quote:
I'm not going to defend homeopathy here with the same vigour that I've defended things elsewhere, because I agree that it sounds highly improbable. My mind says it's complete nonsense. However, I also trust my ND. Homeopathy is a small part of what she does and she's never prescribed it for me.
Defend? Why would you defend it
at all? It deserves your derision and disdain.
It is nonsense, LindaLou. Pure quackery. Worse than snake oil and patent medicines, because at least those had actual ingredients in them, even though they were ineffective and sometimes harmful.
If your ND prescribes homeopatic remedies, she's prescribing quackery.
Why would you trust anything your ND says if she thinks that homeopathy is valid? (I realize that you said that she 'despises traditional homeopathy', but I'm not sure what other kind there is)
It would be like a mainstream MD saying that they think that disease is caused by evil spirits and not germs, or that appendicitis can be cured with psychic surgery. Why would believe anything they say? Why wouldn't you simply back away, smiling and nodding?
quote:
If she did, I would give her the benefit of the doubt and try it. There's no harm in it, it's not as if I'm hoping it's going to cure my cancer or mend a broken leg.
You think that prescribing completely useless, quack remedies is harmless? You think that it is ethical to tell people to purchase sugar pills and distilled water, thus lining the pockets of quack remedy manufactuers? I guess your idea of right and wrong is different than mine.
Now, I'm going to repeat what I said in my last post to you, becasue you have yet to address it but it it is at the cruux of how you argue your position here. You have a very stong double standard, and a profound bias in which you mistrust everything that mainstream medical science does, and pretty much blindly accept everything that isn't in the mainstream.
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?
Edited by nator, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
