Homeopathy
- Thread starter tres
- Start date
![[DOD]Asprilla](/styles/overclockers/avatars/8.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
Homeopaths are dangerously evil people. There are absolutely no published stidies that show the effects of their work and yet we are supposed to trust them with our health; rather you than me.
Homeopathy is nothing like a vaccination. A vaccine gives you a weakend or dead version of the virus / disease so that your body can recognise it and learn to produce the right antigens. Homeopathy gives you something that might make you feel a bit ill and expects the same result.
Some of the recommended doses for these preparations are such that you would need a sphere of water big enough to fill the void between the earth and the sun (I'm not making this up btw) in order to get one molecule of the active ingredient.
Homeopaths try to get round this by saying that the water 'remembers' the effect of the active ingredient. Given that every molecule of water on this planet has passed though at least 100 other living organisms during it's time on earth does it 'remember' their effects as well.
They are dangerous charlatans who prey on the vulnerable and they all deserve locking up.
On what basis did you reach this conclusion?
It is entirely different to modern medicine. Homeopathic remedies are so heavily diluted than they rarely contain even one single atom or molecule of the substance which is supposed to be treating your symptoms. Needless to say, this renders it no more effective than tapwater.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2003
- Posts
- 6,961
- Location
- Cambs UK
Nonsense.
The thought that something can retain the memory of a molecule of something is stupid. Not only that, but think about the effects of drinking tap water that has already been through about 4 other people, and the molecules of all sorts of things that have once been in there.
The thought that something can retain the memory of a molecule of something is stupid. Not only that, but think about the effects of drinking tap water that has already been through about 4 other people, and the molecules of all sorts of things that have once been in there.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
What I'm always disappointed about is that homeopaths don't take the extra logical step and point out that we're all drinking dinosaur urine - if water has memory then surely we must be because there has to be an awful lot produced in ~160m years.
Homeopathy is utter garbage. It has no scientific basis and is entirely faith based.
I can't moan too much, as I'm a Christian with faith in God, but I'm inclined to think that God gave me the capacity to discern good science from bad.
I can't moan too much, as I'm a Christian with faith in God, but I'm inclined to think that God gave me the capacity to discern good science from bad.
[DOD]Asprilla;14213547 said:
but your quite willing to trust your health to a doctor, on the off chance you don't suffer the side effects of whatever they may give you, and hope what they actually give you sorts the problem out ?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
This goes back to the studies referenced - the medicines you take have been proven to work on X number of people and there may be side effects for Y number of people as a subset of X plus a simple cost/benefit analysis - if I take this medicine then there is a (usually) small chance I will suffer from the side effects mentioned but if I don't there is a (usually) large chance I will not get better or at least will not get better anywhere near as quickly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
As SPW say, the difference is that in order to get a licence a medicine has been studied in a controlled manner. These studies are not fault free, but they can be read and decisions made upon them.
Modern medicine is based on iterative learning and development. Homeopathy can make no such claim.
Mind, I'd also put those who run campaigns for medicines to be made available on the NHS even though they are not proven and have not been assessed by NICE in the same basket as homeopaths.
[DOD]Asprilla;14213877 said:
I wouldn't they are not the same. Most of those drugs have completed some or most of the trials and have been shown to be promising. Some have even been licensed abroad. Most of them are for terminally ill patients, so why shouldn't hey have them before the full trial ends. The trials take so long.
They certainly not the same in any shape or form to homeopath.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2008
- Posts
- 3,011
There's quite a lot of ignorance in this thread
It's true that there are a large number of homeopathic treatments which will have little affect on an illness, but these "medicines" are a consequence of more companies jumping on the bandwagon trying to make money
There are many prescribed homeopathic treatments that are very successful and have strong scientific backing. The problem with many illnesses is that the number of pathogens/"foreign objects" is not great enough to warrant the body's immune system to react significiantly, meaning the disease shall remain. Homeopathic medicines introduce chemicals which have similar propertes to those of the pathogens that cause the disease. The increase in number means that the immune system reacts more violently to the disease and it is soon treated; hence why these treatments "help the body's natural healing".
It's true that there are a large number of homeopathic treatments which will have little affect on an illness, but these "medicines" are a consequence of more companies jumping on the bandwagon trying to make money
There are many prescribed homeopathic treatments that are very successful and have strong scientific backing. The problem with many illnesses is that the number of pathogens/"foreign objects" is not great enough to warrant the body's immune system to react significiantly, meaning the disease shall remain. Homeopathic medicines introduce chemicals which have similar propertes to those of the pathogens that cause the disease. The increase in number means that the immune system reacts more violently to the disease and it is soon treated; hence why these treatments "help the body's natural healing".
No, they don't. Homeopathy "works" on the principle that water can be "imprinted" with something that makes you ill. You then dilute the water literally billions of times until there is no trace of the something that makes you ill, and just the imprint left on the water. This imprinted water then somehow helps to cure you, on the strange assumption that "like cures like".
The most obvious problem with this is that all water in the world ever should now arguably be imprinted with everything in the world ever, but they get around that by saying they use "succussion" to control which imprints remain.
It's ********.
I wish all Christians were like you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
Show me an example, I really would love to see it, since I don't believe there is a single study that has been filed in full for peer review that shows the effectiveness of a single homeopathic treatment.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2008
- Posts
- 3,011
Yes, this is true, but that is one of the "possible" mechanisms of action, and i agree that the principle of this imprinted water is very sketchy
i've mentioned the other possible mechanism of action, which definately seems more plausible - to me anyway.
take a look at this link if you want:
http://www.kulisz.com/how_does_homeopathy_work.htm