Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Homeopathy
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 16 of 76 (426729)
10-08-2007 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by mark24
10-08-2007 4:12 PM


Appropriate Subtitles
Particpants,
Please use appropriate subtitles that reflect the contents of the post.
Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.
Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour timeout.
Thank you Purple

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by mark24, posted 10-08-2007 4:12 PM mark24 has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 17 of 76 (426736)
10-08-2007 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Kitsune
10-08-2007 1:10 PM


Why?
I don't honestly know enough about it to be able to say. If my ND says it works for her patients, I trust her judgement.
Why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Kitsune, posted 10-08-2007 1:10 PM Kitsune has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Kitsune, posted 10-08-2007 4:49 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 20 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 4:58 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Kitsune
Member (Idle past 4300 days)
Posts: 788
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 09-16-2007


Message 18 of 76 (426739)
10-08-2007 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by molbiogirl
10-08-2007 4:22 PM


Re: Answer the question, Lindalou!
Do you understand that a homeopathic "medication" is nothing but water?
Do I understand that it is likely that a homeopathic preparation does not contain a single molecule of anything but water? Yes.
Is it "nothing but water"? A scientist would say so. The original idea was that the "memory" of the substance is retained in the water. Like I said, I haven't looked into it and I don't know enough to be able to comment knowledgeably. However, as you are well aware, I believe that there are potentially many aspects about the world we live in that are waiting to be discovered. We don't know it all. Maybe we don't even know it all about water.
If it works, it works. What's the deal?
Are you going to continue with this "But they believe it too!" nonsense?
You mean the majority of people, even doctors, aren't always right? Are you sure that's what you want to be saying to me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 4:22 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 5:05 PM Kitsune has not replied
 Message 26 by nator, posted 10-08-2007 9:44 PM Kitsune has replied

Kitsune
Member (Idle past 4300 days)
Posts: 788
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 09-16-2007


Message 19 of 76 (426746)
10-08-2007 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Dr Adequate
10-08-2007 4:36 PM


Why?
Because she has helped me and many others. My mainstream doctors were the ones responsible for the particular help I needed from my ND, because of the drugs they gave me. I go with what works.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2007 4:36 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 8:00 PM Kitsune has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 20 of 76 (426749)
10-08-2007 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Dr Adequate
10-08-2007 4:36 PM


It's even worse than you think, Dr. A
Lindalou's ND is an online "doctor"!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2007 4:36 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Kitsune, posted 10-09-2007 12:26 PM molbiogirl has replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 21 of 76 (426755)
10-08-2007 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Kitsune
10-08-2007 4:45 PM


Water Memory
The original idea was that the "memory" of the substance is retained in the water. Like I said, I haven't looked into it and I don't know enough to be able to comment knowledgeably. However, as you are well aware, I believe that there are potentially many aspects about the world we live in that are waiting to be discovered. We don't know it all. Maybe we don't even know it all about water.
Finally!
So. Is it fair to say that, even tho there is no evidence whatsoever that water has a memory (and mind you ... physicists have explored the subatomic structure of matter extensively), you're going to go with "Well. We don't know what we're going to find out tomorrow?".
I suppose it's useless to point out this is a logical fallacy.
wiki writes:
The fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative is a logical fallacy of the following form:
"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."
It is asserted that a proposition is true, only because it has not been proven false. The negative proof fallacy often occurs in the debate of the existence of supernatural phenomena, in the following form:
* "A supernatural force must exist, because there is no proof that it does not exist".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Kitsune, posted 10-08-2007 4:45 PM Kitsune has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 22 of 76 (426774)
10-08-2007 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Kitsune
10-08-2007 4:00 PM


Don't tar the whole NHS, please
Please don't tar all British Doctors with that brush:
Doctors renew drive to ban NHS homeopathy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Kitsune, posted 10-08-2007 4:00 PM Kitsune has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Damouse, posted 10-08-2007 6:32 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 23 of 76 (426780)
10-08-2007 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Dr Jack
10-08-2007 6:01 PM


Re: Don't tar the whole NHS, please
The article hints at some intent to step up and out of the Middle Ages, but goodness. Thats where sponsorship money was going?
I had thought that (at least for the most part) medecine had left the realm of superstition and was a certifiable science....

This statement is false.
Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Dr Jack, posted 10-08-2007 6:01 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 8:09 PM Damouse has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 24 of 76 (426795)
10-08-2007 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Kitsune
10-08-2007 4:49 PM


Water Memory
In 1988, a French scientist, Jacques Benveniste, working at that country's prestigious INSERM institute, claimed to have found that high dilutions of substances in water left a "memory". His findings were published in Nature but with a caveat:
bbc writes:
The then editor of Nature, Sir John Maddox, agreed to publish Benveniste's paper -- on one condition. Benveniste must open his laboratory to a team of independent referees, who would evaluate his techniques.
BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon - Homeopathy: The Test
Davenas, E., et al. 1988. Nature 333: 816. The Benveniste paper.
Subsequent investigations disclosed that the research had been inappropriately carried out.
The scandal resulted in the suspension of Benveniste.
At the time, Benveniste was research director of the Clamart-based Unit 200 of INSERM, the French biomedical research agency, which studied the immunology of allergy and inflammation. He was suspended after Maddox launched an investigation of his methods.
Nature 431, 729 (14 October 2004).
There have been others: clusters of water molecules arranged in specific patterns (Anagnostatos 1994); arrangements of isotopes such as deuterium or oxygen-18 (Berezin 1990); or "coherent vibration" of the water molecules (Rubik 1990).
Anagnostatos, G. S. 1994. In Ultra High Dilution: Physiology and Physics, edited by J. Schulte and P. C. Endler. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Berezin, A. A. 1990. Medical Hypothesis 31: 43.
Rubik, B. 1990. Berlin Journal of Research in Homeopathy 1: 27.
Of course, there is no proof whatsoever of any of this nonsense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Kitsune, posted 10-08-2007 4:49 PM Kitsune has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 25 of 76 (426799)
10-08-2007 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Damouse
10-08-2007 6:32 PM


You think that's bad...
In 1938, Senator Royal Copeland of New York, a physician trained in homeopathy and a principal author of the FDCA (Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act), included within the law’s definition of “drugs” articles monographed in the HPUS (Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States).
Homeopathics were grandfathered in!
FDA regulates homeopathic drugs in several significantly different ways from other drugs. Manufacturers of homeopathic drugs are deferred from submitting new drug applications to FDA. Their products are exempt from good manufacturing practice requirements related to expiration dating and from finished product testing for identity and strength. Homeopathic drugs in solid oral dosage form must have an imprint that identifies the manufacturer and indicates that the drug is homeopathic. The imprint on conventional products, unless specifically exempt, must identify the active ingredient and dosage strength as well as the manufacturer.
Page Not Found | FDA

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Damouse, posted 10-08-2007 6:32 PM Damouse has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Coragyps, posted 10-08-2007 9:57 PM molbiogirl has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 26 of 76 (426827)
10-08-2007 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Kitsune
10-08-2007 4:45 PM


Re: Answer the question, Lindalou!
quote:
Is it "nothing but water"? A scientist would say so. The original idea was that the "memory" of the substance is retained in the water. Like I said, I haven't looked into it and I don't know enough to be able to comment knowledgeably. However, as you are well aware, I believe that there are potentially many aspects about the world we live in that are waiting to be discovered. We don't know it all. Maybe we don't even know it all about water.
So, does that mean that if I piss into a bottle, and then distill it to take everything out of the water but the H2O, does the resulting purified water have the "memory" of the urine in it?
If I take water that has been in a toxic waste dump, and purify it, does that mean the water has the memory of toxins in it?
Most of the water on the planet has simply been recycled for millenia. There is almost no "new" water. Shouldn't all water have a "memory" of everywhere it has ever been over the millenia?
What you are suggesting, yet again, is that all we know about the physics of matter is completely wrong and that made up, illogical stuff that contradicts all we know is really what's going on.
quote:
If it works, it works. What's the deal?
Remember in the other thread when you agreed with me that those children's cold medicines that were shown to be ineffective should fall out of favor? The scientists studying them determined that the only positive effect was from the placebo effect.
Now, you seem to be making a complete reversal when it comes to homeopathy, even though the reason we are objecting to homeopathic remedies is for the exact same reason; the only possible benefit is from the placebo effect, since there is no active ingredient in the product whatsoever.
Why is it "no big deal" here but not with the other products?
And LindaLou, aren't you a bit worried that you are taking medical advice from somebody on the internet that doesn't even charge for their services? Did I read that right? That sounds, to put it mildly, seriously foolhardy.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Kitsune, posted 10-08-2007 4:45 PM Kitsune has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Kitsune, posted 10-09-2007 12:33 PM nator has replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 27 of 76 (426829)
10-08-2007 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by molbiogirl
10-08-2007 8:09 PM


Re: You think that's bad...
Homeopathics were grandfathered in!
Ugh! That needs to get fixed......
Oh, and Percy's description left out whacking the dilution bottle on a leather pad. Surely that makes all....no, I guarantee it makes no damn difference at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 8:09 PM molbiogirl has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by nator, posted 10-08-2007 10:12 PM Coragyps has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 28 of 76 (426842)
10-08-2007 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Coragyps
10-08-2007 9:57 PM


Re: You think that's bad...
quote:
...whacking the dilution bottle on a leather pad.
Leather, eh? I wonder if the anti-cruelty people who seem to gravitate towards quackerly like this would be pleased to know about the dead cow skin requirement?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Coragyps, posted 10-08-2007 9:57 PM Coragyps has not replied

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 29 of 76 (426857)
10-08-2007 10:36 PM


The human nose is capable of detecting its said 10,000 different smells in parts per trillion. Water separates charges due to its polar covalency suspect it becomes hard to test in parts per trillion but interestingly the body can recognize smells in parts per trillion which is like what your likely talking in respect to a 30 time dilution.
http://www.faqs.org/health/topics/99/Smell.html

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by molbiogirl, posted 10-08-2007 11:09 PM johnfolton has replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 30 of 76 (426867)
10-08-2007 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by johnfolton
10-08-2007 10:36 PM


Smell v. Homeopathy
The human nose is capable of detecting its said 10,000 different smells in parts per trillion. Water separates charges due to its polar covalency suspect it becomes hard to test in parts per trillion but interestingly the body can recognize smells in parts per trillion which is like what your likely talking in respect to a 30 time dilution.
Olfactory receptors detect smell using a "lock and key" mechanism.
The smell (the key) fits into the receptor (the lock).
The key (hah!) difference is this:
There's a molecule present that fits into the olfactory nerve receptor.
There are no "medicinal molecules" in a homeopathic.
It is water.
Plain old water.
Hence the twisted logic of Anagnostatos, Berezin, et. al.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by johnfolton, posted 10-08-2007 10:36 PM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by johnfolton, posted 10-08-2007 11:45 PM molbiogirl has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024