Homeoskeptic said:
Tell me then, why do homeopaths achieve long lasting cures of their patients then and why do they have so many?
Perhaps rather than keep saying it does not work, you should concentrate your efforts on finding out exactly how it does work!! Theres a thought.
Just for your information, I graduated from medical school and did a three year postgraduate course so that I could practice homeopathy. I have also undertaken further postgraduate courses the longer I have been in practice. I am currently studying with an Italian homeopathic doctor out in Italy on a three postgraduate course there.
Perhaps you should try homeopathy sometime, you might be surprised to find that it works for you.
Now isn't that interesting. The original comments in this thread were made by and to Corallinus, who swears she isn't Naturalhealth. Now Homeoskeptic, who
is Naturalhealth and has admitted to that, and whose line of argument and style of English only bears a truly surreal resemblance to Corallinus by some spooky coincidence, just jumps in and continues the conversation as if it was all addressed to her in the first place.
Which of course it was. BSM has posted the rules about sock puppets. I suggest you decide which username you want and "retire" the other before one of the admins does it for you.
Now, back to "it works!", which is all you seem to be able to say. If these cures are real, and so numerous, how come this striking effect completely disappears as soon as everyone concerned no longer knows who has been given the remedy and who hasn't? How come homoeopathy is lurking at the fringes of medicine, lacking acceptance by all but the most "new-age" oddities, if it can demonstrate efficacy? How come even prominent homoeopaths like Lionel Milgrom and Harald Walach are having to postulate weird and wonderful "magic" modes of action dependent of some sort of power of the mind of the practitioner to explain the rather embarrassing fact (which they simply can't deny) that when faced with any of the standard tests to see whether a medical intervention is having any effect or not, the result always comes out as "not"?
Now, we say, what's the point of postulating possible modes of action until you know there is a real effect there to explain? And indeed, there have been trials where even "magic" worked by the practitioner should have shown up if it was there, and these have been null as well.
If this effect were real, it wouldn't be the medics who would be most interested. Medicine has a history of pragmatism, of adopting self-evident working treatments and worrying about how they work later. If homoeopathy really worked, the medics would mostly just get on and use it. The people who would be really all over it would be the physicists and chemists, because all their up-to-the-minute theories about how the universe actually works would be shown to be incomplete, to put it politely.
Physicists and chemists just live to be the first one to explain a hitherto puzzling phenomenon. If there really were a homoeopathic effect, it would be Nobel Prize territory for whoever figured it out. So why is nobody of any stature looking at this? Simply because they no there is no effect there, and wasting one's career trying to explain something that doesn't happen is academic suicide. (Ask Jacques Benveniste!)
So, Naturalhealth (I'll just keep calling you that, as both socks seem to answer to the name), prove there is an effect, and you won't have to ask twice to find the cream of the scientific community fighting to be allowed to explain it. Until then, carry on quacking.
We know you don't have a medical degree because even a third year medical student could write better case studies than you can manage. And because you completely forgot which diploma to pretend to have, if that were the case, before BSM inadvertently reminded you. So why not go and be a useful citizen - take up Italian again, why don't you?
And by the way, I've tried homoeopathy three times - twice as a patient, and once a self-proving because all these homoeopaths said I ought to. Guess what happened every time? Nothing. And the replies I got were mainly that homoeopathy doesn't work on sceptics! So much for the pretence at material science! (And ignoring the fact that the first time I wasn't a sceptic, as I knew nothing at all about this strange new "doctor" my parents had taken me to, and had no reason at all to believe the pills he gave me wouldn't cure me. But they didn't.)
Rolfe.
