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

Homeopathy, Chiropractic and similar "alternative" views

Discussions on astrology, homeopathy and superstition etc.

Moderators: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip

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

#921  Postby Dr. Nancy Malik » Jun 22, 2010 6:16 am

gilthanass wrote:
Perfect! If you recall Nancy, this is exactly what I was asking for many many pages ago, a way to tell the difference between homeopathic remedies and water (and to tell if they had been successed or not).


More evidence for higher dilutions
http://www.nonlinearbiomedphys.com/content/3/1/10
http://lkm.fri.uni-lj.si/xaigor/slo/zna ... mental.htm
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: 43
Female

Country: India
India (in)
Print view this post

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

#922  Postby MedGen » Jun 22, 2010 7:20 am

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
MedGen wrote:
Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
A homeopath physician during case taking tries to know the make-up of a patient. Genetic code genome is responsible for what's going to constitute the resulting individual. This code map is responsible for

1. Structure/built/looks of an individual
2. nature.emotions, senstivity, reactions of an individual
3. tolerance to external factors like heat, cold, sun, wind, sound, light
4. desires, aversions, thirst, appetite
5. peculiar symptoms

When a homeopath physician takes all these above for prescribing a medicine, it becomes a genetic constitutional simillimum


What utter bullshit. You want to invoke genetics? Then you need to show you understand the complex interactions that lead from genotype to phenotype, not continue with this nonsenscial bollocks you've been spouting for the last 40+ pages. Symptoms are the outward physcial manifestations of a disease or disorder dictated by ones genetic make-up and environmental interactions. People have different genotypes and experience different environments which interact to influence their susceptibility to a given disease.


As we all know from the books of genetics, immunology and physiology that proteins synthesized by various cells play a major role in establishing a homoeostatic equilibrium in the milleu interior as well as milleu exterior.

This equilibrium (in which the proteins play a important part as either a catalyst or an active chemical member of the reactions) ultimately contributes to the resultant immunity. Thus, immunity is protein dependent. If immunity ever can be disturbed it can be only due to ' PROTIEN' factor .One has to now understand the conditions which shall increase or decrease these ' proteins' and thereby disturb the 'immunity' and cause immune impairment leading to disease.

Conditions leading to disturbed 'Protein Factor' are:

Emotions: Homoeopaths know that emotional upset causes diseases. 'Ailments from' is one of the most important factor considered by us in solving cases. Moreover, what happens at biological level is least understood.

Emotions like anger, hate, grief, shock, indignation, jealousy, loss of position, loss of loved ones, business failures etc are known to be a cause of disturbed secretions of neurotransmitters like Adrenaline, Serotinin, epinephrine, non- epinephrine, dopamine etc. These neurotransmitters are essentially amino- acid based proteinous enzymes. These are almost certainly going to upset the protein factor in the equilibrium. These are therefore a chief cause in impaired immunity leading to any disease.

Artificial increases in Immunoglobulins (proteins) by Vaccinations are second major cause of immune impairment. This is the chief cause of disease syndrome beginning in infancy.

Antibiotics, which kill 'bacteria', result in animal protein or toxins being liberated in the lumen, which are absorbed into the system thereby upsetting the Homeostasis Equilibrium or health.

Quoted from National Journal of homeopathy 2000 Sept / Oct VOL II NO 5. by Dr Praful Vijaykar (predictive homeopathy)
http://www.njhonline.com/2000/sep_oct_v ... edy2.shtml


:picard: Where do you get this stuff from? Do you make it up, or is this the unscientific shit that actually passes for learning on a homeopathy course?
The nature of reality is not subject to the decrees of human institutions

User avatar
MedGen
 
Posts: 753
Age: 37
Male

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

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

#923  Postby GenesForLife » Jun 22, 2010 7:33 am

There is so much fuckwittery in there that it becomes difficult to find a starting point, but since the anti-vaccine agenda is high on the list of importance, I'll start there. Vaccinations don't "artificially" increase the concentration of immunoglobulins, they just prime the immune response against subsequent exposure to the antigen. 'Protein factor' as a concept, by the way, is practically non-existent in the field of biochemistry, so other than pointing out that the article makes extremely annoying, dangerous, discoursively malfeasant, suppurating, odious, odorifierous, nauseating and most importantly, false statements , I do not know what to say in the face of that wall of psuedoscientific babble.
GenesForLife
 
Posts: 2920
Age: 32
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

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

#924  Postby Alan C » Jun 22, 2010 7:42 am

So are we adding anti-vaccination to this turgid pile of bullcookies?
Lose it - it means go crazy, nuts, insane, bonzo, no longer in possession of one's faculties, three fries short of a happy meal, WACKO!! - Jack O'Neill
User avatar
Alan C
 
Posts: 2661
Age: 45
Male

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

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

#925  Postby Shrunk » Jun 22, 2010 10:37 am

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote: those seven pages lists only references not the paper itself http://bit.ly/di7aIL


Well, gee, thanks for that Nancy. You see, I actually thought the entire texts of all the studies "supporting" homeopathy totaled seven pages.

Do you think I'm an idiot?

Seven pages. Including uncontrolled studies. Which, by their own admission, are outnumbered by those that don't support homeopathy (They call these "inconclusive.") Beyond pathetic.

(BTW, Nancy, I seem to have overlooked the part where you apologized for posting plagiarized material in violation of the forum rules. Could you point that out to me?)
"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: 56
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#926  Postby Dudely » Jun 22, 2010 12:36 pm

Alan C wrote:So are we adding anti-vaccination to this turgid pile of bullcookies?

Yes, anti-vaccination material has been posted at least three times. My favorite was it keeps our immune systems from getting good "practice".
This is what hydrogen atoms do given 15 billion years of evolution- Carl Sagan

Ignorance is slavery- Miles Davis
User avatar
Dudely
 
Posts: 1450

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#927  Postby gilthanass » Jun 22, 2010 12:40 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
OHSU wrote:
Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:It does not take the mind, the thoughts, the emotions, its consciousness, its dreams, its waking, sleeping, into consideration while treating the body.


Are you saying that homeopathic remedies treat thoughts, emotions, consciousness, dreams, etc?

How?

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:The body is all they see, the body is all they treat...


And what do you see? How do you see it, exactly?


Secretions of neurotransmiters, either increase or decrease in their value affect the mood, nature and behaviour of an individual, which result in anger and fear (adrenaline), depression and sadness (serotonin, epinephrine).

That's why in homeopathy during case analysis, a patient is asked about it's nature, behaviour, emotions, anger, etc. because it directly affects the person in picture. It would be adamancy on the part of conventional medicine (with the exception of psychiatry) by just sticking to just physical symptoms of the patient. They are tamering the homoeostasis at local biochemic level. This upsets the homoeostasis further in depper tissues and transfers the toxins to higher to cause disease suppression


What the hell? Where did you go to school? Seriously, your knowledge of the nervous system is pretty low for a doctor. Let me give you a quick tip: Adrenaline = epinephrine. Yep, same shit, different name. So, why are you treating it like it's two different molecules? Sorry, that's just sad. Also, serotonin isn't responsible for depression and sadness, if anything, it's the other way around. Why do you think the most common treatment for depression are drugs designed to INCREASE serotonin levels? (MAOI - prevent the breakdown of serotonin amount other things, SSRI - prevent the re-uptake of serotonin, which increases the amount available). Sorry, but I question how much you think you know about this stuff. Also (from another post) there is no such thing as nonadrenaline (unless you are referring to every molecule that is, well, not adrenaline). You're probably thinking of noradrenaline (or norepinephrine if you'd rather).
User avatar
gilthanass
 
Posts: 155

Print view this post

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

#928  Postby DST70 » Jun 22, 2010 12:41 pm

Shrunk wrote:
DST70 wrote:Thanks Nancy. This is a useful point to illustrate cases where the disease state is not best viewed as a single discrete entity, which presents problems for a reductionist science.


Any semi-competent "allopathic" practitioner would take a history focussing on the same factors. The claim that medicine considers "diarrhea" a single, monolithic entity is a ridiculous lie.


Certainly no doctor I've ever seen would ask much about uncommon or peculiar symptoms, unless I presented with a host of other complaints. That's not about competence, more about there being no theoretical reason to link diarrhoea with feeling worse in a warm, stuffy room, for example.
DST70
 
Posts: 56

Print view this post

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

#929  Postby DST70 » Jun 22, 2010 12:44 pm

Paul wrote:Someone tells me "this 200 years old spark of intuition will work, but it defies physics, and I haven't a clue how it really works". What else is there other than faith?


You could try it for yourself? :shock:
DST70
 
Posts: 56

Print view this post

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

#930  Postby DST70 » Jun 22, 2010 12:48 pm

Dudely wrote:To make Shrunk's point clear- he is not talking about medical trials where you take one medicine and test it. He is talking about the studies that have been done which focused on its efficacy as a whole- one of which is posted by him further up this page. In that study homeopathic practitioners were allowed to treat the patients however they liked. They were allowed to "individualize", as it was put by the good Doctor. This was compared against a control group of placebos and it was found to be no more effective. I would say the efficacy has been validated quite clearly in this case- practitioners were allowed to practice as they liked with no intervention by the current "viewpoint of medicine", and it was found lacking. am I missing something here? How is this not evidence that it is no more effective?


Yes, I understand. There are also studies that do show it to be more effective, but I'm thinking these rounds of study-swapping could go on a long time.......... :ask:
DST70
 
Posts: 56

Print view this post

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

#931  Postby Dudely » Jun 22, 2010 12:52 pm

DST70 wrote:
Paul wrote:Someone tells me "this 200 years old spark of intuition will work, but it defies physics, and I haven't a clue how it really works". What else is there other than faith?


You could try it for yourself? :shock:


. . . And you could try worshiping Odin. Worked pretty well for a few hundred million.

I don't like betting my life on something with nothing to back it up and a host of charlatans ready in the wings to take my money.
This is what hydrogen atoms do given 15 billion years of evolution- Carl Sagan

Ignorance is slavery- Miles Davis
User avatar
Dudely
 
Posts: 1450

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#932  Postby Shrunk » Jun 22, 2010 12:54 pm

Dudely wrote:
Alan C wrote:So are we adding anti-vaccination to this turgid pile of bullcookies?

Yes, anti-vaccination material has been posted at least three times. My favorite was it keeps our immune systems from getting good "practice".


While at the same time claiming homeopathy is good because it "stimulates" the immune system.
"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: 56
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#933  Postby Dudely » Jun 22, 2010 12:55 pm

DST70 wrote:
Dudely wrote:To make Shrunk's point clear- he is not talking about medical trials where you take one medicine and test it. He is talking about the studies that have been done which focused on its efficacy as a whole- one of which is posted by him further up this page. In that study homeopathic practitioners were allowed to treat the patients however they liked. They were allowed to "individualize", as it was put by the good Doctor. This was compared against a control group of placebos and it was found to be no more effective. I would say the efficacy has been validated quite clearly in this case- practitioners were allowed to practice as they liked with no intervention by the current "viewpoint of medicine", and it was found lacking. am I missing something here? How is this not evidence that it is no more effective?


Yes, I understand. There are also studies that do show it to be more effective, but I'm thinking these rounds of study-swapping could go on a long time.......... :ask:


There are many hundreds that show no effect and only a few that do, and either their methodology is suspect, or their result can be safely weighed against the mass of those opposing that result. Your supposition that somehow that weight of evidence is balanced is dishonest.
This is what hydrogen atoms do given 15 billion years of evolution- Carl Sagan

Ignorance is slavery- Miles Davis
User avatar
Dudely
 
Posts: 1450

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#934  Postby Shrunk » Jun 22, 2010 12:57 pm

DST70 wrote: Yes, I understand. There are also studies that do show it to be more effective, but I'm thinking these rounds of study-swapping could go on a long time.......... :ask:


No, the evidence is unequivocal. The studies that seem to support homeopathy are generally small and poorly controlled. The better designed the study, the less likely homeopathy is able to demonstrate an effect. This is what is observed with placebo.

Advocates of homeopathy simply cherry pick the studies that seem in their favour and try to ignore or hide the rest. This is dishonest and unscientific.
"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: 56
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#935  Postby Shrunk » Jun 22, 2010 12:58 pm

DST70 wrote:Certainly no doctor I've ever seen would ask much about uncommon or peculiar symptoms, unless I presented with a host of other complaints. That's not about competence, more about there being no theoretical reason to link diarrhoea with feeling worse in a warm, stuffy room, for example.


And the problemt with that 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: 56
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#936  Postby Lazar » Jun 22, 2010 1:14 pm


!
MODNOTE
Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
OHSU wrote:
Is the value of a substance as a curative agent not tied to its chemical and physical properties? How is it, then, that substances that are made into homeopathic preparations become chemically and physically indistinguishable from water in every single way, yet still retain the ability to cure illness? Doesn't it seem just a little bit odd that for hundreds or thousands of completely unrelated substances, the property related to treating disease is precisely the quality (and the ONLY quality) that happens to be retained when diluted in water, and that for each of the hundreds or thousands of substances in question, that special property that makes the substance curative is not otherwise detectable via any means? That seems like quite a coincidence to me.

If water retained some but not all the physical or chemical properties of diluted substances, doesn't it seem likely that different substances would behave differently? For example, doesn't it seem that certain substances would totally lose whatever property it is that makes them useful for treating disease, but they'd retain their color, while for other substances it might be smell, and others their flammability? It just seems really strange and not a little suspicious to me that all substances should lose all their properties, and become completely indistinguishable from pure water except for whatever property they have that makes them curative.

Can someone knowledgeable in homeopathy explain the chemical or physical mechanism of that to me?


Many experiments have been conducted in the more remote past as well as re-cently, to at least prove the existence of something in our potencies, of which I will give some examples here.

1. In 1948, Wormser and Loch tested several substances from 24X to 30X. They used a photoelectric cell, to measure the intensity and wavelength of these potencies and found measurable changes, of both intensity and wave-length in these substances.

2. In the years 1951-3, Gay and Boiron tested both distilled water and Natrum muriaticum in the 27C potency for their dielectric constant. They were able to show that the potency of Natrum mur. could be easily selec-ted from among 99 control bottles.

3. In 1963, Boericke and Smith tested a 12X potency of Sulphur, with and without succussion. They tested the solvent structure by nuclear magnetic resonance spectrum. They found that there were structural changes in the solvent, as the potency was increased by succussion, while no such change was detected in the controls. They repeated the experiment in 1974, with diverse potencies of Sulphur, up to the 30C.

4. In 1966, Stephenson and Brucato tested both distilled water and Mercu-rius corrosivus, from the 1X to the 33X. They found that the dielectric constant for the controls varied from 5.6 to 6.05. For the homoeopathic potencies it varied from 2.8 to 4.4.

5. In 1975, Young tested Sulphur from 5X to 30X, with controls. He also tested the solvent structure by nuclear magnetic resonance spectrum. He found that there were measurable changes in the spectra at each dilution and succussion. No such changes were observed for the solution without succussion or without Sulphur.

6. In 1976, Boiron and Vinh used Raman Laser Spectroscopy, showing that for the 1C potency of Kali bichromicum the spectrum of alcohol disap-pears completely, while that for potassium bichromate appears. In Kali bich 1C the ratio of the number of potassium bichromate molecules is 1 to 500. In such a case the light meets 500 more alcohol molecules as those of bichromate, yet the alcohol spectrum does not appear.

7. In 1982, Resch, Gutman and Schauer found that dilute sodium chloride solutions revealed an increase in electrical conductivity, by rocking them prior to measurement.

8. Four French researchers developed a method of detection through nu-clear magnetic resonance, conducted in the late 80's, which shows spe-cific sinus waves for each potency, as well as a specific sinus wave for the substance used. These latter remain the same throughout all poten-cies of that substance, while the sinus wave expressing the potencies, are specific to those potencies. Thus a clear and recognisable scientifi-cally provable frame of reference exists, for each remedy and potency.

9. More recent NMR studies have reached similar conclusions (Demangeat et al., 1992; Weingärtner, 1992).

10. Recent experiments with Raman Laser Spectrography have shown that a 1M potency (1 divided by 100 to the –1000th power) of Kali bichromicum reveal the spectrum of Kali bichromicum and not that of water. It must be realized that there are supposedly no molecules of Kali bichromicum present in this dilution rate, since it is way beyond Avogadro’s limit, which lies at 1024 or 10012.

11. Another Raman Laser Spectrography test with Natrum muriaticum 10M showed the spectrum of Chloride of sodium, instead that of water. It must be noted that here the dilution rate is a 1000 times smaller still than that of the previous example.

12. Ultra-high dilutions of lithium chloride and sodium chloride (10-30 g/cm-3) have been irradiated by X-rays at 77 K, then progressively rewarmed to room temperature. During that phase, their thermo luminescence has been studied and it was found that, despite their dilution beyond the Avo-gadro number, the emitted light was specific of the original salts dissolved initially.

Reference
http://chestjournal.chestpubs.org/conte ... 3/936.full


This post seems to be taken word for word from this website. We do not allow plagiarism here and if you wish to cite work from other websites this should be made explicit. Likewise this post seems to come word for word from this blog

This is an advisory to please always credit the source when you are quoting another website etc. Further posting behaviour of this nature may result in moderator action.
Image

Spinozasgalt: "And how come no one ever sigs me?"
User avatar
Lazar
 
Posts: 2280
Age: 37
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

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

#937  Postby natselrox » Jun 22, 2010 1:25 pm

Somewhere in this thread, Ms. Malik asked, "why should we stop someone who wants to opt for Homeopathic treatment?". I asked the editor of a popular website promoting the cause of EBM to provide a link for the ill-effects of Homeopathy and he gave this.

http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html

Hope this answers your question, ma'am.
When in perplexity, read on.

"A system that values obedience over curiosity isn’t education and it definitely isn’t science"
User avatar
natselrox
 
Posts: 10037
Age: 109
Male

India (in)
Print view this post

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

#938  Postby Arcanyn » Jun 22, 2010 1:33 pm

Dr. Nancy Malik wrote:
Emotions like anger, hate, grief, shock, indignation, jealousy, loss of position, loss of loved ones, business failures etc are known to be a cause of disturbed secretions of neurotransmitters like Adrenaline, Serotinin, epinephrine, non- epinephrine, dopamine etc. These neurotransmitters are essentially amino- acid based proteinous enzymes.


So, adrenaline, seratonin, norephinephrine and dopamine are all proteins, are they? In that case, perhaps you could help me find the peptide bonds on these molecules, as I'm having difficulty locating them. Also, I'm struggling to understand how they are 'amino acid based', when amino acids are generally expected to be . . . well . . . acids. Not a single one of these small molecules has even one COOH group, which means that not only are they not proteins (and don't even remotely resemble them, given that proteins are large polymeric molecules), they don't even qualify as amino acids.

Adrenaline (aka epinephrine):
Image

Serotonin:
Image

Norepinephrine:
Image

Dopamine:
Image

It must be fun to be a homeopath - you can claim to be an authority on disease without having even a passing understanding of year 12 biology.
Power doesn't corrupt, it reveals. Only when someone is free from constraints and consequences do they show their true character.

Sign the petition for the William Lane Craig/David Icke debate here:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/craigickedebate/signatures
User avatar
Arcanyn
 
Posts: 1491
Age: 36
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

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

#939  Postby Shrunk » Jun 22, 2010 1:38 pm

natselrox wrote:Somewhere in this thread, Ms. Malik asked, "why should we stop someone who wants to opt for Homeopathic treatment?". I asked the editor of a popular website promoting the cause of EBM to provide a link for the ill-effects of Homeopathy and he gave this.

http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html

Hope this answers your question, ma'am.


It's a good point. Of course, mentally competent adults are free to make decisions about their own health, no matter how stupid those decisions may be. But any health professional has an obligation to ensure that the person considering the treatment is adequately informed about its nature, risks and benefits. So if a homeopath says, "I believe this treatment will help you. However, my belief is contradicted by the overwhelming bulk of scientific evidence, which clearly demonstrates that homeopathic treatments are no more effective than placebo. Meanwhile, conventional medicine offers treatments that are scientifically demonstrated to treat your condition. However, I can at least assure you that if you take my treatment you are almost guaranteed not to suffer any adverse effects from the treatment itself, since it consists of nothing more than water."

If a patient still agrees to take the homeopathic treatment after this explanation, then he has made an informed decision for which he should bear full responsibility. But if the patient is not given this information, then if the prescriber was a medical doctor, she would be guilty of a severe ethical violation. I have no idea what ethical standards, if any, govern homeopathic practice, so cannot comment on that.
Last edited by Shrunk on Jun 22, 2010 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"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: 56
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

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

#940  Postby Paul » Jun 22, 2010 3:05 pm

DST70 wrote:
Paul wrote:Someone tells me "this 200 years old spark of intuition will work, but it defies physics, and I haven't a clue how it really works". What else is there other than faith?


You could try it for yourself? :shock:


And your point is?

Trying a homoeopathic remedy, in the absence of any reasoned, rational, scientific explanation, would be taking it on faith.
I could also try a faith healer, or asking people to pray for me. Just about as likely to have any effect on my health.
"Peter, I can see your house from here!"
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 4550
Age: 63
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