Homeopathy a lot of poppycock? Preferable to other activities involving herbal preparations and needles, such as being a heroin addict prostitute, which is more poppy 'n' cock.
Laugh all you want matey.......it's all down to being your choice in such matters.
Choice should be informed choice. A good GP will let you know the possible side effects of medication before prescribing.
Similarly a homoeopathic practitioner should warn you that their "remedy" may not have any beneficial effect because it contains no active ingredients whatsoever (but at least no side effects).
Mum was trained by the NHS is the 90s (she was a reg physio)
I can not remember whether they were trialling it within the NHS or not, but my mum certainly believed it was a valid method of pain relief.
I do not know whether the NHS use it today but the jury certainly seems to still be out as to the validity of it.
Regarding acapuncture, I was surprised that my GP recommended it to me recently for sinus problems. I haven't tried it so far but he was confident that it is beneficial for this condition.
Choice should be informed choice. A good GP will let you know the possible side effects of medication before prescribing.
Similarly a homoeopathic practitioner should warn you that their "remedy" may not have any beneficial effect because it contains no active ingredients whatsoever (but at least no side effects).
Regarding acapuncture, I was surprised that my GP recommended it to me recently for sinus problems. I haven't tried it so far but he was confident that it is beneficial for this condition.
I had acupuncture, on the NHS after a car accident and resulting injuries. It went warm and stayed warm for a whole day. no pain.
It worked for me, doesn't mean it works for everyone, but I've tried TENS, felbinac gel, and I get regular steroid injections. Acupuncture worked best, for me anyway.
I take it you haven't had the experience of one or more of your parents being in such a position then.
One doctor prescribes this, another one comes in and prescribes that, then another doctor comes in and questions the use of the previous two doctor's prescription and so prescribes something to counteract the effects of those . ........and on and on it goes.
Although some herbal remedies are based on the same concept of like treating like. The problem is we cannot currently conceive of how a dilute could work.
No, the problem is that, if homeopathy was anything more than a placebo, we would be able to see that effect conistently in trials.
It doesn't matter HOW homeopathy works. It matters IF it works. And for any treatment, working means 'better than placebo'. And homeopathy fails that test.
Any proposed mechanism is irrelevant until we have shown there is an effect to explain. Right now, homeopathy just shows us we don't understand the placebo effect, its mechanism, or how powerful it can be.
Why can't people just delude themselves better? Why do they need to first imagine that it's something to do with drinking water?
I find it quite sad that some don't have enough imagination to delude themselves and actually have to fool themselves into yet another nonsense belief system first.
It really is quite tragic. No wonder religion is still doing a roaring trade with this sort of dark age thinking still being pedalled as valid and normal.
After a heavy night out on the beer etc.and you're feeling like sheeite next morning, take Nux. Vom.(homeopathic) and then see if you think it's poppycock.
and here is an explanation about how homoeopathy works, at the same time as showing how e does not equal mc2
re writing Einstein's theory.
This lady is supposed to medically trained!!!!
Why can't people just delude themselves better? Why do they need to first imagine that it's something to do with drinking water?
I find it quite sad that some don't have enough imagination to delude themselves and actually have to fool themselves into yet another nonsense belief system first.
It really is quite tragic. No wonder religion is still doing a roaring trade with this sort of dark age thinking still being pedalled as valid and normal.
What has religion got to do with it?
I, for one have NO religious belief and would say that Religion "IS" "poppycock"
Homoeopathy is based on a principle of a substance, that is "known" to cause a bad effect in large doses, may, (in diluted doses) have the benefit of relieving such similar symptoms. What is wrong with that principle? Can you prove that it doesn't work?
As regards the overused and little understood term of placebo, I suspect that a sugar pill labelled as Paracetamol would, in some people, be seen as doing the job.
The amount of people you see coming out of the chemists, with their weekly prescription in paper bags, thinking they've got something to satisfy their ills, is laughable.
All I said in the first instance, was, to try (at your own discretion), a remedy that "may" overcome certain symptoms. The particular remedy I mentioned, has certainly worked for me in the past. That is all the evidence I need and I think I'm certainly intelligent enough not to be fooled by placebo, but I make no claim of a cure.
However, to add, I do NOT use "homoeopathy" in preference to a serious prescription from my GP. Though I do use a system of medication based on similar thinking because I'm capable of making my own choice (at this moment) in these decisions, which is not the case of the incapacitated elderly who are pumped drug after drug on the basis of a pharmaceutical data sheet.
Over the years I have paid out for homeopathy. Liverpool. Mersey Care operate a clinic in a local health centre. My GP was happy to refer me there for treatment for Arthritus, Cellulitis infections and now for hypertension.
No, the problem is that, if homeopathy was anything more than a placebo, we would be able to see that effect conistently in trials.
It doesn't matter HOW homeopathy works. It matters IF it works. And for any treatment, working means 'better than placebo'. And homeopathy fails that test.
Any proposed mechanism is irrelevant until we have shown there is an effect to explain. Right now, homeopathy just shows us we don't understand the placebo effect, its mechanism, or how powerful it can be.
So I didn't say it works just that we don't know, and the concept on which it is based is believable. We don't know enough about how the body heals itself. Some pharmaceuticals seem to help the problem short term but cause problems long term.
So I didn't say it works just that we don't know, and the concept on which it is based is believable. We don't know enough about how the body heals itself. Some pharmaceuticals seem to help the problem short term but cause problems long term.
So I didn't say it works just that we don't know, and the concept on which it is based is believable. We don't know enough about how the body heals itself. Some pharmaceuticals seem to help the problem short term but cause problems long term.
I know we have disussed this before Bolly, but my point is that homeopathy claims impact beyond placebo - which han't been substantiated. As such, I think such a claim should be illegal (as it would be for a traditional treatment making claims without proper evidence (i.e not just anecdote)).
How it may work is not important, until such time as we establish that it does work.
As for the ideas having merit - 'like curing like' is an intersting idea, but the memory of water (and only remembering the beneficial molecules) is where most people struggle with the merit.
I would agree we don't know enough about how the body heals itself, and that all is not rosy in the world of pharma. However, what failings there are there are no reason to give other areas a free pass.
Homoeopathy is based on a principle of a substance that is "known" to cause a bad effect in large doses, may, (in diluted doses) have the benefit of relieving such similar symptoms. What is wrong with that principle? Can you prove that it doesn't work?
It's not up to the sceptics to prove it doesn't work. It's up to homeopaths to prove it DOES work. As with any medical treatment.
As to what's wrong with the principle - there i no evidence to say that it's true. Anecdote is not evidence. Anecdote just tells us there may be an effect to investigate - and in this case it's the placebo effect.
After a heavy night out on the beer etc.and you're feeling like sheeite next morning, take Nux. Vom.(homeopathic) and then see if you think it's poppycock.
It may well work fine, placebo is very powerful.
If it makes you feel better then that is fine for a hangover and no reason you should stop using it. The issues around homoeopathy are to do with taking money from real treatment and using it for serious problems when proper treatment should be used.
The Thalidomide fiasco is what started the modern practice of many many years of rigorous testing.
Back then, medicine testing was no-where near as rigorous as it is today.
Comments
Choice should be informed choice. A good GP will let you know the possible side effects of medication before prescribing.
Similarly a homoeopathic practitioner should warn you that their "remedy" may not have any beneficial effect because it contains no active ingredients whatsoever (but at least no side effects).
Regarding acapuncture, I was surprised that my GP recommended it to me recently for sinus problems. I haven't tried it so far but he was confident that it is beneficial for this condition.
Tell that to such people in a Nursing Home.
This makes absolutely no sense.
I had acupuncture, on the NHS after a car accident and resulting injuries. It went warm and stayed warm for a whole day. no pain.
It worked for me, doesn't mean it works for everyone, but I've tried TENS, felbinac gel, and I get regular steroid injections. Acupuncture worked best, for me anyway.
I take it you haven't had the experience of one or more of your parents being in such a position then.
One doctor prescribes this, another one comes in and prescribes that, then another doctor comes in and questions the use of the previous two doctor's prescription and so prescribes something to counteract the effects of those . ........and on and on it goes.
Sorry, this is going off topic.
No, the problem is that, if homeopathy was anything more than a placebo, we would be able to see that effect conistently in trials.
It doesn't matter HOW homeopathy works. It matters IF it works. And for any treatment, working means 'better than placebo'. And homeopathy fails that test.
Any proposed mechanism is irrelevant until we have shown there is an effect to explain. Right now, homeopathy just shows us we don't understand the placebo effect, its mechanism, or how powerful it can be.
I find it quite sad that some don't have enough imagination to delude themselves and actually have to fool themselves into yet another nonsense belief system first.
It really is quite tragic. No wonder religion is still doing a roaring trade with this sort of dark age thinking still being pedalled as valid and normal.
see below for how homoeopathy does not work
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKu5yXLKcok
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd7IUJv_Fvw
and here is an explanation about how homoeopathy works, at the same time as showing how e does not equal mc2
re writing Einstein's theory.
This lady is supposed to medically trained!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0c5yClip4o&feature=related
What has religion got to do with it?
I, for one have NO religious belief and would say that Religion "IS" "poppycock"
Homoeopathy is based on a principle of a substance, that is "known" to cause a bad effect in large doses, may, (in diluted doses) have the benefit of relieving such similar symptoms. What is wrong with that principle? Can you prove that it doesn't work?
As regards the overused and little understood term of placebo, I suspect that a sugar pill labelled as Paracetamol would, in some people, be seen as doing the job.
The amount of people you see coming out of the chemists, with their weekly prescription in paper bags, thinking they've got something to satisfy their ills, is laughable.
All I said in the first instance, was, to try (at your own discretion), a remedy that "may" overcome certain symptoms. The particular remedy I mentioned, has certainly worked for me in the past. That is all the evidence I need and I think I'm certainly intelligent enough not to be fooled by placebo, but I make no claim of a cure.
However, to add, I do NOT use "homoeopathy" in preference to a serious prescription from my GP. Though I do use a system of medication based on similar thinking because I'm capable of making my own choice (at this moment) in these decisions, which is not the case of the incapacitated elderly who are pumped drug after drug on the basis of a pharmaceutical data sheet.
Works for me. Each to there own I suppose.
So I didn't say it works just that we don't know, and the concept on which it is based is believable. We don't know enough about how the body heals itself. Some pharmaceuticals seem to help the problem short term but cause problems long term.
Actually, in my student days when I was wont to frequent bars of an evening, that actually did work.
A very sensible analysis.
I know we have disussed this before Bolly, but my point is that homeopathy claims impact beyond placebo - which han't been substantiated. As such, I think such a claim should be illegal (as it would be for a traditional treatment making claims without proper evidence (i.e not just anecdote)).
How it may work is not important, until such time as we establish that it does work.
As for the ideas having merit - 'like curing like' is an intersting idea, but the memory of water (and only remembering the beneficial molecules) is where most people struggle with the merit.
I would agree we don't know enough about how the body heals itself, and that all is not rosy in the world of pharma. However, what failings there are there are no reason to give other areas a free pass.
It's not up to the sceptics to prove it doesn't work. It's up to homeopaths to prove it DOES work. As with any medical treatment.
As to what's wrong with the principle - there i no evidence to say that it's true. Anecdote is not evidence. Anecdote just tells us there may be an effect to investigate - and in this case it's the placebo effect.
I think that would cure obesity rather than hunger.
Still poppycock of course.
Does homoeopathic medicine?
You're better off sticking with science.
It may well work fine, placebo is very powerful.
If it makes you feel better then that is fine for a hangover and no reason you should stop using it. The issues around homoeopathy are to do with taking money from real treatment and using it for serious problems when proper treatment should be used.
Like Thalidomide did .....as I remember.
The Thalidomide fiasco is what started the modern practice of many many years of rigorous testing.
Back then, medicine testing was no-where near as rigorous as it is today.