The doctor they call 'Healing Hans' or Quack?

[Twan]

Do you really think that that quack gets paid by medical insurance to administer "medical care" which is not standard of care. These guys are just high priced quacks. Bob Marley went to one in his last days. They prey on celebrity lack of education and perhaps even lack of intelligence.

sound lke yuh have a bad mind...a big one too !!

[Reggaedoc]

What the ************ you talkind about Island. Where in the damn article it stated the age that Bolt started to go to this money grabbing quack for treatment. Point out the paragraph to me. I may have missed it, and if you can't point it out to me stop talking crap about not reading the article. Did you read the article. Bolt was introduced to him at 16 to see if he is trainable, nowhere did it say that he saw him for medical treatment at 16. Did you read the damn article boss, or if you did how could you come to that conclusion?. His quakery is about his practice of medicine. Analysing and suggesting types of exercises is medical or surgical intervention?.

[Islandman]

Lol! Starting to bob and weave I see.

Bolt has been going to this quack since he was 15?

So let's see, by that u meant , was he going to him "for treatment", not for consultation. Btw he is still consulting with him on those issues according to the article. I guess the consultation is free.

You are really amusing, anyway carry on since You are more knowledgable than the whole German soccer fraternity on these issues.

[Reggaedoc]

Thats right. Why? Because they are Germans or a soccer team means they know more than me?. What are you implying?. I don't get it.

[Reggaedoc]

Islandman, I don't think you understand that there are two aspects to medicine/surgery; treatment and diagnosis. I know, because that is how I have been making a living and feeding my family for decades. Its all I have ever done my entire life. There is a difference between a trained ortho surgeon analysing your biomechanics, on a consultation, and even suggesting an exercise regimen, and one sticking you with a syringe full of "medicine" which has never been approved and not a US Pharmacopia or European Pharmacopia listed drug, and even if it is listed, it is being used off-label. That kind of nonsense could never be practiced in the USA.This man's work has never been published in a peer reviewed journal, or even opened to the minimal of scrutiny. If you can't see the difference between the level of intervention between a doctor suggesting an exercise routine, and the same guy coming at you with a scalpel or syringe with an unconventional surgical procedure or medicine, and where standared of care ends and quackery begins, then you have a serious problem... and please don't tell me about the big names and endosements by the German soccer fraternity, or the Jamaican T & F fraternity, as that means absolutely nothing to me, if all you have is anecdotal evidence.

[Exile]

It IS a thin-line. I support scientific basis for decisison making but am also aware that main-stream western science has not been able to explain everything. I don't think Hans need to be the one to write scientific publications in 'peer-reviewed" journals, if that is not his core business. His business is making money and serving his clients whether physiological or psychologically. It should be up to the mainstream scientific community to 'test' his methods and endorse or refute them as nonsense - if they can show that their results are clear.
Herein lies the rub. Who is paying for the research?

If Hans feels he has a a 'special' treatment, why give it the world and lose his competitive advantage? Who knows he may have a new masking agent.

So the jury will have to remain out until we can prove whether he is a quack or truly a healer. Don't forget there are many quacks in mainstream medicine, the pharmacuetical indistry and even in science.

[Reggaedoc]

There you go again. what's a thin line?. The difference between scietific evidence based medicine and anecdotal evidence?. His medicine doesn't even meet the standard of anecdotal evidence. It is more like pure patient testimony, which is the lowest form of medical evidence, even lower than anecdotal evidence.

Exile sir, when one has a technique/procedure/drug that he/she thinks is safe and effective, the proponent of the same designs a study to establish a safe dose(called phase 1 trials), then study it's efficacy(called phase 2 trials), then compare it's efficacy against other established techniques/procedures/drugs. These studies, to be considered robust and valid, have to be double blind, placebo studies, with the study and placebo groups having met the same criteria for inclusion. After the data are collected, they have to be put through rigorous statistical regression to prove statistical significance between the treatment and placebo groups, and the null hypothesis has to be rejected to prove efficacy of the treatment. Anything less than that is not, I repeat not up to my standard of acceptability, and not up to the standard of the hundreds of medical students and residents that I have trained over the last several decades. No matter which Bolt, or lightening, or German soccer team endorses it. Plain and simple. It is the responsibility of the proponent of the treatment to design, perform, procure funding, publish for peer review, and not the other way around. This guys work does not meet scientific acceptable standard, that is why he is hiding behing testimonials. Junk medicine, and I have earned the right to say that. Period.

[Don1]

I agree

[Peter R]

If he has a cocktail that is effective wouldn't he (and the general population with the ailments he purports to treat) be better off patenting it and distributing it to the wider community? I suppose though it would have to pass some sort of tests in order to be patented? If it is legally available in Germany, then I would assume he could sell it to the German medical community for starters... get Bolt, Radcliffe, Bayern Munich et al to endorse it and him would gone clear... but he's probably making a small fortune already judging from his clients/patients listed in the article and cannot be bothered with the hassle of doing and due diligence stuff...

Anyway, he sounds like an upscale obeah man to me...

[Reggaedoc]

That's right Pete. It seems to me that hsi clients would most likely have the same result by doing nothing or just getting injected with a balanced saline or glucose solution, and that would be even safer. This Quack is worse than an obeah man. Why?. I am supposed to give him a pass because he is endorsed by famous names. Not so fast Hans. Open yourself to scrutiny by the medical community and then we can talk. There is no secret in medicine/surgery. Afterall that is how the medical community got rid of quacks in the first place.

[Exile]

There I go again??? When did I first go? I am quite aware of drug trials procedures, I think you totally missed the point of my post because you were so eager to espouse your knowledge. Please re-read my post and remove the blinders, also do not interpret everything literally. The man may well be a quack, or a healer - there lies the thin-line. Western medicine does not have ALL the answers despite the trials some of which we know have proven to have been BIASED, data WITHHELD, and MANIPULATED or plain BAD SCIENCE.

[Exile]

The medical community still have many quacks and haven't gotten rid of them. There are probably more quacks in mainstream medicine that in Lawyer firms.

[Reggaedoc]

Again you go. Look, medicine/surgery is an art as much as it is a science. Doctors are not perfect, and the science of medicine is not perfect. Errors in diagnosis and treatment are going to be made. I have opertated on patients in the past where the preopertative history, symptomotology, physical exam, imaging studies, blood tests etc suggest a particular diagnosis. At the time of surgey, the disease anatomy confirms a different diagnosis, and I had to adjust the procedure, change instruments etc. That is not quackery. That is simply making a preoperative diagnosis and treatment plan based on the evidence and limitations of currently available technology. Of course the ultimate diagnosis is made upon inspecting and palpating the diseased tissue, and even then you are not 100% sure. The pathologist gives you a final diagnosis, and even then the patologist may not be 100% sure, because current staining techniques may not be able to distinguish one disease from another. All this has nothing to do with quackery.

You keep trying to hang on to the nonsensical cliche, that modern medicine is full of practicing quacks. That may be true in countries where they don't have a good tradition of medical education, and the local medicine man is all they have, and of course a very tiny few gets interspersed here and there in places where medicine is well developed eg. Dr. Hans. Those are quacks. Since there are so many quacks practicing, can you name one in your parish who is a quack, or even one from the catchment area of your nearest hospital?. Thats just not true, and one should not let this nonsensical, over-romaticization of holistic medicine and the fact that standard scientific based medicine does not have all the answers, cause one to accept that school of thought. Scietific-based madicine does not have all the answers because the thechnology needed to give the the answers does currently not exist, and when the answer comes, as it always does, it will come from the scientific-based medical community, and not from the medicine-men, rain-dancers, obeah men, folk-healers, bush doctors, holistic practitioners, and other quacks.

So next time you have a concern about you health, god forbid, please find yourself an allopathic practitioner and resist the urge of seeing your nearest holistic practitioner, or you might just end up getting your final diagnosis, or I should say, your family might end up getting your diagnosis from the pathologist at autopsy.

[Exile]

Nice anecdote...now you have gone off the deep end and changed the whole argument. I completely understand when errors of judgement are made or even for diagnosis, Txs and Rxs - I was never talking about that. The quacks are those that either don't know what they are doing, deliberately do it or really don't care.
Again you have jumped to conclusions not based on any of my posts - I never said I accepted any school of thought on holistic medicine and I maintain that there are MANY quacks operating in medicine - without needing to name any.
As for any personal concerns on my health issues or my family's - you really don't need to go there. As for the pathologist comment - you have really crossed the line of decency there.

If indeed the medical fraternity were so clean we wouldn't need lawyers and malpractice cases - but then that must be only in places where medicine is not 'well-developed'.

[Don1]

R'Doc ...I don't think anyone could or even would rightfully question your expertise in this medical area... I also agree with you regarding the value of scientifically developed data in evaluating any metric...including one's health and the fixes that professionals suggest to us

However you state above that medicine is as much art as it is science. This being the case, why not accord this German fellow (who I gather is a MD & subject to the German authorities) the benefit of the doubt in his somewhat quixotic or indeed "artistic" approach to treating sports injuries??... Especially given the fact that the fellow has been doing it apparently with success for decades.. Dr Steadman who is world renown in orthopedic surgery endorses the guy and even entrusted his wife to him (I'm assuming they were on good terms at the time and meant her well). I recall Steadman salvaged Bibi's knees and his career more than once...Fuller too I think.

I suppose even the application of art to the science of medicine must take place within some very limited & definable parameters for you...and perhaps the German exceed those bounds?

just wondering

Respect