The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Split

Homeopathy, Chiropractic and similar "alternative" views

Discussions on astrology, homeopathy and superstition etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#161  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:14 pm

Darkchilde wrote:..Without antibiotics, without modern medicine a lot of people would be dead by simple diseases.


I think you need to know more about anti-biotics

http://www.chiro.org/ChiroZine/ABSTRACT ... tics.shtml
http://www.physorg.com/news104754091.html
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#162  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:19 pm

Crocodile Gandhi wrote:
I have a question for you: If I was to drink a litre of diluted homeopathic medicine would I suffer any ill effect from taking a massive overdose?


If the homeopathy medicine is not your similum, it won't have any effect
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#163  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:21 pm

Darkchilde wrote:And she must be treated only with homeopathic crap, no hospitals, real doctors or real medicine.



By "real" do you mean homeopathy?
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#164  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:26 pm

generalsemanticist wrote:Please tell me your doctor is not responsible for your health. We are all responsible for our own health. Dr. Malik makes a valid point. Disease is a result of a number of factors, not merely the presence of a pathogen. We are exposed to them continuously so why are we not sick all the time?


Suppose a group of people are exposed to Influenza Virus. Only few of them get sick and others remain healthy. Why does that happen?

The people who remain healthy were immune to disease and were not vulnerable to disease. Immunity is a inborn tendency in individuals to recognize and acquire antigens. In short, the people who were immune to the disease were dynamically in a perfect equilibrium.

People who got affected by disease were dynamically deranged before only, and were vulnerable to get affected by disease bacteria or virus. So, dynamic derangement in the person was first to occur, then bacteria and viruses entered in their body to produce disease.

Homeopathy has always maintained that it's an environment which plays a very important role in disease manifestation. But conventional medicine has never accepted this fact wholeheartedly.
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#165  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:32 pm

lordshipmayhem wrote:No, Dr. Malik's claim is not that pathogens are just one cause of disease, but that pathogens have nothing to do with disease. That this flies in the face of evidence gathered over more than 150 years of medical research is the issue we have with her.


Wrong. You have misunderstood my words
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#166  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:35 pm

generalsemanticist wrote:I understood Dr. Malik to mean that pathogens are involved in disease but the environment in which it operates plays a more important role. I'm not sure I agree with that totally - I might suggest that its 50-50. I don't see any need to insult her - its so childish. :(


This is exactly what I meant to say
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#167  Postby GenesForLife » May 28, 2010 7:52 pm

Bullshit, you cannot type nonsense and blame others for "misunderstanding" it. You said germs are not the cause of diseases, the quote is still littered around the thread if you want to check, Koch's postulates and a century of empirical research say that is manifestly wrong.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#168  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » May 28, 2010 7:52 pm

generalsemanticist wrote:I found this interesting quote in a comment here.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... rug-deaths

When we will realize that the "science" of medicine defined efficacy of treatment by the elimination or reduction in specific symptoms, even if these symptoms are themselves defenses of the body. This "efficacy" is akin to unscrewing a warning light in your car and asserted that you've a "scientifically proven" method of treating cars that are sick.


This resonates with me. You are correct when you say double blind studies verify efficacy of drugs however, this should not be confused with good heathcare. People involved in AM are much more interested in healthcare, not merely getting rid of symptoms with toxic drugs.


Homeopathy medicine is of the view that that mere treatment of symptoms and organs can only help temporarily and that it is the healing power of the body as whole that has to be enhanced
Evidence-based scientific homeopathy is a modern nano-medicine like Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM)
User avatar
Dr. Nancy Malik
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dr. Nancy Malik
Posts: 289
Age: 42
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#169  Postby GenesForLife » May 28, 2010 8:04 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
generalsemanticist wrote:Please tell me your doctor is not responsible for your health. We are all responsible for our own health. Dr. Malik makes a valid point. Disease is a result of a number of factors, not merely the presence of a pathogen. We are exposed to them continuously so why are we not sick all the time?


Suppose a group of people are exposed to Influenza Virus. Only few of them get sick and others remain healthy. Why does that happen?

The people who remain healthy were immune to disease and were not vulnerable to disease. Immunity is a inborn tendency in individuals to recognize and acquire antigens. In short, the people who were immune to the disease were dynamically in a perfect equilibrium.

People who got affected by disease were dynamically deranged before only, and were vulnerable to get affected by disease bacteria or virus. So, dynamic derangement in the person was first to occur, then bacteria and viruses entered in their body to produce disease.

Homeopathy has always maintained that it's an environment which plays a very important role in disease manifestation. But conventional medicine has never accepted this fact wholeheartedly.


1. Differential levels of sickness can be due to variations in the infective dose, immunity because of previous exposure, and also due to the progressive attenuation of the virus that takes place as it spreads.

2. Any evidence for "dynamic derangement"? As someone familiar with the fundamentals of immunology I can tell you you are speaking out of the proverbial you know what.

3. Provide evidence for "dynamic equilibrium" , otherwise , if it sounds like woo, smells like woo and looks like woo, it is woo.

4. You talk about environment, ey? Then, can you explain how people in the same environment may not show identical levels of vulnerability, pathogens, on the other hand, fulfil Koch's postulates and all you have here is an assertion.

5. Homeopathy makes philosophical point does not mean Homeopathy works, it is a logical fallacy and a non-sequitur at that, there still is bugger all evidence that Homeopathy works,both regarding observed mechanisms and the extremely hilarious biochemical principles involved, please stop spouting cretinous drivel and supply evidence.

Generalsemanticist, the answer to that question again is simple, there needs to be a minimal infective load/dose of pathogens before they can cause disease, but far less to mobilize the pathways of immunity in the body, and unless immunity is suppressed, an exposure to an antigen, not necessarily to the level of infective dose, can trigger an immune response.

So, back to our resident Homeopath, evidence please.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#170  Postby GenesForLife » May 28, 2010 8:10 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
Darkchilde wrote:..Without antibiotics, without modern medicine a lot of people would be dead by simple diseases.


I think you need to know more about anti-biotics

http://www.chiro.org/ChiroZine/ABSTRACT ... tics.shtml
http://www.physorg.com/news104754091.html



More retarded drivel, I see, the first article asserts that Pasteur created hydrophobia, for instance, whereas we have found the requisite virus that induces those symptoms and verfied a direct causal link using Koch's postulates.

The second article explains the emergence of drug resistance, which automatically does nothing to suggest that antibiotics aren't efficacious , and what part of the concept that resistance is specific to certain antibiotics do you refuse to understand?

So, more retarded bullshit, it really is getting infuriating, as I said before, and will say it again...

EVEN PROVING THAT CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE DOESN'T WORK DOES NOT MEAN THAT HOMEOPATHY WORKS

Now, evidence please.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#171  Postby Darkchilde » May 28, 2010 9:29 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
Let me list only among those you have listed

Homeopathy treatment for cancer
http://www.homeopatia.edu.pl/index.asp? ... =13&ide=41
http://www.freewebs.com/homeopathy249/c ... iespti.htm


Those people with the above websites should be ashamed for disseminating false and inaccurate information, as well as getting people's hopes up, without being able to deliver. Even I, without being a doctor, know that in the first site the quack (that wants to be called a doctor) is talking out of his arse. Totally.

There is no peer-reviewed studies, no clinical trials, no nothing.

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
homeopathy treatment for depression
http://www.homeorizon.com/homeopathic-a ... depression


And again it is wrong. There are many causes of depression, and one of those which is not listed is a traumatic experience, like the death of a loved one which can cause depression. Bipolar disorders, post partum depression, etc. etc.

But where it gets it wrong is the treatment with homeopathic remedies. Depression needs a lot more than just water.

And wikipedia gets it right. Read about depression here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_psychological_depression I think you need to go back to school, to a proper university with a proper medical degree, where you can learn real medical science and not the crap that is homeopathy. Because homeopathy is not medicine, it is quackery.

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
homeopathy treatment of AIDS
http://drptandon.blogspot.com/2008/06/c ... athic.html


Again, more crap. The study is wrong, there was NO CONTROL GROUP.

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
homeopathy treatment of cold
http://www.simillimum.com/education/fir ... coryza.php


Really? You want to treat the common cold with arsenic and mercury? Is that website insane? Mercury and Arsenic are poisonous and dangerous to health.

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE? WHERE ARE THE PEER REVIEWED ARTICLES? AND NO NOT THE HOMEOPATHIC JOURNALS BUT REAL MEDICAL JOURNALS.
User avatar
Darkchilde
RS Donator
 
Posts: 9015
Age: 51
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#172  Postby Darkchilde » May 28, 2010 9:31 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
Darkchilde wrote:And she must be treated only with homeopathic crap, no hospitals, real doctors or real medicine.



By "real" do you mean homeopathy?


When I say medicine, and real medicine, I do not mean homeopathy. Homeopathy is quackery.
User avatar
Darkchilde
RS Donator
 
Posts: 9015
Age: 51
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#173  Postby Darkchilde » May 28, 2010 9:35 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
GenesForLife wrote:Stop waffling and post evidence, please. Heard of a localized infectiona and a systemic infection? For instance, take HPV infections, which manifest as warts, locally, it is the region that gets infected which is, um, infected and not the whole person getting sick, so there goes another blind assertion.


According to homeopathy medicine, it is the whole person who is affected by the disease and it is the whole person who responds to the medicine.


And again you are wrong. I had an infection in my cheek once. No other organ was affected, I was fine otherwise. A cleaning soap, an antibiotic cream and some oral antibiotics for one week, and the infection was gone. All prescribed by my dermatologist (a real doctor with real studies, and not a homeopath).

Oral antibiotics are always prescribed with any kind of infection.
User avatar
Darkchilde
RS Donator
 
Posts: 9015
Age: 51
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#174  Postby iamthereforeithink » May 28, 2010 9:40 pm

:coffee:
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
User avatar
iamthereforeithink
 
Posts: 3332
Age: 10
Male

Country: USA/ EU
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial

#175  Postby Shrunk » May 29, 2010 1:03 am

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
Let me list only among those you have listed

Homeopathy treatment for cancer
http://www.homeopatia.edu.pl/index.asp? ... =13&ide=41
http://www.freewebs.com/homeopathy249/c ... iespti.htm

homeopathy treatment for depression
http://www.homeorizon.com/homeopathic-a ... depression

homeopathy treatment of AIDS
http://drptandon.blogspot.com/2008/06/c ... athic.html

homeopathy treatment of cold
http://www.simillimum.com/education/fir ... coryza.php


This is beyond pathetic. You were given the choice to produce whatever evidence you wanted to demonstrate that homeopathy is of any use whatsoever, and this is the best you can do? Not a single controlled trial, most of them just random comments by people with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

Do you even understand what the word "evidence" means? If you asked me to provide evidence that my field (psychiatry) is able to treat illnesses, I would be able to provide you with Cochrane reviews. Do you even know what a Cochrane review is?
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
 
Posts: 26170
Age: 55
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#176  Postby Darwinsbulldog » May 29, 2010 1:52 am

Homeopaths and their apologetics should be charged with first degree murder in every case where it is proven that they have misdirected people away from conventional medical treatment, and subsequently lost their lives because of the lack of said conventional treatments.

I formally object to these people being allowed to tout their worthless and dangerous views ad nauseam on a forum dedicated to rational skepticism. Their total denial of facts is not cute or amusing, but may cause real harm to people who though ignorance or limited intellectual powers may believe this inane mind-pus and therefore refuse treatment which may save their lives, or at the very least, provide an improvement in the quality of their lives.
Jayjay4547 wrote:
"When an animal carries a “branch” around as a defensive weapon, that branch is under natural selection".
Darwinsbulldog
 
Posts: 7440
Age: 65

Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#177  Postby Darkchilde » May 29, 2010 5:11 am

Darwinsbulldog wrote:Homeopaths and their apologetics should be charged with first degree murder in every case where it is proven that they have misdirected people away from conventional medical treatment, and subsequently lost their lives because of the lack of said conventional treatments.

I formally object to these people being allowed to tout their worthless and dangerous views ad nauseam on a forum dedicated to rational skepticism. Their total denial of facts is not cute or amusing, but may cause real harm to people who though ignorance or limited intellectual powers may believe this inane mind-pus and therefore refuse treatment which may save their lives, or at the very least, provide an improvement in the quality of their lives.


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
User avatar
Darkchilde
RS Donator
 
Posts: 9015
Age: 51
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#178  Postby GenesForLife » May 29, 2010 8:51 am

I am reminded of Cali's question, and a very pertinent one at that, to supernaturalists at this juncture, and I'd like to pose the same question again to the woobegone, instead of resorting to strawmen, blind assertions and more or less a whole menagerie of logical and scientific fallacies, when all that is required to prevent woo from being dismissed as woo is to prove that the postulates of woo actually work and enjoy the requisite evidential support.

We have seen absolutely none of that with respect to Homeopathy in this thread, this points to the fact that there currently exists no evidence for woo, and until such evidence , empirically strong evidence at that is provided, it is rather foolish and arrogant to expect that woo be treated with anything other than scorn and derision.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#179  Postby Darkchilde » May 29, 2010 9:35 am

GenesForLife wrote:
We have seen absolutely none of that with respect to Homeopathy in this thread, this points to the fact that there currently exists no evidence for woo, and until such evidence , empirically strong evidence at that is provided, it is rather foolish and arrogant to expect that woo be treated with anything other than scorn and derision.


The problem is that, although people like most members of this board, understand that homeopathy is quackery, there are a lot of people who believe in the "Big Pharma conspiracy" and that conventional medicine <insert whatever conspiracy or similar here>, and go to homeopaths. Homeopaths are not doctors, they are only taught quackery, most of them are part of the anti-vax movement, and they are dangerous to people's health; not to mention that everybody is in danger from their practices, since they do not practice medicine but quackery, and are not able to recognize diseases. Because if two viruses present the same external symptoms, it does not mean that internally it will be the same or that the viruses can be treated with the same antibiotics; homeopaths will not do blood analysis or any other similar test to determine the virus. If the virus is a new strain or a new virus, real doctors, real medical experts need to analyze and find a cure for the specific virus. A general antibiotic may not work for a new virus.

Also, homeopaths cannot distinguish between bacteria and viruses; and, as most people know, you cannot treat bacteria the same way as viruses. Even in conventional medicine antibiotics do not work for bacteria, there are other pharmaceuticals for bacterial infections.

But a lot of people are taken in by those homeopaths. Why? Because homeopaths have one thing that doctors lack today: they listen to people, and do not dismiss them after 15 minutes of having seeing them. True, that most ailments are just minor, and do not need much attention; but doctors could stay and talk a bit more with their patients, reassure them a bit more. It is the psychological aspect of the patient that many times doctors do not take care of; and it is that aspect that people need at times, and why a lot of people go to homeopaths.
User avatar
Darkchilde
RS Donator
 
Posts: 9015
Age: 51
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The Danger of Science Denial - "Alternative Medicine"-Sp

#180  Postby GenesForLife » May 29, 2010 9:47 am

Dad's a doctor and the topic of anti-vaccine activities by homeopaths has come up in several discussions between us. The problem is that herd immunity is vital when trying to eradicate a disease, and even if a small minority doesn't get vaccinated, the rest could be in trouble.

You've got it wrong, Darkechild, antibiotics are all anti-bacterial, they don't work against viruses.

In common usage, an antibiotic (from the Ancient Greek: ἀντί – anti, "against", and βίος – bios, "life") is a substance or compound that kills bacteria or inhibits its growth.[1] Antibiotics belong to the broader group of antimicrobial compounds, used to treat infections caused by microorganisms, including fungi and protozoa.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic

Of course, the clue is in the name, bacteria are truly biotic, viruses are semibiotic at best.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 31
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Pseudoscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest