Calling all wlaking Chiropracters, Osteopaths, Physiotherapists and Doctors



In message <[email protected]>,
Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> writes
>
>That there are some charlatans out there in ALL medical fields, of
>this I have no doubt.

You may be interested to know that some bloke has recently applied for a
homeopathic test on James Randi's 1 million US$ challenge. Read all
about it here:

http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/121/1/

Randi writes "I always hasten to accept challenges from smug,
self-righteous, totally certain, believers in woo-woo! I therefore
accept your offer without hesitation. In the past, I’ve consumed huge
quantities of homeopathic preparations that were supposed to produce
dreadful consequences in my poor old body, but I only experienced mild
indigestion from the lactose."

No doubt the poor sap will fail in his challenge, as has everybody else
who's tried to prove any clinical effect from homeopathy [*], but hey!
he stands a chance of being a million bucks better off.

[*] I allow the possibility of a placebo effect.

Regards,
--
Neil Pugh
 
In message <[email protected]>,
Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> writes
>
>That there are some charlatans out there in ALL medical fields, of
>this I have no doubt.

You may be interested to know that some bloke has recently applied for a
homeopathic test on James Randi's 1 million US$ challenge. Read all
about it here:

http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/121/1/

Randi writes "I always hasten to accept challenges from smug,
self-righteous, totally certain, believers in woo-woo! I therefore
accept your offer without hesitation. In the past, I’ve consumed huge
quantities of homeopathic preparations that were supposed to produce
dreadful consequences in my poor old body, but I only experienced mild
indigestion from the lactose."

No doubt the poor sap will fail in his challenge, as has everybody else
who's tried to prove any clinical effect from homeopathy [*], but hey!
he stands a chance of being a million bucks better off.

[*] I allow the possibility of a placebo effect.

Regards,
--
Neil Pugh
 
On 6 Nov, 12:23, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 3:51 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Citizen Jimserac wrote:
> > > Does "placebo" mean the patient only THINKS they got better
> > > or does it mean they did get better but science does
> > > not know why or does it mean that they got better
> > > somehow (unknown to science) but it might
> > > or might not have been from the treatment?
>
> > Potentially any of those.
>
> > It's long been observed that a positive attitude appears to aid
> > recovery, and it's entirely likely that given a "wonder pill" someone's
> > positive attitude in thinking it will help them, in itself helps them.
>
> > In a trial a placebo is something that is practically certain to not do
> > anything for the condition. So a sugar pill rather than a drug pill, or
> > a spoonful of syrup rather than a spoonful of medicine, for a cancer
> > condition that doesn't responding to syrup or sugar.
>
> > Pete.
> > --
> > Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> > Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> > Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> > net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
>
> I see! Then those who peremptorily dismissHomeopathyas "placebo"
> effect are just as unscientific as some of the supporters of it.
>
> Interesting.

Why?

If a homeopathic treatment performs no better than other placebos in
tests, and if there's no good reason to believe that the active
ingredient will help (either because it's been massively diluted, or
because it's a silly example of like-cures-like thinking), then
"placebo" is a perfectly good description of homeopathic treatment.
 
On 6 Nov, 12:23, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 3:51 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Citizen Jimserac wrote:
> > > Does "placebo" mean the patient only THINKS they got better
> > > or does it mean they did get better but science does
> > > not know why or does it mean that they got better
> > > somehow (unknown to science) but it might
> > > or might not have been from the treatment?
>
> > Potentially any of those.
>
> > It's long been observed that a positive attitude appears to aid
> > recovery, and it's entirely likely that given a "wonder pill" someone's
> > positive attitude in thinking it will help them, in itself helps them.
>
> > In a trial a placebo is something that is practically certain to not do
> > anything for the condition. So a sugar pill rather than a drug pill, or
> > a spoonful of syrup rather than a spoonful of medicine, for a cancer
> > condition that doesn't responding to syrup or sugar.
>
> > Pete.
> > --
> > Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> > Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> > Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> > net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
>
> I see! Then those who peremptorily dismissHomeopathyas "placebo"
> effect are just as unscientific as some of the supporters of it.
>
> Interesting.

Why?

If a homeopathic treatment performs no better than other placebos in
tests, and if there's no good reason to believe that the active
ingredient will help (either because it's been massively diluted, or
because it's a silly example of like-cures-like thinking), then
"placebo" is a perfectly good description of homeopathic treatment.
 
On 6 Nov, 12:23, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 3:51 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Citizen Jimserac wrote:
> > > Does "placebo" mean the patient only THINKS they got better
> > > or does it mean they did get better but science does
> > > not know why or does it mean that they got better
> > > somehow (unknown to science) but it might
> > > or might not have been from the treatment?
>
> > Potentially any of those.
>
> > It's long been observed that a positive attitude appears to aid
> > recovery, and it's entirely likely that given a "wonder pill" someone's
> > positive attitude in thinking it will help them, in itself helps them.
>
> > In a trial a placebo is something that is practically certain to not do
> > anything for the condition. So a sugar pill rather than a drug pill, or
> > a spoonful of syrup rather than a spoonful of medicine, for a cancer
> > condition that doesn't responding to syrup or sugar.
>
> > Pete.
> > --
> > Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> > Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> > Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> > net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
>
> I see! Then those who peremptorily dismissHomeopathyas "placebo"
> effect are just as unscientific as some of the supporters of it.
>
> Interesting.

Why?

If a homeopathic treatment performs no better than other placebos in
tests, and if there's no good reason to believe that the active
ingredient will help (either because it's been massively diluted, or
because it's a silly example of like-cures-like thinking), then
"placebo" is a perfectly good description of homeopathic treatment.
 
On 6 Nov, 12:23, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 3:51 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Citizen Jimserac wrote:
> > > Does "placebo" mean the patient only THINKS they got better
> > > or does it mean they did get better but science does
> > > not know why or does it mean that they got better
> > > somehow (unknown to science) but it might
> > > or might not have been from the treatment?
>
> > Potentially any of those.
>
> > It's long been observed that a positive attitude appears to aid
> > recovery, and it's entirely likely that given a "wonder pill" someone's
> > positive attitude in thinking it will help them, in itself helps them.
>
> > In a trial a placebo is something that is practically certain to not do
> > anything for the condition. So a sugar pill rather than a drug pill, or
> > a spoonful of syrup rather than a spoonful of medicine, for a cancer
> > condition that doesn't responding to syrup or sugar.
>
> > Pete.
> > --
> > Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> > Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> > Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> > net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
>
> I see! Then those who peremptorily dismissHomeopathyas "placebo"
> effect are just as unscientific as some of the supporters of it.
>
> Interesting.

Why?

If a homeopathic treatment performs no better than other placebos in
tests, and if there's no good reason to believe that the active
ingredient will help (either because it's been massively diluted, or
because it's a silly example of like-cures-like thinking), then
"placebo" is a perfectly good description of homeopathic treatment.
 
On 8 Nov, 18:26, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> as you know.

There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.

The results have been laughable.
 
On 8 Nov, 18:26, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> as you know.

There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.

The results have been laughable.
 
On 8 Nov, 18:26, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> as you know.

There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.

The results have been laughable.
 
On 8 Nov, 18:26, Citizen Jimserac <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> as you know.

There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.

The results have been laughable.
 
On Nov 9, 9:52 am, bobrayner <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8 Nov, 18:26, CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> > CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> > tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> > medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> > as you know.
>
> There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
> Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.
>
> The results have been laughable.

I'm inclined to agree. The definitive tests await someone to do them
but nobody seems to.

For an interesting account of an licensed Accupuncturist attempts to
get some evidence on Homeopathy,
and the results of his research, mostly negative,
see this link:
http://www.ancientway.com/articles/homeopathyunnatural.html

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 9:52 am, bobrayner <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8 Nov, 18:26, CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> > CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> > tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> > medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> > as you know.
>
> There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
> Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.
>
> The results have been laughable.

I'm inclined to agree. The definitive tests await someone to do them
but nobody seems to.

For an interesting account of an licensed Accupuncturist attempts to
get some evidence on Homeopathy,
and the results of his research, mostly negative,
see this link:
http://www.ancientway.com/articles/homeopathyunnatural.html

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 9:52 am, bobrayner <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8 Nov, 18:26, CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> > CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> > tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> > medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> > as you know.
>
> There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
> Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.
>
> The results have been laughable.

I'm inclined to agree. The definitive tests await someone to do them
but nobody seems to.

For an interesting account of an licensed Accupuncturist attempts to
get some evidence on Homeopathy,
and the results of his research, mostly negative,
see this link:
http://www.ancientway.com/articles/homeopathyunnatural.html

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 9:52 am, bobrayner <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8 Nov, 18:26, CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, absolutely correct, I await definitive tests PRO as well as
> > CON. In part, I suspect this might be due to the costs of doing the
> > tests and the fact that the research money is tied up by the dominant
> > medical philsophy which is "in bed" with the pharmaceutical industry,
> > as you know.
>
> There have been quite a few studies supported by Big Homeo, too.
> Boiron, for instance, has lots of money to spend on research.
>
> The results have been laughable.

I'm inclined to agree. The definitive tests await someone to do them
but nobody seems to.

For an interesting account of an licensed Accupuncturist attempts to
get some evidence on Homeopathy,
and the results of his research, mostly negative,
see this link:
http://www.ancientway.com/articles/homeopathyunnatural.html

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 6:35 am, Neil <[email protected]> wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>,
> CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> writes
>
>
>
> >That there are some charlatans out there in ALL medical fields, of
> >this I have no doubt.
>
> You may be interested to know that some bloke has recently applied for a
> homeopathic test on James Randi's 1 million US$ challenge. Read all
> about it here:
>
> http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/121/1/
>
> Randi writes "I always hasten to accept challenges from smug,
> self-righteous, totally certain, believers in woo-woo! I therefore
> accept your offer without hesitation. In the past, I've consumed huge
> quantities of homeopathic preparations that were supposed to produce
> dreadful consequences in my poor old body, but I only experienced mild
> indigestion from the lactose."
>
> No doubt the poor sap will fail in his challenge, as has everybody else
> who's tried to prove any clinical effect from homeopathy [*], but hey!
> he stands a chance of being a million bucks better off.
>
> [*] I allow the possibility of a placebo effect.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Neil Pugh

I'd be interested to see if they can even agree on a testing
procedure.

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 6:35 am, Neil <[email protected]> wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>,
> CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> writes
>
>
>
> >That there are some charlatans out there in ALL medical fields, of
> >this I have no doubt.
>
> You may be interested to know that some bloke has recently applied for a
> homeopathic test on James Randi's 1 million US$ challenge. Read all
> about it here:
>
> http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/121/1/
>
> Randi writes "I always hasten to accept challenges from smug,
> self-righteous, totally certain, believers in woo-woo! I therefore
> accept your offer without hesitation. In the past, I've consumed huge
> quantities of homeopathic preparations that were supposed to produce
> dreadful consequences in my poor old body, but I only experienced mild
> indigestion from the lactose."
>
> No doubt the poor sap will fail in his challenge, as has everybody else
> who's tried to prove any clinical effect from homeopathy [*], but hey!
> he stands a chance of being a million bucks better off.
>
> [*] I allow the possibility of a placebo effect.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Neil Pugh

I'd be interested to see if they can even agree on a testing
procedure.

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 6:35 am, Neil <[email protected]> wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>,
> CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> writes
>
>
>
> >That there are some charlatans out there in ALL medical fields, of
> >this I have no doubt.
>
> You may be interested to know that some bloke has recently applied for a
> homeopathic test on James Randi's 1 million US$ challenge. Read all
> about it here:
>
> http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/121/1/
>
> Randi writes "I always hasten to accept challenges from smug,
> self-righteous, totally certain, believers in woo-woo! I therefore
> accept your offer without hesitation. In the past, I've consumed huge
> quantities of homeopathic preparations that were supposed to produce
> dreadful consequences in my poor old body, but I only experienced mild
> indigestion from the lactose."
>
> No doubt the poor sap will fail in his challenge, as has everybody else
> who's tried to prove any clinical effect from homeopathy [*], but hey!
> he stands a chance of being a million bucks better off.
>
> [*] I allow the possibility of a placebo effect.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Neil Pugh

I'd be interested to see if they can even agree on a testing
procedure.

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 6:35 am, Neil <[email protected]> wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>,
> CitizenJimserac<[email protected]> writes
>
>
>
> >That there are some charlatans out there in ALL medical fields, of
> >this I have no doubt.
>
> You may be interested to know that some bloke has recently applied for a
> homeopathic test on James Randi's 1 million US$ challenge. Read all
> about it here:
>
> http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/121/1/
>
> Randi writes "I always hasten to accept challenges from smug,
> self-righteous, totally certain, believers in woo-woo! I therefore
> accept your offer without hesitation. In the past, I've consumed huge
> quantities of homeopathic preparations that were supposed to produce
> dreadful consequences in my poor old body, but I only experienced mild
> indigestion from the lactose."
>
> No doubt the poor sap will fail in his challenge, as has everybody else
> who's tried to prove any clinical effect from homeopathy [*], but hey!
> he stands a chance of being a million bucks better off.
>
> [*] I allow the possibility of a placebo effect.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Neil Pugh

I'd be interested to see if they can even agree on a testing
procedure.

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 5:17 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
> CitizenJimseracwrote:

> This is silly: you've said already that all the money comes >from Big Pharm, and now you're saying practically none of it >does. You can't have it both ways!

All the advertising and marketing money.


> > In this regard, I hope that you have already read the award winning
> > book by Dr. Maria Angell M.D., a former editor in chief of the
> > prestigious New England Medical Journal, entitled "The Truth About the
> > Drug Companies" which gives some overview of the astonishing scope and
> > depth of their depredations and deceptions.


> I'm not going to claim Big Pharm are Nice People any more than I'll do
> the same for oil companies (I trained as a geophysicist, but couldn't
> face working in oil or mining), but the point is, as you say, they're
> out to make money. And if homeopathy can be shown to work then there is
> money in it. It might not use the same model as other money making from
> drugs, but money is money and the accountants don't really care if it's
> made from tincture of St. John's Wort or Prozac.

True. And apparently the Big Farm folks will continue to use their
preferred double blind testing methods, even after 27,000 people just
won a lawsuit against Merc for damages from Vioxx. The damage award
is an incredible 5 BILLION dollars. Say, you're right , there IS some
really BIG money floating around in this industry!!!

Check out Dr. Angell's book, it is a real eye opener.

Citizen Jimserac
 
On Nov 9, 5:17 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
> CitizenJimseracwrote:

> This is silly: you've said already that all the money comes >from Big Pharm, and now you're saying practically none of it >does. You can't have it both ways!

All the advertising and marketing money.


> > In this regard, I hope that you have already read the award winning
> > book by Dr. Maria Angell M.D., a former editor in chief of the
> > prestigious New England Medical Journal, entitled "The Truth About the
> > Drug Companies" which gives some overview of the astonishing scope and
> > depth of their depredations and deceptions.


> I'm not going to claim Big Pharm are Nice People any more than I'll do
> the same for oil companies (I trained as a geophysicist, but couldn't
> face working in oil or mining), but the point is, as you say, they're
> out to make money. And if homeopathy can be shown to work then there is
> money in it. It might not use the same model as other money making from
> drugs, but money is money and the accountants don't really care if it's
> made from tincture of St. John's Wort or Prozac.

True. And apparently the Big Farm folks will continue to use their
preferred double blind testing methods, even after 27,000 people just
won a lawsuit against Merc for damages from Vioxx. The damage award
is an incredible 5 BILLION dollars. Say, you're right , there IS some
really BIG money floating around in this industry!!!

Check out Dr. Angell's book, it is a real eye opener.

Citizen Jimserac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back