I tended to notice that too. Another interesting question by you skepcroc.
While as one poster pointed out, different doctors might have some variance in what they recommend in the real world of seeing doctors, but the skeptics on yahoo answers tent to blanket down/hate anything not a doctor or drugs while they stand by all doctors and all the drugs and their treatments and never show any penchant for pointing out any of the many bad things some of these doctors or drugs have done.
They have little civility (some do but they are in the minority of the skeptics) often when it comes to insults following along the Glen Beck..Rush Limbaugh line of banter..the meaner the better..they justify it somehow as for the greater good or something. I admit some like Gary tend to use less personal insults or stick more to facts than others who are more insulting on one's intelligence etc in their comments or how they word things in a civil manner, but I am talking how they come across as a whole.
This blanket approval and denial and ignoring of the many people harmed or killed by allopaths and drugs helps to discredit them in my view to the average person.
The way they down everything alternative..all the hundreds of plants and the many different faces under the alternative health umbrella form various physical massage techniques, diets, exercise, branches of medical thought (Chinese, native American, Ayurvedic etc, color therapy, music and art therapy, acupuncture-pressure, aromatherapy, homeopathy, naturopathy, etc etc) and say it is all useless makes them look like close minded ninnies in my opinion as each things must be looked at separately when it is so broad.
Every herb cannot be all bad but each must be looked at individually just as all drugs are not the same in their dangers and help to man. It is this across the board thinking --all them is good and all us is bad that diminishes their credibility as it make them seem inflexible and closeminded and closed to growth and change.
The openminded person as well as the supporters on here tend to be better able to admit their flaws in alternative health or see that sometimes allopaths or drugs might be better in some cases...they are not so bad and white in ther thinking, but more gray They are better able to admit when they were wrong on something. winning is not so important as being honest and helping someone.
Again I am not saying every single supporter or skeptic is always one way or the other but much of the time does follow these patterns and trends.
The alternative medicine supporters will not be so uniform. It is like politics I think..I suspect there are more liberals into alternative health and more conservatives into status quo and "traditional" medicine. Again although there may be liberal doctors and conservative alternative health practitioners, overall, they tend to mimic the behaviors often found in the two major political parties and I suspect more liberals are drawn/open to alternative health and more conservatives to the traditional ways.
Liberals tend to be more open minded and see more nuances and possibilities etc. They tend to have a lot more disagreements on various liberal type positions and issues.They tend to be nicer and more aware of people's feelings in generalities (although they may be individual exceptions). they do not like hurting people.
On the other hand, conservatives seem to follow the party line unflinchingly. they do not divide and have as many third parties as they see presenting a uniform front does not dilute their percentages, and makes them easier to understand, they tend to think only my way is the best or take the highway, they do not like change, they do their same talking points on every station and with every person in the group, they never acknowledge the bad guys among them no matter how much they claim to support family values while ignoring the discrepancies of more dems in power being in long tern relationships with less sex scandals for the most part (again there are exceptions)..they can't acknowledge it as it might lose their supporters.
They know to win they must be united at the cost of individual dissent. they tend to be more prone to group think and peer pressure I suspect. And often this works while dems who are more open and kind get clabbored. Both parties/chains of thoughts have strengths and disadvantages.While the dems often have better ideas thy can be too nice and spineless to get their stuff more mainstream. People tend to be afraid of change sometimes.
So the political parties and the two camps here will both draw certain personality types to them as well as fall into certain personality types themselves and I feel the alt supporters tend to act more like your democrats and the skeptics more like your republicans. wondering if anyone agrees or wishes to state their political parties honestly.