• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Queens Homoeopath in Sydney

EHLO

Critical Thinker
EHLO
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
273
Any Sydney-siders free tomorrow?

The Queens very own Homoeopath is in town and is giving a free keynote address at the Homoeopathic Medicine Conference in Bondi. He was on the radio this morning http://www.abc.net.au/rn/breakfast/stories/2008/2361569.htm making lots of ambiguous but testable claims about the practice.

Apparently he's a rheumatologist and part of some WHO homoeopathic working group?? so it's interesting to hear how he stresses the "complementary" aspects of treatment as opposed to stating that homoeopathy is efficacious in its own right.

Depressing. Can someone offer him a million bucks?
 
I'll be there but will be busy in the morning, otherwise I may just have heckled him from the back.
 
EHLO said:
The Queens very own Homoeopath is in town and is giving a free keynote address at the Homoeopathic Medicine Conference in Bondi. He was on the radio this morning http://www.abc.net.au/rn/breakfast/stories/2008/2361569.htm making lots of ambiguous but testable claims about the practice.

Apparently he's a rheumatologist and part of some WHO homoeopathic working group?? so it's interesting to hear how he stresses the "complementary" aspects of treatment as opposed to stating that homoeopathy is efficacious in its own right.

Depressing.
Click to expand...

Rheumatology is one of Dr Peter Fisher's sub-specialities (after homeopathy). For any new readers, here’s an interesting comment he made back in 2001:
It seems more important to define if homeopathists can genuinely control patients' symptoms and less relevant to have concerns about whether this is due to a ‘genuine’ effect or to influencing the placebo response.

http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/40/9/1052
Click to expand...

Basically, that doesn’t sound like a man who’s too interested in robust scientific evidence – something which is further suggested by his connections with the World Health Organisation (WHO). This from a 4-page critical commentary on the leaked WHO draft report on homeopathy which appeared in Skeptical Inquirer in 2005:
“The WHO clearly applies a method which countless homeopaths also use: selective critical thinking... critical reviews by the most influential authors/authorities that are specialized in scientific research on alternative treatments--the Web site Bandolier (Oxford University), the Cochrane Library, and Edzard Ernst (Exeter University)--are entirely ignored.”

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_5_29/ai_n15763205
Click to expand...

Interestingly, during an intense interview with Richard Dawkins last year, Peter Fisher admitted that it was “plain ambition” that got him into homeopathy in the first place. You can view their meeting here (27.30 mins to 32.22 mins):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4720837385783230047

For anyone who might be attending the conference in Bondi, it's well worth a view.
 
If anyone gets a chance to ask questions, I have a couple.

1) He's on the record as saying that "there is absolutely no reason to think that homeopathy works to prevent malaria" (he actually said he was "very angry" about people making this claim). How does he differentiate this from any other homoeopathic treatment?

2) He has claimed that "A review of 119 randomised, peer-reviewed clinical trials of homeopathy at the end of 2005 showed 49% positive results for homeopathy. Only 3% were negative." Has this "review" been published anywhere? I can't find it on pubmed. It appears that this review was conducted by the British Homeopathic Association (it is described in what appears to be a press release issued by them as "our review") but there doesn't seem to be any mention of it on their website. Are there any plans to publish this "review"?
 
Blue Wode said:
Interestingly, during an intense interview with Richard Dawkins last year, Peter Fisher admitted that it was “plain ambition” that got him into homeopathy in the first place. You can view their meeting here (27.30 mins to 32.22 mins):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4720837385783230047
Click to expand...

Cheers for that - It didn't click that he was the homeopath in Enemies of Reason.

He's a great example of the worst case scenario when it comes to this sort of nonsense - well qualified with a high profile and celebrity endorsement. Somehow sitting in the audience yelling "Quack" at regular intervals probably wouldn't go very far in persuading the audience to question their beliefs.
 
Fisher is also the editor-in-chief of comedy "journal" Homeopathy, which has been responsible for polluting the literature with some dreadful rubbish. Perhaps most notably the paper discussed at some length here.
 
Hey! Maybe he could publish the 2005 review he referred to. If it's good enough for him, it must be good enough for Homeopathy.
 
Last edited:
Blue Wode said:
Fairly detailed abstracts of Peter Fisher’s presentations can be found here:
http://www.homeopathynsw.org/speakers/Dr_Peter_Fisher.htm
Click to expand...

Ah. Special pleading. I never would have guessed. :)

The irony of this line is worth it:

"A paper by Shang et al, published in the Lancet in 2005 included a meta-analysis, but was not a systematic review. It was subject to serious criticism including its lack of transparency and ‘data-dredging’."

Not only is it a lie, but he immediately follows it with a mention of those homeopathy studies that can only be called 'positive' because of data-dredging.

Linda
 
From abstract 3:
Homœopathy has been attacked in the media, particularly in the UK. The attacks have two main bases:

1. Homœopathy is ‘implausible’, because of its use of ultramolecular dilutions and lack of understanding of the mechanism of action.
2. Because of unsustainable and sometimes irresponsible claims from within the homœopathic community, principally on prevention, immunisation and arbitrary theories based on metaphor, not similarity.
Click to expand...


He's missed one:

3. It doesn't work.
 
Mojo said:
From abstract 3:


He's missed one:

3. It doesn't work.
Click to expand...

So we've got three reasons now why people are mean to homeopathy:

1. There's no mechanism for it to work
2. Practitioners lie about it working
3. There's no evidence of it working.

So, quantum tunneling and entagled pairs it is then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom