Homeopathy

Skybird · 06-29-10, 05:29 PM

Do you believe in it (or variations of it) as an effective cure, or not?

Myself, I cut it short, I think it is quackery.

I see a chance of it being effective in the meaning of a placebo being effective. I also can imagine that this placebo effect can be transported via a mediating person (a mother orders homeopathic treatement for her child, and the child responds to her expecation and behavior by showing a placebo effect). However, I cannot ignore that I was unable to find hints for any serious study prooving the effectiveness of the method, but that many studies that were claimed to deliver evidence in the past years, have been withdrawn by their authors, or have been called back by publishers, or that the homeopathy fan group itself even admitted were extremely faulty. I also cannot ignore the many inherent inconsistencies of the theory, and the almost superstitious thinking behind the "Gleichheitsprinzip" (similiarity principle?), which reminds of the wearing of flower amulettes in the medieval. I knew people long time ago, who treated the "depressed mood" of their cat with Bachblüten, and swore that the cat became better and behaved differently. I knew those people quite well for some years, and their cat as well, and I did not see any change at all, i also did not see any depressed basic mood in that cat. I think the people just saw what they wanted to imagine into it.

In that a patient maybe denies regular medical treatement over attempts of trying homeopathy first, I even see risks involved.

The idea of information being written into water and carried by water molecules when the agents get deluded to ratios that finally not even one molecule would be left in all of earth's oceans, I cannot believe at all. I find Sheldrake's morphogenetic fields theory very interesting and fascinating (not proven wrong but also not proven right, however), but when comparing to homeopathy's basic assumptions, Sheldrake has presented a model and theory with hierarchic argument that compares to homeopathy like a Ferrari compares to an oxcart.

What do you think?

View Poll Results: What you think of homeopathy (and variations of it)?
It's quackery, no doubt.	24	68.57%
I'm not sure what to think of it, I'm uncertain.	5	14.29%
I believe in it being efficient even if we cannot explain it.	6	17.14%
Voters: 35. You may not vote on this poll

06-29-10, 05:29 PM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Homeopathy Do you believe in it (or variations of it) as an effective cure, or not? Myself, I cut it short, I think it is quackery. I see a chance of it being effective in the meaning of a placebo being effective. I also can imagine that this placebo effect can be transported via a mediating person (a mother orders homeopathic treatement for her child, and the child responds to her expecation and behavior by showing a placebo effect). However, I cannot ignore that I was unable to find hints for any serious study prooving the effectiveness of the method, but that many studies that were claimed to deliver evidence in the past years, have been withdrawn by their authors, or have been called back by publishers, or that the homeopathy fan group itself even admitted were extremely faulty. I also cannot ignore the many inherent inconsistencies of the theory, and the almost superstitious thinking behind the "Gleichheitsprinzip" (similiarity principle?), which reminds of the wearing of flower amulettes in the medieval. I knew people long time ago, who treated the "depressed mood" of their cat with Bachblüten, and swore that the cat became better and behaved differently. I knew those people quite well for some years, and their cat as well, and I did not see any change at all, i also did not see any depressed basic mood in that cat. I think the people just saw what they wanted to imagine into it. In that a patient maybe denies regular medical treatement over attempts of trying homeopathy first, I even see risks involved. The idea of information being written into water and carried by water molecules when the agents get deluded to ratios that finally not even one molecule would be left in all of earth's oceans, I cannot believe at all. I find Sheldrake's morphogenetic fields theory very interesting and fascinating (not proven wrong but also not proven right, however), but when comparing to homeopathy's basic assumptions, Sheldrake has presented a model and theory with hierarchic argument that compares to homeopathy like a Ferrari compares to an oxcart. What do you think? __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.