On June 16 2010 06:17 Glowy wrote: No, it doesn't. I'm a chemist student soon to take my bachelor and then a master in biochemistry. I promise it won't work. Except some placebo in fanatics.
wtf dude...
Well i'm currently working on my masters in medicinal chemistry and i can promise you it works. Where does this leave us?
I hope you don't use arguments like that when you write your bachelors assignement.
(no i dont think it works it was for the sake of argument..)
On June 16 2010 05:42 snowbird wrote: It works. My mother is an alternative practioner (chinese medicine, acupuncture, homepathy, etc.) and she's helped a lot of people who were almost beyond repair due to being a chemical waste dump thanks to "scientific medicine".
Scientific medicine = let's treat the symptoms, people will see results and think it helps (plus we can make $$$ because ppl keep coming back).
Chinese medicine = let's treat the cause, there may be no immediate visible effect, but it will actually cure the disease.
Edit: Personally I don't let my mother treat me because I'm just too lazy and rather take some pill and be done with it. Homeopathic treatment is more than just taking some pill, it usually involves more involvement (diet change, change of habits / sleeping pattern), because it takes a look at the whole body system and not just one symptom.
I'm glad to get it cleared that my 6 years of medical school only taught me about symptoms and how to treat them. I'm somewhat wondering why we spent the first 4 years learning about stuff like the endocrine system, how neural impulses traverse the neuron, how muscles contract, how the immune system works, how the body senses danger - the list goes on.
I'm also wondering why antibiotica is used in medicine at all - since they treat the cause of the symptoms and not the symptoms. I'm also wondering why we spend so much time advocating for better diet/hygiene - I mean, doctors only treat symptoms right?!
My mind. It was just blown. In a very unpleasant way.
"Chinese" medicine works due to the very same reason "western" medicine does and whilst an educated doctor in "western" medicine can explain why his medicine works from an objective POV - the practioneer of the "chinese" medicine can't.
I'm sorry I had to dumb it down like that and of course my first post was not to be taken seriously. But seeing the arguments against homeopathy I thought I had to counter on the same level.
Please do explain what homeopathic medicine can cure, the processes behind this and why it is that studies have shown no statistically significant difference between homeopathic remedies and placebos. I'd encourage you not to dumb it down seeing as there are many users here with post-secondary biology and medicine education.
On June 16 2010 06:06 KwarK wrote: I once gave a particularly vulnerable female friend of mine a very hard time for using homeopathic remedies when she was ill. She was still ill at the time and needed lots of gentle care. I don't feel bad. People have to learn!
Well, I look at this way, the money you spent on those sugar pills could have been spent on ben and jerry's while you sit in bed at home and recover.
Also I'm incredibly annoyed by people that ask what's the harm?, especially due to the joke in science circles that homoeopathy doesn't have any side effects because to have those, you need effects first.
The story is always the same, homoeopathy/chiriopractory/crystal therapy/vitamin supplements cures something in a more desirable manner/cures something that is incurable with evidence based medicine. (delete as appropriate)
And you can laugh, call it a tax on the stupid, but all this preys on the weak and the desperate and that can easily be you, or someone you know, now or in the future.
By law mediums have to state that they are providing an entertainment service and should not be taken seriously. I would ideally apply that across the whole spectrum, from homeopathy to graphology. If you don't have the science behind you then you have to make that abundantly clear before you sell your bullshit.
On June 16 2010 05:42 snowbird wrote: It works. My mother is an alternative practioner (chinese medicine, acupuncture, homepathy, etc.) and she's helped a lot of people who were almost beyond repair due to being a chemical waste dump thanks to "scientific medicine".
Scientific medicine = let's treat the symptoms, people will see results and think it helps (plus we can make $$$ because ppl keep coming back).
Chinese medicine = let's treat the cause, there may be no immediate visible effect, but it will actually cure the disease.
Psychics and witch doctors and people like your mother can help people with small issues and make them feel better.
You'll see those people hauling ass to the hospital when they get cancer or AIDS or get into an accident. When they get an ear infection, they'll take antibiotics. When they have something serious, Chinese medicine won't help. Your herbs and stuff, they may help a little - but thanks to "western medicine", you'll probably live above 70 year old. Say thanks to "scientific medicine" for nearly tripling your life expectancy.
You're just gullible -_- sorry man. Get back to me when you eradicate something like smallpox.
Well I got just the respsonses I expected.
I don't want to "convince" anyone (like that's even possible over the internet), so I'll just leave the thread.
Edit: Just one thing, no serious alternative practitioner would ever claim to be able to cure cancer or AIDS, or mend bones or have a substitute for antibiotics. That's just ridiculous. I don't know why people use that as an argument.
She doesn't even get her facts right. The NHS budget is £80b, not £8b. With that in mind I'm not too unhappy about £4m being spent on homeopathy, it's 1/20th of a percent of the total budget. £0.0005 on homeopathic medicine for every £1 spent on actual medicine is pretty diluted, they should be happy.
Actually it would be £0.05 per £1.
Because 80,000,000,000 divided by 4,000,000 is 20. My bad. I always forget that exemption to normal maths.
Oh haha I missed the billion vs. million.
I thought the UK was spending four billion pounds on homeopathy.
Show them this? James Randi explaining why Homeopathy is BS.
His argument is bad. He basically just makes fun of it without explaining why the homeopathic "law of similars" or the idea that the "essence of the medicine", or whatever the fuck he called it, is still in the solution and get's more potent with further dilution is untrue. He just expects us to assume that those ideas are untrue without presenting any kind of evidence against it.
In general I see homeopathy in the same light as meditation. If you believe in it you can support your immune system with your mind with either of those. As long as "proper" medicine is subscribed if the medical condition requires it, I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, I think many people go to the doctor prematurely. As long as your body can take care of the illness on it's own, you should leave it to him and show a little patience.
When homeopathic medicine first came about, and systematically killed its first victims (sorry, patients), who were wealthy enough to purchase the treatment they determined that it wasn't the fundamental principle of pouring things like lead and arsenic into people's bloodstreams that was wrong, they just needed to 'improve' the mixture more by diluting it further and further. Then, as the statistics showed that diluting the mixture further and further lowered the casualty rate, they deduced that further dilution must be working, making the mixture stronger and stronger the more they dilute it!
The original intent of homeopathic medicine wasn't to trick people into thinking this was a miracle cure. They actually thought it worked, using statistics to analyze the data they got back from tests and attaching the 'science' afterwards.
People who got the ailment had X casualties (the poor)
People who got the ailment and received homeopathic treatment (the rich) died less often (primarily because they were already being better taken care of than the poor to begin with)
People who received 'stronger' versions of homeopathic treatment (more dilute versions of the same stuff) had even LOWER casualty rates (because they were being better taken care of AND they were pumping less shit into their bodies than earlier trials)
Like almost every scientific discovery in the history of humanity, you try it first and THEN attach meaning/explanations afterwards. They didn't know about this 'essence' stuff beforehand. They attached that AFTER they saw that further dilution improved the casualty rate.
Homeopathic medicine is cognitive dissonance, and just plain bad statistics, at its finest.
Show them this? James Randi explaining why Homeopathy is BS.
His argument is bad. He basically just makes fun of it without explaining why the homeopathic "law of similars" or the idea that the "essence of the medicine", or whatever the fuck he called it, is still in the solution and get's more potent with further dilution is untrue. He just expects us to assume that those ideas are untrue without presenting any kind of evidence against it.
In general I see homeopathy in the same light as meditation. If you believe in it you can support your immune system with your mind with either of those. As long as "proper" medicine is subscribed if the medical condition requires it, I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, I think many people go to the doctor prematurely. As long as your body can take care of the illness on it's own, you should leave it to him and show a little patience.
Uh what?
Water doesn't have "memory"
You might have something with law of similars if you were in fact getting that SIMILAR thing in the first place but because it's so diluted you actually aren't getting anything but water or whatever base the medication is in.
I also agree that people generally go to the doctor very prematurely but this medication is being sold on the basis that people don't realize how dilute this stuff actually is.
Then again, getting rich due to ignorance has always been a mainstay.
i always find it painfully ironic whenever there are people on forums denouncing modern science from being whats proper while using the world wide web, created by the people at the forefront of scientific discovery.
I'm a little confused now because while I knew that scientific research had generally shown that homeopathic treatment doesn't work, I didn't know just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Why then would the Swiss health care system cover homepathic treatment?
On June 16 2010 04:57 Lefnui wrote: It's not a vague concept at all. And I find it interesting that you refuse to respond to the rest.
Tell me, do you believe that diluting something makes it stronger?
Are you trolling or honestly devoid of reading comprehension.
How have I been trolling? What are you talking about?
You've avoided the question twice now so I'll repeat it:
Do you believe that diluting something makes it stronger?
On June 16 2010 06:28 Mango wrote: Pretty harsh reactions versus homeopathy inhere.
It deserves harsh criticism, it's nonsense.
I think alot of people underestimate the placebo effect. Endorphins can have a very strong positive effect on the human body, which can actually help to overcome certain small ilnesses.
The placebo effect is indeed strong, it's the very reason that anyone believes in such garbage. However, that fact doesn't favor homeopathy, it goes against it. Homeopathy isn't supposed to work through placebo effect. The concept and people who believe in it claim that the dilutions actually work, not that they are a mere matter of suggestion.
It should never be used for the serious diseases though, I think everybody can agree on that.
Unfortunately not, there seem to be many insane homeopathy supporters who believe that it can treat serious illnesses such as cancer. And even if people only thought that it applied to lesser illnesses, it would still be extremely troubling. For people to disregard science and believe in something with absolutely no evidence behind it, something that contradicts common sense; that leads to very dangerous places.
As a medical student myself I would never advise one of my patients to use homeopathy, nor would I ever use it myself. But who are we to criticise those who do find benefits in it?
There are people who find benefit in the most disgusting, insane and ridiculous practices. But that does not justify such things. Ridiculous concepts deserve criticism.
On June 16 2010 07:57 Orome wrote: I'm a little confused now because while I knew that scientific research had generally shown that homeopathic treatment doesn't work, I didn't know just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Why then would the Swiss health care system cover homepathic treatment?
Because there's enough idiots out there that want the treatment. Change the world by writing your political representative today and tell them you don't buy any of this scientific medicine mumbo jumbo, that your 'cultural, natural medicinal remedies' work just as well, that you want that as an option in your national healthcare system and they're going to go ahead and implement it. Why? Because its easier to appeal to your nutjob beliefs to get your vote than it is to convince you how wrong you are.
Gonna take some time, and might not happen in your generation, but its bound to happen eventually if enough people complain about it.
On June 16 2010 07:57 Orome wrote: I'm a little confused now because while I knew that scientific research had generally shown that homeopathic treatment doesn't work, I didn't know just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Why then would the Swiss health care system cover homepathic treatment?
According to the internet (read: Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy]). This was withdrawn in 2005 - "The Swiss government, after a 5-year trial, withdrew homeopathy and four other complementary treatments in 2005, stating that they did not meet efficacy and cost-effectiveness criteria."
It does, however, state that other countries still recognise Homeopathy as a form of medicine. The reasoning, I would assume, is the same as any government reasoning - for votes and popularity. If you look at the countries it is most prevalent and still covered you get places like India where there is a strong cultural draw to the sort of "natural" remedies. Or place like the UK where I have heard many arguments for Homeopathy rotate around the fact "the royal family uses it!"
To those who do feel Homeopathy provides more than simply a placebo effect, explain to me why someone can take a full packet (or two) of sleeping pills and have no noticeable effect. As has been stated many times, there is no scientific grounding for Homeopathy - dilution does not make things stronger, especially when something is so dilute it's effectively a drop in the universe.
EPT
