DEBATE GROUP 3

Motion: This House Believes That Alternative Medicine Poses A Threat to Public Health

1. Chair Person : I Made Kriswandika (P07120017023)

2. Timer Keeper : Putu Kartika Wardani (P07120017026)
Affirmative Team
3. First Speaker : Ni Wayan Dila Damayanti (P07120017024)
4. Second Speaker : I Komang Pugleg Wikrama (P07120017021)
5. Third Speaker : Ni Made Mezha Anindya Prabhaswari (P07120017029)
6. Reply Speaker : Ni Luh Yosin Supiawati (P07120017022)
Opposite Team
7. First Speaker : Ni Made Sri Meira Utami (P07120017030)
8. Second Speaker : Ayu Laksmi Agustini (P07120017028)
9. Third Speaker : Ni Kadek Witya Dana Yanti (P07120017027)
10. Reply Speaker : Ni Luh Putu Lina Lestari (P07120017025)

First speaker (Affirative Team)

Thank you so much for the time that given to me. Good morning ladies and gentlemen I'm Dila
Damayanti as the first speaker from affirmative team. First of all, I would like to introduce my
team. I'm as the first speaker would like to give the definition and give an argument. Second
speaker is pugleg wikrama will rebutall and give another argument. Third speaker is mezha
anindiya will rebutall too and give the last argument. And last yosin supiawati as replay speaker
will replay argument from another speaker and strengtening our team argument.

Alternative (or complementary) medicine, as a concept, covers such a huge range of techniques
and practices. However, broadly speaking, the term usually refers those techniques that fall
outside conventional, pharmacological or surgical practices. In some countries such as the US
and Germany practitioners are frequently physicians; in others they may have no medical
training at all. Generally speaking both critics and supporters tend to define alternative medicine
as any medical approach “that does not fall within the realm of conventional medicine”.
Alternative therapies have not been tested for efficacy before they come on the market; they
usually were in use long before we had the idea of licensing and regulating drugs. Consequently,
we have little or only incomplete knowledge about their efficacy.
I completely agree with the motion that belives alternative medicine poses a threat to public
health. Before I give my argument I would like to give definition of alternative medicine.
Alternative medicine is medical therapies thar are not regraded as ortodox by the medical
profession, such as herbalism, homeopathy, and acupunture.

Ladies and gentlemen beside that I'll deliver my argument that is many alternative remedis such
as homeopathy, offer nothing but a false hope and can discourage patients from consulting a
doctor with what may be serious symptoms.

I think that's all from me. And I completely agree with the motion. Thank you, time i return to
moderator.

First Speaker (Opposite team)

Good morning ladies and gentleman. I’m Meira as first speaker from opposite team. First, I want
to introduce my team. I’m as first speaker. Laksmi as second speaker. Witya as third speaker.
And Lina as replayed speaker. I will give my rebuttal for the first opinion of affirmative team.

She said many alternative remedies, such as homeopathy, offer nothing but a false hope and can
discourage patients from consulting a doctor with what may be serious symptoms.

I don’t agree with her opinion. A huge number of fully accepted medical practices started being
seen as something a bit off the wall, it’s wrong to deny sick people access to a treatment that may
be mainstream in 20 years.

There is a fine line between what is considered alternative and what is thought of as mainstream.
Techniques do move across that line and when they do so, they are seen as mainstream.
However, this process of reform, refinement and acceptance takes time.

In the meantime, it is simply unfair to deny treatment to patients who want it because the medical
establishment is beholden to a conservative academic orthodoxy and drug and treatment
providers with vested interests in ensuring that particular cures and techniques will continue to
be purchased and utilized.

This comes down to the ‘well it can’t hurt, can it’ approach to alternatives. There is simply no
serious medic – or any other scientist for that matter who would suggest that it’s a good idea to
ingest products that are of dubious origin and purport medical benefits without having been
tested. In many cases these have been shown to be at least irrelevant and at worst actively
harmful.
Of course, it is painful to deny treatment to a patient on the basis that the medication has yet to
complete its trial stage but there is a reason for doing that in that it allows doctors to be 100
percent sure of a product before they’re prescribed.

That’s all from me. And I still don’t agree with the motion. I’m Meira back to the house.

Second Speaker (Affirmative Team)

Thanks for the time that has given to me. I’m Pugleg as the second speaker from affirmative
team. I want to give my rebuttal for the first opinion of opposite team. She said a huge number of
fully accepted medical practices started being seen as something a bit off the wall, it’s wrong to
deny sick people access to a treatment that may be mainstream in 20 years.

I don’t agree with her opinion. Although there are many accounts of the efficacy of alternative
treatments, not one has been demonstrated to work in a clinical trial

Alternative therapies have been tested in mainstream medical journals and elsewhere. Not only
have thousands of research exercises failed to prove the medical benefit ”alternative” treatments
for severe and terminal diseases, serious peer-reviewed studies have routinely disproved them.

It’s all well and good to pick at mistakes in individual studies. Indeed, this tactic often forms the
mainstay of pleas for legitimacy made by members of the alternative medical community.
However, the odds against such consistently negative results would be extraordinary.

By contrast, conventional medicine only prescribes medicines and treatments that are proven,
and vigorously proven, to work.

I think that’s all my opinion. Based on my rebuttal, I still stand up on my opinion that I agree
with the motion. I’m Pugleg back to the house.

Second Speaker (Opposite Team)

Thanks for the time that has given to me. I’m Laksmi as the second speaker from opposite team.
I want to give my rebuttal for the second opinion of affirmative team. He said, although there are
many accounts of the efficacy of alternative treatments, not one has been demonstrated to work
in a clinical trial.

It’s understandable that the medical establishment has an interest in ignoring treatments that are
freely available. Pharmaceutical companies make billions each year selling drugs that cost
pennies to manufacture.
There is an enormous vested interest in insuring that the world in general, remain tied to the idea
that the only solution to disease is to swallow a pill provided by a man in a white coat. There are
other solutions that have been used for thousands of years before anybody worked out how to
make a buck out of it. For much of the world these therapies continue to be the ones people rely
on and the rush of pharmaceutical companies to issue patents on genes of some of these
traditional remedies suggests that there must be at least some truth in them.

I think that’s all my opinion. Based on my rebuttal, I still stand up on my opinion that I disagree
with the motion. I’m Laksmi back to the house.

Third Speaker (Affirmative Team)

Third Speaker (Opposite Team)

Thanks for the time that has given to me. I’m Witya as the third speaker from opposite team. I
want to give my rebuttal for the third opinion of affirmative team.

How can you say that alternative medicine does not have evidence based? Here the government
has made regulations governing traditional medicine, namely Law No. 36 of 2009. In addition,
there is a study put forward by Andel and Carvalheiro (2013) who conducted a study of the use
of traditional medicine in Suriname found that 66 percent of local people use traditional
medicines in one last know, with complaints of cold cough, fever, hypertension, headaches,
disorders of the uterus and urinary tract disorders.

As said speaker 1 and speaker 2, where alternative medicine is still more reliable than
conventional medicine. For the example in China, where according to WHO noted, 30-50
percent of the public health is allocated for herbal concoctions. For 5,000 years, the Chinese
medicine has treated various diseases. Another example is in the country of India, where
Ayurveda or the science of life is an ancient holistic system for diagnosing and treating, has
existed since 1000 BC in India. Ayurveda is the oldest medical system known to man. In losing
to our own country, Indonesia, Indonesia is one of the largest medicinal plants in the world.
About 80 percent of the world herbs growing in this country. Indonesia has around 35 thousand
high-level plant species, of which 3,500 are reported as medicinal plants.

I think that’s all from me. Based on my rebuttal, I still stand up on our opinion. I absolutely,
completely, honestly disagree with the motion! I’m Witya back to the house.

Reply Speaker (Opposite Team)

Reply Speaker (Affirmative Team)