Homeopathy
- Thread starter Vashdaman
- Start date
Shortenings are fine, but many people seem to get it wrong though. Skikes always says Matsumi, for instance. :SI think that this quote from Ben Goldacre explains why I feel it doesn't work
If Homeopathic remedies work it must be by magic or in some way that contradicts known science fact.
If you do belive in it though I doubt that anything I can say could to convice you otherwise, personal experiance has a strong influence on a person.
It can be dangerous, Its one thing to take a remedy for a cold or sore throat, its probably going to get better anyway, but at the other end of the scale there are quack doctors telling people to use it for HIV, Cancer, Maleria etc and that is not going to do anyone any good.
If Homeopathic remedies work it must be by magic or in some way that contradicts known science fact.
If you do belive in it though I doubt that anything I can say could to convice you otherwise, personal experiance has a strong influence on a person.
It can be dangerous, Its one thing to take a remedy for a cold or sore throat, its probably going to get better anyway, but at the other end of the scale there are quack doctors telling people to use it for HIV, Cancer, Maleria etc and that is not going to do anyone any good.
Vashdaman
Za Warudo
Homepaths are by law not allowed to claim to a client they can cure sicknesses like Cancer ect, and have to recommend conventional treatment for it. If someone of their own free will decides to use homeopathic treatment for Cancer or stop the conventional treatment of it, then thats their decision and neither homeopathy nor homeopaths can be blamed for that. Everyone has the right to choose for themselves how to be treated. Homeopathy certainly doesn't deserve to be called "dangerous" any more then conventional drugs are.
There is new scientific research been done everyday that helps support the homeopathic pricipals, "known science facts" as you say, are still changing and being rewritten as we discover more all the time. A lot of the interesting scientific reaseach done that supports homeopathy(such as research into the memory of water and high dilution studies) simply gets ignored by the main stream. Your only going off what someone else has claimed to you is "scientific fact".
As for the Ben Goldacre quote, heres a counter quote of my own: "Ben Goldacre is a twat"
Sorry I couldn't help that. But it is important to remember that he is a journalist not a scientist, he may want to be one but he's not.
There is new scientific research been done everyday that helps support the homeopathic pricipals, "known science facts" as you say, are still changing and being rewritten as we discover more all the time. A lot of the interesting scientific reaseach done that supports homeopathy(such as research into the memory of water and high dilution studies) simply gets ignored by the main stream. Your only going off what someone else has claimed to you is "scientific fact".
As for the Ben Goldacre quote, heres a counter quote of my own: "Ben Goldacre is a twat"
Sorry I couldn't help that. But it is important to remember that he is a journalist not a scientist, he may want to be one but he's not.
Otaku-san
Chuunibyou
memorium said:
You sure told yourself there.
Anyhow VD this is the first I've heard about homoeopathy, but have heard about how people test these drugs on people when seriously ill. I'm guessing it's the same theory.
Plus I think vashdaman's nikename/shortname should become "VD" since it's relevant to this thread
I used him because his was the first quote I found that explained how little of the original substance in left when the remedy has been made, I don't understand how that could be strong enough to do anything. Please explain how magic is supposed to work.
I don't get the whole 'like cures like' theory either. Take something that causes sickness to cure sickness. I would be worried to speculate on what a
homoeopathy contraceptive might contain...
I don't get the whole 'like cures like' theory either. Take something that causes sickness to cure sickness. I would be worried to speculate on what a
homoeopathy contraceptive might contain...
Vashdaman
Za Warudo
Corra said:
Sorry Corra, I didn't mean to be rude there, I just felt like expressing my views on the twatery bastard that is Goldacre (Its all Peace and Lurve really though)
But yeah as for the like for cures like theory, well it's actually very similar to the theory behind vaccinations, with a few key differences of course.
Vashdaman
Za Warudo
No, its not that, and I'm sure all his arguments can and have actually been adressed by various prominent homeopaths. It's beacuse he's not just anti-homeopathy, he's literally anti everything that isn't conventional and which he actually knows very little about. As I said he's a journalist not a scientist.
For example take his book "Bad Science", it trys to beasically destroy anything that isn't "conventional medicine" not just homeopathy but every kind of alternative forms of healing even including slightly more cutting edge nutritionist's. Now I'm not a big Jillian Mceith fan (mainly due to the shock tactics she uses on TV) but she's positively tame compared to other leading nutritionists in terms of actual nutritional advice, and he guns even for her hard. It's not even only just the nutritional supplements (which can do some people a lot of good no doubt) but pretty much everything thats not beans on toast, maybe with some margerine to keep the calories down you know. He also guns for acupucture and pretty much anything else you can think of. Basically anything which suggests it can heal you without the use of drugs is quack worthy to Goldacre.
He obviously see's himself as a self righteous crusader of "good science" but he's not even a scientist, it's a joke. He's just made a name for himself bashing all alternate types of healing, thats basically his career. But if there was a book called "Bad Journalism" he no doubt would deserve a chapter.
For example take his book "Bad Science", it trys to beasically destroy anything that isn't "conventional medicine" not just homeopathy but every kind of alternative forms of healing even including slightly more cutting edge nutritionist's. Now I'm not a big Jillian Mceith fan (mainly due to the shock tactics she uses on TV) but she's positively tame compared to other leading nutritionists in terms of actual nutritional advice, and he guns even for her hard. It's not even only just the nutritional supplements (which can do some people a lot of good no doubt) but pretty much everything thats not beans on toast, maybe with some margerine to keep the calories down you know. He also guns for acupucture and pretty much anything else you can think of. Basically anything which suggests it can heal you without the use of drugs is quack worthy to Goldacre.
He obviously see's himself as a self righteous crusader of "good science" but he's not even a scientist, it's a joke. He's just made a name for himself bashing all alternate types of healing, thats basically his career. But if there was a book called "Bad Journalism" he no doubt would deserve a chapter.
Im not upset or anything, I can tell this is a subject that you have a lot of passion for.
Tbh its not really something you can change somebodies mind on. I do not think that big companies are out to get us or that it works. Your do. We could argue until be were exhausted and neither of us would back down. At the end of the day Im not going toforce you to stop you taking homeopathic remedy and you aren't going to force me to start taking it, and as long as people have a choice of what they want to do its fine.
Tbh its not really something you can change somebodies mind on. I do not think that big companies are out to get us or that it works. Your do. We could argue until be were exhausted and neither of us would back down. At the end of the day Im not going toforce you to stop you taking homeopathic remedy and you aren't going to force me to start taking it, and as long as people have a choice of what they want to do its fine.
Vashdaman
Za Warudo
Corra said:
Absolutely, believe it or not I didn't actually start this topic to try and change anyone's mind or argue (well ok I'll admit calling that twat goldacre a twat was a bit out of order). I really just wanted to get a feel for what the people of this forums views are or how many here are even aware of it. But or course I can't help offering my own personal opinions as well.
Anyway though I just realized I never actually offered a proper reply to the question of your last post so I might as well offer my views on it. Homeopathy works with such a small (near non molecule level) of the actual substance because its supposed to work on a vibrational level. So its more like the energy of the original substance rather than the physical stuff itself, but this actually makes the results more potent and can stimulate change in the "vital force" of a person. Now this sits perfectly with me and makes sense as I already believe in what the Chinese call Qi or what I guess could be called the vital force. And this is really part of the reason some claim Homeopathy is placebo, because they don't accept these ideas and it is very hard to scientifically prove them in a conventional manner, yet they know homeopathy does work.
However it is also interesting to note that some homeopaths don't actually accept the "vital force" either, and believe it somehow stimulates the body into healing some other way. So I guess you could take it or leave it but the vital force does actually make sense to me personally.
Also heres a random piece of information I learned the other day from my friend. Apparently homeopathy is very popular within the Muslim community, as there is meant to be a verse in the Koran that sort of propagates homeopathy and the law of similars, it was something to do with a fly and soup but I can't really remember now. I found that quite interesting.