The Forum > Article Comments > Homeopathy - there’s nothing in it > Comments
Homeopathy - there’s nothing in it : Comments
By Chrys Stevenson, published 11/2/2011Homeopathy works no better than a placebo, so why is it sold in pharmacies?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Page 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 15
- 16
- 17
-
- All
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 11 February 2011 4:41:00 PM
| |
Also check out references to a book titled Rediscovering Real Medicine by Dr Jean Elmiger MD.
Dr Elmiger is a remarkable Swiss doctor and highly accomplished Homeopath who developed his own unique method of Sequential Therapy. A method based on both empirical application and observation, and profound intuitive insight into the subtle mechanisms of dis-ease and healing. It is one of the most remarkable books on dis-ease, health-and-healing, that I have ever read. The case studies are extraordinary. Posted by Ho Hum, Friday, 11 February 2011 4:44:11 PM
| |
Onya Chrys. Well done.
Nice article. Homeopaths are hitting back this year, using terms like "stunt" and that 10.23 is proof that participants fail to understand homeopathy. The British Homeopathy Ass'n stated: http://www.britishhomeopathic.org/media_centre/news/10.23_response_2011.html I think the silliest thing I read was that skeptics were misguided because homeopathic sleeping pills were "contraindicated for overdose". Victorian/Melbourne Skeptics 10.23: http://vicskeptics.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/the-1023-event-in-melbourne/ YouTube; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvgRMcfo0Yk Paul Willis in Antarctica; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQzOidQKafA Indomitable James Randi; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMukj31qw1U Paul Offit on dilution of duck liver and heart to prepare Oscillococcinum - a homeopathic cold/flu pill. More dilute than 3x10 to the 80th. Which = more than volume of universe. Been sexed up with some images: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4_Vu7juiok Posted by Firesnake, Friday, 11 February 2011 4:58:03 PM
| |
The overdose experiment is invalid:
1. Taking more of a homeopathic remedy makes no difference. It is binary: either the body receives the signal, or it doesn't. 2. Coffee as a homeopathic? Certain substances antidote all homeopathic remedies, including coffee, menthol, camphor and mercury sourced from ocean-fish (due to nuclear experiments). Were the experimenters alert to this fact and made sure these substances are out of their system? Were they also alert that they must take the remedy at least one hour after any food and half an hour before eating again? 3. Homeopathic remedies are meant to cure in the deepest sense of the word - not to create effects, such that making one sleepy when one is not tired. How is being awake a malady? 4. One has to accept a homepathic remedy, that is either believe it works or be sceptical about it, but if one denies its effect to begin with, one's body doesn't accept it. 5. Water contamination is a serious issue that could void the remedy. During preparation The water must be absolutely pure with not a single foreign molecule. It is therefore preferable to use alcohol instead, but that of course makes the remedy much more expensive. The best homeopathic remedies carry the blessings of the practitioner who made them. That of course requires a high moral and spiritual stature on their behalf. I would be quite hesitant to pick a mass-produced remedy off the shelf in a pharmacy, not even knowing the person who made it. Homeopathy is not about achieving instantaneous results. Regarding Penelope Dingle, she should have been made aware of the choice whether her priority is to be cured, or to get rid of her cancer, as these are not the same. According to homeopathy, things usually get worse before they get better and death is but a symptom. Once the crisis of death is over, the remedy would have made her healthier in her next lifetime. If all she wanted was to remove the critical cancer instead of its root-cause, then homeopathy was not for her. Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 11 February 2011 5:18:30 PM
| |
Ok, so it is "pick a study" time.
I quite liked yours, Clownfish. Permit me to quote from it: "...the results of this study can be spun to a variety of conclusions." Yours was pretty good too, Shadow Minister. "This case-controlled study provides evidence that statin use reduces perioperative mortality in patients undergoing major vascular surgery." I'll buy that. But "what to do after major surgery" wasn't quite what I had in mind. Here's one that I found just now.. http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/170/12/1024 >>Statins have been shown to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality among individuals with clinical history of coronary heart disease. However, it remains uncertain whether statins have similar mortality benefit in a high-risk primary prevention setting... Conclusion This literature-based meta-analysis did not find evidence for the benefit of statin therapy on all-cause mortality in a high-risk primary prevention set-up.<< It's all good fun isn't it? Posted by Pericles, Friday, 11 February 2011 6:10:57 PM
| |
"The overdose experiment is invalid:
1. Taking more of a homeopathic remedy makes no difference. It is binary: either the body receives the signal, or it doesn't...' etc, etc, dodge, evade, dodge. You really have drunk the homeopathic Kool-Aid, haven't you? Does the word 'unfalsifiability' ring any bells? Posted by Jon J, Friday, 11 February 2011 8:36:37 PM
|
Read this:
http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/circulationaha;107/14/1848
This is one example where patients using statins had only 22% of the chance of mortality that non users had.
There is plenty more.