got the answers they needed in the hospitals, have gone to Ruth. She has diagnosed their problem and they have gone back to the hospitals and said 'look again'. She is a good person who has ended up in an awful situation. At least she was brave enough to front up on your show. My heart goes out to Yvonne who is facing a huge battle. I wish her peace.

21 May 2010 08:56p.m.

bruce julian wrote:

I wish to post comment in defence of Ruth Nelson. I first contacted Ruth some 20 years ago due to ongoing dissatisfaction with GP diagnosis and prescription medicines which had no effect (good or bad)relative to my complaint.
I was astounded with her accurate observation of the state of my body, given that I had never met her before. I was run over by a tractor at age 15, suffering many broken ribs and spinal injuries. Ruth immediately picked up on this, even telling me that I had suffered a major injury in my mid teens. Further, she correctly noted I had suffered major impact to the back of my head (This occured when I was run over, the tractor travelling at about 20mph bucked me up into the air where upon landing back first onto tarsealed road, my head impacted followed by the rear wheel ran over my chest/mid section)
Given that an Iridologist can see such evidence in ones eyes, it is little wonder that in general Iridologists are sought after by people wanting more in depth information than that which most GP's can offer if the patient witholds information relevant or not to their cause for seeking medical advice/treatment.
Ruth had always insisted that it is sometimes imperative to seek conventional medical treatment eg., antibiotics.
I have the utmost faith in Ruth Nelsons'ability to diagnose as an Iridologist, the personal proof lies in my wellbeing.
I do not believe that Ruth would ever refuse to help any person regardless of their personal views re conventional medical treatment, her strong faith serves her so well in assisting many people, so often without financial reward at all and at great expense to her personally.
I am a firm believer in Iridology diagnosis and would place my life in Ruths'hands anytime.

21 May 2010 08:35p.m.

Mary L wrote:

Carl, no one is disputing what the lady's head looked like or the fact she now has to live with it for the rest of her life. What they are attempting to dispute is with whom the responsibility lies for her being in the situation she is in. The reality is that Yvonne could have sought conventional medical treatment at any time but chose not to. She, and she alone must now deal with her personal decision everyday and in fact should take some responsibility for it instead of attempting to blame others. Freedom of choice means that people can choose the medical treatment they receive and in this situation, Yvonne chose to seek alternative treatment. No one held a gun to her head and said you must do this, you must listen to Mrs Nelson - she made an adult decision in an adult world with a fully sane mind. Just because her choice backfired on her does not mean that it is anybody elses fault but her own.

21 May 2010 05:43p.m.

carl wrote:

well thats great 4 you and your family but that ladys lost a good portion of her skull, and conventional medicine is whats keeping her alive, perhaps one day you to will learn the hard way

20 May 2010 05:50p.m.

Helen wrote:

as a student doing a Degree of Naturopathy, this story not only caught my attention but has plucked at heartstrings as well. Firstly - conventional medicine has a very important role in health care and that should never be dismissed. If you need emergency surgery etc then you DEFINATELY want the highly trained conventional medical doctors there to heal you.
Second - I don't believe we, as natural therapists, are an "Alternative". We should, and are, striving to provide an integrative Health Care system, whereby Natural Therapies can be used WITH conventional medicine to provide the most beneficial treatment possible to the client.
Third - I do not believe the only one of these ladies is to blame for what turned out to be a serious illness. Everyone is entitled to choose their own health care methods. As natural therapists, we aim to empower people to take responsibility for their health and to help & support the client with ANY decision they make. We too, however, as healthcare health care professionals, must know our scope of practice and refer out (in this case to her GP right at the start) to ensure that the correct treatment will be given.
I am still in the dark as to whether or not Ruth is qualified or not. However, it does wuorry me that there are no regulations, meaning the girl working down the road could easily call herself a naturopath and begin to medically advise people on healthcare plans and treatments. I have embarked on this Degree to make sure that I have enough medical knowledge of both the human body and its systems as well as the use, effects and contraindications of herbs etc that we may administer. This in turn will allow for safe and effective treatments.
There is no Right or Wrong medicial system. If we can pull the best from conventional medicine with natural medicine - the intergrative medicine apprach - then I believe regulations can be imposed and safer more effective medical treatments will be available to the people of aotearoa :)

20 May 2010 10:26a.m.

Mel wrote:

I have known Ruth for nearly 20 years. She has helped me, my family and friends. We have more confidence in her as a qualified iridoligist than in doctors who misdiagnose, shove pills at you and then want to see you again in a week. Two years ago a specialist diagnosed me with a serious diease, after a consultation with Ruth I not only didn't have the diease, my health problem was not serious and very easily fixed. The specialist did admit that his diagnosis was wrong, he felt at the time it was better to tell me the worst case scenario. This is why I have no faith or confidence in the health profession.