Adm: I desperately need help

[Zep]

So in summary, homeopaths have argued with skeptics as follows.

H: 30x ultra-dilutions work! So homeopathy works!

S: Umm, no. There's nothing there, which we can show by mathematics, logic, and in actual fact. And no tests have ever shown them to be any better than placebo. Your argument is quite silly, and unsupported by evidence.

H: OK, then 6x ultra-dilutions work because there ARE molecules! So homeopathy works!

S: Umm, wrong again. There may be some molecules, just a few, but they constitute so tiny a fraction of a remedy and dose that they are almost uncountable, and are hardly likely to have any effect on a human anyway. In fact, given the tiny doses and the size of humans, there are still unlikely to be any tincture molecules in a 6X remedy either.

H: All right then. How about 1x or 2x? Plenty of molecules then! So if you agree to 1x or 2x, homeopathy works!

S: So you are now advocating that all available herbal and mineral concoctions on earth are "homeopathy"? Anything dissolved in water or alcohol is "homeopathy"? Jim Beam? Coca Cola? Ocean water? Sewerage? I think the authorities will definitely have something severe to say about any homeopaths who try to administer raw sewerage to people as a "real medical remedy", even in Pakistan... Face it. Skeptics won this debate.

 

[Mojo]

Tell me does homeopathic medicine work in 1x or 2x?

You tell us. Have you conducted any properly controlled and blinded trials of any remedies at those concentrations? If so, please provide references to the papers. Or are all the homeopaths in Pakistan too busy attending conferences and congratulating each other?

Edited to add: I have no confidence in their ability to run a controlled trial in any case, seeing as Homeo Man has claimed that the difference in outcome between the treatment and control groups in a study conducted by "Dr. Qureshi" was because of differences between the groups themselves. I don't think these guys even have the faintest idea what the purpose of a control group is.

 

[Mojo]

Also, of course, the categorisation of all homeopathic remedies in the question "does homeopathic medicine work in 1x or 2x" is somewhat revealing. Homeo Man (and the other homeopaths on here) seems to think that it's some sort of monolithic system, and he can make a blanket assertion that all remedies work for all conditions.

In proper medicine, of course, each individual treatment is tested for a specific condition, and the results of the testing are only held to demonstrate that that particular treatment is effective (or indeed ineffective) for that particular condition.

Anders W. Bonde has just expressed this much more eloquently here.

 

[The Don]

Sewerage[/B]

[mode = pedant] I think you mean sewage. Sewerage is the network of pipes in which sewage is carried[/mode]

 

[MRC_Hans]

So in summary, homeopaths have argued with skeptics as follows.

H: 30x ultra-dilutions work! So homeopathy works!

S: Umm, no. There's nothing there, which we can show by mathematics, logic, and in actual fact. And no tests have ever shown them to be any better than placebo. Your argument is quite silly, and unsupported by evidence.

H: OK, then 6x ultra-dilutions work because there ARE molecules! So homeopathy works!

S: Umm, wrong again. There may be some molecules, just a few, but they constitute so tiny a fraction of a remedy and dose that they are almost uncountable, and are hardly likely to have any effect on a human anyway. In fact, given the tiny doses and the size of humans, there are still unlikely to be any tincture molecules in a 6X remedy either.

H: All right then. How about 1x or 2x? Plenty of molecules then! So if you agree to 1x or 2x, homeopathy works!

*snip*

...Reminds me of "A day at the races": "I don't like the part about 'the party of the foist part'" - "OK, we'll take that away [rrrip!]. Now, the party of the second part...." etc..

Hans

 

[drkitten]

...Reminds me of "A day at the races": "I don't like the part about 'the party of the foist part'" - "OK, we'll take that away [rrrip!]. Now, the party of the second part...." etc..

It might remind me of that, too.

If that scene had, in fact, been in "A Day at the Races" and not in "A Night at the Opera."

"Day at the Races" was the "tuitsy-fruitsy" ice cream. Of which this whole homeopathic exchange is also eerily reminicent.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Damn! Well, that just shows that I need to see them again .

Hans

 

[Qureshi1_78]

S: Umm, wrong again. There may be some molecules, just a few, but they constitute so tiny a fraction of a remedy and dose that they are almost uncountable, and are hardly likely to have any effect on a human anyway. In fact, given the tiny doses and the size of humans, there are still unlikely to be any tincture molecules in a 6X remedy either.

If this is your claim then you would be having no hesitation of taking cyanide 2x? Don't you?

 

[drkitten]

If this is your claim then you would be having no hesitation of taking cyanide 2x? Don't you?

Evidently in Pakistan, 6x (as referred to in the original post) is the same as 2x (as referred to in the response).

This answers a lot of questions I had about Pakistan.

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

If this is your claim then you would be having no hesitation of taking cyanide 2x? Don't you?

Please state either in mg/l or mM how strong your "cyanide 2x" is.

 

[Qureshi1_78]

Wait for Dr. MAS, he is conducting 4 year course at this forum. He can better reply then me.

 

[Rolfe]

It's quite clear that Mas hasn't the faintest idea how concentrated either a 2X or a 6X solution is, or how to calculate it in any units known to science. So presumably none of the rest of the collective has either.

Rolfe.

 

[Darat]

Wait for Dr. MAS, he is conducting 4 year course at this forum. He can better reply then me.

Er no he isn't to do that he would need to get permission from the JREF.

 

[Rolfe]

Er no he isn't to do that he would need to get permission from the JREF.

So what's your view on this thread here, in the Education section? I mean, he's not actually doing any teaching, but he says he's going to.

Rolfe.

 

[Darat]

So what's your view on this thread here, in the Education section? I mean, he's not actually doing any teaching, but he says he's going to.

Rolfe.

Well as you say he isn’t and if he starts to "advertise" the fact he is running a seminar at the JREF forum he'll have to get permission from the JREF to use their facilities.

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Wait for Dr. MAS, he is conducting 4 year course at this forum. He can better reply then me.

What? I would expect a reaonably bright 12 year old to be able to answer that question. Did your "Dr." qualification come with some kind of moneyback guarantee because it is clearly doesn't work properly?

You brought up this subject;

"If this is your claim then you would be having no hesitation of taking cyanide 2x?"

Do you not even understand your own question?

Quite bizarre.

 

[Qureshi1_78]

Well as you say he isn’t and if he starts to "advertise" the fact he is running a seminar at the JREF forum he'll have to get permission from the JREF to use their facilities.

You have the habit to find some rules to bound Dr. MAS but he has changed his strategy. He will never come under DARAT BASKET. What I say does not apply over Dr. MAS I am not his spokesman.

 

[Rolfe]

In that case, how about answering BSM's question on your own behalf? After all, as he said, a reasonably bright 12-year-old would be able to manage it.

Please state either in mg/l or mM how strong your "cyanide 2x" is.

Rolfe.

 

[Olaf/QII]

We can believe that you honestly believe in this, but we still need evidence that it actually works.

When you claim you can present valid scientific theories for how homoeopathy works, we believe that you think you have these theories. When you constantly stall and use laughable excuses for not presenting the theories you claim to have, we start believing that you are not honest, and that you know you do not have valid scientific theories for homoeopathy.

Act honest, and we will treat you as an honest person (well, most of us, anyway - you know, that we are not such a homogenous group that one can speak for all)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=15105967

Why is it that no pseudo-skeptic can come up with a logical answer as to why these studies keep coming up so resoundingly positive.

p < .0001

Don't give me that rubbish about that ridiculous farce put on by the BBC where they had some lab tech design a faulty experiment. He used ammonium chloride on the cells effectively sinking the ship before it even left the port.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57736

 

[Zep]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=15105967

Why is it that no pseudo-skeptic can come up with a logical answer as to why these studies keep coming up so resoundingly positive.

p < .0001

Don't give me that rubbish about that ridiculous farce put on by the BBC where they had some lab tech design a faulty experiment. He used ammonium chloride on the cells effectively sinking the ship before it even left the port.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57736

At the risk of you running round your lounge room with the lampshade on your head and cheering, I've reported you for spamming. The wording I used to the admins was as follows:

Olaf/QII appears to be spamming threads with the same nonsense again and again. One or two threads is OK, but it's now about a half-dozen. I DO realise s/he is trying to get banned though too.