Homepathy cures. YEAH RIGHT!
Scott Schaefer
YEAH RIGHT, hear Dr. Stephen Barrett (of quackwatch.com) talk about
HOMEPATHY.
Join comedy Writer host Scott Schaefer at http://www.talkspot.com and tune
into the News/Politics channel, and just say YEAH RIGHT.
Samantha Quill
says...
I tried some. The box has the word Homeopathic on it, implying to me at least
that they are a homeopathic cure, or else they just are using the word to jump
on the natural health care craze. On the back two studies are referenced, one
with 26 mg dosage and the other with 13.5 mg dosage. Both have 42% (odd, same
results??) of patients responding favorably to the zinc. Now, is 13 mg a
homeopathic doasge? If the original - symptom causing substance (zinc) was
diluted to only 1,000,000th of the original dose, that would mean that the
original dose would be 13Kg of zinc taken every 3 hours. Does 13Kg of zinc
eaten every 3 hours cause cold-like symptoms (and by cold-like I don't mean
loss of body temperature). Or is this just the marketing people using an
unregulated and thus meaninless label on their product to make it more
appealing in the current marketplace?
Sam "arsenic is a 100% natural substance-must be good for you" Quill
JPRTIST
Pretty good analytical skills presented in your post for all of us to
ponder. Sounds fishy to me, I'll have to start looking at some of the
stuff labeled "homeopathic". The concept behind homeopathic, as always
led me to be a little skeptical.
You forgot to mention one thing though, did the zinc help?
--
Sir J.P.R.J.
A Lord, Supreme Being and Reigning Monarch of afa-b,
Debunker of the Half Baked Air Disaster Conspiracy Theorists,
Archangel and Random Buggerist of the Critically Inept,
A Puzzlement to the "Green Geezer"
lib·er·al adj. Abbr. lib. 1. a. Not limited to or by established,
traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas;
free from bigotry. b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas
for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others;
broad-minded. c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism. d.
Liberal Abbr. Lib. Of, designating, or characteristic of a political
party founded on or associated with principles of social and political
liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2. a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor. b.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes. 3. Not strict
or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation. 4. Of, relating
to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or
university curriculum: a liberal education. 5. a. Archaic Permissible or
appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious. n. 1. A person with
liberal ideas or opinions. 2. Liberal Abbr. Lib. A member of a Liberal
political party. [Middle English generous from Old French from Latin
lşberłlis from lşber free; See leudh- in Indo-European Roots.] lib
“er·al·ly adv. lib “er·al·ness n.
Samantha Quill
The cold lasted about the same as any other cold, I didn't notice any
significant difference other than they left a bad taste in my mouth that
may have diverted attention away from other discomforts from the cold, and
were relieved when it went away.
Sam
medonel
Medical College has been producing Homeopathic doctors since the eighteenth
century.
This is a brilliant and formidable for of today's alternative medicines.
Mary T
for what we now recognize as "real" medicine. Frankly, I think our medical
arts have strayed too far from both science and healing and need to look
back at their roots.
Mary T
medonel <med...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<36F028E7...@earthlink.net>...
tscottme
It works because the mountebank said so and he sounds so sincere.
--
Scott Methvin
Stop plate tectonics!
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: Homeopathy existed before modern medicine
Which says nothing in regards to its value.
The thing I can never understand about homeopathic theory is why, if
dilution can "superpower" the effects of materials used in treatment why
it doesn't have the same effect on things in the water that will cause
negative effects?
tim gueguen 101867
medonel
in simple terms that you may understand.
It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England. It should be good
enough for us who are not royals.
Mike Combs
>
> Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy. Think of this
> in simple terms that you may understand.
> It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England.
Which STILL says nothing in regards to its value. Think of this in
simple terms that you may understand. Royal does not equal right.
--
Regards,
Mike Combs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey, where's the moonbase? Where're the Eagles? What a rip...
Commentator
When you can present some real data that homeopothy works you may get a
more sympathetic reception.
But sadly there are no reputable, repeatable, double blind studies
showing this hundred year old nonsense works.
Did you hear about the guy who forgot to take his homeopathic medicine
and died of an overdose?
paghat
> That's easy to say when you know there's a backup when the hokum fails.
>
> It works because the mountebank said so and he sounds so sincere.
> --
> Scott Methvin
I love big words.
-paghat
Commentator
>
> Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy. Think of this
> in simple terms that you may understand.
> enough for us who are not royals.
>
> TIMOTHY GUEGUEN wrote:
>
> >
> > The thing I can never understand about homeopathic theory is why, if
> > dilution can "superpower" the effects of materials used in treatment why
> > it doesn't have the same effect on things in the water that will cause
> > negative effects?
> >
> > tim gueguen 101867
Clearly you have gone beyond the pathologically gullible to the simple
pathological.
Get a life.
Ivor Taylor
>When you can present some real data that homeopothy works you may get a
>more sympathetic reception.
>
>But sadly there are no reputable, repeatable, double blind studies
>showing this hundred year old nonsense works.
>
>Did you hear about the guy who forgot to take his homeopathic medicine
>and died of an overdose?
What a pity you are so obviously biased. Double blind studies cost lots
of cash and are the tool of the drug companies used to stop competition.
The drug companies use double blind studies to test their products so as
to make them safe. Such products as Thalidomide were tested by the drug
companies. There is hardly any modern drugs manufactured that do not
produce side effects. Doctors then prescribe yet another drug with yet
more side effects to combat the effects of the first drug. Fact 1/3 of
all drugs prescribed in the U.S.A. are secondary drugs, to combat the
side effects of the first drug.
I would like to remind you that most herbal medicines (not all) have not
been tested with double blind studies, However those that have usually
prove positive. After all herbal medicine has been curing people for
over 3000 years. Homeopathy has also been curing people for longer than
modern medicine.
During the Plague of London when Black Death was so prevalent it was
proven that the survival rate for those patients treated in the
Homeopathy Hospital far exceeded the so called normal medical profession
of the time. This fact is recorded in the House of Commons records.
--
Best wishes
Ivor Taylor
Herbs for Health
http://www.herbcure.demon.co.uk
Commentator
>
>
>>>Huge amount of bullshit snipped>>>
I see, it costs too much to actually find out if your codswallop works,
and double blind studies are tools of the drug companies.
Clearly you could use some real education and medication rather than
flowers and herbs.
tscottme
spreading, and homeopathy is more effective than modern medicine.
Flawless logic. Don't forget the DDT kool-aid.
John Ritson
<nos...@notrolls.com> writes
>When you can present some real data that homeopothy works you may get a
>more sympathetic reception.
>
>But sadly there are no reputable, repeatable, double blind studies
>showing this hundred year old nonsense works.
>
>Did you hear about the guy who forgot to take his homeopathic medicine
>and died of an overdose?
Have you never tried homeopathic whisky? A drop of malt whisky in a
bucket of water, carefully stirred, so as to 'potentiate' the water,
then a drop of the result in another bucket of water, again carefully
stirred. Then take a small glass of the result (with water if desired,
naturally).
John
paghat
<agape@WHOA!.com> wrote:
> paghat wrote in message ...
>
> >I love big words.
> >-paghat
>
> I'm sorry Ratty...I just can't help myself...
>
> You love big cocks, too? Ride THIS:
>
>
> begin 666 BigCock.jpg
I never download such stuff (my newsreader would put it on my desktop
Happy Virus & all). Give me an url & I'll go see if I'm disgusted or not.
If it's a big turkeycock cool.
-paghat
john d.
: What a pity you are so obviously biased.
pot.kettle.black
: Double blind studies cost lots
: of cash and are the tool of the drug companies used to stop competition.
Exactly how are double blind studies the tool used to stop competition?
If a drug comany carries out costly double blind studies, that will
reduce the company's profits. Then competitors will have an economic
advantage. They merely read the published results of the study in
the scientific literature, and start producing the same drug, without
having to pay for the double blind study.
: The drug companies use double blind studies to test their products so as
: to make them safe.
Safe, and effective. Double blind tests also eliminate the placebo
effect. The latter is a strong argument for testing homeopathetic
remedies by double blind studies.
: Such products as Thalidomide were tested by the drug
: companies. There is hardly any modern drugs manufactured that do not
: produce side effects. Doctors then prescribe yet another drug with yet
There are lots of herbal remedies with side effects. Herbal remedies
are potentially more dangerous than the drugs produced by modern
methods. Local variations in soil chemistry, microclimate, harvest
time & method, etc., all introduce variables.
(...)
: I would like to remind you that most herbal medicines (not all) have not
: been tested with double blind studies, However those that have usually
: prove positive. After all herbal medicine has been curing people for
: over 3000 years. Homeopathy has also been curing people for longer than
Your statements contain the fallacy of false cause (post hoc,
ergo proptor hoc). The 3000 year history of herbal medicine has
no relation to the double blind studies of some herbal remedies.
Rather, the 3000 year history of herbal remedies is merely an
indication of the primitive medical technology which existed over
most of that time period. The concept of double blind studies
is relatively modern.
: modern medicine.
: During the Plague of London when Black Death was so prevalent it was
: proven that the survival rate for those patients treated in the
: Homeopathy Hospital far exceeded the so called normal medical profession
: of the time. This fact is recorded in the House of Commons records.
The HoC records of that time period are not of much use, since
they were written by superstitious men. Their knowledge of
valid statistical samples, causal relations between treatment
and patient responses, etc. were nonexistant.
John Wright
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN wrote in message <7cr6ir$1t0$1...@missing.its.to>...
>Mary T (bso...@ptialaska.net) wrote:
>: Homeopathy existed before modern medicine
>Which says nothing in regards to its value.
>
>The thing I can never understand about homeopathic theory is why, if
>dilution can "superpower" the effects of materials used in treatment why
>it doesn't have the same effect on things in the water that will cause
>negative effects?
>
>tim gueguen 101867
The thing I can't understand is if diluting down the samples makes them more
powerful, and the undiluted parts are poured down the drain, why is it that
drinking the contents of the sewer where it ends up doesn't make you less
ill, but much much more ill?? And if the stuff in the sewers eventually
gets dumped into the sea and diluted down a bit, why is it that drinking sea
water doesn't cure all known illnesses? And as that water ends up as rain
and falls on the land and ends up even more very diluted, and hence very
powerful, when it hits our reservoirs, why is it that drinking tap water
doesn't cure all known illnesses? And since the force that cures can't be
destroyed, so they say, why is it that they don't just chuck some in the
reservoirs and cure us all for all time? If the homeopaths' theories are
true it should work wonders that way. Or is it all just a load of crap?
john wright, 742
John Wright
Ivor Taylor wrote in message <$bBBeDAc...@herbcure.demon.co.uk>...
>During the Plague of London when Black Death was so prevalent it was
>proven that the survival rate for those patients treated in the
>Homeopathy Hospital far exceeded the so called normal medical profession
>of the time. This fact is recorded in the House of Commons records.
>--
>Best wishes
>Ivor Taylor
>Herbs for Health
>http://www.herbcure.demon.co.uk
>
What you mean to say is that giving people pure clean water to drink at a
time when the water supply was polluted, and now known to be a deadly source
of diseases such as cholera, was a good thing. Clean water as we understand
it just did not exist at that time. Removing the source of many
infections - they drunk water out of the Thames, but dumped (sic.) their
untreated sewage into the Thames as well - would obviously reduce the chance
of catching many infections. But that doesn't mean that the clean water was
a cure, it just meant they didn't drink infected water and catch any one of
the other diseases present. Hence the illusion that homeopathy cured
things. But people with more than half a brain can work out why it
_appeared_ to work, and only the terminally naive can't.
john wright, 742
LadyNi
paghat <pagger...@my-dejanews.com> wrote
>
>I never download such stuff (my newsreader would put it on my desktop
>Happy Virus & all). Give me an url & I'll go see if I'm disgusted or not.
>If it's a big turkeycock cool.
I wonder if homeopathy will cure the happy99 virus someone
sent me.
LadyNi
Lou MinattiЩйо
C'mon, don't be a skeptical party pooper! The "vibrations" left by the
alcohol molecules are enough to give a good buzz.
BTW, did you ever hear about the homeopathic treatment for a bullet
wound?
--
We're watching you at SpOOk CentralЩйо.
http://www.watchingyou.com
"Y2K advocates were like newly hatched mosquitoes. They only have a
short amount of time to suck blood before they die." - Paul Kedrosky
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote:
<snip>
>--
>Best wishes
>Ivor Taylor
>Herbs for Health
>http://www.herbcure.demon.co.uk
Well, at least we finally got an objective, unbiased opinion.
--
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
Guerilla Ontologist
Year 2000 Compliant since 1961!
"Another ignorant reactionary" cuz "Jim" said so.
"Next, I'm going to learn to write with my Wang."
Captain, 23rd Field Artillery Battalion, Salvation Army (Ret.)
Sic transit gloria mundi.
ArghhAieee
advocate of homeopathy:
>Mary T (bso...@ptialaska.net) wrote:
>: Homeopathy existed before modern medicine
>Which says nothing in regards to its value.
>
>The thing I can never understand about homeopathic theory is why, if
>dilution can "superpower" the effects of materials used in treatment why
>it doesn't have the same effect on things in the water that will cause
>negative effects?
Now THERE's a killer of a rude question!!!
If aspirin diluted to a molecule a milliliter will cure what ails you, then why
doesn't the chlorine and lead at the same concentrations send you straight into
the crypt?
Inquiring minds want to know!!
*** *** *** ***
"Give a Liberal a fish, and he'll eat for a day, but offer a Liberal a job and
he'll tell you
he ain't workin' for no chump change."
*** *** *** *** ***
Glen Quarnstrom
I've been lead to believe that Happy69 will cure almost anything.
--
gl...@cyberhighway.net
http://www.cyberhighway.net/~glenq/
"I am just as childish as they are."
--- "Judy," speaking for trolls everywhere.
...hangin' in #Geezer when I'm on IRC.
Michael Lacy
Ivor Taylor <iv...@permaweld.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>When you can present some real data that homeopothy works you may get a
>>more sympathetic reception.
>>
>>But sadly there are no reputable, repeatable, double blind studies
>>showing this hundred year old nonsense works.
>>
>>Did you hear about the guy who forgot to take his homeopathic medicine
>>and died of an overdose?
>
>What a pity you are so obviously biased. Double blind studies cost lots
>of cash and are the tool of the drug companies used to stop competition.
Double blind studies are the tools of the drug companies??
Argument from conspiracy is a sure sign of a scoundrel or a fool.
>The drug companies use double blind studies to test their products so as
>to make them safe. Such products as Thalidomide were tested by the drug
>companies.
And were found to be perfectly safe for all the eventualities they tested
for. Sadly, they forgot to test it on pregnent women, but that is human
error, not an indictment of the testing proceedure itself. And I
understand that Thalidomide is back on the market, and very effective for
treating a variety of cancer symptoms.
>There is hardly any modern drugs manufactured that do not
>produce side effects. Doctors then prescribe yet another drug with yet
>more side effects to combat the effects of the first drug. Fact 1/3 of
>all drugs prescribed in the U.S.A. are secondary drugs, to combat the
>side effects of the first drug.
Coming from someone who believes double-blind studies are part of a drug
company conspiracy, I take your 'facts' with a very dilute saline solution.
>I would like to remind you that most herbal medicines (not all) have not
>been tested with double blind studies, However those that have usually
>prove positive.
That's probably because herbal medicines (at least the traditional ones)
have already been tested by trial and error. I wonder how many people died
in ancient times by being given the wrong weed by the witch-doctor?
> After all herbal medicine has been curing people for
>over 3000 years. Homeopathy has also been curing people for longer than
>modern medicine.
Correction; homeopathy has been _in use_ longer than modern medicine. Its
actual effectiveness has yet to be proven or even given a sound theoretical
basis.
>During the Plague of London when Black Death was so prevalent it was
>proven that the survival rate for those patients treated in the
>Homeopathy Hospital far exceeded the so called normal medical profession
>of the time.
Hardly surprising. Since medieval medical professionals had no clue
whatsoever about what caused the plague, doing nothing (i.e. homeopathy)
was probably a much more conducive to survival than
bloodletting/leeches/exorcisms.
Michael Lacy
tscottme
missing that prevents the unprocessed homeopathic compounds from working
and guarantees the effectiveness of the processed homeopathic compounds
is the careful addition of the most important ingredient, a homeopath's
mortgage and car payment.
Commentator
>
> In article <36F148...@notrolls.com>, Commentator
> <nos...@notrolls.com> writes
> >more sympathetic reception.
> >
> >But sadly there are no reputable, repeatable, double blind studies
> >showing this hundred year old nonsense works.
> >
> >Did you hear about the guy who forgot to take his homeopathic medicine
> >and died of an overdose?
>
> bucket of water, carefully stirred, so as to 'potentiate' the water,
> then a drop of the result in another bucket of water, again carefully
> stirred. Then take a small glass of the result (with water if desired,
> naturally).
>
Thus you have proven the old statement that you can indeed get drunk on
water...the same way as you can on land.
I wonder when someone is going to offer just such a product, or better
homeopathic heroin or cocaine. Of course the bottle contains water so
the powers that be may have a hard time actually prosecuting you...
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy.
: Think of this
: in simple terms that you may understand.
: It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England.
So what? Like all other human beings they are liable to make mistakes,
hold false beliefs etc.
tim gueguen 101867
Ivor Taylor
What you don't seem to grasp is the way that homeopathy works. Yet this
very same method is employed in allopathic (modern medicine).
The way that homeopathy cures is by means of the immune system. By
introducing a minute amount of a compound, that taken in large amounts
would cause symptoms similar to the disease in question. This triggers
the immune system to react and thus cure the disease. This is just like
giving a vaccination, where an amount of dead cells obtained from the
disease is injected into the body to stimulate the immune system.
By the way don't think that I am totally opposed to allopathic. Surgery
for instance has progressed a long way and modern painkillers are
excellent. We are however still ripped of constantly by the drug
companies, most of whom will protect their profits quite ruthlessly.
Taking a different line of defence. Many veterinary surgeons now use
homeopathy quite successfully on animals. Though the animals can't talk
back and verbally confirm the effects, the diseases non the less clear
up and disappear. I have proved this personally by doctoring my own
animals with very high success rates,
If you wish to play the Ostrich carry on, after all we once believed the
world was flat. Had other people not believed otherwise, the native
Americans would still be practising their excellent herbal medicine.
For my own opinion I prefer to keep an open mind and not to condemn to
quickly that which I don't understand. After all how many times has
science moved the goal posts.
Lou MinattiЩйо
>
> Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy. Think of this
> in simple terms that you may understand.
> enough for us who are not royals.
Whats the homeopathic cure for a bullet wound? Take a bullet and grind
it down. Add the "bullet dust" to purified water. Then dilute the
solution. Dilute it some more. Keep diluting! Dilute until there are
less than 10 molecules of "bullet" per cc of water. Then pour it into
the wound. Yes, that should do it.
Bill
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN wrote in message <7cviv1$uki$1...@missing.its.to>...
>medonel (med...@earthlink.net) wrote:
>: Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy.
>Then give us a proper explaination of how it works.
>
>: Think of this
>: in simple terms that you may understand.
>: It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England.
tscottme
Ivor Taylor wrote:
Where are the homeopathic emergency rooms? Where are the double-blind
studies? It's just another old superstition that its proponents are able to
use precisely because they know that when push comes to shove a more
effective means awaits. All talk and no action?
Commentator
How can you say that homeopathic "drugs" stimulate the immune system
when it can be easily demonstrated by elementary chemistry that not one
molecule of the substance in question exists in the solution taken as a
cure?
Nice sounding words, but sadly reality says they are bullshit spouted by
someone who is ignorant as a bag of hair.
W. Ivey
>of cash and are the tool of the drug companies used to stop competition.
>to make them safe. Such products as Thalidomide were tested by the drug
>companies.
Thalidomide apparently wasn't tested enough to convince the U.S.'s FDA
to allow its use here. (It's currently making a comeback, but for a
different use and with cautious studies to back it up.) Just thought
I'd point that out.
>I would like to remind you that most herbal medicines (not all) have not
>been tested with double blind studies, However those that have usually
>prove positive.
I think "usually" is too strong a word here. And, when they do show
results appropriate to their claimed powers, often these results are
accompanied by side effects that make them remain a questionable
therapy. (Foxglove is a good example. It works, but not dramatically
if you have modern alternatives to compare it to and it has very
dangerous side effects.)
>After all herbal medicine has been curing people for over 3000 years.
In some cases, true. In many cases the patient just got better - as
most do. Doing nothing is frequently as effective as any treatment
if the patient is otherwise healthy. (And, given some of the "cures"
of the past delivered by any form of medicine, leaving them alone
was definitely the better choice.) -Wm
Terry Smith
> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 08:06:46 -0800
> Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy. Think
> of this in simple terms that you may understand.
> It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England. It should
> be good enough for us who are not royals.
Great. Lets all turn into piss-heads, talk to our plants, or cheat on and
divorce our partners. I doubt that the preferences of displaced minor
hanoverian non-entities carry much weight as scientific evidence.
Did you know your drinking water has bacterial toxins, sewage and
indistrial pollutants at homeopathetic dilutions?
Terry
--
Australia has government that wishes to control what it had no part in
creating, and doesn't understand. Their response to a UN committee charged
with examining our genocide was unbalanced, and an insult to Australians.
Still - we'll have the best Olympics money can buy.
BlueAce69
Lou MinattiЩйо wrote in message <36F3A1...@yahoo.com>...
>medonel wrote:
>>
>> Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy. Think of
this
>> in simple terms that you may understand.
>> It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England. It should be
good
>> enough for us who are not royals.
>
>it down. Add the "bullet dust" to purified water. Then dilute the
>solution. Dilute it some more. Keep diluting! Dilute until there are
>less than 10 molecules of "bullet" per cc of water. Then pour it into
>the wound. Yes, that should do it.
Sounds like it would work. But what about knife wounds?
Rev./Doktor Adam Adam of the Frozen Tundra, DFS, BOFH, BsD, SubG
Skep-Ti-Cult member #91-79385-837
Sir Adam, Knight of the Quitteningйо
Archangel of the Witty Comment
<this space for rent>
SMI...@ix.netcom.com
His medicine did nothing for my ailment.
He sent me a bill for $200.00
I sent him 2 cents.
He diluted his medicine.
I diluted his payment.
29
xxxxxxxxxxxx
John Ritson
<iv...@permaweld.demon.co.uk> writes
[snip]
>Taking a different line of defence. Many veterinary surgeons now use
>homeopathy quite successfully on animals. Though the animals can't talk
>back and verbally confirm the effects, the diseases non the less clear
>up and disappear. I have proved this personally by doctoring my own
>animals with very high success rates,
You clearly missed the point about double-blind testing. This is
required to a) find out if any effect remains after placebo effects
(patients believing they are receiving a wonder-drug - conventional or
not - and improving because of this belief)
and b) avoid mis-diagnosis by doctors who expect improvements in those
given a wonder-drug and thus see it even if it is not there.
>
>If you wish to play the Ostrich carry on, after all we once believed the
>world was flat. Had other people not believed otherwise, the native
>Americans would still be practising their excellent herbal medicine.
Once again your knowledge of history is at fault. At the time of
Columbus it was generally accepted that the earth was round. Columbus
had the inaccurate belief that the earth was a lot smaller than it
really was, and thus thought the Atlantic was a short-cut to Asia.
>For my own opinion I prefer to keep an open mind and not to condemn to
>quickly that which I don't understand.
> After all how many times has
>science moved the goal posts.
John
tscottme
Ivor Taylor wrote:
<snip>
> If you wish to play the Ostrich carry on, after all we once believed the
> world was flat. Had other people not believed otherwise, the native
> Americans would still be practising their excellent herbal medicine.
> For my own opinion I prefer to keep an open mind and not to condemn to
> quickly that which I don't understand. After all how many times has
> science moved the goal posts.
>
Do you not recognize accepting a new theory because it is new and accepting
a theory because it can be *proven* to be true. Granted the round earth
theory supplanted the flat earth theory, but not because the "round
earthers" were bigger bullies but because their theory explained empirical
data and could be tested by making accurate predictions.
JPRTIST
That's good, real good.
--
Sir J.P.R.J.
A Lord, Supreme Being and Reigning Monarch of afa-b,
Debunker of the Half Baked Air Disaster Conspiracy Theorists,
Archangel and Random Buggerist of the Critically Inept,
A Puzzlement to the "Green Geezer"
lib·er·al adj. Abbr. lib. 1. a. Not limited to or by established,
traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas;
free from bigotry. b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas
for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others;
broad-minded. c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism. d.
Liberal Abbr. Lib. Of, designating, or characteristic of a political
party founded on or associated with principles of social and political
liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2. a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor. b.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes. 3. Not strict
or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation. 4. Of, relating
to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or
university curriculum: a liberal education. 5. a. Archaic Permissible or
appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious. n. 1. A person with
liberal ideas or opinions. 2. Liberal Abbr. Lib. A member of a Liberal
political party. [Middle English generous from Old French from Latin
lşberłlis from lşber free; See leudh- in Indo-European Roots.] lib
“er·al·ly adv. lib “er·al·ness n.
JPRTIST
>
> TIMOTHY GUEGUEN wrote in message <7cr6ir$1t0$1...@missing.its.to>...
> >Mary T (bso...@ptialaska.net) wrote:
> >: Homeopathy existed before modern medicine
> >Which says nothing in regards to its value.
> >
> >The thing I can never understand about homeopathic theory is why, if
> >dilution can "superpower" the effects of materials used in treatment why
> >it doesn't have the same effect on things in the water that will cause
> >negative effects?
> >
>
> The thing I can't understand is if diluting down the samples makes them more
> powerful, and the undiluted parts are poured down the drain, why is it that
> drinking the contents of the sewer where it ends up doesn't make you less
> ill, but much much more ill?? And if the stuff in the sewers eventually
> gets dumped into the sea and diluted down a bit, why is it that drinking sea
> water doesn't cure all known illnesses? And as that water ends up as rain
> and falls on the land and ends up even more very diluted, and hence very
> powerful, when it hits our reservoirs, why is it that drinking tap water
> doesn't cure all known illnesses? And since the force that cures can't be
> destroyed, so they say, why is it that they don't just chuck some in the
> reservoirs and cure us all for all time? If the homeopaths' theories are
> true it should work wonders that way. Or is it all just a load of crap?
>
> john wright, 742
The bigger the lie, the easier it is for the public to believe it.
Terry Smith
> Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 09:42:28 +0000
> Well John, my response seems to have woken you all up.
> What you don't seem to grasp is the way that homeopathy works. Yet
> this very same method is employed in allopathic (modern medicine).
Peer reviewed trials indicate that there is no demonstratable effect of
homepathic flummery. The closest demonstration of any of its claims
[memory effects in solutions at dilution levels where, statisticly, there
are no molecules of the `active' substance remaining, was unrepeatable,
and the `report' is generally considered to be fraud.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
>Homeopathy existed before modern medicine -- it provided all the groundwork
>for what we now recognize as "real" medicine. Frankly, I think our medical
>arts have strayed too far from both science and healing and need to look
>back at their roots.
>
>Mary T
>
"Get back to their roots." HAHAHAHAAH!!! Good one, Mary. ROOTS! HAHAHAHAH!
Michael Lacy
>>When you can present some real data that homeopothy works you may get a
>>more sympathetic reception.
>>
>>But sadly there are no reputable, repeatable, double blind studies
>>showing this hundred year old nonsense works.
>>
>>Did you hear about the guy who forgot to take his homeopathic medicine
>>and died of an overdose?
>
>What a pity you are so obviously biased. Double blind studies cost lots
>of cash and are the tool of the drug companies used to stop competition.
Double blind studies are the tools of the drug companies??
Argument from conspiracy is a sure sign of a scoundrel or a fool.
>The drug companies use double blind studies to test their products so as
>to make them safe. Such products as Thalidomide were tested by the drug
>companies.
And were found to be perfectly safe for all the eventualities they tested
for. Sadly, they forgot to test it on pregnent women, but that is human
error, not an indictment of the testing proceedure itself. And I
understand that Thalidomide is back on the market, and very effective for
treating a variety of cancer symptoms.
>There is hardly any modern drugs manufactured that do not
>produce side effects. Doctors then prescribe yet another drug with yet
>more side effects to combat the effects of the first drug. Fact 1/3 of
>all drugs prescribed in the U.S.A. are secondary drugs, to combat the
>side effects of the first drug.
Coming from someone who believes double-blind studies are part of a drug
company conspiracy, I take your 'facts' with a very dilute saline solution.
>I would like to remind you that most herbal medicines (not all) have not
>been tested with double blind studies, However those that have usually
>prove positive.
That's probably because herbal medicines (at least the traditional ones)
have already been tested by trial and error. I wonder how many people died
in ancient times by being given the wrong weed by the witch-doctor?
> After all herbal medicine has been curing people for
medonel
Modern medicinity is killing us with there pills and shorts. Vaxicnation is
against the word of GOD. HE will cure you of anything you don't need no
shots.
kwantem mekanik wrote:
> In article <I4382CAE...@herbcure.demon.co.uk>, Ivor Taylor
> <iv...@permaweld.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >The way that homeopathy cures is by means of the immune system. By
> >introducing a minute amount of a compound, that taken in large amounts
> >would cause symptoms similar to the disease in question. This triggers
> >the immune system to react and thus cure the disease. This is just like
> >giving a vaccination, where an amount of dead cells obtained from the
> >disease is injected into the body to stimulate the immune system.
>
> Ahem, No. it's not. Vaccination works because the body recognizes and
> defends against the _protiens_ included with the injection.
>
> Many homeopathic solutions are NOT protiens, and the body has no way to
> recognize them and therefore fight against them.
>
> >Taking a different line of defence. Many veterinary surgeons now use
> >homeopathy quite successfully on animals. Though the animals can't talk
> >back and verbally confirm the effects, the diseases non the less clear
> >up and disappear. I have proved this personally by doctoring my own
> >animals with very high success rates,
>
> And how did you control against the possibility that disease was cured by
> the body's own defenses and was not influenced at all by homeopathy? Did
> you take two identical animals with identical afflictions, and treat one
> with homeopathy and leave the other to cure itself???
>
> I thought not...
>
> **********************************************
> * The language of truth *
> * is unadorned and always simple. *
> * - Ammianus Marcellinus *
> * http://burtcom.com/kwantem *
medonel
We also filter it out and do other things with it. That is why in a y2k
emergent we will have no problems.
Terry Smith wrote:
> > From: medonel <med...@earthlink.net>
> > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 08:06:46 -0800
>
> > Obviously you Just don't understand the marvel of Homeopathy. Think
> > of this in simple terms that you may understand.
> > It is the medicine used by the Royal Family of England. It should
> > be good enough for us who are not royals.
>
> Great. Lets all turn into piss-heads, talk to our plants, or cheat on and
> divorce our partners. I doubt that the preferences of displaced minor
> hanoverian non-entities carry much weight as scientific evidence.
>
> Did you know your drinking water has bacterial toxins, sewage and
> indistrial pollutants at homeopathetic dilutions?
>
Bart Lidofsky
>If aspirin diluted to a molecule a milliliter will cure what ails you, then why
>doesn't the chlorine and lead at the same concentrations send you straight into
>the crypt?
Your message demonstrates that you know virtually nothing about
homeopathy (regardless of its efficacy or lack thereof). Also note that,
while aspirin was the most commonly prescribed drug for decades, it wasn't
until the early 1970's that anybody was able to figure out how it actually
worked.
This is NOT to say that any remedy is effective; it IS to say
that, when the theory behind how a remedy works is nebulous, then test the
efficacy of the remedy rather than the theory.
--
Bart Lidofsky
Systems Administrator
New York Theosophical Society
ny...@dorsai.org (official)
ba...@sprynet.com (personal)
Bart Lidofsky
>Let me see, the life expectancy is increasing, western medicine is
>spreading, and homeopathy is more effective than modern medicine.
>Flawless logic. Don't forget the DDT kool-aid.
Ever hear about the statistician who drowned in a pool with an
average depth of 12"?
No serious homeopath will state that homeopathy is superior to
allopathy in all situations. Allopathy is certainly the way to go for
repairing emergency physical damage (broken bones, cavities, heavy
bleeding, severed body parts, heart attacks).
Now, forgetting about the efficacy or lack thereof of homeopathy,
the key advances by modern medicine on life expectancy have been
antibiotics, anti-parasiticals, and improved surgical technique. This
keeps people from dying as much at an unusually early age, a figure which
skews the average life expectancy.
When I was working at the American Cancer Society, one of the
statisticians showed me that the more you break down a group into
subgroups of similar characteristics (except the one you are trying to
test), the more meaningful figures you will come up with (for example, he
showed that the death rate from cancer, from the 1950's to the 1970's,
properly pro=rated, except for lung cancer, actually showed a stedy
decline, contrary to alarmist reports of the time.
Unfortunately, double-blind tests of homeopathy are
near-impossible, and there has been no credible theory behind homeopathy.
However, in tests where the homeopathic practitioner prescribes the
remedy, but does not know whether the remedy is properly prepared or inert
sugar pills (no cracks, please; let's try to keep this polite), there have
been mixed results.
Bart Lidofsky
>Once again your knowledge of history is at fault. At the time of
>Columbus it was generally accepted that the earth was round. Columbus
>had the inaccurate belief that the earth was a lot smaller than it
>really was, and thus thought the Atlantic was a short-cut to Asia.
Actually, the circumference of the world WAS known, as well, and
Columbus was looking for an all-water route to Asia to avoid having to go
around Africa or portaging across the Middle East (both ways being long
and dangerous). From his diaries, it is clear that he knew that he had
discovered a new land; he wrote back to Spain that he had discovered a
short-cut to Asia in order to maintain support.
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: Total nonsense. We all use homeopathy and stay very well even unto our 90s.
: Modern medicinity is killing us with there pills and shorts. Vaxicnation is
: against the word of GOD.
that the Bible doesn't ban computers?
tim gueguen 101867
Bart Lidofsky
>Peer reviewed trials indicate that there is no demonstratable effect of
>homepathic flummery. The closest demonstration of any of its claims
>[memory effects in solutions at dilution levels where, statisticly, there
>are no molecules of the `active' substance remaining, was unrepeatable,
>and the `report' is generally considered to be fraud.
What does the report to which you refer have to do with
homeopathy?
Bart Lidofsky
>
>Argument from conspiracy is a sure sign of a scoundrel or a fool.
Which were the prosecutors of the conspirators who bombed the
World Trade Center in New York, scoundrels or fools?
How about the FTC's trust-busting?
John Wright
Ivor Taylor wrote in message ...
>Well John, my response seems to have woken you all up.
>
>What you don't seem to grasp is the way that homeopathy works. Yet this
>very same method is employed in allopathic (modern medicine).
>
I read the theory but as a chemist, sometime ago, I bothered to calculate
the value of your "minute amount of a compound" present in your medicine,
and like many others before me found that there would not be a _single_
molecule present if you carried out the imfamous "century dilution". If I
remember correctly, it comes out at something like one molecule per ocean of
distilled water. Hence if there is nothing there I can't help but say that
this will have any effect. Sorry, but I seem to have let the facts get in
the way of belief.
>
>Taking a different line of defence. Many veterinary surgeons now use
>homeopathy quite successfully on animals. Though the animals can't talk
>back and verbally confirm the effects, the diseases non the less clear
>up and disappear. I have proved this personally by doctoring my own
>animals with very high success rates,
My ex-wife is a vet, and she has never used homeopathy, none of her friends
who are vets have used it, it never features in vet medcine journals, it is
not taught at vet college, but you say it is used by many vets. Strange.
Best wishes to you to (at least you're polite when you reply, even if I'm
not always polite)
john wright, 742
DrPostman
>Our water has no problems as it comes from our own well.
>We also filter it out and do other things with it. That is why in a y2k
>emergent we will have no problems.
Sure - as long as you forget about all the crap leaching into the
water table.
You're doomed.
--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
High Counselor of the New Usenet Order
Addicted to Art Bell? http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/1282
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, Lifetime member of the
Art Bell Internet Fan Club, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: jamiemps(at)mindspring.com
"God almighty, take the vote and get it over with.''
Shouted out by a spectator in the Senate Gallery - 2/4/99
Ivor Taylor
>My ex-wife is a vet, and she has never used homeopathy, none of her friends
>who are vets have used it, it never features in vet medcine journals, it is
>not taught at vet college, but you say it is used by many vets. Strange.
>
>Best wishes to you to (at least you're polite when you reply, even if I'm
>not always polite)
>
Perhaps we British are leading the field, though I think not. Try this
one:-
The American Holistic Veterinarian Medical Association
2214 Old Emmorton Rd.
Bell Air,
MD 21015
I'm sure they would recommend a good Homeopathic Veterinarian.
or Natural Health Care For Your Cats - Author Dr Rudolf Deiser. American
All about Homeopathy for small animals.
In the UK quite a number of medical doctors are also registered
Homeopaths. Any of these doctors can also refer patients to Homeopaths
paid for by the National Health Service. We also have quite a number of
Homeopathic hospitals.
medtools
nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
nose. T
Commentator
I have tried distilled water for a cold, a medicine just as powerful as
homeopathy and it had no effect.
Sorry, but the universe does not have to conform to your desires.
tscottme
medtools wrote:
> L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
> nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
> nose. T
How do you homeopathic groupies ignore the placebo effect. You admit that
double-blind studies aren't available, so what's the answer?
--
Scott Methvin
"What our schools really need is a moment of Science."
P & J
>
> L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
> nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
> nose. T
I have found that people who are this much against it can not be
convinced of any thing different.
My brother had fallen off a roof while reroofing it. He had hurt his
back. The Doctors gave him medication for the bruising and the back
spasms. He was in so much pain that he could hardly move. He finally
asked me for anything that might give him some relief. He had even
tried to drink the pain away with beer with no results. I gave him
some homeopathic remedies. Within 15 minutes he was up and working
around in the yard. I did give him the remedies to take when ever the
pain started to come back and he did with good results. To this day he
will say that they really did not go much good. It is waste of effort
to try to convince some people of anything different when their mind is
set.
I will admit I was a skeptic on the idea that it could ever work. It
was not until I had my third son when my midwife used it during the
birth that I became convinced that it may indeed work. Since then I
have used it a lot. I will caution about using Arnica when breaking a
bone. My son was jumping out of a tree when his friend grabbed his
foot so he fell on his arm and broke it. I thought he had only bruised
it because he could still move his hand so I gave him Arnica. He had
very little bruising and swelling. He was still playing basketball and
catch with his brothers so I did not think it was anything to be
concerned about. After 3 days of watching him sometimes favoring that
arm I took him in to see the Doctor. Even the Doctor did not think it
was broken but had it xrayed just in case. He had a Impound fracture of
the left arm. I have since talked to a few other people who have had
like experiences.
J9
tscottme
Instead just like other true believers, the homoepathic crowd points to
a long history before scientific data could be tested, then claim an
anecdote here and there, and the wonders on animals.
If it works the studies would be more numerous than the excuses.
Mary T
developed from plants and natural substances....
Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals are big business -- at least in the
United States. Natural cures are far less expensive. Any wonder homeopathy
has been labeled a fraud? Not in my book.
Scientific studies? Maybe you should read up on the history of medicine?
Without those studies you claim do not exist; you would not have the array
of disease fighting drugs at your disposal. Some of the new cancer drugs
came straight out of the South American "witch-doctor's" homeopathic bag.
Mary T
Ivor Taylor wrote in message ...
>In article <7d6f93$mn4$1...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>, John Wright
>>
<snip>
Mike Hutchinson
<nos...@notrolls.com> writes
>medtools wrote:
>>
>> L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
>> nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
>> nose. T
>
>
>homeopathy and it had no effect.
Are you saying that the cold _never_ cleared up? If it did, perhaps you
should give some credit to the distilled water. That's what homeopaths
would do. :-) Except that they take it seriously.
>
>Sorry, but the universe does not have to conform to your desires.
--
Mike Hutchinson
www.hutch.demon.co.uk for details of my book 'Bizarre Beliefs' and for a critque
of homeopathy (click on 'Prescrire')
Please remove "no.rubbish" from reply to address
tscottme
Mary T wrote:
> Let's see, barbers used to be surgeons, all pharmaceuticals have basically
> developed from plants and natural substances....
>
> Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals are big business -- at least in the
> United States. Natural cures are far less expensive. Any wonder homeopathy
> has been labeled a fraud? Not in my book.
>
> Scientific studies? Maybe you should read up on the history of medicine?
> Without those studies you claim do not exist; you would not have the array
> of disease fighting drugs at your disposal. Some of the new cancer drugs
> came straight out of the South American "witch-doctor's" homeopathic bag.
>
> Mary T
>
So I guess your argument is that homeopathy is so well proven, it needs no
double-blind studies. good excuse
If the big drug companies are suppressing the benefits of the homeopathic magic
beans why are they rushing to sell their herbal enhanced vitamins?
No proof, no science, plenty of excuses.
Cathy Credulous
Mary T <bso...@ptialaska.net> wrote in message
news:7daf7q$l09$1...@news.ptialaska.net...
>Let's see, barbers used to be surgeons, all pharmaceuticals have
basically
>developed from plants and natural substances....
>
>Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals are big business -- at least in the
>United States. Natural cures are far less expensive. Any wonder
>homeopathy has been labeled a fraud? Not in my book.
You're absolutely right. I used 500mg of Niacin because I read
in a homeopathic book that it could be used for knee pain. Now,
I no longer have knee pain. So I cured my knee pain for $2.97.
That is definitely less expensive than a visit to a regular doctor.
One of the minor side effects of taking extra Niacin is heart
palpatations. Does anyone know a homeopathic cure for heart
palpatations?
>
>Scientific studies? Maybe you should read up on the history of medicine?
>Without those studies you claim do not exist; you would not have the array
>of disease fighting drugs at your disposal. Some of the new cancer drugs
>came straight out of the South American "witch-doctor's" homeopathic bag.
That's amazing. I didn't know South American witch-doctors could
diagnose cancer. Thanks.
Cathy
Keith Morrison
>
> L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
> nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
> nose. T
I do use it. I drink water that surely, at some point, was part of
a larger water source that was in contact with other water sources
that were in contact with all of homeopathy's assorted cures and
remedies at one time or another. Given that this is all homeopathy
claims is required to create their elixirs, not only have I taken
their magical potion, I've been able to get it for free.
--
Keith
Commentator
>
> In article <36F87C...@notrolls.com>, Commentator
> <nos...@notrolls.com> writes
> >>
> >> L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
> >> nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
> >> nose. T
> >
> >
> >homeopathy and it had no effect.
>
> Are you saying that the cold _never_ cleared up? If it did, perhaps you
> should give some credit to the distilled water. That's what homeopaths
> would do. :-) Except that they take it seriously.
> >
> >Sorry, but the universe does not have to conform to your desires.
>
> --
> Mike Hutchinson
> www.hutch.demon.co.uk for details of my book 'Bizarre Beliefs' and for a critque
> of homeopathy (click on 'Prescrire')
> Please remove "no.rubbish" from reply to address
Of course the cold cleared up, in about a week as all colds do. Sorry
to not be clear.
Commentator
>
> Let's see, barbers used to be surgeons, all pharmaceuticals have basically
> developed from plants and natural substances....
>
> Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals are big business -- at least in the
> United States. Natural cures are far less expensive. Any wonder homeopathy
> has been labeled a fraud? Not in my book.
>
> Without those studies you claim do not exist; you would not have the array
> of disease fighting drugs at your disposal. Some of the new cancer drugs
> came straight out of the South American "witch-doctor's" homeopathic bag.
>
>
> Ivor Taylor wrote in message ...
> >In article <7d6f93$mn4$1...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>, John Wright
> >>
> <snip>
> >or Natural Health Care For Your Cats - Author Dr Rudolf Deiser. American
> >All about Homeopathy for small animals.
> >
> >In the UK quite a number of medical doctors are also registered
> >Homeopaths. Any of these doctors can also refer patients to Homeopaths
> >paid for by the National Health Service. We also have quite a number of
> >Homeopathic hospitals.
> >--
> >Best wishes
> >Ivor Taylor
> >Herbs for Health
> >http://www.herbcure.demon.co.uk
> >
So, show us homeopathy works. If the stuff is as powerful, as useful,
as wonderful as you claim it ought to be childs play to provide data
that will sway even the most hard headed skeptic.
But you do not provide such proof, you arm wave, make excuses and offer
useless analogies.
Happy Dog
> Let's see, barbers used to be surgeons, all pharmaceuticals have basically
> developed from plants and natural substances....
You're comparing a worthless modality to a proven source of effective
pharmaceuticals. What's your point?
> Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals are big business -- at least in the
> United States. Natural cures are far less expensive. Any wonder homeopathy
> has been labeled a fraud? Not in my book.
Ah yes, the old conspiracy excuse. Why is it then that doctors and
pharmaceutical conglomerate execs doen't use "natural" cures religiously when
they get really sick? Homeopathy has been labeled a fraud because it makes
great claims which should be easy to prove. Yet the people who make billions of
dollars, yes, BILLIONS, have never been able to reliably demonstrate that
homeopathy does ANYTHING that can't be explained by placebo effect. Doesn't
this seem odd to you? Or are you so blinded by paranoia about suppressive
medical ogres that you can't see the obvious problem with this?
> Scientific studies? Maybe you should read up on the history of medicine?
> Without those studies you claim do not exist; you would not have the array
> of disease fighting drugs at your disposal. Some of the new cancer drugs
> came straight out of the South American "witch-doctor's" homeopathic bag.
Nonsense. Bive me a single example of a new cancer drug that was used by witch
doctors in South America. Are you claiming that these guys can cure cancer as
well?
erruff
medtools
medtools
Larry Farrell
Keith Morrison wrote:
> medtools wrote:
> >
> > L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
> > nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
> > nose. T
>
> I do use it. I drink water that surely, at some point, was part of
> a larger water source that was in contact with other water sources
> that were in contact with all of homeopathy's assorted cures and
> remedies at one time or another. Given that this is all homeopathy
> claims is required to create their elixirs, not only have I taken
> their magical potion, I've been able to get it for free.
Actually, there is something about homeopathy that has been bothering me for
some time and am surprised that no one else has brought up the issue.
If the idea behind homoepathy is that the water in which the original material
was suspended and shaken is supposed to retain some "memory" of that structure,
it seems most likely to me that the memory should be a mold of the material, not
a direct copy of the material itself. If so, no matter when that "memory mold"
is introduced into the body, the response of the body would be to a mold of the
material, and one should expect that antibody produced in response to that would
be what is referred to as "anti-idiotype antibody." That is, the antibody
should be specifically directed at a structure that is a copy of the relevant
material, which is prety much what antibody itself is. Thus, anti-idiotype
antibody would be specifically directed to interact with, and inactivate,
antibody against the material against which protection is sought. The overall
effect, then, *even if homeopathy worked* would be to destroy the protection
that is supposed to be generated.
The above, of course, is based on my seriously flawed understanding of
homeopathy, given that I have done little reading on the theory underlying it
(Oh, excuse me, there *is* no theory underlying it, is there? Therefore, the
above must be incontrovertibly correct!). I suppose I can expect the homeopathy
"experts" who have posted so vociferously in this NG to correct any
misunderstandings immediately.
--
Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
Professor of Microbiology
Idaho State University
medtools
that this or that medicine works or not , only by accepting someone else's
word/work. I think we might be talking about faith in others opinions. I
ask again , if you think it does nothing, why not try it ???? We are not
talking about a lot of money here. T
Michael Lacy
ny...@dorsai.org (Bart Lidofsky) wrote:
Ivor Taylor <iv...@permaweld.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>What a pity you are so obviously biased. Double blind studies cost lots
>>>of cash and are the tool of the drug companies used to stop competition.
Michael Lacy wrote:
>>Double blind studies are the tools of the drug companies??
>>Argument from conspiracy is a sure sign of a scoundrel or a fool.
>
> Which were the prosecutors of the conspirators who bombed the
>World Trade Center in New York, scoundrels or fools?
I believe that you will find that the prosecutors argued from evidence in
that case.
Simply saying 'we can't prove they did it because all methods of testing
the evidince is part of the consipracy, we rest our case your honour' is
not likely to result in a conviction.
Michael Lacy
Kent Campbell
: Worked for my dog and the cat too.
Hi Medtools -
what was the recovery rate in the control group? Was
there a statistically significant difference? An RCT is the only way to
tell if a medical treatment is safe and effective. Don't forget - there
are lots of case reports that "proved" that prefrontal lobotomies were a
safe and permanent cure for schizophrenia.
Best wishes,
Kent.
Fredric L. Rice
wrote:
>Homeopathy has cured more people than anykind of modern medicine.
Funny how no one ever seems to be able to come up with any evidence
tlo back up such a silly claim. I wonder why. Maybe O. J. Simpson
stole it.
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: Let's see, barbers used to be surgeons, all pharmaceuticals have basically
: developed from plants and natural substances....
: Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals are big business -- at least in the
: United States. Natural cures are far less expensive. Any wonder homeopathy
: has been labeled a fraud? Not in my book.
Because its supposed method of operation is incompatible with science and
common sense, which says that if there is not a trace of a compound left
in a preparation it cannot have any physical effect on anything?
Besides, there is nothing to stop a drug firm from introducing a line of
homeopathic products and making money off of them.
tim gueguen 101867
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
: L. If you are so sure that this form of medicine is worthless, and does
: nothing , WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT???? Perhaps the next time you have a runny
: nose. T
tim gueguen 101867
Bart Lidofsky
>So, show us homeopathy works. If the stuff is as powerful, as useful,
>as wonderful as you claim it ought to be childs play to provide data
>that will sway even the most hard headed skeptic.
>
>But you do not provide such proof, you arm wave, make excuses and offer
>useless analogies.
While double blind studies can be made on homeopathic remedies,
one problem is that homeopathic prescription is based not just on the
physical symptoms (except for acute cases), but also on the mental state
of the patient. Most medical testing methods are specifically designed to
eliminate psychosomatic effects within the testing.
Does anybody here know if there is any kind of testing going on of
the placebo effect? If homeopathy turned out to be a focussing of the
placebo effect, would that make it invalid?
--
Bart Lidofsky
Systems Administrator
New York Theosophical Society
ny...@dorsai.org (official)
ba...@sprynet.com (personal)
Bart Lidofsky
>they get really sick? Homeopathy has been labeled a fraud because it makes
>great claims which should be easy to prove. Yet the people who make
>billions of
>dollars, yes, BILLIONS, have never been able to reliably demonstrate that
>homeopathy does ANYTHING that can't be explained by placebo effect.
Can you name a single person or corporation that makes billions of
dollars off of homeopathy? Do all the homeopaths and homeopathic
corporations put together make billions of dollars? And, in answering,
remember not to call a tail a leg.
Bart Lidofsky
As long as you put it that way (it is OK to argue conspiracy if
one has proof of one), then I withdraw my objections.
Bart Lidofsky
>You're absolutely right. I used 500mg of Niacin because I read
>in a homeopathic book that it could be used for knee pain. Now,
>I no longer have knee pain. So I cured my knee pain for $2.97.
>That is definitely less expensive than a visit to a regular doctor.
>
>One of the minor side effects of taking extra Niacin is heart
>palpatations. Does anyone know a homeopathic cure for heart
>palpatations?
Do not fall into the logical trap of putting all so-called
"alternative medicine" into a single hopper. No homeopahic book would say
that you should take 500 mg of ANYTHING for knee pain, and none would
prescribe a specific remedy for a chronic problem. If you want to argue
against vitamin therapy, then do so. If you want to argue against
homeopathy, then do so. But don't say that they're the same thing.
Bart Lidofsky
>If the idea behind homoepathy is that the water in which the original material
>was suspended and shaken is supposed to retain some "memory" of that structure,
>it seems most likely to me that the memory should be a mold of the material, not
>a direct copy of the material itself. If so, no matter when that "memory mold"
>is introduced into the body, the response of the body would be to a mold of the
>material, and one should expect that antibody produced in response to that would
>be what is referred to as "anti-idiotype antibody." That is, the antibody
>should be specifically directed at a structure that is a copy of the relevant
>material, which is prety much what antibody itself is. Thus, anti-idiotype
>antibody would be specifically directed to interact with, and inactivate,
>antibody against the material against which protection is sought. The overall
>effect, then, *even if homeopathy worked* would be to destroy the protection
>that is supposed to be generated.
Even the most dedicated homeopath will tell you that they have no
idea WHY homeopathy works (assuming that it does). You are quoting an
hyphothesis of how it works. Your objectio, however, could be equally
applied to antibodies created through vaccination.
>The above, of course, is based on my seriously flawed understanding of
>homeopathy, given that I have done little reading on the theory underlying it
>(Oh, excuse me, there *is* no theory underlying it, is there? Therefore, the
>above must be incontrovertibly correct!).
I cannot follow THAT logic, either. But I do appreciate your
trying to understand homeopathy before rejecting it.
>--
>Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
>Professor of Microbiology
>Idaho State University
Ah, THAT explains why your objection is more to the point than
most.
Larry Farrell
Bart Lidofsky wrote:
> In article <36F93D17...@isu.edu>, Larry Farrell wrote:
> >If the idea behind homoepathy is that the water in which the original material
> >was suspended and shaken is supposed to retain some "memory" of that structure,
> >it seems most likely to me that the memory should be a mold of the material, not
> >a direct copy of the material itself. If so, no matter when that "memory mold"
> >is introduced into the body, the response of the body would be to a mold of the
> >material, and one should expect that antibody produced in response to that would
> >be what is referred to as "anti-idiotype antibody." That is, the antibody
> >should be specifically directed at a structure that is a copy of the relevant
> >material, which is prety much what antibody itself is. Thus, anti-idiotype
> >antibody would be specifically directed to interact with, and inactivate,
> >antibody against the material against which protection is sought. The overall
> >effect, then, *even if homeopathy worked* would be to destroy the protection
> >that is supposed to be generated.
>
> Even the most dedicated homeopath will tell you that they have no
> idea WHY homeopathy works (assuming that it does). You are quoting an
> hyphothesis of how it works. Your objectio, however, could be equally
> applied to antibodies created through vaccination.
[snip]
No, it cannot at all. Vaccination involves the specific material to which a reaction
is
desired, not a "mold" of that material. Thus, the antibodies produced are idiotypic
antibodies, *not* anti-idiotypic. My objection still stands as a valid objection.
Mary T
tscottme wrote in message <36F8D0E1...@blah.net>...
>
<snip>
>
>So I guess your argument is that homeopathy is so well proven, it needs no
>double-blind studies. good excuse
Your ignorance of what actually contitutes homeopathy needs no excuse ---
there is no excuse for ignorance.
Your line of arguement is that only modern, western medicine is valid. An
arguement which is being proved unvalid every day. The Egyptians, Mayans
and Aztecs practiced forms of homeopathy. They also performed sucessful
neurosurgery --- 4,000 years before the advent of modern, western medicine.
Moreover, modern science has yet to match the Egyptian embalming technique.
Almost all of the pharmacueticals you depend upon were derived from medical
practice in use prior to the advent of modern, western medicine. Those
treatments were valid 1,000 years ago and remain valid today -- they were
not developed in a laboratory, not were they subjected to the studies you
seem to believe occured.
>
>If the big drug companies are suppressing the benefits of the homeopathic
magic
>beans why are they rushing to sell their herbal enhanced vitamins?
>
>No proof, no science, plenty of excuses.
>Scott Methvin
Maybe you should study the history of medicine instead of making so many
invalid proclamations.
Mary T
Lou MinattiЩйо
I tried it. I have bad allergies and was looking for a remedy that
didn't make me drousy. Homeopathic "medicine" didn't do squat. Maybe the
Law of Infinitesimals was taken too far by the homeopath that created
the wonder drug. Good thing real doctors created a non-drousy
antihistimine.
--
We're watching you at SpOOk CentralЩйо.
http://www.watchingyou.com
"Y2K advocates were like newly hatched mosquitoes. They only have a
short amount of time to suck blood before they die." - Paul Kedrosky
Lou MinattiЩйо
>
> tscottme wrote in message <36F8D0E1...@blah.net>...
> >
> <snip>
> >
> >So I guess your argument is that homeopathy is so well proven, it needs no
> >double-blind studies. good excuse
>
> Your ignorance of what actually contitutes homeopathy needs no excuse ---
> there is no excuse for ignorance.
>
> Your line of arguement is that only modern, western medicine is valid. An
> arguement which is being proved unvalid every day. The Egyptians, Mayans
> and Aztecs practiced forms of homeopathy. They also performed sucessful
> neurosurgery --- 4,000 years before the advent of modern, western medicine.
> Moreover, modern science has yet to match the Egyptian embalming technique.
And the average Egyptians, Mayans and Aztecs lived to be what, 30? Real
medicine (not homeopathy) has increased the average life span to more
than twice that.
Mary T
Cathy Credulous wrote in message ...
><snip>
>You're absolutely right. I used 500mg of Niacin because I read
>in a homeopathic book that it could be used for knee pain. Now,
>I no longer have knee pain. So I cured my knee pain for $2.97.
>That is definitely less expensive than a visit to a regular doctor.
---You are probably taking too much Niacin. Start with a very low dose, and
slowly increase the dose until you have reduced pain without side effects.
>
>One of the minor side effects of taking extra Niacin is heart
>palpatations. Does anyone know a homeopathic cure for heart
>palpatations?
>
>>
>>Scientific studies? Maybe you should read up on the history of medicine?
>>Without those studies you claim do not exist; you would not have the
array
>>of disease fighting drugs at your disposal. Some of the new cancer drugs
>>came straight out of the South American "witch-doctor's" homeopathic bag.
>
>That's amazing. I didn't know South American witch-doctors could
>diagnose cancer. Thanks.
>
>Cathy
>
--Cathy, Native medicine men are not retarded, nor are they ignorant. By
our "western" standards, they are ignorant and illiterate. In reality,
their medical practice is based on thousands of years of study, handed down
from generation to generation. If you asked them about "cancer" they would
not know what you were talking about. On the other hand, if you described a
group of known symptoms in language they understand, they could provide you
with a treatment.
Lacking our technology, medicine men do not have the understanding of
viruses and germs we have. On the other hand, they have been successfully
treating many illnesses without the benefit of those tools.
Mary T
>
Lou MinattiЩйо
>
> In article <36F93737...@interlog.com>, Happy Dog wrote:
> >they get really sick? Homeopathy has been labeled a fraud because it makes
> >great claims which should be easy to prove. Yet the people who make
> >billions of
> >dollars, yes, BILLIONS, have never been able to reliably demonstrate that
> >homeopathy does ANYTHING that can't be explained by placebo effect.
>
> Can you name a single person or corporation that makes billions of
> dollars off of homeopathy? Do all the homeopaths and homeopathic
> corporations put together make billions of dollars? And, in answering,
> remember not to call a tail a leg.
If homeopathic "medicine" increased the average lifespan of human
beings, your argument would have some merit. Personally, I'd rather pay
the money and get real medicine and live longer. Healthier, too.
Mary T
The Egyptians were performing successful neurosurgery (so were the Mayans
and Aztecs), 5,000 years before the advent of modern western medicine.
Have doubts --- find yourself an archeologist and sit down for a long,
enlightening conversation.
What makes you think that medical practice dating back thousands of years is
invalid because it was not developed in a modern laboratory? Are you saying
that the experience of healers spanning centuries is invalid because the
learning is handed down orally and not written in books?
Mary T
Happy Dog wrote in message <36F93737...@interlog.com>...
>Mary T wrote:
>
<snip>
Lou MinattiЩйо
>
> I've got an even better one for you Happy Dog --
>
> The Egyptians were performing successful neurosurgery (so were the Mayans
> and Aztecs), 5,000 years before the advent of modern western medicine.
And what was their average lifespan?
Happy Dog
> In article <36F93737...@interlog.com>, Happy Dog wrote:
> >they get really sick? Homeopathy has been labeled a fraud because it makes
> >great claims which should be easy to prove. Yet the people who make
> >billions of
> >dollars, yes, BILLIONS, have never been able to reliably demonstrate that
> >homeopathy does ANYTHING that can't be explained by placebo effect.
>
> Can you name a single person or corporation that makes billions of
> dollars off of homeopathy? Do all the homeopaths and homeopathic
> corporations put together make billions of dollars? And, in answering,
> remember not to call a tail a leg.
Sales of homeopathic products and billings by practitioners of homeopathy easily
surpass a billion dollars per year. Do you dispute this? And, the point isn't
the numbers. The point is that, if they desired, homeopathists would be able to
design and run specific tests that are replicable to prove their claims. Why
isn't this being done? And, in answering, remember to address the salient
point.
hd
Happy Dog
> tscottme wrote in message <36F8D0E1...@blah.net>...
> >
> <snip>
> >
> >So I guess your argument is that homeopathy is so well proven, it needs no
> >double-blind studies. good excuse
>
> Your ignorance of what actually contitutes homeopathy needs no excuse ---
> there is no excuse for ignorance.
>
> Your line of arguement is that only modern, western medicine is valid. An
> arguement which is being proved unvalid every day. The Egyptians, Mayans
> and Aztecs practiced forms of homeopathy. They also performed sucessful
> neurosurgery --- 4,000 years before the advent of modern, western medicine.
> Moreover, modern science has yet to match the Egyptian embalming technique.
Successful neurosurgery? ROFL! The original poster did not say that only
western medicine is valid. They said that homeopathy is a crock and with good
reason. If you're going to argue, why not address the specific issue and skip
the straw men?
> Almost all of the pharmacueticals you depend upon were derived from medical
> practice in use prior to the advent of modern, western medicine. Those
> treatments were valid 1,000 years ago and remain valid today -- they were
> not developed in a laboratory, not were they subjected to the studies you
> seem to believe occured.
Almost ALL? C'mon. Most of the treatments that were valid remain valid.
That's not saying anything. However, most of the treatments used 1K years ago
were INVALID. And they have been discarded. That's how progress is made.
> >If the big drug companies are suppressing the benefits of the homeopathic
> magic beans why are they rushing to sell their herbal enhanced vitamins?
> >
> >No proof, no science, plenty of excuses.
>
> Maybe you should study the history of medicine instead of making so many
> invalid proclamations.
Actually, he's correct. Big drug companies are involved in a fierce turf war
over supplements. It just erupted in a big way with accustaions of inferior
products being levelled at each other. What have you been studying?
hd
Happy Dog
> I've got an even better one for you Happy Dog --
Because you couldn't name a single new cancer drug that was previously in use by
witch doctors? So typical. Why don't you just answer my request for you to
back up your claim? We both know it's because you can't. And now everybody
else does.
> The Egyptians were performing successful neurosurgery (so were the Mayans
> and Aztecs), 5,000 years before the advent of modern western medicine.
> Have doubts --- find yourself an archeologist and sit down for a long,
> enlightening conversation.
Depends on your definition of neurosurgery. If you call cracking open a skull
to treat almost anything and, occasionally, relievinbg pressure from stroke or
trauma and, occasionally, having the patient survive post operative infection
"successful neurosurgery", OK. If you tell me that archeologists have found
evidence of neurosurgery with success rates rivaling modern neuroscience, I'd
say you're completely nuts. You can make a wild statement like that and get a
few delusional people to believe it. But if you want to convince anyone with a
bit of medical knowledge and some common sense, you'd better have some proof.
Which you don't and never will. Time to change the subject again, Mary.
> What makes you think that medical practice dating back thousands of years is
> invalid because it was not developed in a modern laboratory? Are you saying
> that the experience of healers spanning centuries is invalid because the
> learning is handed down orally and not written in books?
Age has NOTHING to do with the validity of a modality. If it worked ten
thousand years ago, it will work now. You're trying to pigeonhole me into a
position of holding modern medicine above criticism whilst ignoring ancient
treatments a priori. That's crap so cut it out. If a treatment is valid, it
can be proven to be so regardless of age or even if anybody understands why it
works. But if great claims are made, as with homeopathy, and the proponents
offer no concrete proof, which should be EASY, considering the magnitude of the
claims, the the modality is to be regarded as unproven and thus suspect. OK?
arf
Commentator
>
> In article <36F93D17...@isu.edu>, Larry Farrell wrote:
> >If the idea behind homoepathy is that the water in which the original material
> >was suspended and shaken is supposed to retain some "memory" of that structure,
> >it seems most likely to me that the memory should be a mold of the material, not
> >a direct copy of the material itself. If so, no matter when that "memory mold"
> >is introduced into the body, the response of the body would be to a mold of the
> >material, and one should expect that antibody produced in response to that would
> >be what is referred to as "anti-idiotype antibody." That is, the antibody
> >should be specifically directed at a structure that is a copy of the relevant
> >material, which is prety much what antibody itself is. Thus, anti-idiotype
> >antibody would be specifically directed to interact with, and inactivate,
> >antibody against the material against which protection is sought. The overall
> >effect, then, *even if homeopathy worked* would be to destroy the protection
> >that is supposed to be generated.
>
> Even the most dedicated homeopath will tell you that they have no
> idea WHY homeopathy works (assuming that it does). You are quoting an
> hyphothesis of how it works. Your objectio, however, could be equally
> applied to antibodies created through vaccination.
>
> >homeopathy, given that I have done little reading on the theory underlying it
> >(Oh, excuse me, there *is* no theory underlying it, is there? Therefore, the
> >above must be incontrovertibly correct!).
>
> I cannot follow THAT logic, either. But I do appreciate your
> trying to understand homeopathy before rejecting it.
>
> >Larry D. Farrell, Ph.D.
> >Professor of Microbiology
> >Idaho State University
>
> most.
>
> --
> Bart Lidofsky
> Systems Administrator
> New York Theosophical Society
> ny...@dorsai.org (official)
> ba...@sprynet.com (personal)
Even without a model as for why homeopathy works you ought to be able to
point to scores of carefully controlled, repeatable, verified, double
blind studies that prove your claims.
Where are they? Could it be there are no such studies? Perhaps...
Commentator
>
> In article <36F934...@notrolls.com>, Commentator
> <nos...@notrolls.com> writes
>
> >Of course the cold cleared up, in about a week as all colds do.
>
> Then the distilled water worked - eventually. :-)
>
> Or so some contributors to this thread would argue.
>
> >Sorry to not be clear.
>
> Oh, you were reasonably clear. I didn't expect the cold to have lasted,
> but was making the point that because it cleared up was no reason to
> jump to any conclusion that the distilled water had anything to do with
> it.
> --
> Mike Hutchinson
> www.hutch.demon.co.uk for details of my book 'Bizarre Beliefs'
> Please remove "no.rubbish" from reply to address
Your point is well taken, and no doubt there are those who will claim
the distilled water cured the cold. Sad, no?
Commentator
>
> In article <36F935...@notrolls.com>, Commentator wrote:
> >So, show us homeopathy works. If the stuff is as powerful, as useful,
> >as wonderful as you claim it ought to be childs play to provide data
> >that will sway even the most hard headed skeptic.
> >
> >But you do not provide such proof, you arm wave, make excuses and offer
> >useless analogies.
>
> While double blind studies can be made on homeopathic remedies,
> one problem is that homeopathic prescription is based not just on the
> physical symptoms (except for acute cases), but also on the mental state
> of the patient. Most medical testing methods are specifically designed to
> eliminate psychosomatic effects within the testing.
>
> Does anybody here know if there is any kind of testing going on of
> the placebo effect? If homeopathy turned out to be a focussing of the
> placebo effect, would that make it invalid?
>
> Bart Lidofsky
> Systems Administrator
> New York Theosophical Society
> ny...@dorsai.org (official)
> ba...@sprynet.com (personal)
Oh NOW I understand!! They just THINK they are sick, and distilled
water applied under the name of homeopathy is sufficient to cure
something which has no organic cause.
Thank you for clearing that up so wonderfully.
Commentator
>
> In article <36F93737...@interlog.com>, Happy Dog wrote:
> >they get really sick? Homeopathy has been labeled a fraud because it makes
> >great claims which should be easy to prove. Yet the people who make
> >billions of
> >dollars, yes, BILLIONS, have never been able to reliably demonstrate that
> >homeopathy does ANYTHING that can't be explained by placebo effect.
>
> Can you name a single person or corporation that makes billions of
> dollars off of homeopathy? Do all the homeopaths and homeopathic
> corporations put together make billions of dollars? And, in answering,
> remember not to call a tail a leg.
>
> Bart Lidofsky
> Systems Administrator
> New York Theosophical Society
> ny...@dorsai.org (official)
> ba...@sprynet.com (personal)
Let us assume that homeopathy could actually cure some disease. How
much would you pay for a cure for the common cold? For stomach ulcers?
For cancer?
You see, if the stuff actually worked you could charge whatever the
market could bear. The argument that there is no money to be made thus
it is ignored is, at best, hopelessly ignorant, and at worst dangerous.
Commentator
>
> I've got an even better one for you Happy Dog --
>
> and Aztecs), 5,000 years before the advent of modern western medicine.
> Have doubts --- find yourself an archeologist and sit down for a long,
> enlightening conversation.
>
> invalid because it was not developed in a modern laboratory? Are you saying
> that the experience of healers spanning centuries is invalid because the
> learning is handed down orally and not written in books?
>
>
> Happy Dog wrote in message <36F93737...@interlog.com>...
> >Mary T wrote:
> >
>
> <snip>
>
> >Nonsense. Bive me a single example of a new cancer drug that was used by
> witch
> >doctors in South America. Are you claiming that these guys can cure cancer
> as
> >well?
> >erruff
> >
What was the morality and morbidity rate of people subjected to ancient
Aztec neurosurgery?
Oh, you do not know? it DOES make a difference, most obviously when it
is YOUR head that is about to be drilled open.