|
On June 16 2010 04:09 Impervious wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:00 Djzapz wrote:On June 16 2010 03:56 Issorlol wrote:On June 16 2010 03:54 Djzapz wrote:On June 16 2010 03:53 Issorlol wrote:On June 16 2010 03:49 Twisted wrote:On June 16 2010 03:44 Destro wrote:
warts are a virus, usually removing them does remove the effected area but its fully possibly for them to continue to grow. The issue i have with this, is that it makes no sense as to why you would assume it was the homeopathy that fixed your warts. The way you described homeopathy, it would be like putting out a bonfire with a candle? You also described the immunization process that has been adopted by modern medicine... but thats entirely pre-emptive.
I don't know why you ruled out the possibility of your body removing the virus itself, and jump to the conclusion it was diluted water that had a 6month triggering time. (???)
Why wouldn't it be? I just have an open mind about it. Maybe it is true that the medicine is mixed with something that works but why would they call it homeopathic then? And of course I have thought about the possibility of my body removing the virus itself. I was walking around with em for what.. 2-3 years or whatever. Tried various treatments as written in my original post which didn't work. So what, just coincidentally 6 months (as described with the treatment method) after I started using it they die in less than 3 days? There are also doctors here that have followed a regular education of 10 years to become normal house-call doctors and after that picked up a course in homeopathy. Why would they do that if they don't believe in it? They are doctors after all that have learned to cure people the conventional way. Water does not cure warts. The timing is purely coincidental. Like I said there might've been an active ingredient in the solution he used. If it was 100% homeopathic then it's definitely coincidental but I don't think they would sell 100% homeopathy for warts. When are actual homepathic remedies not functionally pure water? + Show Spoiler +Like here, it has menthol for instance and honey. Plenty of homeopathic medicine aren't just homeopathy. + Show Spoiler +Here, 20% ethyl alcohol. It's being marketed as homeopathic. It's not..... There is a difference.....
You can come up with an homeopathic solution, add it to actual medicine, call it homeopathic; then it works; people then say homeopathy works. It's a problem and I agree it's not really homeopathy. You still pay for and buy the homeopathic part of the final product.
|
It's crap but your chances of convincing a "believer" of that are about as good as the chances of it healing you.
|
On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug.
Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then
1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured
and
2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price
|
On June 16 2010 04:09 Destro wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:06 Twisted wrote:http://ecam.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/neq042Random article I googled about Thuja Occidentalis. Mind you, it's actually made of a tree. Can't really read it because it's too scientific but it's a published article so I would assume a professor approved of the publishing of this article (it's from Oxford). Some people are arguing that every homeopathic medicine is made of water with a 0.001% other ingredient in it? Is that even true? Wouldn't the dose be different with sometimes 0.1% or whatever? Posts like 'you are drinking water', while I was actually taking small pills, don't really help your argument so I won't respond to those. is there a cut and dry outline of what a homeopathic medicine must consist of to be considered homeopathy? could end a lot of confusion in this thread
Homeopathy is always a dilution of something (in cases where it's something harmful or related to what it's supposed to cure, it's more accurately called isopathy). There are different dilution levels, but all homeopathic remedies are, functionally, water in liquid form and placebo in pill.
|
On June 16 2010 04:12 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug. Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then 1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured and 2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price
I can tell you right now that ground up scorpion is going to cost way more then pills containing the active ingredient. It isn't actually all that hard to find out what is active.
1) Mass spectrometry etc. -> find out all the stuff that's in it
2) Remove from the list things that have been tried
3) Test the rest on the virus
Companies spend m/billions on R&D, do you know how much money the patent for the cure to herpes is worth?
|
Basicly homeopathy is this: You take a active ingridient that actually works and dilute it with water until there is about 1 molecule of active ingridient in milion molecules of water (numbers might not be exactly like that ,but You get the drift). The clue here is that homeopaths belive in something called "memory of water", the water acordingly to their belief should take some properties of active ingridient and work exactly like that active ingridient (or even stronger).
So homepath medicine is : water, sugar, and active ingridient diluted to the point when its existence is negligable.
|
On June 16 2010 04:12 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug. Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then 1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured and 2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price
There are several flaws with this line of thought. It is much, much safer to identify the specific chemical(s) involved and synthesize them. This can prevent people from dying to adverse reactions to the other chemicals in the scorpion, yet still benefit from the cure to herpes.
It costs a lot of money to do this, but once it's been done, the remedy is available forever. In the long term, it's only a little more expensive, yet the cost/benefit ratio is much more favorable.
Also, it could be possible to study the reasons why this medicine works, and then create an even better version. A lot of medicines are created because of this. Nobody in their right mind grinds up opium as a painkiller anymore, when they have access to relatively cheap drugs that are 1000 times as potent, with less side-effects.....
|
On June 16 2010 04:16 seppolevne wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:12 travis wrote:On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug. Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then 1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured and 2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price I can tell you right now that ground up scorpion is going to cost way more then pills containing the active ingredient. It isn't actually all that hard to find out what is active. 1) Mass spectrometry etc. -> find out all the stuff that's in it 2) Remove from the list things that have been tried 3) Test the rest on the virus Companies spend m/billions on R&D, do you know how much money the patent for the cure to herpes is worth?
but what if it doesn't work like that, what if the curing of the herpes is a result of a physiological response to the digestion of multiple ingredients of the scorpion, for example? hopefully it's clear i don't fully know what im talking about here because I don't want to come off like i am arguing now, but rather just being inquisitive. you clearly know more about this than I do.
|
On June 16 2010 04:17 Silvanel wrote:
Basicly homeopathy is this: You take a active ingridient that actually works and dilute it with water until there is about 1 molecule of active ingridient in milion molecules of water (numbers might not be exactly like that ,but You get the drift). The clue here is that homeopaths belive in something called "memory of water", the water acordingly to their belief should take some properties of active ingridient and work exactly like that active ingridient (or even stronger).
So homepath medicine is : water, sugar, and active ingridient diluted to the point when its existence is negligable.
This is not exactly true. They do not use an "active ingredient" in that it normally treats the symptoms, you add one that gives you the same symptoms. So you have a rash? -> poison ivy, stomach ache? -> something that upsets your stomach.
|
United States42692 Posts
On June 16 2010 04:25 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:16 seppolevne wrote:On June 16 2010 04:12 travis wrote:On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug. Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then 1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured and 2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price I can tell you right now that ground up scorpion is going to cost way more then pills containing the active ingredient. It isn't actually all that hard to find out what is active. 1) Mass spectrometry etc. -> find out all the stuff that's in it 2) Remove from the list things that have been tried 3) Test the rest on the virus Companies spend m/billions on R&D, do you know how much money the patent for the cure to herpes is worth? but what if it doesn't work like that, what if the curing of the herpes is a result of the digestion of multiple ingredients of the scorpion, for example? hopefully it's clear i don't fully know what im talking about here because I don't want to come off like i am arguing now, but rather just being inquisitive. you clearly know more about this than I do.
Make a list of what is in ground scorpion. Remove chemicals one by one until it stops working. The ones that are left are the cure. Synthasise and sell.
|
Twisted:
I just read a litle about Thujone and homeopathy, it seems like it is only a 1:100 dilution. This would make it about 0.9 gram of Thujone pr. liter water ( around 35.526*10^20 molecules(ish)). That is not a very dilute solution compared to much modern medicine - so if this is what you took it is very plausible that it actually worked.
Also the article you mentioned talks about thujone's medical probabilities(not much about homeopathy) so it seems it is a very biologically active molecule which again makes your claim it cured you reasonable.
If homeopathy uses solutions of around 1:100 i dont see how you can dispute it scientifically. But when you dilute something to 1:10^23 (or even higher) it is not going to cure you.
|
I've just started "Polarity" yesterday. I'm sceptic about all that energy stuff but it's my aunt that does it so we'll see..
|
On June 16 2010 04:26 seppolevne wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:17 Silvanel wrote:
Basicly homeopathy is this: You take a active ingridient that actually works and dilute it with water until there is about 1 molecule of active ingridient in milion molecules of water (numbers might not be exactly like that ,but You get the drift). The clue here is that homeopaths belive in something called "memory of water", the water acordingly to their belief should take some properties of active ingridient and work exactly like that active ingridient (or even stronger).
So homepath medicine is : water, sugar, and active ingridient diluted to the point when its existence is negligable. This is not exactly true. They do not use an "active ingredient" in that it normally treats the symptoms, you add one that gives you the same symptoms. So you have a rash? -> poison ivy, stomach ache? -> something that upsets your stomach.
Well i have heard of both methods. Both makes no sense at all.
|
On June 16 2010 04:25 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:16 seppolevne wrote:On June 16 2010 04:12 travis wrote:On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug. Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then 1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured and 2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price I can tell you right now that ground up scorpion is going to cost way more then pills containing the active ingredient. It isn't actually all that hard to find out what is active. 1) Mass spectrometry etc. -> find out all the stuff that's in it 2) Remove from the list things that have been tried 3) Test the rest on the virus Companies spend m/billions on R&D, do you know how much money the patent for the cure to herpes is worth? but what if it doesn't work like that, what if the curing of the herpes is a result of the digestion of multiple ingredients of the scorpion, for example? hopefully it's clear i don't fully know what im talking about here because I don't want to come off like i am arguing now, but rather just being inquisitive. you clearly know more about this than I do.
Well yes that is a common occurrence as well. While not exactly the same thing, this can be seen in flavour. Analyze the flavour of vanilla(a bunch of chemicals) and it is simply one molecule: vanillin. But do the same for apple(1000+ chemicals) and it is not so simple. None of them on their own are the "apple" flavour.
But they will usually do much more analysis then just "see if it works". They will compare the molecules to currently understood molecules for similarity of action. They will take the time to mix and match if it is plausible. And for the most part it is, as something that is shown to work (or believed to) is a much more promising/cheaper path then trying to find something from scratch.
|
On June 16 2010 04:32 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:26 seppolevne wrote:On June 16 2010 04:17 Silvanel wrote:
Basicly homeopathy is this: You take a active ingridient that actually works and dilute it with water until there is about 1 molecule of active ingridient in milion molecules of water (numbers might not be exactly like that ,but You get the drift). The clue here is that homeopaths belive in something called "memory of water", the water acordingly to their belief should take some properties of active ingridient and work exactly like that active ingridient (or even stronger).
So homepath medicine is : water, sugar, and active ingridient diluted to the point when its existence is negligable. This is not exactly true. They do not use an "active ingredient" in that it normally treats the symptoms, you add one that gives you the same symptoms. So you have a rash? -> poison ivy, stomach ache? -> something that upsets your stomach. Well i have heard of both methods. Both makes no sense at all.
"Based on an ipse dixit[1] axiom[2] formulated by Hahnemann which he called the law of similars, preparations which cause certain symptoms in healthy individuals are given as the treatment for patients exhibiting similar symptoms. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy
|
Netherlands13554 Posts
On June 16 2010 04:29 Ao_Jun wrote:
Twisted:
I just read a litle about Thujone and homeopathy, it seems like it is only a 1:100 dilution. This would make it about 0.9 gram of Thujone pr. liter water ( around 35.526*10^20 molecules(ish)). That is not a very dilute solution compared to much modern medicine - so if this is what you took it is very plausible that it actually worked.
Also the article you mentioned talks about thujone's medical probabilities(not much about homeopathy) so it seems it is a very biologically active molecule which again makes your claim it cured you reasonable.
If homeopathy uses solutions of around 1:100 i dont see how you can dispute it scientifically. But when you dilute something to 1:10^23 (or even higher) it is not going to cure you.
Thanks for posting this. I agree when it's diluted 1:10^23 that it's not going to cure you lol. That's mostly what I'm trying to argue. General consensus of people who are so much against homeopathy in this topic argue that everything that's considered homeopathic medicine is diluted to that degree.
So when something is diluted 1:100 like Thuja, it's no longer homeopathic according to you (you as in general crowd in this topic)?
The whole voodoo that water is enchanted by the medicine if it's diluted that much is obviously something I don't believe in.
|
On June 16 2010 04:28 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:25 travis wrote:On June 16 2010 04:16 seppolevne wrote:On June 16 2010 04:12 travis wrote:On June 16 2010 03:51 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2010 03:37 travis wrote:
The health industry searches far and wide for potential cures, and the easiest place to start is with "traditional" remedies.
what health industry are you talking about? most of the money in today's health industry, at least here in the U.S.A, is based in pharmaceuticals. are you trying to tell me that the pharmaceutical industry is interested in traditional remedies? that's B.S. they are interested in making money, as are most western doctors. which is exactly why you see so many commercials for drugs with a million side effects and then 1 month later you hear about class action lawsuits against that company because the drug was causing so many problems. it's to the benefit of these companies to discredit alternative healing as much as possible. You're completely wrong here. It's a huge time saver to start with a natural remedy that works and break it down until you can find the thing that makes it work. Way better than just experimenting with chemicals at random until something does something. What the pharmaceutical gives you isn't a natural remedy, they don't give you willow bark extract, they give you asprin. But you're an idiot if you think they ignore willow bark extract. If they heard some random amazonian tribe used a unique natural remedy only they had access to they'd be on that in a second. They'd test the natural remedy to see if it worked, then test the chemicals within it to see which of them worked, then synthesise the drug. Point taken, and I was off base with how I said that. But I think you're oversimplifying it. If in chinese medicine ground up scorpion was said to be a cure for herpes, then 1.) it would not be so easy to find out what about the ground up scorpion caused the herpes to be cured and 2.) im not so sure it would be in the companies best interest to develop a medicine based on it, when people could buy ground up scorpion for 1/4 the price I can tell you right now that ground up scorpion is going to cost way more then pills containing the active ingredient. It isn't actually all that hard to find out what is active. 1) Mass spectrometry etc. -> find out all the stuff that's in it 2) Remove from the list things that have been tried 3) Test the rest on the virus Companies spend m/billions on R&D, do you know how much money the patent for the cure to herpes is worth? but what if it doesn't work like that, what if the curing of the herpes is a result of the digestion of multiple ingredients of the scorpion, for example? hopefully it's clear i don't fully know what im talking about here because I don't want to come off like i am arguing now, but rather just being inquisitive. you clearly know more about this than I do. Make a list of what is in ground scorpion. Remove chemicals one by one until it stops working. The ones that are left are the cure. Synthasise and sell.
It's actually a pretty long and tedious process to single out an active ingredient. Mostly if you have a complex mechanism(ie multiple molecules) it will be discarded for more profitable ventures.
|
On June 16 2010 04:40 Twisted wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 04:29 Ao_Jun wrote:
Twisted:
I just read a litle about Thujone and homeopathy, it seems like it is only a 1:100 dilution. This would make it about 0.9 gram of Thujone pr. liter water ( around 35.526*10^20 molecules(ish)). That is not a very dilute solution compared to much modern medicine - so if this is what you took it is very plausible that it actually worked.
Also the article you mentioned talks about thujone's medical probabilities(not much about homeopathy) so it seems it is a very biologically active molecule which again makes your claim it cured you reasonable.
If homeopathy uses solutions of around 1:100 i dont see how you can dispute it scientifically. But when you dilute something to 1:10^23 (or even higher) it is not going to cure you. Thanks for posting this. I agree when it's diluted 1:10^23 that it's not going to cure you lol. That's mostly what I'm trying to argue. General consensus of people who are so much against homeopathy in this topic argue that everything that's considered homeopathic medicine is diluted to that degree. So when something is diluted 1:100 like Thuja, it's no longer homeopathic according to you (you as in general crowd in this topic)? The whole voodoo that water is enchanted by the medicine if it's diluted that much is obviously something I don't believe in.
According to homeopaths the more dilute the more powerful. When it's 1:100 it's not homeopathy. When you take an aspirin it's not 100% active ingredients. When you take antibiotic pills it's not 100% antibiotics. The reason why it's 1/100 is so you can pick it up with your fingers or so they can put something else in the other 99%.
|
On June 16 2010 03:45 Twisted wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 03:40 Lefnui wrote:
Unfortunately, nothing you said can be taken seriously. None of it has any evidence to support it at all, only subjective stories from people that support homeopathy. The principles of homeopathy are extremely illogical and are contradicted by science. Just want to point out that it shouldn't be shot down instantly because 'science' told us so. Lots of oriental medicine from people living in the jungle from plants or whatever would probably receive the same response from established doctors who believe in their education.
That's not true at all. There are purely logical, scientific reasons for why those plants are medicinal. Homeopathy on the other hand is based off of insane, illogical principles. The idea that something becomes stronger the more you dilute it is bat shit crazy. That is a core principle of homeopathy.
This is a longshot, but: has "science" proven that it *doesn't* work?
That is indeed a long shot. The onus is upon people who believe in homeopathy to prove it, not science to contradict it. In my opinion common sense disproves it though.
I don't know why you keep putting science in quotes. Seems like you're a bit cynical or sarcastic about science in general.
|
Netherlands13554 Posts
On June 16 2010 04:48 Lefnui wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 03:45 Twisted wrote:On June 16 2010 03:40 Lefnui wrote:
Unfortunately, nothing you said can be taken seriously. None of it has any evidence to support it at all, only subjective stories from people that support homeopathy. The principles of homeopathy are extremely illogical and are contradicted by science. Just want to point out that it shouldn't be shot down instantly because 'science' told us so. Lots of oriental medicine from people living in the jungle from plants or whatever would probably receive the same response from established doctors who believe in their education. That's not true at all. There are purely logical, scientific reasons for why those plants are medicinal. Homeopathy on the other hand is based off of insane, illogical principles. The idea that something becomes stronger the more you dilute it is bat shit crazy. That is a core principle of homeopathy. That is indeed a long shot. The onus is upon people who believe in homeopathy to prove it, not science to contradict it. In my opinion common sense disproves it though. I don't know why you keep putting science in quotes. Seems like you're a bit cynical or sarcastic about science in general.
I put science in quotes because it's a vague concept. Not because I'm cynical/sarcastic about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.vitadiscount.com/vitasprings/chestal-children-boiron.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.lhasaoms.com/2005/sqerl/inv/vinceellg.jpg)
