James Randi's Challenge to Homeopathy Manufacturers and Retail Pharmacies

[cleanhippie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SMukj31qw1U




James Randi is THE MAN!

[Archae]

1. Homeopathy is a scam.

It just doesn't work. Period.

[Voice for Peace]

7. disagree strongly from personal experience. Also you might read this

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman/luc-montagnier-homeopathy-taken-seriously_b_814619.html

[SDuderstadt]

8. You disagree that...

homeopathy is a scam?

How much evidence do you need?

[Voice for Peace]

10. personal experience for 30 years is enough evidence for me.

but have you read the article?

[SDuderstadt]

11. Yes...

I read the article. It's hardly from an unbiased source.

And, your "personal experience" means nothing.

[Thunderstruck]

14. So, "personal experience" now means nothing? Since when?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Thunderstruck]

23. Interesting (and offensive) choice of words in your subject line...but alrighty then.

I don't know from homeopathy anyways. I was just wondering about "personal experience" on a broader scale not meaning anything.

[immoderate]

29. Read up on faith healing.

What do personal experiences mean?

That's why there is science.

--imm

[Voice for Peace]

27. Why do you need to evaluate it scientifically if it works for you?

If it doesn't work for you, don't use it!

But why make a big deal out of it?
It's not like people are getting rich off of suckers
who think it works for them.

It works for me, I like it, there are no side effects,
it's cheap and affordable.

Why should anybody have a problem with this?

[SDuderstadt]

28. How do you know it works for you?

Serious question.

[Voice for Peace]

33. How do you know if a glass of water has quenched your thirst?

Or that an aspirin has taken away your headache?

Or that a pair of socks made your feet feel warmer?

Or that the sun brings light and warmth?

Are these all scientifically proven phenomena?
Is that how we know?

Serious answer, I hope you get what I mean.

[HuckleB]

35. Nice list of red herrings.

[SDuderstadt]

36. No, I don't get what you mean...

It's all science-denial rationalization.

You can live in a faith-based world if you want to.

[Voice for Peace]

53. OK, here's how I know

I took a remedy for an ailment, and it worked.

Used the remedy again and again, over a period
of thirty years. Always worked.

Even if somebody were to disprove that it works,
I would still take it -- because it works for me.

Some years back I was taking a prescription
medication. It was not helping the ailment,
and I was having serious side effects.

I told the doctor and he said, no that's
not possible, this medication doesn't do that.

But when I stopped taking it, the side effects
went away. When I started again, they came back,
and so on. The doctor denied that my personal
first hand experience had any validity, because
the science didn't back it up.

Whom should I trust? Myself, or the doctor?

[HuckleB]

59. Except that the ailment would have improved on its own.

You did nothing but waste your money on inert sugar pills.

[Voice for Peace]

64. perhaps would have improved in 3 or 4 days

whereas there was relief & improvement within half hour with the remedy.

try it you might like it.

[HuckleB]

75. I have.

I won't my money again.

You wasted money on something so mild that it was going to be better in a half hour?

Wow!

[SDuderstadt]

82. You believe a homeopathic remedy worked in...

1/2 hour? Can you explain how it did that?

[Voice for Peace]

225. I'd like to be able to explain how it worked. I'd like to understand how it works.

And I think about it often, I wonder how it works.

But I do know it works. Maybe it would have gone away
on its own in a half hour, instead of 3 days, I don't know!

[cleanhippie]

175. But there is nothing IN what you took.

What actual medicine was in what you took? What were the ingredients?

[Voice for Peace]

226. best I can figure is there are nano particles of information

that inform my own body.

[cleanhippie]

261. and you seriously believe that? seriously?

Then you really should seek professional help.

[Voice for Peace]

265. lol you're right, of course

[woo me with science]

131. People used to think that bags of grain spontaneously generated rats.

Sometimes the mechanism you are assuming is not the correct one.

:evilgrin:

[Voice for Peace]

133. true.

Common sense has been disabled in too much of human history.

[woo me with science]

141. Believing rats came from grain was perfect common sense.

What is needed here is science, not hunches.

Every single discussion of homeopathy I have seen attempted on DU has devolved into a single argument on the part of Believers: "It helps me, and you can't argue with that."

You are making an unsupported, illogical assumption that, because you FEEL it helps you, the claims for its effectiveness are therefore valid.

That is like saying that, because rats appear in grain bins, we now have proof that rats generate spontaneously from grain.

Like the ones watching the rats, you are misreading the mechanism, and your conclusion - that homeopathy works - is faulty as a result. There may be multiple reasons you feel better after taking your swig of water, but science shows us that they have nothing to do with the homeopathic remedy itself. I could substitute any water preparation, and as long as you did not know the difference, you would continue to claim relief.

Homeopaths work in the realm of psychology, just like magicians, hucksters, and snake oil salesmen. They appeal to authority, pattern seeking, confirmation bias... They know the minds of the people whose money they are taking.

Quite a magic trick, to charge big money for water and be hailed as a healer, to boot.

[SDuderstadt]

143. Science-deniers...

struggle with shorthand abstractions and, thus, have crippled epistemologies, much like conspiracists.

[Voice for Peace]

156. we won't agree on this so I better leave it at that; except to say I was never led to believe

in homeopathy. Only discovered that when I tried it,
it worked for me. I'd love to know why, and have my
own theories... but they are nothing more than hunches.

Many (many!) years ago I met a woman scientist, researcher
for the Canadian Cancer society. We struck up a conversation
about her work. I told her I thought diet had something to
do with cancer, or at least some cancers.. it just made sense
to me, nothing more than a hunch. At that time there was
little or no research being done, at least none that I'd heard
of, into the relationship between what we ingest and cancer
& other disease.

I always remember the look on her face.. she looked frankly
stunned by the idea, like it had never occurred to her.

This is just an anecdote, not related to homeopathy -- but
so many great discoveries begin with nothing but a hunch.
I would never discount one, from anybody, without giving it
consideration.

Instead of thinking: "that can't possibly work, because xyz!"
I tend to think the opposite way: eg, if we begin from an
assumption that it does work, what might be happening to
make it so?

It's possible science hasn't gotten there yet, ie to
grasp and then prove the stuff that happens on the most
subtle, tiniest levels in our bodies.

[woo me with science]

158. We seriously need an overhaul of science education in this country.

There is a difference between, "The science is not there yet," and, "The mechanism you are proposing is so at odds with established science that it falls in the realm of magic rather than medicine."

No, the problem is not that "the science isn't there yet." The problem is that those who sell magic water as a remedy cannot provide support for its effectiveness, because it is impossible for them to do so. Instead, they continue to dupe a scientifically illiterate public by mumbling utterly fabricated pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo about "memories" retained by water. When pushed further about the mechanism, they exclaim regretfully that "the science isn't there yet."

You would not have tried it if you did not suspect it would work for you. So, yes, you were primed to believe.

Pseudoscience is not harmless. Tricking people into paying good money for water is not harmless; it is unethical. Allowing charlatans to infiltrate our medical establishments is not harmless.

Pseudoscience hurts people by confusing them about which treatments are actually supported by science and which aren't, by diverting them from actual medicines that could help them, by sucking money out of their pockets under false pretenses, by degrading the quality of our medical establishments as a whole, and by exposing people to unproven, sometimes frankly dangerous treatments.

http://whatstheharm.net/

[cleanhippie]

177. After 10 years of studies the British NIH took homeopathy off the approved treatment list

because it had no better effect than placebo did.

[ZombieHorde]

306. I used to work in various group homes. Sometimes we would have our pharmacy package M&Ms into pill

bubble packs. We cured all sorts of ailments with those M&Ms. We made it just as formal as their other meds, we even charted and double signed for each M&M we gave out. Worked like a charm.

[Voice for Peace]

222. believing rats came from grain isn't common sense for someone who has seen baby rats, or knows grain

so maybe we have a different notion of what 'common sense' means.

This is often an unfortunate problem in communication -- that
people think they're talking the same language, and they're not --
because we have different understandings of what words mean.

A good example of that is that I might say "I love you"
meaning "I love the goodness in you, your wisdom, your
humor, I have fun with you, I see so much good in you and
I love it" -- and the other person hears "I want to marry you
and own you."

[dmallind]

310. Ermm. yes they are

Homeopathy on the other hand relies on stories not data or established theory.

I just cannot fathom the idea of equating homeopathy with basic physics such as the sun generating heat and light.

[WingDinger]

118. First, what is homeopathy. Is med. Marijuana? Are all the drugs that are nothing more than

synthesized natural compounds?

[Mopar151]

219. Not at all.

has to do with extreme dilutions, with a methodology of manufacture that has little to do with science. Many pharmaceutical drugs are based on non-synthesized natural compounds.

[Voice for Peace]

227. A simplistic explanation.

"The hair of the dog that bit you."

A tiny bit of the poison that causes the illness
makes the body rally its defenses against the illness itself.

It's similar to the idea of vaccinations, I think, but
on a much more subtle level.

[HuckleB]

240. Here:

http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/a-kind-of-magic/

[immoderate]

31. "It's not like people are getting rich off of suckers who think it works for them."

:rofl:

--imm

[HuckleB]

39. That is one amazing quote.

Magical even.

[FLAprogressive]

43. Oh lawdy.

:rofl:

[Voice for Peace]

57. you laugh, but who is getting rich off of homeopathy?

[HuckleB]

69. In the US alone...

"Retail sales for homeopathy in the United States are around $300 to $450 million annually and growing, according to the National Center for Homeopathy."

http://www.homeopathic.org/content/homeopathy-overview

That's a lot of money made on sugar pills, with no actual value to the customer. Why do we allow this scam to be perpetrated on consumers?

[Voice for Peace]

74. how does that compare with retail sales for pharmaceutical prescription and over-the counter

remedies? If the market for homeopathy is growing, it's not because people are stupid.

[HuckleB]

77. You are much too predictable.

You are offering a red herring, yet again. Nice try.

Humans have a long history of fooling themselves, and falling for scams. Try reading up on it, some time.

[Voice for Peace]

86. and you are much too personally dismissive.

And just as predictable.. but this is how the wars
begin. You need to see me as being stupider than
yourself. But I'm not. We are both human beings,
learning as we go.

And we're here for a short time; don't waste it
on diminishing others simply to make a point.

[SDuderstadt]

87. "this is how the wars begin"?

WTF?

[HuckleB]

90. Exactly. -eom-

[Voice for Peace]

95. wars are born out of disrespect and negation of those with whom we disagree

[SDuderstadt]

97. WTF?

Could you explain WWII to me?

[HuckleB]

100. Another factor in the creation of the momentum for war...

... has often be attributing beliefs and statements to others who do not hold such beliefs and have not made such statements.

Hmmm.

[Voice for Peace]

109. I apologize if I've misinterpreted your posts.

I don't like to do that.

[HuckleB]

123. Thank you.

[HuckleB]

89. Now you are trying to put words in my mouth.

That type of posting is despicable, in my view.

I have not diminished anyone. I have simply pointed out the reality of the scam known as homeopathy.

[Voice for Peace]

98. well, maybe re-examine your choice of words

and try to read from my point of view.

Maybe I am thin skinned but I don't like being
accused of bullshit, denialism, predictability,
and so on.. it just isn't productive communication.

[SDuderstadt]

101. Truth hurts...

doesn't it...

[Voice for Peace]

103. no, truth doesn't hurt.

[cleanhippie]

179. Do you actually KNOW what is in your homeopathic remedies?

Seriously, do you know?

[HuckleB]

102. You created words for me, and chose to rant against your own creation.

Try again.

[Voice for Peace]

106. whatever, maybe I mixed up your posts with someone else's.

[HuckleB]

107. "Whatever."

Thanks for the unapologetic hypocrisy.

[Voice for Peace]

110. now see... there ya go

why accuse me of hypocrisy?

let's just end this, it's going nowhere.. agree to disagree. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you, I swear this is true.

[HuckleB]

122. Because you put words in my mouth, and more than once.

Please pay attention.

[Voice for Peace]

128. please forgive me.

[FLAprogressive]

149. Can there be an honest discussion of homeopathy without someone else bringing up the "big pharma"

red herring?

[woo me with science]

155. There is a difference when you are LYING about what your product does. nt

[woo me with science]

152. I recently walked out of a veterinarian's office in sheer disgust,

after having been referred there by an emergency vet.

The place was ridiculous. Oil paintings on the walls, polished wood counters, antiques. And brochures for homeopathic animal treatments lining the walls.

I don't claim to know that they afforded all the expensive surroundings based on the homeopathy component of their practice, but I can tell you without a doubt that those sham treatments for dogs, cats, and turtles were not cheap.

[Voice for Peace]

228. was that in Maryland by any chance?

[woo me with science]

256. Northern Virginia. nt

[blondeatlast]

80. + LOL. nt

[HuckleB]

32. If there is no plausibility for the product to "work," then it's doing nothing.

Your belief is no different than that of someone who subscribes to faith healing.

Save your money.

http://www.sram.org/0302/bias.html

[Voice for Peace]

40. I love science, don't get me wrong.

But you can't deny that many people have been killed
by bad science.

And our understanding of science is always
evolving.

What is this body? Is it not an astonishing thing?

Billions of tiny particles of energy constantly in
motion, constantly changing. An intelligence we
can't begin to grasp.

Without wonder, openness, willingness to suspend
our limiting boundaries of thought, science is
blind, limited, full of erroroneous conclusions.

I think it's even been scientifically "proved"
that faith healing has sound basis in science.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Voice for Peace]

50. why do you care so ferociously about this subject

that you need to be dismissive of a different point of view?

I know there are cases when people have used homeopathy
when a different medical approach was needed.

But you can't deny there are way more instances of
harm when people have trusted the "science" of many
pharmaceuticals and the "experts" who prescribe them.
Do you defend that kind of science?

What about the science that says the oil in the
Gulf is gone and it's safe for swimming and eating
the seafood? Do you believe that science?

Science has proven many things that it has since
disproved.

Homeopathy is essentially harmless.

What is harmful is arrogance,lack of self-knowledge,
cheat and deceit. There is so much of that stuff in
the name of science that it's downright criminal.

[SDuderstadt]

52. Spare me your "you need to be open-minded about different viewpoints" (paraphrase)...

bullshit. A truly open-minded person looks for evidence of claims. You have none.

Your false equivalence argument is not very impressive either.

[Voice for Peace]

61. Spare me your insults.

It adds nothing to the conversation.

Have you any experience in your life for which there
is no other evidence, other than you know what you
saw/felt/heard?

[SDuderstadt]

63. No...

I live in an evidence-based world, unlike you.

[Voice for Peace]

67. wow.

[Ghost in the Machine]

157. Hoo boy! You really brought the screeching howler monkeys out, didn't you?

It's kind of fun to watch :evilgrin:

[HuckleB]

56. Homeopathy is a human invention. There is no basis for it.

It is a human scam, used to scam other humans out of their money. Similar scams have been to be illegal, for good reason. There is no reason that the homeopathy scam should be legal in a logical system of laws.

Next.

[HuckleB]

48. And now you're offering more red herring?

Read up on "nonspecific effects," then get back to me.

[sufrommich]

162. "I think it's even been scientifically "proved"

that faith healing has sound basis in science."


Wow. I'd like to see the link for that.

[cleanhippie]

183. There is no such thing as "bad science", only bad people. Please, answer this question.

There is nothing scientific at all about homeopathy. It has been put to the test of the scientific method and has failed, repeatedly.


You have been asked, how do you feel about the fact (yes, its a fact) that if your homeopathic remedy were replaced with tap water and you didn't know it, your feelings about the "effect" your homeopathic remedy had would remain the same. Does that not give you reason to take pause and reevaluate what you are spending money on and telling others about as an alternative to actual medicine?

Please, answer this. You have been asked several times and not answered.

[Voice for Peace]

220. Sorry, I didn't read your question until now.

It seems silly to spend a lot of time on this debate, because
those who believe strongly that homeopathy has no value aren't
going to change their minds, nor am I. But I'll try to answer
your questions.


You have been asked, how do you feel about the fact (yes, its a fact) that if your homeopathic remedy were replaced with tap water and you didn't know it, your feelings about the "effect" your homeopathic remedy had would remain the same.

This is the first I'm aware of being asked that question..
but it has no basis in fact -- ie, that's never happened to
me. I can't say how I'd feel, or whether I'd have an imaginary
response to a tap water substitute.


Does that not give you reason to take pause and reevaluate what you are spending money on and telling others about as an alternative to actual medicine?"

If that were true, yes it would give me reason for re-evaluation.


But fyi re cost: a remedy that costs about $9 lasts me for months.
It's not much cost. I also do not tell other people what they
should do, or believe.

And when people disagree with me, I like to consider their point
of view, because I like learning, and having my limiting concepts
blown.

However, I ultimately fall back on what is my own first-hand
personal experience. Not beliefs, but hard experience. Something
that can't be proved, unfortunately.

[cleanhippie]

252. So you agree then that if it were factual that one could unknowingly substitute tap water

for you homeopathic remedy and you could not tell the difference, then you would re-evaluate your opinion on the matter? DO I have that right? Seems like exactly what you said.

Here is the 10 year British study that proved that homeopathy does not work any better than placebo does and that patients could not tell the difference between homeopathy and placebo. The British NHS has dropped Homeopathy from approved services because it is a waste of money.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4502.htm

Now that you KNOW, what say you now?

[Voice for Peace]

254. I say, why do you care? If I am happy with the homeopathy, and content that it works

why do you want me to disturb myself based on others'experiences?

I have my own experience.

Can you understand that this is important?
To be able to think, and feel, for ourselves?
Without anybody else's validation?
Scientific, governmental, religious or otherwise??
What about our SELF?

Do you understand??
this is everything, everything!

[cleanhippie]

260. But it seems you are intentionally deluding yourself

and if that is the case, you need to seek professional help. Seriously.

[BuddhaGirl]

262. no, I think your extreme attachment to insisting that someone

is "deluding" themselves means you may need professional therapy.

Seriously.

[cleanhippie]

264. Are you also of the opinion that homeopathy is a valid treatment for illness?

If you are, and you have been reading these threads, then you know that they are, in fact, NOT valid treatment for ANY illness, then you too, are self-deluding, and that IS pathological.

[Teaser]

300. "I think it's even been scientifically "proved" that faith healing has sound basis in science"

you think incorrectly.

[cleanhippie]

174. It's not like people are getting rich off of suckers who think it works for them.

Uh, yeah, thats EXACTLY what is happening.

[HuckleB]

21. FYI...

http://www.sram.org/0302/bias.html

[Thunderstruck]

26. I don't know anything about homeopathy. I was just wondering when "personal experience"

means something and when it doesn't.

[HuckleB]

30. Personal experience minus plausibility tends to mean very little.

[Voice for Peace]

45. a question

can you think of a personal experience you have had,
which you know to be real, and true, but which has not
been validated by others? (Expert or otherwise)

[HuckleB]

49. Yup.

And it has no value to anyone but me. Further, if I use it to waste my money on foolish products, against all evidence, then shame on me.

[Voice for Peace]

72. I don't know about the shame on you, but hopefully you are learning

if you are wasting your money on something that
is not benefitting you.

My experience with homeopathy has benefitted me,
I don't impose it on others. I don't really understand
why people are so intense about denouncing it.

[HuckleB]

76. You've convinced yourself of something that is not plausible.

No matter how many times you repeat yourself, you are doing nothing but fooling yourself.

[cleanhippie]

186. If your homeopathic remedy was substituted with tap water and you didn't know it

you would still have that "benefit" you speak of. Knowing this, why do you continue to spend you money on it?

[cleanhippie]

185. If it cannot be validiated, it is in no way "real and true".

It means you don't understand what is was you experienced or why.

[cleanhippie]

184. It means nothing when speaking about science and the scientific method.

Thats the beauty of the scientific method, no one will EVER have a "personal experience", so it keeps that out of the equation.

[Hugabear]

166. So I suppose we should put stock in faith healing

Plenty of people with "personal experience" say that faith healers are legit

[Voice for Peace]

229. I think each person is unique, and has the right to whatever works for them

as long as it doesn't harm others. I don't believe
particularly in faith healing, but I do believe in
the awesome intelligence of my own body & immune system.

[Teaser]

299. It always means nothing

.

[Voice for Peace]

18. lol... of course my personal experience means nothing to you

-- but it means a great deal to me.

I belive almost anything can be "proved" to be a scam.

But one thing that can never be disproved is a person's
own first-hand experience. How can that be disproved?

If you have personal first-hand experience of anything,
you know this is so.

I don't expect anyone else to believe in my experience.
Everyone has to make their own choices and come to their
own conclusions.

But I am wary of trusting "experts" -- when there are
always so-called experts on both sides of every issue;
and the "facts" are always changing, or being disproved.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

24. Firsthand experience must be driven by knowledge.

If you don't understand that sugar pills don't actually provide benefit, that tends to lead others to ignore your personal experience.

[Voice for Peace]

120. I think knowledge should be driven by first-hand experience.

that's the whole basis of science.

[HuckleB]

232. There is no science if your experience is uninformed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

[provis99]

37. you're not much interested in logic or rational thinking, are you?

hey, if you enjoy quackery like homeopathy, knock yourself out. By the way, I've got a box of lucky chicken shit to sell you: it will bring you good luck. You know how I know? By personal experience; it has brought me much good luck.

[verges]

70. How do you feel about

Global Warming? Evolution?

[Voice for Peace]

81. serious question?

How do I feel about it? Or what do I believe?

As far as what I know absolutely -- very little.
I know the crocuses bloom earlier every year,
summers are getting hotter, new antibiotic-
resistant bugs are proliferating and killing
people.

What do I believe? I believe human unconsciousness
and pollution are significantly contributing to global
warming, if not causing it outright.

I believe evolution is valid and is ongoing every moment.

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Voice for Peace]

92. You didn't answer my questions from previous posts..

which science do you believe in? Is there any that you deny?

Would you take your kids swimming in the gulf,
and feed them local shrimp?

I've heard the science says it's all safe.

[SDuderstadt]

94. What "science" am I supposed to deny?

Do you know the difference between science and pseudoscience?

[Odin2005]

99. Wrong, science is saying the shrimp is unsafe. Corporate Liars are saying it is safe.

Calling corporate hacks "scientists" is like calling global warming denialists "scientists", or creationists "scientists".

[HuckleB]

104. +1,000,000,000,000!!!

[Odin2005]

108. Thanks. I get sick of the "evil corporate science" shtick.

[CanSocDem]

172. yeh...

..."corporate science" is really promoting the public interest. You do know what that is, don't you?? The public interest???

BTW, the "public interest" isn't about creating monopolies in commerce. It's about giving people choices....

Are you so insecure, that you would deny others their choice??

.

[HuckleB]

282. Are red herrings all you can offer?

Homeopathy is a scam. It is not a choice. It's hard to take someone's criticism of corporations seriously when they buy into this scam.

BTW, most science-based medicine folks are very critical of the corporate nonsense. That is the point.

[Voice for Peace]

113. that's what she said.

[madinmaryland]

138. Excellent point!

:thumbsup:

[verges]

112. If scientific research

were to show that something was bad, I would be seriously inclined to veer away from it. If scientific research showed that something was good (or harmless) andmy anecdotal evidence or observations proved to me otherwise, I might be inclined to still steer clear. This would simply be exercising cvaution. Because, as you've stated elsewhere, science , with the accumulation of more knowledge has been proven wrong. However, to do just the opposite and ignore scientific research and base the entire decision on anecdotal evidence would be foolhardy.

Thirty years ago a friend's mother died of cancer. They believed Laetrile was helping, even though it wasn't. She would have died anyway, but the foolhardy treatment in the face of science cost them a great deal.

[Voice for Peace]

115. I'm glad to bring you comfort..

let's drop this.. no hard feelings.

[edhopper]

16. Your crazy for using that

newfangled homeopathy. I'll stick with the tried and true leeches and bleeding. I have centuries of people saying it helps.

[blondeatlast]

91. Actually, leeches do have a practical, scientifically proven medical benefit.

My sis was a hospital pharmacist for 30 years and they always kept a supply on hand. They help amputation wounds heal without infection! This was a leading burn treatment hospital so amputations were done frequently. The difference between that and homeopathy is that the benefit of leeches has been scientifically.

:hi:

[roguevalley]

215. my dad's hand was saved from amputation by leeches and doctors

are using them a lot. Before you just spouting off, you might want to look it up. as for Randi? What a self aggrandizing tool.

[Blue-Jay]

65. "data" is not the same as "anecdote".

But, hey, if you feel better, that's great. (seriously) Belief is frequently powerful.

But it ain't science.

[KansasVoter]

170. Same logic use for ghosts, ESP, UFOs, etc. Wow, Wow, Wow.

[HuckleB]

243. -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/03/bad-science-manipulate-mind-causality

[Ian David]

297. Wow, if I spent 30 years being scammed by something that stupid, I wouldn't tell anyone.

Imagine if the emperor who bought "invisible clothes" went back for a new outfit every year for 30 years.

[HuckleB]

12. Homeopathy Pseudoscience at the HuffPo

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2775

More Anti-Science at the Huff Po
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=1909#more-1909

Beware the Nobel Laureate Argument from Authority
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?s=Homeopathy&paged=2

Homeopathy – Failing Randomized Controlled Trials Since 1835
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=4750

Stop the scam!

[edhopper]

17. The

basic theory of homeopathy is a scientific impossibility, it is like perpetual motion or therapeutic touch.

[HuckleB]

22. Yup.

But few of us want to admit that we've been conned, so we defend our own wasteful to the bitter end.

[Mopar151]

117. Exactly!

Show a SHRED of actual scientific evidence, from a double-blind study, that homeopathy really works. Never happen, 'cuz homeopathy is thin smoke and distant mirrors.

Look over the James Randi Educational Foundation at jref.org - Take the Million Dollar Challenge.

[Odin2005]

13. Personal experience means nothing. Confirmation Bias.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[anamandujano]

34. Good read plus

My mother has had lots of good experience with various natural remedies after long standing approved (Big Pharma approved that is) either failed or caused problems.

She just got out of intensive care and we were lucky to have a couple of her doctors look at naturals I brought in and sign off on them. They thought it would be worth a try and checked the small print to make sure it wouldn't badly react with anything she was on.

I wouldn't recommend anyone stop taking any drug that has been prescribed without a doctor's approval and monitoring. Anyone with cancer, diabetes or other serious situations should not be self medicating.

If your doctor is outdated and won't work with you, get a new one who is open to new ideas.

It's my unfortunate experience with doctors which leads me to believe that once most get out of med school they go on automatic pilot.

Most importantly, whenever you or a family member is prescribed something, always ask the doctor for the fine details and get on the great internets and research the hell out of it. If I hadn't been running interference and lobbing my mother's doctors research I had done, she'd be dead now.

[Voice for Peace]

130. good for you. I fear too many people blindly turn over their health & happiness to doctors

and other authorities -- who in many cases don't know what they're doing.

[originalpckelly]

216. Really, I mean, they only spent 8 years in school...

and at least 2 in residency (often more in some specialties) to become doctors. Just what exactly is the training your homeopathic nonsense BS practitioners receive?

[Voice for Peace]

230. The homeopathic practitioners I've known have been successful MD's.

[loudsue]

54. I'm with you. The people who "don't believe in" homeopathy

probably don't "believe in" physical therapy or massage, or chiropractic, either, for all I know. They seem to be incurious about the world around them, and fearful and doubtful of trying new things. Very dogmatic about what could possibly be true, and it naturally has to make money for big pharma, or it's REALLY not true.

I say they are just fearful and paranoid. You can't teach them anything because they already know it all.

[SDuderstadt]

58. What an absurd strawman...

How is science "incurious"?

[loudsue]

62. Your reading comprehension is lacking. Re-read my post.

Nowhere was it said that "science" is incurious. Scientists, like those scientists who study homeopathy, are curious about the world they live in. And their reading comprehension is better than what you demonstrate here.

[SDuderstadt]

68. Why is the consensus of science that...

homeopathy is "woo"?

[HuckleB]

60. On open-mindedness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

[woo me with science]

127. Marvelous video.

Very apt for this discussion.

[cali]

66. look, the fact remains that there is no scientific evidence that homeopathy

is effective. None. Physical therapy is rooted in science. There is some evidence that spinal manipulation can be effective treatment.

[HuckleB]

73. Yes.

When I've gone to a physical therapist, he or she would explain the procedures, the exercises, the purpose, and the evidence base. Sometimes the evidence base is weak, but the PT noted that. The justification for trying the weakly supported exercise was in hope of avoiding a surgery. Interestingly, the PTs I have known, also note that sometimes injuries seem to get better with time on their own. I have never had those things acknowledged by someone espousing homeopathy, reiki, acupuncture, etc...

Those are some very different worlds.

[Odin2005]

105. What do you call a failed Physical Therapist? A Chiropractor.

:rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

111. Q. How many chiropractors does it take to change a lightbulb?

A. Only 1, but it takes 12 visits.

[Voice for Peace]

231. lol... but there are many good chiropractors who will see you once and charge almost nothing

and not even suggest you return. I've seen both kinds.

[HuckleB]

308. Baloney.

[eShirl]

134. I don't know, most of my massage school classmates seemed skeptical of the homeopathy presentation

I think we would have been considered by most people to have fairly open minds. It received about the same reception as iridology.

[woo me with science]

208. Quite the curriculum they're offering you there.

Do they tell you it's all shit? Is this a course on the scientific method and recognizing pseudoscience, I hope?

Please tell me you are not receiving federal aid for instruction in homeopathy and iridology. :wow:

[originalpckelly]

217. Physical therapy is real and massage is too.

It feels good to have someone massage you, I can probably prove to you with an fMRI how beneficial massage can be to you.

Chiropractors however are flim-flam artists like homeopathic folks.

[eridani]

266. PT and massage have scientifically demonstrated benefits

So does chiropractic, for certain back problems. Homeopathy does not.

[LeftishBrit]

305. Look...

could people PLEASE not equate support for modern medicine or distrust of alternative medicine with wanting 'Big Pharma' to make money?!

There are some people who are just interested in Big Pharma making money. Few of these would post on a board like DU. I am a big supporter of single-payer healthcare, and am very worried about my own current government's threats to the NHS, and horrified at the influence of the anti-public-healthcare lobbies, including the Pharma ones, in the USA.

You may think that those of us who prefer modern 'conventional' medicine are wrong or stupid; but please don't assume that we have corrupt motives.

Distrust of many aspects of conventional medicine is common among teabagger types and right-libertarians. Should I assume that because you support homeopathy, you must be a right-libertarian with a sympathy for teabagger sites? It would be just as fair as assuming that I must be a fan of 'Big Pharma' because I prefer conventional medicine.

And *who* does not believe in physical therapy?

[charlie]

307. Thanks

Well said. You're probably just shouting into the wind, but thanks for saying it.

[sufrommich]

160. You can find scientists who will claim that dinosaurs and humans

lived together too. That doesn't make it fact.

[Chemical Bill]

180. Homeopathy often works for me as well.

I use arnica for traumatic injuries. I gave some to a girlfriend who had broken her toe, and her father (a doctor) said that her toe healed twice as fast as breaks normally do. I also have a hard time with statements that offer blanket condemnation, as some here tend to do. Funny how closed minds (don't) work.

Bill

[KansasVoter]

190. Wow, con men love people like you. And "doctor" does not mean shit. Nice try.

[Chemical Bill]

197. Thank you. n/t

[Voice for Peace]

234. Why be so dismissive of this person? Does it add anything to your understanding?

[charlie]

200. Arnica is an herbal remedy

Unless you're using a preparation that's diluted to a fare-thee-well, ie, no longer contains a trace of arnica, it's not homeopathy.

[Chemical Bill]

205. .

If you define trace to include any physical part of the herb, then your statement is incorrect. Either something is diluted and it contains a trace or it contains no trace in which case it is not diluted.

Bill

[charlie]

207. Take it up with the homeopaths

They dilute their "medicines" to the point where the chance a single molecule of the original concoction remains is astronomically improbable.

Your arnica isn't homeopathic. It's an ordinary herbal salve.

[Chemical Bill]

276. By what method do you make the detirmination...

of the dilution that you state. GC? GC-MS? What is the detection limit?

Bill

[charlie]

280. Exponential dilution

Do you know about homeopathy? There's no need for detection equipment to determine the probability.

Dissolve 1 part substance in 100 parts solvent. Or 1000 parts, as some prefer. It won't make much difference in the end.

Extract 1 part from the dilution and add to another 100 parts solvent. Mix. Repeat 20, 40, 60, 100, 200 times. Or more. The more steps, the more potent it'll become.

It won't be long before it's statistically certain you're just mixing solvent with solvent.

[originalpckelly]

218. The methodology of homeopathy sounds patently ridiculous.

[Chemical Bill]

277. That is a judgement that has no scientific basis. n/t

[HuckleB]

283. Actually, it is the state of the science in regard to the scam known as homeopathy.

[Dorian Gray]

274. Arnica

isn't homeopathic. It's actually plant life, and that's different than homeopathic remedies.

[Chemical Bill]

278. Please explain. n/t

[Dorian Gray]

291. It's been explained to you in this thread...

Arnica is a plant. You are not getting a dilution that contains a miniscule amount of the substance. You are getting the herbal remedy.

Herbal medicines are not homeopathic. Many herbs are used in conventional medicine, and our bodies do react in different ways to herbs. I've used arnica for bruising. It seems to lessen the duration of bruises. (I bruise easily, especially when I was recently on blood thinners.)

[HuckleB]

242. It's painfully easy to trick the mind into seeing things that aren't there

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/03/bad-science-manipulate-mind-causality

[Voice for Peace]

246. I appreciate that you care about my well being and want to help me

but I am ok. If I'm a fool, at least I am
happy and I am healthy, and that can't be bad.
I don't pay war taxes, I live for peace and
truth and beauty. I do my best wherever and
however I can. Let's not debate these small things
any more.

[HuckleB]

249. If you didn't want to "debate," then why did you bother posting here?

:shrug:

[Voice for Peace]

251. I didn't realize what I was getting myself into.

Are you interested in changing your point of view? If not, what's the point for anyone to debate?

[HuckleB]

273. I am always interested in challenging my point of view, via viable evidence.

That does not appear to be something you care about, however.

[Voice for Peace]

281. ok. you win.

:fistbump:

[HuckleB]

284. I'm not interested in winning.

But if I've won, what do I win?

:evilgrin:

[charlie]

285. A million homeopathic bucks!

$1 million @ 1 googol percent inflation = less than pocket lint.

[Chemical Bill]

181. Link please. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

2. Go...

James Randi!

[blondeatlast]

3. Great idea. I have insulin dependent diabetes--and I'm just fine pumping insulin, TYVM,

homeopathic fans.

If I had a dollar for every homeopathic remedy that's been offered to me I could have a lovely spa weekend...

[eShirl]

4. I know what you mean...a relative would not leave my type I diabetic husband alone

"doctors are a scam! you need to try natural remedies!"

I don't get why they are so evangelical about it

[Mopar151]

221. Because admitting they are wrong

Is very hard for them - changing from a beleif in beleif to a beleif in fact means addmitting they have been full of shit for a major part of their lives.

[Joe Bacon]

5. I'm in the same boat

A friend told me to take Vanadium Sulfate like she did and I wouldn't need metformin.

She wound up in the ER with blood sugar so high her meter went off the scale.

[HuckleB]

6. K & R.

Stop consumer scams.

[RandomKoolzip]

9. Damn, I could just kiss James Randi.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[immoderate]

25. I will be seeing Randi Friday night.

FLASH, an atheist group, is presenting Darwin Day. Randi participates in our events, is showing for the reception dinner.

AronRa is the featured speaker.

BTW, I have seen Randi swallow two bottles of homeopathic sleeping pills. A funny routine.

Edit to add: Randi appears here in a promo for our event.
http://www.youtube.com/user/AronRa?blend=1&ob=5
If you are in South Florida next weekend drop in.

--imm

[MedicalAdmin]

51. Randi seems mostly about randi

Imho he's just another scammer who found a niche market. I've never seen a video, live presentation, or anything with him in it where he wasn't hawking his site, fundraising or his speakig services like some multi level marketer. The time I saw him live I thought I was in a revival meeting.

I have no opinion about the OP as I mostly see it flame bait.

I can't wait for the replies that ask about what I do or don't "beleive" about homeopathy. (shakes head sadly while contemplating appeals to authority the world over of all stripes and kinds).

[SDuderstadt]

55. How, specifically, is James Randi...

a scammer?

How is the OP "flame-bait"?

[MedicalAdmin]

286. Just my opinion, mate.

Just like my preference of Pinot Gris over Merlot. I prefer my facts raw ... others seem to like them with a side show. Whatever.

The OP is flamebait because these posts seem to all become flamebate and attract a minimum of discussion and a maximum of vitriol. My post for example.

[Fuddnik]

85. You haven't been watching very long, then.

James Randi has been debunking fake psychics and pseudoscientific fraud since before there was an internet. One of his most famous was Uri Geller back in the '70s. It takes a professional magician to expose another one, when they claim super powers.

Another one he got, was my former martial arts instructor from back in the early '70s. His name was Guy Savelli, and he claimed he could move objects with his mind. He was featured in the BOOK, "Men Who Stare at Goats", as the man who convinced some idiot Generals in the Pentagon that he could train them to walk through walls. And, he told them he could kill goats with his mind too.

[eridani]

267. Geez--good thing that Aferforth Dumbledore never found out about that

WElcome to DU.

[MedicalAdmin]

287. Fine. 2 examples from the 70's. Wow.

And I've attended 2 "events" hosted by the AMAZING RANDI - yada, yada, yada. They were about 10 years apart and both of them were like carnival barker sales events IMHO. Feel free to disagree.

I don't see him doing much more than maintaining his cult of personality, using the same old scams but applying them in new ways. I guess the guys gotta eat,, but I don't have to buy him a steak dinner.

Again, just my opinion.

[KansasVoter]

236. You are biased then, he is a great person for exposing scams.

[MedicalAdmin]

288. I daresay that we are all biased.

Don't you agree?

[immoderate]

258. Well I know him pretty well. Started following him over 30 years ago.

Over the years he's exposed scams and helped many people to embrace critical thinking. Didn't work on you though. It begs the question a bit to accuse an activist and show person of self promotion, doncha think? :shrug:

The Randi prize is real, and the tests are always suggested and agreed to by the subjects. The problem is that professional scammers like cold readers, and homeopathy purveyors, won't submit to the test. They know they can't pass, and it will cut their income. Many of the applications are from severely deluded people, who really believe they have super powers. Like the guy who hitch hiked from Mexico and had only an empty suitcase for the million dollars he would win. His claim: He could make himself invisible. Most of these claims are very sad, and caused suspension of the prize, by Randi. It was brought back by popular demand and the underwriters, but Randi doesn't personally take part any longer. The JREF runs it.

If you understand Avagadro's Number, the validity of homeopathy is a moot question. The placebo effect can be very strong, even when you know you're taking a placebo.

Your last sentence has a lewdly dangling participle, and too late to edit. Darn. Whose head is it that is doing the contemplating?

--imm

[MedicalAdmin]

289. It's not lewdly dangling. It's more like the dandling that dare not mention it's name.

While I appreciate the work Sr. Randi has done in the abstract, I don't have to like the way he seems to have gone about ... and I don't. He's a guru, whether intentional or not.

I am tempted to ask if you "believe" in avogadro's number, but I know better. As for homeopathy, we don't use it at our clinic, but at least we sent a staff member to learn enough about it to at least discuss it intelligently for reasons having to do with the number of questions we were getting from patients. It seemed a responsible thing to do rather than just say to patients "gee, we don't know anything about it but it must be bunk." Our conclusion is that it may very well be the placebo effect, but given that the placebo effect is more efficacious than some pharmaceuticals for certain conditions we are content to tell those patients that think they are getting help from them that it is OK to keep using them as long as we can continue to monitor their progress and as a part of our overall treatment.

My "beef" if you want to call it that is not with critical thinking, which I try to embrace when not drinking rum, but rather with the methods. It is a complain of style rather than substance. I hope this clarification helps, er, clarify my previous inadequite post.

[immoderate]

292. I admit that when I see a dangling participle, I go for the throat.

I actually had to "count" Avagadro's number as a freshman chemistry student, many years ago. So I've been on the ground there. A better question would be if I believe in atoms. No one has ever seen one. It's only a hypothetical model that changes frequently. Leptons and bosons could be forest creatures that vanish when you look at them. (And if you order from Schroedinger's Pizza it both has and doesn't have anchovies until you open the box.)

To ascribe curative powers to homeopathic preparations, based on typical dilutions, and the rational for picking therapeutic agents, strains any credulity.

I am aware of the placebo effect. Placebos even have an effect on subjects that know they are taking placebos. And if it helps to call the sugar pills homeopathy, that's fine. But they shouldn't cost more than TicTacs, should they?

BTW, I've seen Randi chug two bottles of homeopathic sleeping pills to start a lecture. Is that the stylistic presentation you're objecting to?

--imm

[MedicalAdmin]

294. That old canard? It's BS.

Criminy. If Mr. Randi wants to make a point fine, but how about a point that at least reports what is printed on the box. Go to a store and lick up one of the boxes that Randi "bravely" swallows. Read it. He claims that the box claims to be a powerful sophoric. It doesn't.

If premise A is false and premise A is the basis for premise B, then is it likely that premise B is also false? THAT is my issue. And this example gets brought up by his fans, whom I now dub Randites, every time I chat with one them. And it drives me nuts. It's a freakishly and obviously bad example. And it's another example of the side show showmanship that I dislike about Randi.

The efficacy of homeopathy is beside the point when the example used to disprove it is full of shit.


Snort, grrrrrr, growl, bitch, moan, complain. I'll get off my pet soap box. Sorry about that. I'm feeling all rantish this morning. Must get coffee. Must get coffee.

[immoderate]

301. I never heard him make any claims that weren't on the box.

He just said they were homeopathic sleeping pills. And he demonstrated that they don't do anything. Straw man, anyone?

I don't know what A and B are. I know these facts: The "active ingredient" is unlikely to be present in the preparation, and said reactant has no relation to the disease to begin with. No independent study has validated the efficacy of these preparations.

Your complaint is that Randi is a showman. That's why you've heard of him. I bet you didn't complain when he was escaping from straight jackets. If he was a librarian, who would keep his mouth shut about these scams, you would be OK. But his activism puts you on the spot.

--imm

[MedicalAdmin]

302. Well, no...

Not really. It isn't his activism that puts me on the spot, it was the OP.

Question: did you read the box? But I went out and purchased one of the boxes that he swallows (for about 3 bucks - less than a latte) and it doesn't say anywhere on it that taking too much will put you to sleep. He is purposfully using incongruent pharmacological warning, which don't appear on the box, to make a point. It's classic misdirection - and the chumps love it. It's a false congruency where one doesn't exist. Don't take offence at the term chump as it's an old carny term for customer and given Randi's background he is well aware of his customer base/chumps.

Again, I have no problems with skepticism or empirical data. I am, in fact, a fan of such. However, I don't like Randi. His methods are more than a little reminiscent of revival meeting and vaudville shows. I can't say I ever saw his "magic show" and the only reason I ever heard about him is because he is promoted, in methods that much in common with multi level marketing, through sites that I visit and through people who should know better.

He's found his audience and his niche. He milks it. I get that. If you and others dig that, I'm cool with that. But I don't have to be a fan and I'm not one any more than I admire Snooky.

You want to make a case against homeopathy, then I would suggest that Randi is not an example to emulate if you want to be taken seriously.

[SDuderstadt]

303. I don't believe...

you've got the slightest idea who you're talking about.

[MedicalAdmin]

304. Nope - saw him live.

It's personal preference, as I've stated. If you like him, great. That's your preference. I don't. And yes I've caught his "act" twice after being invited by people I know. Same schtick, different day. Bleh.

Don't get upset. I just don't like him and feel that he does the efforts of efficacy no favors. That is just my opinion. Why do you care and what does it matter what I think? It has no bearing and no effect on my job or the performance thereof. Patients mention him and I just say that I have seen him twice and redirect the conversation. It's not germain to what I do.

I get the stong feeling that alot of his fans would just rather that I, and anyone with my opinion, just shut up. I won't do that, but I will consider the value of another post like my first one. While not flame bait, it was of dubious value in a post that was, IMO, fan oriented.

[cali]

38. For years, my primary care physician was a homeopathic doctor

he was also a graduate of Harvard Medical School. Kind of a nut, but a good guy and a good neighbor. And actually, quite a good doc. He even made house calls when my son was little.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anamandujano]

44. and big phama garbage never enriched or killed anyone.

You forgot to add that.

[FLAprogressive]

46. And here come the "big pharma" red herrings.

[The Straight Story]

84. I would not call it red herrings

Just because something was created in a lab and has science studies behind it does not mean it works and is good for you. It can be more harmful, that can be covered up, and profit made off of the gullible who believe the big companies making it.

Also - please note the following: The same drug affects many people in different ways, the same can be said of 'alternative' medicines.

I don't have a dog in this fight (I don't buy many meds, vodka is cheaper and cures all....) but I think the idea here is that the same arguments one uses can be mirrored back.

I don't trust something from a lab just because some guy in a suit says it works. And I am not about to trust some tea because some hippie in CA says it cured his blindness :)

[HuckleB]

93. When it is used to defend or justify homeopathy, it is a red herring

No one is talking about trusting anything blindly.

[anamandujano]

309. Love your in depth arguments

which can be dismissed as quickly as you type them.

[SDuderstadt]

47. "Big pharma garbage"

LOL.

[blondeatlast]

96. I'll continue to support Novo Pharmaceuticals by using insulin.

I know, I'm supporting Big Corpo and I'm sure you've got some remedy that can replace insulin. go ahead, sell me on it.

[derby378]

71. Some of you would salivate at my collection of homeopathic books and journals

Yes, that includes some antique bound volumes of Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy sitting on my shelf. I also have some old correspondence from Frederick Humphreys and a few old Munyon's bottles, most of them still containing pills. I even have an unopened bottle of Chionia.

I find the history of homeopathy fascinating, but the science behind homeopathy dubious at best. Expecting some immaterial essence to restore health to your body by tweaking your "vital force" is a concept that nobody has ever successfully demonstrated to my knowledge. Same goes for this whole "memory of water" craze.

[eridani]

268. The history is pretty fascinating. Back in the 19th century, so many remedies

--were actively dangerous that homeopathy looked good by comparison. If it didn't cure you, at least it wouldn't hurt you.

[derby378]

290. I've got one prime example for you - from my homeopathy book project

I hold the copyright on this, so if you want to reproduce this elsewhere, please ask me first. :hi:

The Philadelphia Medical Times featured an editorial in its January 23, 1875 issue in which the editors supported legislation to reign in the dealings of incompetent doctors and medical quacks, whom the editors described as "richer in ambition than in money or conscience." One such practitioner, who plied his trade with an "Eclectic" diploma in hand, discussed with the Medical Times editors a case of enteritis that produced a partial bowel obstruction:

Professor, I am no homeopath; I am a regular physician. I am no dealer in infinitesimals. I treat actively. This man wanted his bowels open. I was bound they should be opened, and, by our father Æsculapius, they have been.

The eclectic then described the regimen he administered to the patient: 120 grains of "blue pill," half an ounce of turpentine, and 28 drops of croton oil, followed by blistering and cupping. But when the editors of the Medical Times encountered the enteritis patient, they beheld a man in extreme pain with a thready pulse of 150, a severe blister over his abdomen, and cups placed over the raw surface, some of them producing blood. He had ingested almost twice the minimum lethal dose of croton oil at the behest of his eclectic physician, not to mention that the "blue pill" was probably a mercury compound of some sort. The doomed patient's three children and his wife, who was again pregnant, could only watch helplessly as he slowly passed away in agony.

(c) 2011 by Daniel Barnett. All rights reserved. Permission granted to reprint this excerpt on democraticunderground.com.

Unfortunately, there were a lot of these soulless freaks running around conducting their butchery in the guise of "medical science," and that only served to strengthen the case of the homeopathic schools.

I have no idea when I'll finish this book - might take me the rest of my life, but I'm working on it.

[Fuddnik]

78. K&R

Take to the frauds Randi!

[Vickers]

79. Dude needs an eyebrow trim. n/t

[Fuddnik]

88. Maybe he'll trim them when he finds a homeopathic remedy that works.

[BuddhaGirl]

116. LOL

He seems rather unbalanced, too. He has never paid out the million dollars - he controls the "challenge" details, after all. :eyes:

[SDuderstadt]

119. WTF?

The controls are agreed to by the claimant and are refereed by mutually agreeable scientists.

[HuckleB]

124. You expect proponents of homeopathy to recognize that reality?

:evilgrin:

[Blue-Jay]

147. Heh. You used "homeopathy" & "reality" in the same sentence.

It could be the first time that's ever happened.

[sufrommich]

163. "He has never paid out the million dollars "

Yeah, there's a reason for that. :eyes:

[BuddhaGirl]

178. and he will never do so

it's not in his be$t intere$t ;-)

[immoderate]

259. Well, first it's not his money. It's an endowment. He is neutral.

The money was put up by a billionaire years ago. It's like Vegas. Payout is good. Who do you think will win it? a fortune teller? dowser? phrenologist? numerologist? You get to design your own test!

Remember that Randi exposed Uri Geller, who in case you forgot, scammed major universities, ran circles around the defense department, and was covered as news. And he exposed Peter Popoff, who was running a faith healing wire scam. Popoff stole millions from sick and desperate people. Randi put him out of business, at least for a while.

As I explained elsewhere, professionals, like cold readers and homeopaths, won't submit to testing. No possible gain for them. Randi knows they're a scam, and they know that he knows. Most of the people who do try are deluded. They believe they have super powers. Most of the applications are illiterate and show disorganized thinking. It's sad. Randi leaves the prize stuff to the foundation.

There's a video floating around of a woman showing up to claim the million who has the power to make people pee by staring at them. She was one of the more sane ones. (She might have had that effect on her kids.:shrug: )

You think you have a shot? Can you do better than the woman who sells self hypnosis for breast enlargement? :)

--imm

[NYC Liberal]

114. I'd like someone who thinks the homeopathy nonsense works

to explain exactly and scientifically HOW it works -- beyond just "I think it does."

[WingDinger]

121. For instance, Med. Marijuana causes cotton mouth, and stops nausea.

That is known by most young people, and they dont need evidence. Is Med. Mar. homeo?

[HuckleB]

126. Marijuana is not homeopathy, unless you choose to dilute it to the point...

... where nearly no to absolutely no marijuana is in the supposed medication.

[WingDinger]

136. Why is that?

[trotsky]

165. Google "homeopathy" and read.

You will see that "homeopathy" is not equal to herbs/supplements/etc.

[HuckleB]

250. .

http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/a-kind-of-magic/

[Confusious]

293. Well, any homeopthic remedy will cure cottenmouth.

And dry mouth, and thirst. So it does cure something.

Don't take the pills though, it has to be liquid form.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[NYC Liberal]

137. But I can go and read about the science behind it. It has been

studied and written about in peer-reveiwed scientific journals.

What is the scientific explanation for what homeopathy is and how and why it works?

[WingDinger]

145. There is no motivation to study any drug you cannot patent.

THAT, ia why you cannot read anything. Only Gov. does those kinds of studies.

[NYC Liberal]

153. Ok, so explain it. How does homeopathy work? nt

[cleanhippie]

193. uh, ok.

:tinfoilhat:

[WingDinger]

146. Obviously, the placebo effect is prominent in many instances.

And yet, as I stated elsewhere, MOST REAL SCIENCE DRUGS, are simply natural compounds, that have been synthesized.

[NYC Liberal]

154. Yes, natural compounds do have real effects.

But homeopathy is not simply "natural compounds" - you know that.

[cleanhippie]

192. Placebo effect, thats how it works.

The British NIH conducted a 10 year study and found that homeopathic remedies perform no better than placebos do. Its all psychological, nothing more.

[NYC Liberal]

196. Here's an NIH study for you:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20129180

CONCLUSIONS: Placebo effects in RCTs on classical homeopathy did not appear to be larger than placebo effects in conventional medicine.

Big whoop.

[cleanhippie]

202. Here is the actual British study. They dropped it as an approved treatment for anything

because it doesnt work.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4502.htm

You can deny the science all you want, but you only make yourself look foolish.

[cleanhippie]

203. Hahahaha! Fail. Thats not an NIH study, its a study by "The Faculty of Homeopathy"!

:rofl:

even the related citations link to studies that homeopathy to be unsubstantiated.


Hahahahahahahahahahaha!

[NYC Liberal]

223. Dude, I'm agreeing with you and Randi that homeopathy

is bullshit! My link was to show that homeopathy is bullshit because at best it is just a "placebo effect" no stronger than the one in real medicine. Except real medicine actually works beyond just a placebo effect.

PLEASE don't think I'm defending homeopathy or using that link to do so. Although if I was...your post would be an entirely appropriate response ;)

[cleanhippie]

248. So sorry, I thought you were.

My apologies.

[NYC Liberal]

255. No worries, like I said...

totally appropriate response if I had been :)

[FLAprogressive]

148. Medical marijuana is certainly not homeopathic.

[cleanhippie]

191. No, its not, because there are actual molecules of cannabis affecting your brain

and causing those symptoms. Med Pot actually contains substances, homeopathic remedies are sugar water/sugar pills and contain nothing at all.

[LeftishBrit]

295. Medical marijuana is certainly not homeopathy

Medical marijuana contains an active substance, which does often help with nausea, and for example enable people to tolerate chemotherapy.

Homeopathy doesn't contain an active substance; or it's so diluted as to be essentially inactive.

The one good thing about homeopathy is that it doesn't have side effects, except that of preventing people from seeking really effective treatments for serious disorders. But you can hardly equate such an intert substance with an active drug such as marijuana.

[madinmaryland]

139. Perfect! They have no clue and even deny what they are taking is

anything more than a sugar pill.

[NYC Liberal]

140. I especially love the warnings on the back. LOL!

Sadly, scientific ignorance is not limited to right-wingers.

Homeopathic emergency room - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0

[blondeatlast]

151. LOL! Thanks; that's great! nt

[progressoid]

275. Two homeopathic lagers please.

:spray:

[Desertrose]

125. Oh dear...not Randi again. nt

[SDuderstadt]

129. No one expects science-deniers...

to accept James Randi.

[woo me with science]

132. They are purists.

They won't even take his money. :rofl:

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

[Blue-Jay]

135. Or....

The Spanish Inquisition!



(hey, somebody had to do it)

[Desertrose]

164. ..

:rofl:

oooohhhhh..."science denier".
Your labeling of me cuts me to my very core.
:sarcasm:


So you accept and "believe" everything James Randi and any others who reinforce your worldview say, yet deny the possibility of anything beyond that.

Somehow I'm guessing you don't see the humor in that.

[BuddhaGirl]

182. Randi lacks a science background

and was quite the huckster back in the day! :evilgrin:

[Desertrose]

187. Back in the day.....?

Some interesting articles that I'm sure this crowd will love. :evilgrin:








Faking scientific data and failing to report commercial conflicts of interest are far more prevalent than previously thought, a study suggests.

The study included scientists from a range of disciplines. Misconduct was far more frequently admitted by medical or pharmacological researchers than others, supporting fears that the field of medical research is being biased by commercial interests.

[cleanhippie]

194. What do you mean?

Whats wrong with James Randi?

[Dappleganger]

142. Homeopathy is not real science.

Another reason why Rand is a fraud.

[SDuderstadt]

144. Huh?

Are you accusing Randi of being a fraud because he exposes the pseudoscience of homeopathy?

[Blue-Jay]

150. I assumed Ayn Rand or Rand Paul.

Nobody calls James Randi "Rand". He'll cut ya for that.

[sufrommich]

159. I love James Randi, he cuts through the woo bullshit

without mercy.

[MadHound]

161. How about this,

How about letting people use the medicines and methods that they want to in order to treat their own personal health problems without somebody else trying to shove their ideology down their throats?

I know, novel concept.

[sufrommich]

167. Science is an ideology? I thought only creationists tried to

use that convoluted logic.

[MadHound]

169. Umm, did I say that science is an ideology? No, I didn't, so please stop shoving words in my mouth

But thanks for demonstrating the sort of mindset I was referring to in such a perfect manner.

[sufrommich]

173. Then what "ideology" are you talking about? Here's your quote:

"without somebody else trying to shove their ideology down their throats?"

[MadHound]

176. Their ideology about what does and doesn't work for their personal health problems,

Any other questions?

[cleanhippie]

198. Well, the science says it works no better than a placebo does and that it is a fraud

Any other questions?

[MadHound]

269. Well, unlike you, I don't put too much faith in commercial science,

It has led us down the garden path before, or have you forgotten thalidomide babies, DDT, and the numerous other things that commercial science said was either good for us, or not good for us.

Certain, non-profit scientific conclusions are worth believing, but you need to be leery of anything to do with science when big money is involved. Commercial science turns out to be just as fallible and any other faith.

[HuckleB]

272. It's the only "faith" I've found that actually challenges itself, and never rests on set beliefs.

That's actually what makes it something that is not a faith, unlike a belief in homeopathy, for example.

[LeftishBrit]

298. Fine; but the problem is that many of the homeopaths and others try to impose THEIR ideology

And insist that conventional medicine is a scam; that we shouldn't be using it; that anyone who does is a supporter of 'Big Pharma'; and in some cases, that government-provided healthcare is a form of tyranny.

Not all do; and some people take homeopathic medicine in conjunction with conventional medicine - IMO they're wasting their money, but if they think it makes them feel better that's entirely their business. But it is the anti-conventional-medicine warriors who worry me.

[BuddhaGirl]

168. +1

how *democratic* of you :-)

I cannot understand how people get so completely exercised by something that is approved by the FDA, sold in the U.S. legally, as well as the rest of the world.

Live and let live.

[HuckleB]

214. So you think all scams should be made legal?

If not, why the hypocrisy?

[MadHound]

270. Scientific scams like thalidomide, DDT and the current crop of psychotropic drugs are, sadly, legal

I see no hypocrisy in advocating the continued legality of alternative medical practices if we're going to continue to let the scam of commercial science flourish. I believe that one good scam requires competition, not a monopoly.

[progressoid]

279. Hahahaha.

"I believe that one good scam requires competition, not a monopoly."

So you're admitting that homeopathy is a scam then.

OK.

[Voice for Peace]

235. lol... a novel concept indeed

[KansasVoter]

238. You can do what you want. But we can point out it is stupid if we want.

[BuddhaGirl]

263. "stupid"

is your opinion ;-}

[HuckleB]

244. Hmmmmmmm.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/03/bad-science-manipulate-mind-causality

[KansasVoter]

171. People are stupid. Do not understand the placebo effect!

[cleanhippie]

188. Or that "personal experiences" do not mean anything when compared to the data

[KansasVoter]

189. So true.

[CanSocDem]

195. About the placebo effect...

Where were you a year or so ago when it was revealed that a high percentage of doctors regularly prescribe the metaphorical "sugar pill".

I noticed that you're at a loss to explain the science of homeopathy. How about the science of the placebo effect...??? Got anything...????

.

[cleanhippie]

199. Yes, its all psycological. IOW, its in your head.

And I am not at a loss to explain anything, especially the "science" of homeopathy, since it is not "science" at all. Therefore, there is nothing to explain but the placebo effect. Here let me help you out...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo

Oh, and in case you are wondering if there have been any scientific studies on homeopathy, you are in luck. The British NHS dropped homeopathy as an approved treatment for anything after a 10 year study that found it doesn't work.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4502.htm

[CanSocDem]

201. Oh really...

Maybe its the 'condition' thats all in your head. But don't take my word for it...you have a multi-million dollar industry in the business of telling you you are sick. Go with that.

Read Ivan Illich. Start with Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health.

.

[cleanhippie]

204. Are you changing the subject?

You may be right that the "condition" isn't a condition at all, but that has NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. Lets stay with that, ok?

Do you DISAGREE that the placebo effect and the "effect" on gets from a homeopathic remedy is all psychological? If so, why?

[CanSocDem]

206. Nice try.

But no...we're still talking about "effects".

"Do you DISAGREE that the placebo effect and the "effect" on gets from a homeopathic remedy is all psychological?"

I would go so far as to say, IMO, all 'effects' are psychological. Have you heard of 'hypnosis?? It has amazing 'effects'.

[cleanhippie]

209. Well then, you would be wrong.

I would go so far as to say, IMO, all 'effects' are psychological.

Science has shown, repeatedly, that this is not the case. But lets stay on homeopathy. Are you saying that homeopathy is a valid treatment?

[CanSocDem]

210. If it works...I'd say ANY treatment is valid. (eom)

[cleanhippie]

211. But it doesnt work, thats the point.

If a person who is taking a homeopathic remedy feels that it is "working for them", and that remedy is replaced with sugar water without their knowledge, they will continue to think it is "working". That means that it is NOT the homeopathic remedy that is "working" but instead it is the psychological effect known as "placebo". Its not the homeopathy, its all in the persons mind.

[cleanhippie]

212. So you approve of people getting scammed out of their money?

If they want to sell sugar water/sugar pills as a homeopathic remedy, then it needs to be disclosed that is is sugar water/sugar pills, and charged accordingly. People are paying a lot of money for what they think is "medicine" and it is anything but. You approve of this practice?

[blondeatlast]

213. Yeah, my non-functioning pancreas has been all in my head since age 7--before I had

any idea I even had a pancreas.

I'll stick with Big Pharma, thank you.

[Odin2005]

224. What a very insulting post.

Yes, My Asperger's is all a figment of my imagination. What utter BULLSHIT.

[CanSocDem]

271. You're insulted...???

Why? Because I don't agree with you? I must have missed the memo that made you special.

Anyway, despite what you think...this isn't about you. Everybody experiences their own reality and yours is about a medical condition that ModernMedicineInc. hasn't solved. You could move past this in any number of ways, but you choose to harass me and my experience instead.

How does this help you? Try to resist claiming that it's all about 'the public good' and your altruistic desire to save people from 'wasting' their money. Fact is, in a free-market health industry, such claims are simply ludicrous. It's like saying the trillions of $$$ you spend on the military is justified by killing Saddam Hussein.

The military, like the medical industry, is all about self preservation. Do you understand this...??? Start looking at the REAL goals of industry. Industry doesn't care about you, no matter what you think. Their goals are about serving mass populations...and, most importantly about sustaining their market share.

I'm dismayed that a 'progressive' message board such as this, tolerates the very institutions that are responsible for regressive policies that are clearly against human values such as good health and economic stability, to name just two.

From my perspective, defending modern medicine on the basis that it is basic science is utter bullshit. It's an industry that browbeats its' consumers into submission. And it's always right out front when competitors appear, with the outrageous claim that they are ignorant of "science" and rational thought. I'd be insulted if I wasn't so confident in my own beliefs and if I didn't understand the nature of propaganda and the culture of the free market.


.

[HuckleB]

233. There is no...

... "science of homeopathy."

Goodness.

[KansasVoter]

237. I saw Randi do a talk on quack medicine (homeopathy) and he took a whole bottle of...

GNC "homeopathy" Sleeping pills. 30 tablets and then talked for 2 hours.

WOW, he didn't fall a sleep!

Who would have thought it?

[charlie]

241. Homeopathy saved Billy Joel's daughter's life

She tried to kill herself with homeopathic sleeping pills.

[KansasVoter]

245. Wow, didn't know that. Glad it failed!

[cleanhippie]

247. I don't think I would classify that as "saving" here life.

Perhaps her own ignorance was the culprit?

[HuckleB]

239. The end of homeopathy?

http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/a-kind-of-magic/

[FLAprogressive]

253. Unfortunately nothing will keep people from buying it aside from an outright ban. They will continue

to believe. After all, the naysayers are part of the Big Pharma Conspiracy.....

[Tunkamerica]

257. I was just going to post that

here's the blog link:

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/jref-news/1208-feb5video.html

[Ian David]

296. I want James Randi to do a weekly show with Randi Rhodes. Call it, "Randi and Randi."