Dan Dredger wrote a new post, Stuck in a tedious debate with a homeopath? Here’s how to settle it 3 years, 10 months ago
By Professor Edzard Ernst
As soon as I write something critical about homeopathy, some people start claiming that I am biased. And as soon as even the most respected institution publishes a report on the […]
This will be very handy for me.
I’m currently engaged, single-handedly, against a handful of homeopathy supporters at New Matilda. This will be beneficial.
The article itself is interesting. We’ve just had a census in Oz and some have complained that a Spiritual but not Religious category was needed.
The author included homeopathy among the “Woo” and that incensed some fans, including a homeopathic doctor from the US. If anyone is interested – https://newmatilda.com/2016/09/24/spiritual-cherrypicking-science-trumps-climate-scepticism-apparently-not-homeopathy/?
Homeopathic Accident & Emergency Dept.
Len Walsh #3
Oct 5, 2016 at 9:00 am
I’m currently engaged, single-handedly, against a handful of homeopathy supporters at New Matilda.
Yep! The closed minds of the uneducated woomeisters may know no scientific answers and no scientific methodology, but they can trot out answers copied from fellow science illiterates about “materialism”, and cherry-picked definitions of the self contradictory “scientism”, – thrown at definitive science by science duffers who are sitting in denial of evidence!
Show them James Randi taking what should be a lethal dose of “calms forte” on stage before he begins a lengthy talk. It is a homeopathic sleep remedy and the dude takes like 32 of them. Now, if they are medicinal, he surely should get sleepy, NO? Plus in the video he’s appears to be an octogenarian and at no point gets remotely sleepy. Not as much as a single yawn!
Go here for a transcript of his damn awesome TED talk and a link to the vid:
In his 17 minutes, he hammers away at cold readers-talk to the dead charlatans and the hoeopaths…. the hits never end!!!
Homeopatic remedies are good for the treatment of thirst, but there are much cheaper alternatives.
It was a nice idea at the time.
These days, to get government funding, the burden of proof would have to be on those promoting this – shall we say (nicely) – unproven treatment. No bias here. If Homoeoeooepathy was as good as its promoters claim, they should have no bother doing some proper studies. After all, the stuff has to be cheap to manufacture, doesn’t it?
But then there’s the placebo effect. It does offer a wide variety of placebos for those who respond well to them. After all, some patients don’t actually need medicine to get better, so it’s arguably better to prescribe something evidently harmless instead of anything active.
On thing that irritates me about the usual anti-woo stance (often presented here) is that it’s based on “this can’t possibly work”, instead of on “if this worked we’d have experimental data that clearly shows it works, and we don’t”. (Don’t lots of potential new treatments fail at the clinical trial stage, costing pharma quite a lot, but isn’t that the correct way to find out what works and what doesn’t?)
Saying it “can’t possibly work” is of course a sign of prejudice, and opens the door to the opposing view that conventional medicine/science is biased against this wonderful treatment.
When it was first introduced, the treatment appears to have been essentially a placebo at the core of a regime of changes to lifestyle and diet, which were justified on the basis that the medicine is very fragile. So the patient took up the lifestyle/dietary changes and got better, without having to be told that was all they needed. An unfortunate side-effect is that this “fragile” medicine doesn’t play well in clinical trials.
What I’m trying to get across is, it’s not necessary to antagonise or denounce the pro-homoeopathy stance, just send them away (politely) to get the necessary clinical data before applying for public funding. And don’t go into oxygen starvation waiting for them to come back with any.
What I’m trying to get across is, it’s not necessary to antagonise or denounce the pro-homoeopathy stance, just send them away (politely) to get the necessary clinical data before applying for public funding.
Their repeated failure to produce the data despite repeated requests for it, rather demands a much more vocal shaming to stop their parasitising.
Placebos are real with real outcomes. Its time for rip off artists to make way for professional psychologist-trained NHS GPs and nurses. Immune systems turn up to eleven from their normal seven when pampered and led to believe that its associate body is in safe hands.