Homoeopathy article from Penn State

Based on table 1. Lab 2 seems to be a useless lab. No significant result. Lab 3 is not much better with only one slightly significant result. lab 4 is clearly the best lab.

I haven't read the article but isn't a little strange when the significant difference goes in different directions in the same test for different labs?

The also seems to mostly ignore the bad laboratory 2 in the article.
 
fredriks said:
Based on table 1. Lab 2 seems to be a useless lab. No significant result. Lab 3 is not much better with only one slightly significant result. lab 4 is clearly the best lab.

I haven't read the article but isn't a little strange when the significant difference goes in different directions in the same test for different labs?

The also seems to mostly ignore the bad laboratory 2 in the article.
Click to expand...


combined p<.0001





meow
 
So the lab with the most tests found nothing but the other labs managed to find enough to not take that into account.

Lab 4 seems to be a very good lab.
 
paximperium said:
So? I could create an experiment that shows that drinking urine cures cancer with a p<0.001 as well by using crap science.

Do you even know what a p-value means?
Click to expand...
I'm guessing something to do with urine? Or taking it (by any route), as miaow seems to be doing. :D

Yuri
 
Yuri Nalyssus said:
I'm guessing something to do with urine? Or taking it (by any route), as miaow seems to be doing. :D

Yuri
Click to expand...
Well a p-value only tells us if the results are statistically due to chance, NOTHING about the validity of the results themselves.

Design a biased or badly done study and the results are completely useless even if they have a nice p-value.
 
I concur with what Fredriks is saying. His description of the inconsistent findings is the same as my recollection of this train crash of a paper.

I wonder if Xanta meow has ever done any scientific research, and so has any inkling of the ways researchers can come up with "significant" findings from a load of codswallop? I suspect not.

Load of random output from a very unstable system, which can produce apparently "significant" findings in either direction if you torture the data sufficiently.

Nothing to see here.

Rolfe.

Please do not make public accusations of sock-puppetry. If you think a member may be a sock puppet, just report them to the mod team, along with any evidence you may have. However, please note that we only ban people based on clear evidence, similarity in posting style is not enough even if it seems obvious.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quote:
"I don’t know if it works," says Kelly Karpa, associate professor of pharmacology in the Penn State College of Medicine, "The whole basis of homeopathy is counterintuitive to everything pharmacologists have learned about drug actions. I won’t say that I buy into it 100 percent, but I won’t say that I think it’s quackery either. Having never used it myself, I try to keep an open mind. Some patients are convinced that it has helped them. Perhaps the greatest parallel between homeopathy and conventional medicine is the practice of immunization, which also relies on the principle that small amounts of a substance may protect from disease."
Click to expand...

It is appalling that a professor of pharmacology at a major US university could be so profoundly ignorant of the nature of scientific evidence! How did she get that job?
 
Homeopathy is a fraudulent representation of pharmacy and the pharmaceutical sciences that continues to exist in the United States due solely to political, not scientific, reasons. Indeed, homeopathic remedies are defined as drugs in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [21 U.S.C. 321] Section 201(g)(1) as a result of the 1938 actions of U.S. Senator Royal Copeland (D-NY), a noted homeopath of his time. But scientifically, homeopathic remedies are nothing more than highly-purified water misrepresented as medicine based upon an archaic practice that is diametrically opposed to all pharmacological principles. The mental gymnastics required to teach chemistry, pharmacology, and therapeutics while also embracing homeopathy are beyond the skills of anyone trained in the scientific method.

Source: Terra Sig.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom