Big Pharma plotting against itself!

[HansMustermann]

But not from their point of view, hence all the cargo cult science, and appeals to quantum mechanics

... that is somehow misunderstood by the real scientists and only their favourite wooist got it right.

, for example. Many of them seem positively desperate for their enthusiasms to be backed up by science.

Except it's by some science that is totally unlike how the establishment does it.

Sorry, that seems to me like not very different. They still decided that if the actual science contradicts their woo, whole swathes of it are wrong. So some build some sort of NOMA if feasible, e.g., for morals. (E.g., MRI studies may show that homosexuality wiring is born that way, but science isn't appliccable to such moral and psychological stuff!!!111eleventeen) And some build some kind of model where that's not the _real_ science, where it's less easy to argue why one wouldn't use science there. (E.g., why the sun shines.) Or where science is just a matter of opinion, and their wooist's interpretation is just as valid as The Establishment's. Etc.

In the end it still boils down to: that stuff you measure in the labs is wrong, my favourite woo is right. It's just different ways of rationalizing it.

 

[Rara]

Or alternatively "science hasn't caught up with this yet".

When the Boiron rep said this in the documentary, It struck me that it must be very difficult...if not impossible to do quality control then.

How will they be able to tell if they make a mistake in bottling remedies? If someone sued them for purchasing and using a wrongly labelled remedy....how could they prove otherwise?

 

[dudalb]

Isn't doubt the cornerstone of science?

No.

 

[blutoski]

http://www.seven-seas.com/products/new-era


IIRC, homeopathy can get away with it's lies, unlike other fraudulent quackery disproven by science, because it's been grandfathered in by a certain Senator.

That's not the rationale in Canada or the UK, obviously.

 

[Mojo]

When the Boiron rep said this in the documentary, It struck me that it must be very difficult...if not impossible to do quality control then.

How will they be able to tell if they make a mistake in bottling remedies? If someone sued them for purchasing and using a wrongly labelled remedy....how could they prove otherwise?

Attention mes amis! Homeopathic emergency in France!

 

[Mojo]

IIRC, homeopathy can get away with it's lies, unlike other fraudulent quackery disproven by science, because it's been grandfathered in by a certain Senator.

That's not the rationale in Canada or the UK, obviously.

In the UK any medicine already on the market when the Medicines Act came into force (1972 or 1973, I think) was grandfathered in. After that they had to demonstrate efficacy and safety, but when, after another 20 years, they found that no new homoeopathic medicines had been registered because of this, they gave them a special scheme to allow registration without proving efficacy.

And of course it was grandfathered into the NHS.

 

[blutoski]

In the UK any medicine already on the market when the Medicines Act came into force (1972 or 1973, I think) was grandfathered in. After that they had to demonstrate efficacy and safety, but when, after another 20 years, they found that no new homoeopathic medicines had been registered because of this, they gave them a special scheme to allow registration without proving efficacy.

And of course it was grandfathered into the NHS.

Similar in Canada.

What I meant to say is that it's more than one lone senator in the US that we can blame for this.

The fact is: homeopathy is an inexplicably popular treatment modality, and regulators have that in mind when they're making these decisions.

 

[Mojo]

Similar in Canada.

What I meant to say is that it's more than one lone senator in the US that we can blame for this.

The fact is: homeopathy is an inexplicably popular treatment modality, and regulators have that in mind when they're making these decisions.

A lot of it does seem to be to do with friends in high places though.

 

[Jon.]

When the Boiron rep said this in the documentary, It struck me that it must be very difficult...if not impossible to do quality control then.

How will they be able to tell if they make a mistake in bottling remedies? If someone sued them for purchasing and using a wrongly labelled remedy....how could they prove otherwise?

The burden of proof is on the person advancing the suit. They don't have to prove anything to defeat the suit.

 

[Mongrel]

A lot of it does seem to be to do with friends in high places though.

Or the Daily Mail...