Should Homeopathy be illegal?

[Guest]

Because it's water. Or snake oil. Whatever. That is why it should be illegal. It should be illegal for someone to make a claim about a product (that is completely untrue) and then sell this product to people - based on that claim.

You want to sell something, and make a claim that it will actually do something - fine. Show me that it does what you claim it does, or that is fraud. Homeophathic "medicines" are WATER. PERIOD.

You seem like a nice girl RS. Do you think it would be okay if I took advantage of someone when they were sick? When they were desperate? Took their money on false promises? Do you think that is okay?

The product makes a claim. It is unable to show any evidence that it actuall does what is advertised. RS, it's fraud and it's wrong.

Do you think its ok to stop somebodies only form of medicational help, based on its water and not if it helps them?



moi nice girl note to oneself kick andalyns shins more.

 

[Andalyn]

Do you think its ok to stop somebodies only form of medicational help, based on its water and not if it helps them?

You answered my questions with a question.

The point is RS, it is not "medicational help". It is water. What I want to stop is someone selling water, but labeling it as something else. That is fraud.

Don't you understand that you probably get more of what you are looking for out of the tap? There is nothing magical here. It's water.

If water truly helps the patient, then I suggest he or she drink it out of the tap. Buying it for an incredible amount per ounce is only filling someone's pockets, and doing the patient no good. If it is truly placebo, then fill up a bottle with water and lie to yourself.

My main concern is those who prey on the ignorant, sick, and desperate. This is exactly what this is.

RS - if you "got better" from an ilness, I don't know what made you better. Some illnesses spontaneously end. Heck, I read somewhere that 10% to 15% of people with the Human Papaloma Virus get better, even though there is no cure or treatment that makes HPV "go away".

Miracle? Homeopathy? Nope. So, whatever you had - if you got better, my bet is it was something other than the expensive water you were drinking. Someone sold you snake oil. You believed in it then, and you want to believe in it now. But RS, that doesn't make it any more real or true. It simply is not. It's just water. I'm sorry.

 

[Drooper]

Do you think its ok to stop somebodies only form of medicational help, based on its water and not if it helps them?

There is an important issue about information here. Any product should be fit for the purpose for which it is sold.

If homeopathic solutions and tablets were correctly labelled and marketed, i.e. as sugar pills, distilled water, or extremely diluted solutions of a particular substance (as applicable), with no medicinal claims I would have no objection.

This would allow consumers to chose between the expensive (but identical) homeopathic solutions and cheaper plain old water or sugar pills.

 

[Guest]

You answered my questions with a question.

The point is RS, it is not "medicational help". It is water. What I want to stop is someone selling water, but labeling it as something else. That is fraud.

Don't you understand that you probably get more of what you are looking for out of the tap? There is nothing magical here. It's water.

If water truly helps the patient, then I suggest he or she drink it out of the tap. Buying it for an incredible amount per ounce is only filling someone's pockets, and doing the patient no good. If it is truly placebo, then fill up a bottle with water and lie to yourself.

My main concern is those who prey on the ignorant, sick, and desperate. This is exactly what this is.

RS - if you "got better" from an ilness, I don't know what made you better. Some illnesses spontaneously end. Heck, I read somewhere that 10% to 15% of people with the Human Papaloma Virus get better, even though there is no cure or treatment that makes HPV "go away".

Miracle? Homeopathy? Nope. So, whatever you had - if you got better, my bet is it was something other than the expensive water you were drinking. Someone sold you snake oil. You believed in it then, and you want to believe in it now. But RS, that doesn't make it any more real or true. It simply is not. It's just water. I'm sorry.

yes I did answer with a question one that nobody seems to answer.

The point is water or not are you prepared to dictate hypothetically what people can take medicinally?

I dont dispute the labelling already agreed that part yonks back.

Back again to my question above and now added to what gives you the right to dictate what can be taken hypothetically, if people want to take it why cant they. People can look things up for themselves I did. Clearer labeling yes helps.

I can see your point whichi already agreed on, now look at it from where I sit and see how it feels to be told what you can have and that all comes back to modern medicines a monoply dont you think?
I understand fully do you? I didnt say it was magical, thats untrue nor did I sing its prasies as awonder drug, I sadi from apoint of experience it helps how why or what I cant say but it does, if its water then perhaps it works by giving the body a break from od on chemicals I dont know I am not a pharmacist, the point is it helps some people maybe the power of belief is strong so why teminate that persons ownbelief and throw it away like its meaningless?

By the sounds of that andalyn you agree to dictate what people can take to help them, so what is available to those left behind by modern medcines? Or should people in that desperate position just be left to suffer?

I am not heartless or cruel to prey on those in need, I amnot like that I care thats my problem I see it from that point of view, but the way I read you, it sounds no different to those who do you want to get rid of somebodies only hope just like that. Doesnt htat sound cruel?

I still have what I have I am incurable, it helped me get through a bad time briefly when I needed it, it didnt cure me it helped when all that was left was suicide, and I do that again anytime rather than selfkill.
Cant you see what you could do hypothetically by trashing or destroying everything and banning it all because it is not scientifically correct?

Unlike what you think of me as thick I am not so thick, I look up things first, even whenI was so despeparte I checked re checked everything. I gave it ago it helped, that was it. It gave the boost Ineeded to carry on and find the will to live, can you still deny that right to somebody else?

I agree it has to be looked into and labelled correctly i am not disputing that, The placebo effect needs more investigating into. Trashing things because they failed some tests (staged)should be banned along with closed minds. skeptism is one thing but you cant say science at the moment isnt unfallable(?),Tommorrow somethng could happen and it all changes.

I dont think this can be resolved, we just go round again, I stick to my beliefs on the caring side of humanity and you stick to you beliefs on ripoffs.




moi BRAIN

 

[richardm]

The point is water or not are you prepared to dictate hypothetically what people can take medicinally?

Obviously you should be able to take what you like. But should people be able to sell you something under false pretences?

Real Life Example:

Marks and Spencer have just hurriedly changed the packaging on their "Lobster and Prawn Terrine Slices" after they were challenged: In fact, it contained just 2 percent lobster and 3 percent prawn - the rest was smoked salmon. The packaging was misleading.

Should Marks and Spencer have been allowed to keep selling it under the old name, even though there was next to no Lobster or Prawn in it?

What about if you didn't know what lobster was like, and were content with what you got? Is it still okay?

How about if there was no lobster and prawn in it at all?

To my mind, this is one of the big problems with homeopathy. It's not just that people are not buying what they think they are buying, but that they are being repeatedly misled into believing that they are getting something. And that is not nice.

It would not be tolerated in any other field of commerce, and I don't see why homeopathy should be any different.

 

[Guest]

Obviously you should be able to take what you like. But should people be able to sell you something under false pretences?

Real Life Example:

Marks and Spencer have just hurriedly changed the packaging on their "Lobster and Prawn Terrine Slices" after they were challenged: In fact, it contained just 2 percent lobster and 3 percent prawn - the rest was smoked salmon. The packaging was misleading.

Should Marks and Spencer have been allowed to keep selling it under the old name, even though there was next to no Lobster or Prawn in it?

What about if you didn't know what lobster was like, and were content with what you got? Is it still okay?

How about if there was no lobster and prawn in it at all?

To my mind, this is one of the big problems with homeopathy. It's not just that people are not buying what they think they are buying, but that they are being repeatedly misled into believing that they are getting something. And that is not nice.

It would not be tolerated in any other field of commerce, and I don't see why homeopathy should be any different.

what no hi

Yes I know that part richardm, and agree it has to be changed but not the whole lot banned that isnt fair is it on those for whatever reason find it helps for whatever reason?


moi personal view.

 

[richardm]

what no hi

Sorry - Hi!

Yes I know that part richardm, and agree it has to be changed but not the whole lot banned that isnt fair is it on those for whatever reason find it helps for whatever reason?

Okay - no outright ban. But let's say that the homeopathic remedy manufacturers can only label them according to their contents.

So instead of 30c Arnica, 20c Rhubarb and 100c Sulphur, for example, there would be an array of bottles simply labelled:

"Water", "Water", "Water".

I think I would be content with that. They can even include the word "Homeopathic" if they must.

How does that sound?

 

[Guest]

Sorry - Hi!



Okay - no outright ban. But let's say that the homeopathic remedy manufacturers can only label them according to their contents.

So instead of 30c Arnica, 20c Rhubarb and 100c Sulphur, for example, there would be an array of bottles simply labelled:

"Water", "Water", "Water".

I think I would be content with that. They can even include the word "Homeopathic" if they must.

How does that sound?

lol so I should think so not saying hi how rude


sounds ok only and ONLY if it is proved its only water in it already agreed to that.


moi

 

[Guest]

lol so I should think so not saying hi how rude


sounds ok only and ONLY if it is proved its only water in it already agreed to that.

Balderdash,

This is the "right to choose" argument that we hear over and over again in alt med. The argument is topsy-turvy. There is no established right to defraud a consumer. If you want to waste you money trying to buy stock in a non-existent zeppelin company, you have the limited right to so waste your money. Your problem becomes clear as you find that nobody has the right to SELL you such worthless stock.

So the best that can be done at this point is to permit you to mix the xnake oil up yourself. That right you have. To a point. The next issue becomes what other people are being harmed. Do you have the right to refuse medical treatment for your kids and shove snake oil down their throats? That gets dicey. In many countries you could be charged with abuse. Or with practicing medicine without a license. So, no, that right is not clear.

Next comes the biggest issue of all: homeopathic nosodes. These are the homeopathetic "alternative" to vaccination. It is, of course, a death sentence, but never mind that. Nosodes afford no protection against disease. The gullible are fooled because of the herd immunity effect of the community around them -- the people getting the real vaccine protect the fools from ever encountering the disease and finding out they have squat for protection. It is thie flip-side of this herd effect, though, that is the issue with nosodes. By "exercizing your right" to be dullwitted, you also put at risk every infant around you, as well as everybody else with a compromised immune system. If enough people become so dullwitted, outbreaks of diseases will grow into epidemics. You have no right to be so stupid as to jjeopardize my infants in this way.

And no, the "no claim, no fraud" nonsense also doesn't hold. Here in the U.S. we foolishly enacted DSHEA, a stupid law that has permitted the enormous, unregulated growth of alternative medicines as "dietary supplements." The manufacturers are not allowed to make claims about these supplements. But I challenge anybody to not be able to find out the miraculous claimed effects of these products. Gee, somehow, even though manufacturers can't claim Noni Juice does anything, somehow the entire population knows the myth about what Noni Juice does. And St. John's Wort. And Colloidal Silver. And on and on.

It is transparent that no matter what the labelling requirement and advertising requirement, a kind of disinformational brinksmanship is being played. Hints and innuendos. Articles published by persons not directly connected to the manufacturers. All those perky salespeople in GNC stores, telling you how to bulk up, slim down, and "I don't know, but I have a firend whose cancer was cured by these tablets."

"Right to choose," "no claim, no fraud," and "its my body" all sound reasonable until you realize we're talking about our tents and camel's noses. You have the right to let the camel in under your tent so long as you bred the camel yourself, only you live inside the tent, and you have no neighboring tents, and you never go outside. If you meet those criteria, then go ahead, fool yourself and kill yourself. Oh, that''s right, suicide isn't a right in many countries, either, is it?

Cheers,

 

[Guest]

Billy when you have finished your rave let me know.

I'll re say what I already agreed with and then perhaps someobody will realise a big thing.

I can live in hope

moi note to oneself close door on closed minds.

 

[Guest]

Billy when you have finished your rave let me know.

I'll re say what I already agreed with and then perhaps someobody will realise a big thing.

I can live in hope

And just what "big thing" is that?

cheers

 

[Guest]

RichardR like cures like principle try this.

Feed the fever and starve the cold, familiar sentance, meaning if you keep warm despite a burning fever you sweat out the cold, that works doesnt it?

moi currently sueing granny from beyond the grave for saying wrong way round

 

[Guest]

And just what "big thing" is that?

cheers

Have you finished your rave then? I take it not seeing as your tone is so very sarcastic.

Having taken me out of context while I was posting back a reply to Richardm, I have always agreed that homeopathy should be regulated and any medicines that are found to be just pure water and or do not work should be removed, and the homeopathic remedies contents should be clearly labelled and always ask proper medical advice from qualified GPs first.

The point missed is you are basing your views solely on sheep fed material, science is not the be all end all it itself is subjected to improvements or false area claims, nobody can make a uniformed judgement on half staged facts, I havent until I see all relevant data the jury is still out, I do agree the industry needs improving and regualting and thats the whole medical industry.

The rest of your rave I respond to later, a few things you have written are below the belt and unwarrented.

R-S


moi note lock the door too

 

[richardm]

RichardR like cures like principle try this.

Feed the fever and starve the cold, familiar sentance, meaning if you keep warm despite a burning fever you sweat out the cold, that works doesnt it?

Ooer! My Granny used to say "Feed a Cold and Starve a Fever". Between the two of us we're lucky we both made it

 

[Guest]

Ooer! My Granny used to say "Feed a Cold and Starve a Fever". Between the two of us we're lucky we both made it

LMAO well its one of them , and I'm glad your here too, who else named richardm is available for me to argue with
R_s going back to finish her homework on radioactive gold infusions

note rem edit moi and homework as per addtional posting i oops on.

 

[Guest]

Have you finished your rave then? I take it not seeing as your tone is so very sarcastic.

Having taken me out of context while I was posting back a reply to Richardm, I have always agreed that homeopathy should be regulated and any medicines that are found to be just pure water and or do not work should be removed, and the homeopathic remedies contents should be clearly labelled and always ask proper medical advice from qualified GPs first.

The point missed is you are basing your views solely on sheep fed material, science is not the be all end all it itself is subjected to improvements or false area claims, nobody can make a uniformed judgement on half staged facts, I havent until I see all relevant data the jury is still out, I do agree the industry needs improving and regualting and thats the whole medical industry.

The rest of your rave I respond to later, a few things you have written are below the belt and unwarrented.

R-S

When you are done with the pity ploy, try to get to some substance.

Cheers,

 

[Flatworm]

I dont understand what you/they want or need, you ask me for things I never said I had, I never said I wrote it myself but flatworm keeps saying I did.

When you post something on a message board, it is of course implied that you wrote it yourself. It is the same as in any body of writing in a professional or academic setting: It is incumbent upon you to explicitly indicate which parts are not your own words and whose words they are.

 

[Guest]

When you post something on a message board, it is of course implied that you wrote it yourself. It is the same as in any body of writing in a professional or academic setting: It is incumbent upon you to explicitly indicate which parts are not your own words and whose words they are.

Flatworm!

Sheep-fed half-baked uniformed opinions! Have you finished your rave yet? Cleaned up after the party and all that? R-S says nothing she says. She says nothing she says she doesn't say. She says nothing she says she says. You quote her out of context? Don't you know she has too much chaos for you to find the context?

Cheers,

 

[Soubrette]

......RS - if you "got better" from an ilness, I don't know what made you better. Some illnesses spontaneously end. Heck, I read somewhere that 10% to 15% of people with the Human Papaloma Virus get better, even though there is no cure or treatment that makes HPV "go away".
....

RichardR is soooo gonna kick your behind if you don't come up with some kind of cite for that statistic



Sou

 

[RichardR]

Told you

Once again off you go again telling me what I think, wrong train of thought, you have never asked me what I think you just tell me what I think or mean.

Yes I recognise the guys one is you and the other is?

I'm female not a guy

I was reminding you what you wrote.

But OK, please tell me, what do you think about the claim of homeopathy that "like cures like"?