Indeed. Even trying to raise empirical data of validity for acupuncture and meditation has now been more successful - and they struggled for decades to explore both in methodologically okay settings.

However. I asked because I wanted to get a quick impression of how widespread trust in the method is in this non-representative sample of GT members. Pure curiosity. Maybe I ask again in some days about opinions on tarot or enneagrams :DL

So, if somebody has a benefit from falling victim :) to a placebo effect that lasts, fine, if the relief is for real and is not short-term only, it does not matter whether it is an agent or a placebo. I just deny that there is any other, causal factor involved that would make homeopathy an effect beside that of a placebo, or mere belief.

homeopathy: modern equivalent of witch doctors, about as effective as praying.

In answer to that question, I would say in the real world, trust is ridiculously broad. "Teach the controversy!" LOL. Look at the people who believe—contrary to ALL scientific studies—that vaccines cause autism. It's not surprising to learn that the leading "medical" proponents of that entirely discredited hypothesis are in fact... homeopaths.

To see another place where such quackery has broad support, many US insurance plans now pay for chiropractors. Same thing, different name. "Chiropractic" claims to be able to cure all kinds of illness through manipulation. Bat-**** crazy.

I knew an old lady in Minnesota that was REALLY into homeopathic stuff. She had cancer and was treating it with "homeopathic medicine". The cancer totally overran her system and she died.:dead: I think a lot of it may be in your head (like taking a plasebo).:dead:

I just laugh at the "homeopathic" cure for diabetes.:har:
dum,dum,dum,dum dum

It all depends. Some home remidies are good for a skin rash.

But, if I have oozing, burning pustules, I'm gonna run to the Dr. fast and get some real treatment. :yep:

If it looks like a duck, moves like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is probably a duck. Quackery no doubt in my mind.

May I ask how many of the quackery guys here have already taken homoeopathic medicine? As I said I never took anything of that stuff myself but I know some people who had great experiences with it (and it wasn't about mental stuff).

The irony though is there are a pile of drugs from pharmaceutical companies that really do not show much effect beyond the placebo effect. That and of course how they tamper with the study to get desirable results.

Me, long time ago, when I was at university and had many freinds who experiemnted with many different things, amongst them that couple with that cat I mentioned.

Needless to say, I felt no effect.

But to answer in a different way as well: may I give a free quote by Mr. Spock from one novel I read back in those years:

"When I am standing on a huge object that has mass and is rotating around a centre axis, then I know that there is gravitation, and then I must not see the apple I let slip from my hand falling to the ground, but I already know that the apple will fall to the ground."

My thoughts on this subject, for what they are worth, are that there can be no doubt that some homeopathic remedies work for some people, even if it is a placebo effect if you feel better that is surely the point.

This comment in no way stops me from taking the x:ox out of my wife when she tries something wacky in some macho-bravado stance (just don't tell her that!)

Never believed it, never will.

Any one for herbal tea?

Nice podcast on homeopathy here.
After watching that one, you will be able to truly appreciate this one, in which he really drives the point home:D.

The whole prospect of the "all-natural", "evil Big Pharma" fad scares me. It's just not how gullible people shell away money on stuff that either doesn't work, doesn't work as well as conventional medicine, or has adverse side-effects they don't tell you about -- it's the sheer lack of logic used to support all this that gets to me. For example, how people are so busy slinging mud at conventional medical practice that they forget that alternative remedies have side-effects just as conventional remedies. Or how disturbingly effective anecdotes are, when in reality they're utterly worthless to prove anything. What frightens me is how apparent it is that so many lack the required critical thinking skills to cope with the avalanches of conflicting information we are buried under in today's Information Age.

My favourite is the people who are terrified of vaccines because they contain microscopic amounts of some kind of mercury (far less than in, say, sea food), and say they would rather take natural remedies.
Um... guys? Mercury is natural:damn:. It's a chemical element. How much more natural can something get? Oh, and the Chinese had great faith in it as medicine 3000 years ago. Oh, and Big Pharma says it's dangerous. I thought that was all the alternative crowd needed; All Natural, Chinese Wisdom, and shunning from evil Big Pharma:D?

Doesn't matter, as we're not discussing some brand of ice cream, coffee, or submarine combat simulator. Whether homeopathy works is a scientific question that can be, and has been empirically tested. If tests reveal -- and they have -- that it doesn't work as good as, or any better than, a placebo, then it doesn't change anything if I try it -- if it doesn't work, it doesn't work.

Sorry to be an ***, but how do you know that? Swellings have a tendency to go away by themselves, often within a couple of days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYFwT1LcBdI&feature=fvst

Homeopathy is nothing more than amusing bunk!

James Rand is a god.