Back in pre-scientific days one had very little choice when it came to medical advice: it was either a lobotomy, a healthy dose of poisonous compounds, or bloodletting. Naturally, having a bit of one's blood sucked out was far less dangerous in comparison, hence higher survival rates.
"Hirudotherapy" has not been scientifically proven to be effective, and no appeals to ancient wisdom will change that.
Maggots are used to remove necrotic tissues, because they consume it and leave living tissue untouched. Nasty, but quite effective.
Feel free to take a quick Google.
[1] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5319129/ns/health-health_care/t/fd...
I wonder if this is something that could be used in a scarcity scenario, benefit vs risk of infection, etc..
No, it's not. FDA approval only allowed Ricarimpex SAS to marketed as a "preamendment device". FDA approval does not make leeches a "treatment".
[1] https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf4/k040187.pdf
Certainly you have references to back your argument?
Leech therapy, can be safely and effectively used to evacuate blood and morbid humours from deeper tissues and in diseases like psoriasis, chronic ulcers and eczema. Leech therapy can produce better results as a mono or an adjunctive therapy in diseases like angina pectoris, coronary thrombosis, hypertension, atherosclerosis, varicose veins and in many surgical and traumatic conditions.[0]
So we're still using "bodily and morbid humours" in year 2017?
The belief is that majority of all diseases come from within, from foodstuff, blood and superfluous or corrupt humours or the metabolic products.
As for backing my statement up, here you go:
We have not determined whether the positive outcome of the leech therapy is caused by active substances released during the leeching, the placebo effect, or the high expectations placed on this unusual treatment form.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1745367071001503...
You just forgot to include the subsequent statement.
> As for backing my statement up, here you go:
Funny that this same study is used in the article I mentioned:
A German study on 51 patients of knee osteoarthritis, showed a greater decrease in pain (seven days post leech therapy), as compared to control who received topical diclofenac application
Also from the same article you referenced:
An improvement in KOOS and WOMAC scores, and also in VAS, was found in all 3 groups following treatment. These improvements were statistically significant for treatment groups I and II during the complete follow-up period. The reduction in individual requirements for pain medication was also statistically significant. The greatest improvement was seen in the group treated twice with the leeches, with a long-term reduction of joint stiffness and improved function in the activities of daily living.
So I wouldn't qualify it as a rebuttal to the treatment if the whole Results section supports it.
[1] http://bottomlineinc.com/health/medications/what-are-leeches...