View Single Post
Old 7th December 2007, 07:57 AM   #167
Dana Ullman
Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
What condition was Darwin suffering from? Please give references to a reliable diagnosis.
Again, you haven't done your homework. There are various theories about his diagnosis, but that is not the point. Are you or anyone saying that Darwin's 12+ serious ailment "just happened" to get better 8 days after visiting Dr. Gully's clinic and had nothing to do with the treatment he received. Once again, skeptics tend to be much more metaphysical than I am. Thank you for making your position clear.

Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
The evidence shows that homoeopathy does not have this sort of dramatic effect. The best (from your point of view) results from meta analysis of controlled trials just say things like "the results of our meta-analysis are not compatible with the hypothesis that the clinical effects of homeopathy are completely due to placebo. However, we found insufficient evidence from these studies that homeopathy is clearly efficacious for any single clinical condition." This makes it highly unlikely that the "dramatically beneficial effect on Charles Darwin" was caused by homoeopathy. Why would it have worked any better in the 19th century?
It is interesting to note that skeptics love to mention that the above meta-analysis said, "we found insufficient evidence from these studies that homeopathy is clearly efficacious for any single clinical condition." However, do they ever mention what the authors of that meta-analysis say was their definition of "sufficient evidence?" They said that there must be 3 clinical trials conducted by independent investigators.

In 1998 (a year after that meta-analysis published in the LANCET was published), a third such trial on Oscillococcinum was published. And by the way, this meta-analysis showed that patients given a homeopathic medicine had a 2.45 times greater chance of experiencing a therapeutically beneficial effect than those patients given a placebo.

Skeptics can no longer say that homeopathic medicines are proven to be effective in treating a specific condition.

If anyone is asked, does Oscillococcinum have an effect on influenza or influenza-like syndrome, one must say YES. I'll say it for Linda: but this is a self-limiting condition. Sure...but it is worthwhile to reduce the time YOU have the flu to make a cheap medicine without side effects? Yes...except for some of you who like to suffer.

As for that sepsis study...it is a tad ironic (again) that Mr Monkey says that this study doesn't count because the patients were also given conventional drugs. Yeah, Mr. Monkey that is right, but those patients who got individually chosen homeopathic medicines (chosen according to their own unique syndrome of severe sepsis) had a 50% (!) reduced mortality rate. Hey Linda, is this a "self-limiting condition?" Believing in reincarnation doesn't make it such.

Originally Posted by Mojo View Post

All it showed was that the plants were sensitive to extremely small doses of the salts.
Thank you. Yes...plants do have this hypersensitivity, and plants are so much more sophisticated that humans, so there is no way that humans can have this type or any type of hypersensitivity. Hmmm.

The irony here is that homeopathy is said to be based on SIMILARS, when a better term might be RESONANCE...and there is hypersensitivity from resonance (any music appreciators out there?).
Dana Ullman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top