Why does Homeopathy seem to irk skeptics the most?

Links, please.

 

Depends on what you are taking them for. And have you tried alternatives?? I know that up to 1/3 of people of European descent cannot metabolise codiene so it is like giving them water but Panadol does work for them.

 

As I pointed out earlier - you prove it DOES work and you stand to win 10,000 pounds!!

 

Religion has survived 10,000 years. Appealing to age or tradition or popularity is not any indication of efficacy.

 

Cupping. (10 char)

 

Am completely immune to Panadol. No effect whatsoever. (I took a ton of it in high school and since then I can't even look at it without feeling sick) I tend to go to the chemist and get whatever is strongest, it works a couple times then stops. My body just gets used to it straight away and it stops working.

Panzer might think that its because I am telling myself they don't work - that isn't the case. For some people, regular drugs just don't work at all. That is why people try herbal drugs and other remedies. If it works for them, that is all that matters, right?

 

So even if changing a kids diet helps their behavior, it doesn't matter because they still have ADHD and the only cure for a 2 year old, active child is to put them on drugs that turn them into a zombie?

I guess you are not aware of the over medicating in the US?

 

It's also possible that you are engaging in what is called selection bias. You know, like when people claim that it always rains when they wash their car but in reality it barely ever rains when they wash their car.

 

See, now you are assuming something that isn't true. Take it for what it is.

Haven't you ever tried a pill and it hasn't worked? Some people get antibiotics and they don't work so have to get stronger drugs. Does that mean the first drug they tried doesn't work at all?

 

No, I said it's possible, not that it is what is happening. Don't be so defensive.

 

Well, it isn't possible. I did take a couple of Nurofen this morning for stomach cramps and it seemed to work, one of the rare occasions that it did. Often I don't get so lucky.

 

It may be that the cause of the cramps isn't what your doctor thinks it is. One advantage I have found to alternative medicine, particularly chiropractics, is that you can get more time with the practitioner to discover the reasons for ailments. Most doctors rarely have time to really dig into the heart of the matter and will simply attempt to mask the pain with medication.

Still, stay away from homeopathy. It's a fraud. Acupuncture can be effective for some things, as can chiropractics. Naturopaths will at least take the time to discuss and discover underlying medical problems and they will help you understand your lab results, something most doctors won't have time for because they must get through as many patients as possible in a day.

 

Did the chiro cure your cancer or down syndrome? They claim that they can.

 

Ok - so who are these sceptics?

have you seen any survey of people who are generally sceptical, or are you just going to post from sites that in effect just show a selection bias?

homeopathy has a higher profile than a lot of other alternative therapies, so that may account for the bias among sceptics who aren't very well versed int he range of alternative therapies, but I have not seen any evidence that homeopathy is lower down the scale on the sceptics list than say, reiki (I know someone mentioned that here) or urine therapy.

I certainly wouldn't put chiropracty in the same basket as homeopathy, as I have already stated, and "naturopathy" can vary considerably, as do a number of other (especially herbal) therapies, which as I think I have suggested earlier, may well be relying on some of the same chemical components as big pharma uses in mainstream medicine.

Homeopathy may be on a par with these in some instances, or lower.

 

ok

I found an abstract:

http://www.annals.org/content/138/5/393.short

there is plenty of evidence suggesting that it os comparable to placebos, other susggesting that in some cases it is more effective than placebo .... but usually only for certain conditions.

one of the things I hate about homeopathy - and a whole suite of alternative therapies - is that they are usually expensive and feed the patients hypochondria, often making a relatively insignificant condition into a major health issue which encourages self absorption.

 

Yes, but the likelihood of that is about 1 in several trillion. If there is a scientific basis to it, then most of atomic theory is wrong, as is the idea of a molecule.

The problem is how the "solutions" are created. Basically, they start off with a known solution of water and some ingredient. They then take a little from that solution and dilute it in distilled water. They then take a little from the diluted solution and dilute it in distilled water. They dilute it to a point where there is little or no possibility that even a single molecule of the ingredient is still in the water. Supposedly that is the strongest treatment. It's just quackery. Scientific studies have been done of homeopathy. It is no better than placebo in efficacy.

 

Is it getting more popular every year?

 

You're missing a key step.

Maybe it works in a way science doesn't understand yet, or is unable to prove do to technological limitations? See me other thread.

Don't you see homeopathic products more and more?

 

Yes, homeopathy has no side-effects. This has been said since its existence. Their little stunt was a fallacy.

 

Of course it has no side effects. Distilled water has no side effects.

 

Instead of just saying that, why don't you point me to a source with the "key step." If you mean, succussion, when they strike the bottle ten times, I left it out because it is meaningless (essentially it's voodoo).

Did you read my explanation why it cannot possibly work. In a 30C mix, there is a 90% probability that not even a single atom of the original ingredient (besides water) is not even present. If what you claim is true, then much of the molecular theory in modern science is false. There is no evidence for that, especially considering that studies of homeopathy have shown it to be no more effective than a placebo.

The creator of homeopathy did so before the modern atomic theory was in place. He didn't realize how absurd his ideas were, because they make sense in 19th century science. They make absolutely no sense in 20th/21st century science.

I don't. I see a lot more herbal products, though.

 

Then why do Homeopathic manufacturers still include that step if it doesn't work? Seems like they could increase the profits of their "snake oil" by excluding "unnecessary" manufacturing steps.

To me what makes no sense is how a medicine therapy could be so ever increasingly popular for so long if it doesn't work.

I do and this article seems to prove it, at least in Germany (see charts on left side):

Wow, a multi-billion dollar industry?! That must make Homeopathy the most successful "snake oil" industry ever, huh?

 

The sad thing is that they are deluded enough to believe it. I don't believe they are classic "snake oil salesmen" who knew they were defrauding the people. I do believe the homeopaths believe in the crap they sell. There is nothing in the known physical world that would make it work.

There is a sucker born every minute.

Bunch of stupid people.

 

Have you ever tried Homeopathy?

 

Nope, no reason to. I wouldn't waste my money on such crap.