It's funny how many of the same people here complain about how the media get aviation stories wrong, but happily believe them on other stuff while ignoring a true expert.
It's not that, truly. It's not that I don't believe you (or Steingar) are presenting the science to the absolute best of modern understanding. But you're also asking me to ignore the feelings of my own body.
"Placebo effect" doesn't really cut it for me. Why? Because there are too many medications that are ineffective or only partially effective for me, despite the fact that they are FDA-approved, have had their effectiveness validated by numerous studies, and are widely prescribed and recommended.
Tylenol, for example, does nothing for me. (And I do mean nothing. It doesn't even relieve headaches for me, much less joint pain.) Celebrex also did nothing. Aspirin relieves the joint pain a little, but not very much. Ibuprofen is quite a bit better. Naproxen works great, but my doc advised me to take it only for occasional flare-ups because of long-term risk factors. Same for Tolectin. It worked great, but the long-term risk was too high especially, when you consider that I was a young man when I injured my shoulder.
As I got older, the pain got worse; and my doc would occasionally prescribe one of the above (or other) drugs. Some worked, some didn't; all were considered too risky for long-term use, and were only prescribed when the pain was acute.
Then my doc told me to try the G / C / M, and it worked -- pretty darn well, too. And an old girlfriend of mine (a physician with a holistic slant) suggested I add the Cat's Claw; and between the two, the pain is gone. If I stop taking them, it starts to comes back; when I resume taking them, it goes away.
If this is placebo effect, then why is it selective to G / C / M and/or Cat's Claw? Why didn't the Tylenol or the Celebrex help at all? Why does aspirin only help a little, Ibuprofen help more, and Naproxen or Tolectin completely eliminate the pain? My expectations were the same when each of these products were recommended / prescribed. I expected them to work because I trust my doctor. Yet some worked great, some didn't work at all, and most were somewhere in between.
Now here come the two of you, experts both, either of you having forgotten more about science than I'll ever know, making perfectly rational, reasoned, well-explained arguments as to why G / C / M doesn't work. The problem is, although I respect your knowledge and intentions, you're also asking me to deny what my own body is telling me (not to mention what millions of others have also found to be true).
To me, this doesn't create a conflict or argument, but rather a question: Why do these supplements seem to work for me (and for many others), despite what these experts I respect are saying. Could it be placebo effect? Maybe, but it doesn't seem likely given the fact that I've been occasionally treated with many different meds for at least one of these problems for almost 30 years, with widely varying results. But yes, it could conceivably be placebo effect.
But it's also possible that there is some not-yet-understood mechanism that makes these supplements effective in some people whose conditions have origins that the substances or their metabolites correct, that they meet not-yet-identified nutritional deficiencies in some people, or that they work by way of some other not-quite-understood biochemical mechanism.
So please don't mistake my puzzlement for disrespect. I respect what you say, I know you're experts in this sort of thing, and I believe you. But in the end, I can't ignore what my own joints are telling me.
-Rich
