Slashdot Mirror
University of Toronto: Anti-vaccine Homeopathy Course Is Fine
The University of Toronto recently undertook an investigation of one of its courses, a bachelor-level health class that taught both anti-vaccination materials and the "science" of homeopathy. The investigation was undertaken because of complaints from professors and other scientific and medical experts. Surprisingly, the university concluded that the class was just fine. "Students taking (the course) ... are in their final year of study and are expected to approach controversial topics with a critical lens. The instructor reports that she provides these readings as the students have already seen the other side in previous courses." The course's syllabus is available for reading. It contains quotes like this: "There are broad concepts that bind various 'alternative' medical modalities together. Among these is the assertion that the human organism, which developed as an integrated unit in its formation, also functions as an integrated unit; that mind, body, and spirit are inextricably linked. Disorder or disturbance in any one of these areas can cause disease in another area."
Update: 07/13 14:14 GMT by S : Reader Gallenod points out that the University has now decided that the course will not be taught during the 2015-2016 academic year, or over the summer.
Update: 07/13 14:14 GMT by S : Reader Gallenod points out that the University has now decided that the course will not be taught during the 2015-2016 academic year, or over the summer.
"Question the priorities and approaches of mainstream western medicine through the lens of a more holistic approach to health."
"Understand the connection between body, mind, energy, and spirit and how the interplay between these impact health and disease."
"Intelligently address the concerns of those afraid of alternative medicine or skeptical about its efficacy. "
Wow, this sounds like a nice university...
There's a reason those diseases are exceedingly rare. You anonymous idiot.
The instructor, Beth Landau-Halpern, is married to Rick Halpern, the dean of the campus where this course is taught.
I am Audience.
Oranges may be natural medicine, but they're not homeopathy.
The theory of homeopathy is that you cure a disease with a drug that reproduces the symptoms of that disease (that's the prefix "homo" in homeopathy-- "same"). So, oranges would only be useful as a homeopathy remedy if eating oranges gives you the symptoms of scurvy. ...and then homeopathy takes that drug and dilutes it until not a single molecule originating in an orange is in the drug. The homeopathy cure for scurvy would be "take a drink of water from a glass of water that was filled from a glass of water that was filled from a glass of water that had one drop of orange juice in it.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Fortunately, wiser heads have finally prevailed:
http://www.provost.utoronto.ca...
From the article:
=====
The UTSC Health Studies Program has indicated that the course in question will not be taught in the 2015-16 academic year, or over the summer term.
As Provost of this academic institution, I must at all times respect the diversity of opinions and views of academic colleagues and sessional instructors. However, I do note with respect that the Deans of the University’s Faculty of Medicine and Dalla Lana School of Public Health have released a statement commenting on the education of their students regarding vaccinations. It includes the following:
“As deans of two of the health sciences faculties at the University of Toronto, we teach our students that vaccines are safe, effective and vital to children’s health. Vaccines are one of history’s most important and significant achievements in public health and medicine. The best evidence that science can provide proves that the health benefits of vaccines far outweigh their potential side effects, and we instruct our students accordingly.”
=====
TLR
A man no more knows his destiny than a tea leaf knows the history of the East India Company
The placebo effect is merely a name for something we don't understand.
No. No it isn't. If this is the starting point for your argument then you are already wrong before you say another word.