Merged Possible Scientific Foundations of Homeopathy

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wait a minute. Do you mean -- can you possibly mean -- that Ganesha doesn't exist?

Oh! To whom shall I pray for money & good luck & success & stuff?

Buncha old meanies.
 
Kumar said:
I don't know about it but whether it was meant for this purpose?:

Treatment[edit]Routine treatment in an otherwise-healthy person consists of regularly scheduled phlebotomies (bloodletting or erythrocytapheresis). When first diagnosed, the phlebotomies may be fairly frequent, until iron levels can be brought to within normal range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_overload

and this one:
Iron Loading and Disease Surveillance
[https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/5/3/pdfs/99-0305.pdf/quote]
Click to expand...

Well, you are right. Bloodletting actually has a purpose for one special (and rather unusual) condition. The point, as you know, is that it was used for everything, even anemia.

Since you know exactly what the point was, that kind of posts is pure trolling.

Hans
Click to expand...
 
Kumar said:
We just have to understand, which has more importance and which is ultimate: statical significane/observations or practical clinical significance/observations? Whichever is more important, that will get the trophy.
Click to expand...

Practical clinical observation is far from good enough, even when made by educated physicians. Obviously, it gets worse when the observers don't have any medical training, like the case typically is with homeopaths.

There are numerous examples of established clinical practices that have turned out to be inefficient, some even harmful, when properly tested.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
Kumar said:
I don't know about it but whether it was meant for this purpose?:



Well, you are right. Bloodletting actually has a purpose for one special (and rather unusual) condition. The point, as you know, is that it was used for everything, even anemia.

Since you know exactly what the point was, that kind of posts is pure trolling.

Hans
Click to expand...
If you can read 2nd link provided by me, you may also notice some other reasoning?
Click to expand...
 
MRC_Hans said:
Practical clinical observation is far from good enough, even when made by educated physicians. Obviously, it gets worse when the observers don't have any medical training, like the case typically is with homeopaths.

There are numerous examples of established clinical practices that have turned out to be inefficient, some even harmful, when properly tested.

Hans
Click to expand...
Homeopaths now has proper medical training? Just at par to modern med system except difference in durgs.
 
Durgs, Kumar? Oh my goodness damn, that is just like saying DURGA!

She is very impartant Hindu goddess. Be careful, Pakistan is not welcome place for idolatry of female gods.

Homeopathy, well okeh, just keep bit bribes coming by police magistrate. But you knewing this already!
 
Kumar: Defends homeopathy with fallacies and a bit of a lie

Kumar said:
Mass presence, persistence since long and continued growth of anything should also be better evidence of creditability.
Click to expand...
12 September 2017 Kumar: Defends homeopathy with fallacies and a bit of a lie
  1. Appeal to popularity.
    The real stupidity in the appeal to popularity fallacy is that it states that the more popular something is, the better it is. Guess how popular working conventional medicine is :p!
  2. An ignorant appeal to antiquity (homeopathy has only been around since 1796!)
    Quack remedies lasting for a long time does not make them medicine. They have to actually cure something first.
  3. Homeopathy is probably dying, not growing.
    Public opposition is growing as people learn more about how insane it is (active ingredients that do not work and are then removed!).
    Some hospitals are no longer offering homeopathic services.
    Some universities are shutting down homeopathic degree courses.
    The US FDA is getting tougher on OTC homeopathic remedies.
 
Kumar: An ignorant fantasy that popularity = effectiveness

Kumar said:
But people opting it also endorss its effectiveness.
Click to expand...
12 September 2017 Kumar: An ignorant fantasy that popularity = effectiveness.
People experiencing the placebo effect does not make sugar pills effective.
People dying does not endorse the effectiveness of sugar pills.
People being sick does not endorse the effectiveness of sugar pills.

Bloodletting (usually to balance imaginary humors in the blood) was extremely popular for about 2000 years. It had no effectiveness.
Ditto for acupuncture which has almost no effectiveness.
 
Kumar: Links to a web site lying about homeopathy

Kumar said:
See:
https://targetstudy.com/courses/bhms.html
Click to expand...
12 September 2017 Kumar: Links to a web site lying about homeopathy.
The "highly diluted substances" in homeopathy have no active ingredients and thus do nothing.

Just because people offer degrees in homeopathy, does not mean that all homeopaths have those degrees. There are diplomas of homeopathy, etc.
 
Last edited:
If I were just a little less scrupulous, I could make tons of money... There are people out there desperate to believe any old nonsense...
 
MRC_Hans said:
5 1/2 years ... admission, a written test, minimum age 17. ...

Well, thank you for proving my point, Kumar.:rolleyes:

Hans
Click to expand...

It is quite ok. Nothing to arugeon it. If still not satisfied, simple google search will satisfy you. I know very well because my very close relative done it even upto MD.
 
Kumar said:
I know very well. See:
https://targetstudy.com/courses/bhms.html

Even they do Medical human dissection.
Click to expand...

Dissection by correspondence course/distance learning? Seriously, did you even read the 'course' outline? Where do they get the bodies?

Kumar said:
That do not mean that they are not properly medical trainted.
Click to expand...

I assume 'medical trainted' has nothing to do with actual, real medical training, like a actual, real doctor would do.

Kumar said:
Irrelevant! Non-sense!!
Click to expand...

Which accurately describes most (all?) of your posts.

MRC_Hans said:
5 1/2 years ... admission, a written test, minimum age 17. ...

Well, thank you for proving my point, Kumar.:rolleyes:

Hans
Click to expand...

And you can do the course via correspondence. Just how I like my doctor trained.

Kumar said:
It is quite ok. Nothing to arugeon it. If still not satisfied, simple google search will satisfy you. I know very well because my very close relative done it even upto MD.
Click to expand...

We know Kumar, your daughter. The non doctor.
 
fagin said:
Dissection by correspondence course/distance learning? Seriously, did you even read the 'course' outline? Where do they get the bodies?



I assume 'medical trainted' has nothing to do with actual, real medical training, like a actual, real doctor would do.



Which accurately describes most (all?) of your posts.



And you can do the course via correspondence. Just how I like my doctor trained.



We know Kumar, your daughter. The non doctor.
Click to expand...

I do not talk on this idiocy any more.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Oh, I suspect you will.

Dave
Click to expand...

100% i.e A&F. If fagin do not applozize properly or punished for his/her úncivility beyond all limíts inspite of hís/her no contribution. I shall not discuss on this forum anymore. Promise.
If anyone is so addicted to doubting all, he/she should first submit scan copy of his/her DNA reports justifying truth of relations with parents, children and other blood relations, scientifically. Sorry.
 
Kumar said:
100% i.e A&F. If fagin do not applozize properly or punished for his/her úncivility beyond all limíts inspite of hís/her no contribution. I shall not discuss on this forum anymore. Promise.
Click to expand...

This is still talking about it.

Kumar said:
If anyone is so addicted to doubting all, he/she should first submit scan copy of his/her DNA reports justifying truth of relations with parents, children and other blood relations, scientifically. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Skepticism allows for a reasonable level of evidence to support an unexceptional claim. In the case of homeopathy, there is good reason, on the basis of well understood physics, to be certain that there is in fact no active ingredient present in the doses given, there is overwhelming medical evidence that the fundamental "like drives out like" principle is completely incorrect, and there is ample evidence, when studies are not carefully cherry-picked, that homeopathic treatment is indistinguishable from no treatment at all. All the evidence is persuasively against it. This is in no way comparable with your strawman argument.

Dave
 
Where's the vid of Randi downing a fresh bottle of homeopathic sleeping pills at the start of a live presentation?

As I recall.. they weren't very effective. :p
 
Kumar said:
100% i.e A&F. If fagin do not applozize properly or punished for his/her úncivility beyond all limíts inspite of hís/her no contribution. I shall not discuss on this forum anymore. Promise.If anyone is so addicted to doubting all, he/she should first submit scan copy of his/her DNA reports justifying truth of relations with parents, children and other blood relations, scientifically. Sorry.
Click to expand...

fagin, you know what to do. Or, rather, what not to do. We have faith in you :)
 
The power! Can I handle it? Or will I weaken in anticipation of the next thrilling episode?

Same bat **** crazy channel, same bat **** crazy time.

ps. I can be bribed with cake or bacons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kumar said:
100% i.e A&F. If fagin do not applozize properly or punished for his/her úncivility beyond all limíts inspite of hís/her no contribution. I shall not discuss on this forum anymore. Promise.
Click to expand...

Boring, Kumar. You have promised this before. It is only an excuse to bail out of a discussion you realize you are loosing.

You always come back. :rolleyes:

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
Boring, Kumar. You have promised this before. It is only an excuse to bail out of a discussion you realize you are loosing.

You always come back. :rolleyes:

Hans
Click to expand...

No. Your above statement is contradictory. I simply maintained courtesy and obligation esp to those who also contributed.
 
Kumar said:
No. Your above statement is contradictory. I simply maintained courtesy and obligation esp to those who also contributed.
Click to expand...


Ignoring the explanations people have taken the trouble to post for you is not courteous.
 
Mojo said:
Ignoring the explanations people have taken the trouble to post for you is not courteous.
Click to expand...

Mass presence and well distributed facts even practical, legal and least side effect model could not satisfy you, it will simply suggest some perceived agenda in sefish interests or just idiócy. Those who neither contribute nor required in díscussions also neither studied at par nor A&f,, how can be entitled to do personal harsh remarks. Seems, have no respect n care for his near ones.
Any way, since, no required action is prefered, I am leaving permanently. I do got more convinced by these and other discussions, here and elsewheres, that homeopathic model does hold validity, therefore much accepted and leagaly approved and much supported.

Enjoy in you. Thanks all for wharever shared or got. See you at up.:) Good Bye.:(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom