Placebos are direct evidence of the human body's capability to heal itself. What is "wrong" with placebos from the point of view of medical orthodoxy is they cannot be controlled. Rather than healing, the goal of western medicine is to be able to split off a symptom or disease process and "cure" or "manage" is independent from any other changes. That is why it is called "allopathic medicine" (different or other) as contrasted with homeopathic (or same.) This kind of medicine fights the body, attempting to overpower it and cram an external will down its throat, rather than working with it. If you want control and domination of the body, that is fine; just don't pretend is has anything to do with healing or ridicule those who honor the body and its wisdom.
You may be suffering from the "nocebo" effect, which is a negative belief that operates like the well-known (but little understood) "placebo" effect, only in reverse. Or you would, that is, if you were stupid enough to ever try homeopathy.;)
Homeopathy is completely inappropriate for ER, which is one of the few areas western medicine actually excels. Perhaps it was meant to be funny, but it's also quite specious.
Steve Jobs died because he was living in a human body. He would have died eventually regardless of what treatment options he chose. My body will die, and so will yours, and it won't be all that long.
Odds are I've thought about this and looked into it a lot more than you. Odds are I'm a lot more articulate than you speaking about it. And odds are I'm better trained in science and more experienced working with technology than you. Just sayin'.
Seems like you have quite a club going here - incredible arrogance on display. No, I didn't read the article, and I don't need to since I have been following the Slashdot threads on this and similar topics in the "anti-science idiots" vein for a long time. My point is not about homeopathy, per se, as much as Science as a religion. You have your so-called "facts", but they are part of a particular worldview that is less applicable to human health than, say, tablet display technology. Modern medicine is great for physical trauma and stabilizing acute illness (that is, keeping you from dying right now,) but beyond that, it is almost completely charlatan. For sure it is a complete failure at curing any of the rapidly expanding list of serious diseases. Yuck it up fellas.
As a longtime user of homeopathy, I have watched with amusement a scientific studies have been published recently purporting to prove that homeopathy does not work. I know from my direct experience that it works, so if science is finding something different, there must be something wrong with its premises. What we call science is actually just another religion that hold there is a world "out there" separate from the observer that can be experimented upon and manipulated to learn its secrets. Sciences believes one part can be split off and controlled or tested without affecting or being affected by the whole. Since homeopathy is holistic, perhaps this is why its power and effectiveness is beyond the grasp of science.
Personally, I think science could do much better if the orthodox mindset embraced the full implications of the Heisenberg uncertainty principal, but of course there would still be the problem of money dictating what gets studied and what the acceptable (orthodox) outcomes are. We have been seeing a tremendous arrogance and overreach on the part of science, which is providing to be particularly impotent when it comes to what one might reasonably refer to as "health". How much difference is there really in Science saying vaccines are "safe and effective" and homeopathy "effective", then forcing its views on the rest of humanity (by forcing vaccination and outlawing homeopathy,) and the Catholic Church imposing any of its doctrines by force? Anyone with a bit of humility would do well to pause and reflect on this.
We know the human body to be quite competent in healing itself and maintaining its own health, which is actually acknowledged on the face of the pharmaceutical drug trial protocol in form of the "placebo". I guess another way of looking at it is this: who gets to decide if a medication is effective? If I believe and have observed its effectiveness as part of a holistic approach to health and I am willing to spend my money on it, why should I be unable to do that? The attitudes that would say I should not are so very similar to those traditionally "religious" prohibitions we have seen for so many centuries.
Slashdot Mirror
Who will log in to check what's not to be shown? And how will the whistle be blown when this new power is abused?
Placebos are direct evidence of the human body's capability to heal itself. What is "wrong" with placebos from the point of view of medical orthodoxy is they cannot be controlled. Rather than healing, the goal of western medicine is to be able to split off a symptom or disease process and "cure" or "manage" is independent from any other changes. That is why it is called "allopathic medicine" (different or other) as contrasted with homeopathic (or same.) This kind of medicine fights the body, attempting to overpower it and cram an external will down its throat, rather than working with it. If you want control and domination of the body, that is fine; just don't pretend is has anything to do with healing or ridicule those who honor the body and its wisdom.
You may be suffering from the "nocebo" effect, which is a negative belief that operates like the well-known (but little understood) "placebo" effect, only in reverse. Or you would, that is, if you were stupid enough to ever try homeopathy. ;)
Homeopathy is completely inappropriate for ER, which is one of the few areas western medicine actually excels. Perhaps it was meant to be funny, but it's also quite specious.
Steve Jobs died because he was living in a human body. He would have died eventually regardless of what treatment options he chose. My body will die, and so will yours, and it won't be all that long.
Odds are I've thought about this and looked into it a lot more than you. Odds are I'm a lot more articulate than you speaking about it. And odds are I'm better trained in science and more experienced working with technology than you. Just sayin'.
Seems like you have quite a club going here - incredible arrogance on display. No, I didn't read the article, and I don't need to since I have been following the Slashdot threads on this and similar topics in the "anti-science idiots" vein for a long time. My point is not about homeopathy, per se, as much as Science as a religion. You have your so-called "facts", but they are part of a particular worldview that is less applicable to human health than, say, tablet display technology. Modern medicine is great for physical trauma and stabilizing acute illness (that is, keeping you from dying right now,) but beyond that, it is almost completely charlatan. For sure it is a complete failure at curing any of the rapidly expanding list of serious diseases. Yuck it up fellas.
As a longtime user of homeopathy, I have watched with amusement a scientific studies have been published recently purporting to prove that homeopathy does not work. I know from my direct experience that it works, so if science is finding something different, there must be something wrong with its premises. What we call science is actually just another religion that hold there is a world "out there" separate from the observer that can be experimented upon and manipulated to learn its secrets. Sciences believes one part can be split off and controlled or tested without affecting or being affected by the whole. Since homeopathy is holistic, perhaps this is why its power and effectiveness is beyond the grasp of science. Personally, I think science could do much better if the orthodox mindset embraced the full implications of the Heisenberg uncertainty principal, but of course there would still be the problem of money dictating what gets studied and what the acceptable (orthodox) outcomes are. We have been seeing a tremendous arrogance and overreach on the part of science, which is providing to be particularly impotent when it comes to what one might reasonably refer to as "health". How much difference is there really in Science saying vaccines are "safe and effective" and homeopathy "effective", then forcing its views on the rest of humanity (by forcing vaccination and outlawing homeopathy,) and the Catholic Church imposing any of its doctrines by force? Anyone with a bit of humility would do well to pause and reflect on this. We know the human body to be quite competent in healing itself and maintaining its own health, which is actually acknowledged on the face of the pharmaceutical drug trial protocol in form of the "placebo". I guess another way of looking at it is this: who gets to decide if a medication is effective? If I believe and have observed its effectiveness as part of a holistic approach to health and I am willing to spend my money on it, why should I be unable to do that? The attitudes that would say I should not are so very similar to those traditionally "religious" prohibitions we have seen for so many centuries.