The problem is that bloodletting does not rid disease efficiently from the human body. 

The source is a published website. It is the British Colombia Medical Journal and has a credible author who is a medical doctor. 

Evaluate Evidence:  

This is a credible source with a credible author. It is not for or against bloodletting and provides an informative read with scientific evidence. It very clearly identifies the theory behind bloodletting and provides evidence as to why it may not be the best option nowadays. 

Recognize Assumptions, Emotions, Biases:   

There is not a lot of bias in this article. The article is not for or against bloodletting but provides evidence for both. There may be some bias in favour of not using bloodletting nowadays as it is an old practice that was used when there was nothing else. With the advancement in technology and medicine today, there is always going to be bias in favour of the scientific evidence. 

Synthesize Evidence, Identify Alternatives:  

Nowadays, there are better alternatives to bloodletting like erythrocytapheresis - which is an exchange/transfer of bad blood cells from the body with good blood cells from a donor, there is chelation therapy - which is a therapy in which chelation agents are injected into the bloodstream to bond with the heavy metals in the body to then remove them, and there is also modern phlebotomy - which is the same thing as bloodletting but with more precautions.

Select Best Alternative:  

I believe that erythrocytapheresis is the best alternative to bloodletting as it replaces bad blood with good blood immediately to achieve the same effect as bloodletting without actually having to drain blood. This would provide the least harmful effect to a person overall.