Hpathy: Scientific Genius

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

This is a peach of a post at Hpathy. I love the fact that what he says is wrong in such a variety of ways starting with the mis-spellings and concluding with an implication that science doesn't know how vitamins work.

Just in the first paragraph he plucks some clinical chemistry terms from the air, but doesn't quite get them right. Do you suppose he realises that ALT is a TLA and stands for something? Do you suppose he has any idea of what it stands for and how it matters in medicine?

He rounds off the paragraph with a logical fallacy. Well "Dr." Syed have you never seen lab parameters normalise without medical intervention?

See what happens when 200 years of scientific progress pass you by!

http://www.hpathy.com/homeopathy/forum_posts.asp?TID=2869&PN=1

"Its a routene for us here to get the lab tests done before we treat a disease. Therefore, I have many cases that have improved w.r.t lab reports. Like in Liver Funtions, Alt, Cholestrol, ESR etc.

The debate that homeopathy works is now far left behind. Now the topic is "How does it work ?". This last question is too a becoming an obselete.
The latest is " Does it work for ......? "

As for the scientific community... for them the earth was flat only 90 years back, and earth was the center of the Universe too. There was Ether all around the system.

Now, there is Anti-Matter.

I have question for our Allopathic Minds that advocate their scientific bases in adressing health Issues.


Please ask them to answer it first before we even touch the homeopathic question.


Q- What is the mode of working of Vitamins ?

__________________
Homeopath Dr. F.A.Syed
Islamabad, Pakistan "

 

[Gavinimurthy]

BSM

You people are too fast. I thought of posting the question regarding vitamins here, but it is already here.

Can somebody explain in simple terms how do vitamins work, in such minute quantities?

Murthy

 

[Mojo]

Can somebody explain in simple terms how do vitamins work, in such minute quantities?

Murthy

Are you suggesting that vitamins work when present in quantities that are minute in comparison with the quantities of "active" ingredients present in homeopathic remedies?

 

[MRC_Hans]

The short answer is that they take part in the chemistry of the body, in various ways. I'm not a specialist, but there is some information here .

What is the relevance of this question to the discussion of homeopathy? We can show experimentally that vitamins work. They are there in actual (if minute) quantities, and I think we know (perhaps in varying detail) how and why they do what they do.

Hans

 

[Mojo]

Can somebody explain in simple terms how do vitamins work

This is a slightly meaningless question, as "vitamin" is a generic term for a variety of molecules which have a metabolic role but cannot be synthesised by the body, so must therefore be present in the diet. Mostly, vitamins work as cofactors for enzyme-catalysed reactions. This means that, because they take part in the catalysis of reactions, they are not needed in large quantities.

 

[Mojo]

What is the relevance of this question to the discussion of homeopathy? We can show experimentally that vitamins work. They are there in actual (if minute) quantities, and I think we know (perhaps in varying detail) how and why they do what they do.

Hans

I don't think the question was originally intended to be relevant to homeopathy: it looks as if it was intended as an attack (albeit not a very well informed one) on "allopathy" along the lines of the usual "if you can't explain how this works, how can you criticise homeopathy?"

 

[Deetee]

This is a slightly meaningless question, as "vitamin" is a generic term for a variety of molecules which have a metabolic role but cannot be synthesised by the body, so must therefore be present in the diet.

Not always - Vit D for example is synthesised in the skin in the presence of sunlight

 

[MRC_Hans]

I don't think the question was originally intended to be relevant to homeopathy: it looks as if it was intended as an attack (albeit not a very well informed one) on "allopathy" along the lines of the usual "if you can't explain how this works, how can you criticise homeopathy?"

Maybe. In that case, it is an even more stupid argument than I thought .

Hans

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Maybe. In that case, it is an even more stupid argument than I thought .

Hans

I think Mojo was right, which is why I found Syed's post so funny.

 

[Rolfe]

I liked this bit!

The debate that homeopathy works is now far left behind. Now the topic is "How does it work ?". This last question is too a becoming an obselete.
The latest is " Does it work for ......? "

I was aware that many homoeopaths had stopped trying to show that homoeopathy "works" by the elegant stratagem of simply asserting that the question had already been answered in the affirmative. Neat piece of evasion.

However, I'm intrigued by the second assertion. If the question "how does it work?" is also becoming obsolete, this would again imply that an answer had been found. Now, which of the many competing answers does he think has come out on top?

And "does it work for....?" Hey, you already asserted that "it works", so why come up now with the implication that in fact it actually doesn't work for certain conditions?

Rolfe.

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Sigi is really quite remarkably thick;

"Oh God.
Again. In other words. You take a number of persons with higher blood pressure than defined by allopathic medicine as being normal.
The regulation of blood pressure is a system permanently regulated by the body. If this regulations fails to produce values considered as being normal, where does this come from?
In homeopathic treatment, You know, it is not the medicine that cures, it is the body itself. If the correct remedy initiates benefitial effects, not necessarily it is acting on the blood pressure at first. Depending on the case, initial effects may be on aspects not related on first sight to blood pressure (but on the cause(s) of it). Depending on the chronicity of the case, depending on the progress of the pathology, depending on ..... the outcome of remedy application will be different on every patient: will the remedy act on the blood pressure immediately, will it act first on other aspects and on the value of the blood pressure next (or later)? It depends on every case.
Individualization is basic in homeopathy. And individual will be the body to respond. Depending on the strength of vital force, age, damage of tissue and organs, genetic imprint, miasmatic situation... .
If cure comes about, then it is not cure from high blood pressure. This is only one aspect of the cure. We are speaking of the whole picture. Your mind doesn't go beyond the one aspect of HBP here. How can You separate HBP from the person as a whole? Homeopathy can't. It is too holistic.
sigi"

Perhaps he really thinks like this. He's so keen to keep hiding behind the complexity of individual patients he just cannt see the simple point that if homeopathy claims to cure patients and a patient has high blood pressure then it should cure that high blood pressure. No ifs, no buts. Dead simple. But he is simpler.

Homeopathy: raising the standard for failing to see the wood for the trees.

 

[Chris Haynes]

Sigi is really quite remarkably thick;

"...snip...
If cure comes about, then it is not cure from high blood pressure. This is only one aspect of the cure. We are speaking of the whole picture. Your mind doesn't go beyond the one aspect of HBP here. How can You separate HBP from the person as a whole? Homeopathy can't. It is too holistic.
sigi"
...snip...

Okay, I snipped just for brevity.

I think my son's cardiologist would get a good laugh at this. Especially since my son gets an EKG every 3 to 4 months and then an echocardiogram every 6 to 8 months --- just to see what is happening, and if the atenolol is working.

It's not like a homoepath would bother to find out WHY there is high blood pressure, or even take a listen to see if there is a murmur.

So, does Sigi think high blood pressure a condition or a symptom of another condition, oh, say like hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Yep, Sigi realy is that stupid;

"It is the complete picture, Hans!
It is not correct to separate just one symptom from the complete picture of a patient. Have You not really read my former posts? Are You trying to provoke me?
I quit the chit chat from now.
sigi"

 

[Mojo]

Note that when Hans posted a link in response to the question "What is the mode of working of Vitamins ?" he got the response:

by the way the site you mentoined gives us only the theory - and that is not sufficient

At least, I assume that's what Syed was referring to: Hans doesn't seem to have posted any other links in the thread. How else do you explain something like this apart from by reference to a theory?

 

[Rolfe]

A lot of the trouble seems to stem from Hans' choice of high blood pressure as the test condition. An understandable suggestion, as it provides an objective measurement which is absolutely essential if a trial like this is to get anywhere. The problem is that high blood pressure may be asymptomatic, and even if it isn't, it doesn't fit the homoeopathic definition of a disease.

Of course they themselves make "conventional" disgnoses all the time, and treat according to these diagnoses, but as soon as something like this comes up, it will be "down with your allopathic labels, we demand a homoeopathic presentation".

Ideally, if the homoeopaths themselves had any integrity (as Fitness First seems to have), they would come up with a suitable patient grouping to do the test on. But of course they won't. It might be useful to try to think of something else though, something with a clearly defined set of presenting symptoms that hte homoeopaths would recognise.

Rolfe.

 

[Kumar]

Can somebody explain in simple terms how do vitamins work, in such minute quantities?

Murthy

The true need to know will be :

How much our body in perfect health & in disordered state, actually need from vitamins/other substances?

We may have to understand, how many types of energies from differant substances are required with in this RDA range? Whether this RDA is under modern lifestyle envirinments & under modern average health? Whenther this RDA can be reduced by practicing better health practices?

 

[ilk]

The true need to know will be :

How much our body in perfect health & in disordered state, actually need from vitamins/other substances?

We may have to understand, how many types of energies from differant substances are required with in this RDA range? Whether this RDA is under modern lifestyle envirinments & under modern average health? Whenther this RDA can be reduced by practicing better health practices?

So, your question boils down to: "Can my magical pseudo-medical techniques reduce the amount of vitamins that a person requires in order to function normally?"

Noâ„¢

 

[Mojo]

The true need to know will be :

How much our body in perfect health & in disordered state, actually need from vitamins/other substances?

We may have to understand, how many types of energies from differant substances are required with in this RDA range?

We do not get "energies" from vitamins. Vitamins are necessary for our bodies to carry out chemical reactions necessary for life. Read the link Hans posted in the fouth post in this thread. Here's another one. And we most certainly do not get different "types of energies" from different substances. Energy is just energy, remember?

Whether this RDA is under modern lifestyle envirinments & under modern average health? Whenther this RDA can be reduced by practicing better health practices?

We need a certain intake of vitamins in order to maintain an adequate level of them in our cells. Ensuring an adequate intake of vitamins (ideally in the diet but via supplements if necessary) is an essential part of "better health practices."

Incidentally, the question you are now posing (how much vitamins do we need?) is an entirely different (note spelling) question to the one of Murthy's that you quoted in your post (how do vitamins work?).