Which one is modern medicine: Allopathy or Homeopathy?

[Michael Meadon]

You actually cite Jacques Benveniste??? His claims have been utterly discredited by Randi and others: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v334/n6180/pdf/334287a0.pdf

[Hades]

If one considers the attitudes displayed during the recent strikes, and doctors attitudes in general regarding exorbitant medical costs;  perhaps Apathy is a better term modern medicine.

[Michael Meadon]

If one considers the attitudes displayed during the recent strikes, and doctors attitudes in general regarding exorbitant medical costs;  perhaps Apathy is a better term modern medicine.

I'm not sure South African medics are representative. And, as far as I saw, nurses were the worst offenders. Doctors much less so. (And, unfortunately, there is an absolute surfeit in nonsense in nursing. Read some nursing journals - it'll raise the hairs on your back. More pomo nonsense that I can stomach, for example. And I speak as the creator of the "Postmodernism is stupid" Facebook group).

[Dr Nancy Malik]

There is lot of misconception among skeptics of homeopathy medicine. They need to told the basic fundamentals of homeopathy.

http://knol.google.com/k/dr-nancy-malik-bhms/homeopathy-explained/pocy7w49ru14/1#

It covers Definition of Health, Principles of Homoeopathy, How homeopathy works?, Sources of Homeopathic medicines, What medical conditions homeopathy treat? Preventive Medicine, etc

Any further query or apprehension or criticism is welcome.

[Mefiante]

There is lot of misconception among skeptics of homeopathy medicine.

No, there isn’t.  By far the bulk of the misconception exists among homoeopathy’s proponents.  This link exemplifies it.

Any further query or apprehension or criticism is welcome.

No, it isn’t.  Or, only if the use of the word “welcome” is to be read as “will be answered with obfuscation and convenient invention.”  This link exemplifies it.

Homoeopathy supporters are living in a two-hundred-year-old dream world and are desperately trying to cling to defunct, outmoded and bankrupt thinking by making stuff up.  This link exemplifies it.

'Luthon64

[rwenzori]

Hi there Nance old girl - long time no see.

Maybe you could help. One of my many companies is suffering from a lack of imaginative product development. I mentioned this just the other day, and am considering getting Rwenzori Universal Panaceas LLC to investigate peddling Virodene. You might remember Virodene - some industrial gunk with a tendency to kill off HIV along with the person infected. Do you think it might be effective in little homeopathic doses? That would certainly keep our costs down - we would not have to buy so much of the shit. Let me know.

PS. Just ignore the others here, and all their criticism - the place is infested with homeophobes.

[Mefiante]

[T]he place is infested with homeophobes.

That should be “homoeophobes.”  And said infestation is perfectly understandable, given how there’s so much about homoeopathy that’s queer…

'Luthon64

[bluegray]

A kind review

This article covers a 200 year old pseudo science that has been well and truly tested and found wanting by the scientific community.  It's based on theories that, in order for them to work, would require a rewrite of the laws and theories behind physics, chemistry and biology.

The article is bogus.

[Mefiante]

An even kinder review here, though of homoeopathy itself rather than of Malik’s article.  It commits a number of fallacies in the hope of appearing balanced.  The write-up characterises a dangerous kind of journalism by holding out the extremely unlikely hope that homoeopathy might actually work and that everyone should decide the question for themselves.  One wonders whether the author also believes that everyone should decide for themselves whether sucking oleander stalks is hazardous or not.

To its credit, the article leaves out appeals to Quantum Mechanics as a possible mechanism.

'Luthon64

[Dr Nancy Malik]

There is lot of misconception among skeptics of homeopathy medicine.

No, there isn’t.  By far the bulk of the misconception exists among homoeopathy’s proponents.  This link exemplifies it.

Any further query or apprehension or criticism is welcome.

No, it isn’t.  Or, only if the use of the word “welcome” is to be read as “will be answered with obfuscation and convenient invention.”  This link exemplifies it.

Homoeopathy supporters are living in a two-hundred-year-old dream world and are desperately trying to cling to defunct, outmoded and bankrupt thinking by making stuff up.  This link exemplifies it.

'Luthon64

It's not a 200 year old misconception as you think. It is grounded solidly on scientific principles. There is lot of research in homeopathy medicine

http://knol.google.com/k/dr-nancy-malik-bhms/scientific-research-in-homeopathy/pocy7w49ru14/2

There have been more than 130 research studies published in 52 journals. How can you deny that?

[Mefiante]

It's not a 200 year old misconception as you think.

Yes, it is.  In fact, it’s a 200-year-old misconception and a modern superstition.  None of its founding principles is borne out by science.

It is grounded solidly on scientific principles.

No, it isn’t.  It’s loosely grounded on pseudoscientific principles and wishful, muddy thinking.

There is lot of research in homeopathy medicine

Yes, there has.  And wherever the studies have been carefully controlled, your precious homoeopathy fails.

There have been more than 130 research studies published in 52 journals. How can you deny that?

I am equally impressed by the far greater number of research papers on cold fusion published in assorted physics and chemistry journals.  Publication bias, confirmation bias and more wishful thinking add up to “proof” on the strange little world homoeopaths inhabit.

'Luthon64

[GCG]

vote on news24 today



http://www.news24.com/

[Mandarb]

Prime, prime material for a Pharyngulalation.

Sends a mail in hopeful optimism to PZ.

[Dr Nancy Malik]

I have already answered lots of questions asked by skeptics of homeopathy medicine. I am tired of answering again and again. So I have listed most common FAQ on homeopathy

http://knol.google.com/k/dr-nancy-malik-bhms/faq-a-on-homeopathy/pocy7w49ru14/11

Still if something is not answered feel free to ask.I would be more than happy to answer you.

[GCG]

can anyone say troll?