Water has memory, validating homeopathy

"Steelclaws" wrote in message
4.39...
"carole" wrote in
nd.com:

The question is "Does homeopathy work?" The answer is no.

If you are an allopathic stooge who believes any bit of crap you're
fed, homeopathy doesn't work. But if you're an intelligent user who
has actually tried it and know what you're talking about, it does
work.

Have you looked up "idiosyncratic" yet?

What for?


And as for homeopathy working, mind explaining to me why people who rely
on homeopathic preparations to prevent malaria end up catching it?

Wrong preparation?


So who do you believe -- the propaganda or the truth?
On the one hand you have propaganda ...on the other hand you have
truth.

In a way you are correct: homeopathy is the propaganda. Not a single
properly conducted test has ever been able to show that it has the
slightest effect that would be distinguishable from placebo.

I find that hard to believe.


Choose one -- propaganda (allopathic) or truth (alternative).
Head up your arse (allopathic) or enlightened user (alternative).

Fallacy of excluded middle. Not to mention a typical woo believer lie.

Woo is allopathic which is no.1 cause of death in US.



--
Their sugar pills contain nothing and they won't poison your
body. The greater danger is that they poison your mind. -David
Colquhoun on homeopathy

Don't know David Colquhoun but obviously he isn't a great thinker.

--
Carole
www.conspiracee.com
Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool"
http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22

"carole" wrote in
nd.com:

Have you decided yet if Randi used brain waves or magnets? Not that
either would make any difference, of course, to the water.

Maybe magnets because during the time he was present he was playing
around and doing certain tricks - on one of these videos. Wouldn't
have been hard for him to wave his hands over all the vials. Pt 4 -
Details of experiment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzO3A04cOis

Pt 5 - James Randi involvement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhSzOShJb2U

I completely fail to see how waving magnets - surreptiously or not -
would do anything about the distilled water. If you think otherwise,
please present valid evidence.

--
By providing homeopathy on the NHS and allowing MHRA licensing
of products which subsequently appear on pharmacy shelves, the
Government runs the risk of endorsing homeopathy as an
efficacious system of medicine. To maintain patient trust,
choice and safety, the Government should not endorse the use of
placebo treatments, including homeopathy. Homeopathy should not
be funded on the NHS and the MHRA should stop licensing
homeopathic products. - House of Commons report into the
Evidence Check on Homeopathy

Politicians are often quite ignorant about many things and it wouldn't
be beyond the realms of imagination for them to be in the pocket of
the pharmaceutical cartel.

There were several doctors on that committee, which means they were not
just laymen. I'm disregarding any paranoid conspiracy fantasies, btw.

Here's the committee member list:
http://www.publications.parliament.u.../cmsctech/45/4
501.htm

--
There are, in fact, two things, science and opinion; the former
begets knowledge, the latter ignorance. - Hippocrates

"carole" wrote in
ond.com:

Those are the same videos I suggested to her a month ago, aren't
they?

Yes, they are.

I've seldom seen a rationalization of that magnitude.

I know it has to be a bot....

I dunno, her responses seem to be more on topic than those of
Cleverbot.

I don't know who Cleverbot is.

It's not a who, it's a what. As the name says, it is program that is an
experiment in AI. If you go to its website and type something, it
replies.

--
There are two great secrets of the quack's success. One is the
fact that many human ills, including some of the severest, will
run their course and vanish without treatment of any sort.

But still they prescribe the drugs.

Doctors kinda know which illnesses require drugs, and prescribe those.

The
other half are due to the fact that many of life's ills are
wholly or in part psychosomatic. -Martin Gardner

Allopaths don't know the cause or the cure but arrogance often works,
hey?

That's more like alties - who often rely on spurious methods of
diagnosis.

--
There are, in fact, two things, science and opinion; the former
begets knowledge, the latter ignorance. - Hippocrates

"carole" wrote in news:zBRAo.1432$MF5.765
@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com:

Have you looked up "idiosyncratic" yet?

What for?

Because you objected to my sig about anecdotal evidence possibly
pointing to idiosyncrasies and thus being unreliable. It was pretty
clear you did not understand the term in the context.

And as for homeopathy working, mind explaining to me why people who
rely
on homeopathic preparations to prevent malaria end up catching it?

Wrong preparation?

Every homeopathic preparation to prevent malaria appears to be "wrong"
then. People who rely on those get dangerously ill of malaria.
http://whatstheharm.net/newsarchive/...Podgorsek.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/5178122.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...icle6406213.ec
e

Even the more responsible homeopaths - see that last link for one -
advise against it, but that does not stop homeoquacks fleecing their
dupes of their money and health.

So who do you believe -- the propaganda or the truth?
On the one hand you have propaganda ...on the other hand you have
truth.

In a way you are correct: homeopathy is the propaganda. Not a single
properly conducted test has ever been able to show that it has the
slightest effect that would be distinguishable from placebo.

I find that hard to believe.

Try reading some research articles on the topic.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20402610
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20233176
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20223686
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19887810
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17943868
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16125589

Choose one -- propaganda (allopathic) or truth (alternative).
Head up your arse (allopathic) or enlightened user (alternative).

Fallacy of excluded middle. Not to mention a typical woo believer
lie.

Woo is allopathic which is no.1 cause of death in US.

Do you know why Gary Null keeps repeating that lie? He's peddling his
woo products and feels the need to denigrate competition. Now, what's
your motive for repeating the lie?

--
Their sugar pills contain nothing and they won't poison your
body. The greater danger is that they poison your mind. -David
Colquhoun on homeopathy

Don't know David Colquhoun but obviously he isn't a great thinker.

Demonstrably better thinker than you. He's the professor of pharmacology
at University College London.

--
The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that
they know so much that ain't so. -Josh Billings

Bob Officer -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in
:

Sorry, Hans is a mediocre writer at best. The story lacks facts and
substance and Evidence.

So that makes you a clown.

PRojection Carole. All I ask for is evidence, and there is none.
Stories are not Evidence. Now if the story was backed by maybe a Hand
written note signed by Rockefeller or even a directive or letter of
agreement on Rockefeller Corporate Stationary signed by an employee
of Rockefeller.

All you have is mere-say. And mere-say is not ever considered
evidence. This is called the Empty Hand Syndrome. You got nothing, no
matter how much you wave those hands. (at least a clown is funny.)

Well, if someone wrote it, published it in either printed or online form
and it appears to support carole's assumptions, that's good enough for
her. She does not appear to do any validity checks.

--
There are three kinds of medicine: medicine that has been
scientifically validated to work, medicine that has not, and
medicine that has been scientifically shown not to work. -Orac

Bob Officer -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in
:

On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 08:04:10 +0000 (UTC), in misc.health.alternative,
Steelclaws wrote:

Well, if someone wrote it, published it in either printed or online
form
and it appears to support carole's assumptions, that's good enough for
her. She does not appear to do any validity checks.

Or checks with circular sources

Yep, I've noticed that. Sometimes the sites she uses in an attempt to
back her claims up quote the original nonsense word-perfect.

Look at how many people have taken what Rense has on his pages about
Rife's Microscopes being vandalized, and his notes destroyed, when he
notes are on the web and account of all his microscopes state he
cannibalized them to build other microscopes.

Yes, that was rather noticeable.

--
There's this thing called being so open-minded your brains drop
out. -Richard Dawkins

"Steelclaws" wrote in message
4.39...
"carole" wrote in news:zBRAo.1432$MF5.765
@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com:

Have you looked up "idiosyncratic" yet?

What for?

Because you objected to my sig about anecdotal evidence possibly
pointing to idiosyncrasies and thus being unreliable. It was pretty
clear you did not understand the term in the context.

And as for homeopathy working, mind explaining to me why people who
rely
on homeopathic preparations to prevent malaria end up catching it?

Wrong preparation?

Every homeopathic preparation to prevent malaria appears to be "wrong"
then. People who rely on those get dangerously ill of malaria.
http://whatstheharm.net/newsarchive/...Podgorsek.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/5178122.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...icle6406213.ec
e

No, and people dying of cancer doesn't stop the oncologists of fleecing people of their money either.


Even the more responsible homeopaths - see that last link for one -
advise against it, but that does not stop homeoquacks fleecing their
dupes of their money and health.

So who do you believe -- the propaganda or the truth?
On the one hand you have propaganda ...on the other hand you have
truth.

In a way you are correct: homeopathy is the propaganda. Not a single
properly conducted test has ever been able to show that it has the
slightest effect that would be distinguishable from placebo.

I find that hard to believe.

Try reading some research articles on the topic.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20402610
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20233176
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20223686
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19887810
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17943868
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16125589

Anything put out by the NIH is propaganda since the government bodies are infiltrated with pharmaceutical
dupes.
Burton Goldberg couldn't put it any better when he says -

http://www.burtongoldberg.com/page43.html
"No one genuinely committed to finding better ways to treat a disease would knowingly keep an effective
treatment a secret or try to suppress such a treatment." This is an amazing piece of contortionist propaganda.
OAM offers this in defense of the claim by alternative doctors that the mainstream medical community tries to
keep their alternative treatments from the public. The fact is that medical alternatives are suppressed, so we
must conclude that the OAM, NIH, and NCI, by their own statements, are not genuinely committed to finding
better ways to treat disease because they actively suppress information about these treatments.


Choose one -- propaganda (allopathic) or truth (alternative).
Head up your arse (allopathic) or enlightened user (alternative).

Fallacy of excluded middle. Not to mention a typical woo believer
lie.

Woo is allopathic which is no.1 cause of death in US.

Do you know why Gary Null keeps repeating that lie? He's peddling his
woo products and feels the need to denigrate competition. Now, what's
your motive for repeating the lie?

Unlike allopathic which peddles its poo products.


--
Their sugar pills contain nothing and they won't poison your
body. The greater danger is that they poison your mind. -David
Colquhoun on homeopathy

Don't know David Colquhoun but obviously he isn't a great thinker.

Demonstrably better thinker than you. He's the professor of pharmacology
at University College London.

Oh diddums. I douibt it.
Anybody who thinks allopathic medicine can cure chronic disease can't be too bright.


--
The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that
they know so much that ain't so. -Josh Billings

You should take note of the above quote yourself.

--
Carole
www.conspiracee.com
"Nothing would be what it is, Because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary-wise: what it is, it
wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?"
-Alice's Adventures In Wonderland, 1865, Lewis Carroll, English writer and mathematician.

"carole" wrote in
ond.com:

And as for homeopathy working, mind explaining to me why people who
rely
on homeopathic preparations to prevent malaria end up catching it?

Wrong preparation?

Every homeopathic preparation to prevent malaria appears to be
"wrong" then. People who rely on those get dangerously ill of
malaria. http://whatstheharm.net/newsarchive/...Podgorsek.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/5178122.stm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...article6406213.
ec e

No, and people dying of cancer doesn't stop the oncologists of
fleecing people of their money either.

False analogy.

"Looking at all cancers combined the five-year relative survival rate
has now reached 50%. The survival rate in women (56%) is higher than
that in men (43%) and this is also the case for ten-year rates (39%
vs.52%)."
http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/can...l/latestrates/

Homeopathic malaria prevention is still batting zero.

Even the more responsible homeopaths - see that last link for one -
advise against it, but that does not stop homeoquacks fleecing their
dupes of their money and health.

In a way you are correct: homeopathy is the propaganda. Not a
single properly conducted test has ever been able to show that it
has the slightest effect that would be distinguishable from
placebo.

I find that hard to believe.

Try reading some research articles on the topic.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20402610
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20233176
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20223686
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19887810
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17943868
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16125589

Anything put out by the NIH is propaganda since the government bodies
are infiltrated with pharmaceutical dupes.

And your _valid_ evidence for that claim would be?

Burton Goldberg couldn't put it any better when he says -

http://www.burtongoldberg.com/page43.html

I'm seriously not interested in someone who is trying to huckster his
worthless books says to denigrate the competition.

Choose one -- propaganda (allopathic) or truth (alternative).
Head up your arse (allopathic) or enlightened user (alternative).

Fallacy of excluded middle. Not to mention a typical woo believer
lie.

Woo is allopathic which is no.1 cause of death in US.

Do you know why Gary Null keeps repeating that lie? He's peddling his
woo products and feels the need to denigrate competition. Now, what's
your motive for repeating the lie?

Unlike allopathic which peddles its poo products.

Pharmaceuticals have a proven physiological effect, woo crap products do
not - apart from when they poison the poor saps who take those. Btw, do
you remember when Gary Null managed to get poisoned by the stuff he
peddles? Now that was a fitting reward for him.
http://tinyurl.com/3yzn99y

--
Their sugar pills contain nothing and they won't poison your
body. The greater danger is that they poison your mind. -David
Colquhoun on homeopathy

Don't know David Colquhoun but obviously he isn't a great thinker.

Demonstrably better thinker than you. He's the professor of
pharmacology at University College London.

Oh diddums. I douibt it.
Anybody who thinks allopathic medicine can cure chronic disease can't
be too bright.

Where did that 'chronic' come from? It certainly was nowhere in the
actual discussion. Stop reading more into things that are there - oh
hell, sorry, that's your SOP as a conspiracy kook.

--
The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that
they know so much that ain't so. -Josh Billings

You should take note of the above quote yourself.

I have. You haven't - and that is glaringly obvious.

--
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and
I'm not sure about the universe. -Albert Einstein

"Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ...
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 18:56:30 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" wrote:


"Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ...
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 00:16:14 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" wrote:


"dr_jeff" wrote in message ...
On 11/3/10 2:36 AM, carole wrote:


I will go even one more, Homeopathy treatments and practice is a
criminal act of defrauding the patient and public. Its practitioners
should be treated as criminals.


Your bias and ignorance is showing.

Yes, a bias against treatments with no basis in scientific evidence, no scientific rational and no
evidence
that they work. Making people pay for these treatments is tantamount to theft.

Jeff


Hey Dr Jeff, its not my fault that modern medicine has been engineered to only support pharmaceutical
solutions.
Homeopathy was seen as competition and had to go along with any other therapies that cut into market
share.


The truth about the Rockefeller drug empire
The Drug Story - by Hans Ruesch
www.think-aboutit.com/health/TheDrugStory.htm

"The history of the how the Rockefellers and their stooges in the Food and Drug Administration, the US
Public
Health Service, the Federal Trade Commission, the Better Business Bureau, the Army Medical Corps, the Navy
Bureau of Medicine and thousands of health officers all over the country, combined to put out of business
all
forms of therapy that discourage the use of drugs. How the business with disease makes grants to medical
colleges in exchange for a curriculum that favours drug-based medicine.

No evidence there...

"Is it any wonder, asked Bealle,

snip

It is still just a Post Hoc fallacy, Carole. Nothing has changed
since the last time you posted this story. The big problem is you are
taking Bealle's word about the so called influence, and he is not
producing one iota of evidence to support his claim.

Its the most probably story to explain the corruption of medical science, the bureacracy, and the
suppression
of alternative cures - because there is suppression.

Occam's Razor applies. Your claim of suppression is a fallacy since
the story and other false assumption stories of the same nature exist
and can be found not only on Book Seller's shelves all over the world
but on the internet as well.

You can't blame a person for being sceptical of anything that comes out of mainstream since the public is
routinely fed so much spin and lies.


So After applying Occam's Razor we see you claim of "most probable
story to explain" is actually the opposite, the least likely
explanation.

Not from my point of view.
You may have convinced yourself but I remain ever sceptical of anything coming out of mainstream where big
monopolistic interests are concerned, where they spend 2/3 of their expenses on marketing and spin.


You best theory is that everything is fine and above-board, that anybody who disagrees with medical science
is
a quack, which is laughable compared to Hans Ruesch's explanation.

Sorry, Hans is a mediocre writer at best. The story lacks facts and
substance and Evidence.

Sounds just fine to me and a refreshing change from all the politically correct crap we routinely get fed.


So that makes you a clown.

PRojection Carole. All I ask for is evidence, and there is none.
Stories are not Evidence. Now if the story was backed by maybe a Hand
written note signed by Rockefeller or even a directive or letter of
agreement on Rockefeller Corporate Stationary signed by an employee
of Rockefeller.

You really are a clown.


All you have is mere-say. And mere-say is not ever considered
evidence. This is called the Empty Hand Syndrome. You got nothing, no
matter how much you wave those hands. (at least a clown is funny.)

Mere-say -- word of the week?


--
Carole
www.conspiracee.com
Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool"
http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22

"Steelclaws" wrote in message
4.39...
Bob Officer -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in
:

Sorry, Hans is a mediocre writer at best. The story lacks facts and
substance and Evidence.

So that makes you a clown.

PRojection Carole. All I ask for is evidence, and there is none.
Stories are not Evidence. Now if the story was backed by maybe a Hand
written note signed by Rockefeller or even a directive or letter of
agreement on Rockefeller Corporate Stationary signed by an employee
of Rockefeller.

All you have is mere-say. And mere-say is not ever considered
evidence. This is called the Empty Hand Syndrome. You got nothing, no
matter how much you wave those hands. (at least a clown is funny.)

Well, if someone wrote it, published it in either printed or online form
and it appears to support carole's assumptions, that's good enough for
her. She does not appear to do any validity checks.

Yes, I compare writings to others.
For example, there is a lot of coverups in political areas ...stories are fed to the press ...explanations
that cover situations enough but not the whole truth.
People are left with questions and often its the best showman that gets away with things.


--
There are three kinds of medicine: medicine that has been
scientifically validated to work, medicine that has not, and
medicine that has been scientifically shown not to work. -Orac

And medicine that has had rigged studies and medicine that is suppressed and the inventors labeled as quacks.
Absolutely all sorts.

--
Carole
www.conspiracee.com
Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool"
http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22