IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Citing Wikipedia on anything the least bit controversial . .
. . is somewhat less reputable than just stating your own opinion without support. Roving gangs of enforcer goons make sure all controversial topics provide the "correct" information and "incorrect" information is repeatedly deleted.

Whether or not homeopathy "works" is not something I'm going to state an opinion on, but a great many people seem to have been helped by it whether it "works" or not.

Allopathic medicine is expensive - it's where the money is, and using that money the AMA had legislation passed defining how to judge the validity of a treatment in terms consistent only with their own medical theory. The objective of this legislation was to lock homeopathy out completely to assure their own high incomes. This effort continues unabated to this day.

Conclusion: in the United States it is impossible to know whether or not homeopathy works because there's too much money involved. Wherever there is money lies abound.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
Expand Edited by Andrew Grygus July 22, 2007, 01:59:23 PM EDT
New Impossible to know?
Sounds like a religious viewpoint.

[link|http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html|http://www.quackwatc...Topics/homeo.html]

Do the math. And then add the thousands of contaminents that are unavoidable, and tell me which of the various substances are supposed to be exerting their influence on your body, especially in the short term to have an affect.

Not a chance.
New Ah! an unbiased source :)
This article repeats the subterfuge used to get anti-homeopathic legislation passed, "To be accepted homeopathy must explain how it works in terms acceptable to us. In other words, if it can't prove it's allopathic, it's invalid.

It also mentions all the homeopathic schools being shut down without bothering to mention they were forced to shut down by AMA sponsored legislation.

Disclaimer: I do not use homeopathy (and I barely use allopathy) but I still hold that it is impossible to know here in the United States if homeopathy actually works or not - too much money involved.

On the other hand, it's been proven over and over that allopathy doesn't work (in a great many cases) and is often totally wrong. Witness the American Heart Association urging us for 75 years to eat trans fats and rancidity prone (carcinogenic) polyunsaturated fats.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New I don't ask you to accept the source
I ask you to run the numbers and address the concerns.

But you aren't going to because you don't care about this issue, you don't believe in the matter at hand, you just feel it is worthwhile to play Devil's advocate in any issues concerning the AMA.

And you certainly are right on the transfat issue.

But whether or not a profit motivated guild/monopoly was right on the transfat issue has nothing to do with this one.

"To be accepted homeopathy must explain how it works in terms acceptable to us."

Where's that quote from?

Here's a decent quote that pretty much encompasses all you need to know about this scam.


Oscillococcinum, a 200C product "for the relief of colds and flu-like symptoms," involves "dilutions" that are even more far-fetched. Its "active ingredient" is prepared by incubating small amounts of a freshly killed duck's liver and heart for 40 days. The resultant solution is then filtered, freeze-dried, rehydrated, repeatedly diluted, and impregnated into sugar granules. If a single molecule of the duck's heart or liver were to survive the dilution, its concentration would be 1 in 100200. This huge number, which has 400 zeroes, is vastly greater than the estimated number of molecules in the universe (about one googol, which is a 1 followed by 100 zeroes). In its February 17, 1997, issue, U.S. News & World Report noted that only one duck per year is needed to manufacture the product, which had total sales of $20 million in 1996. The magazine dubbed that unlucky bird "the $20-million duck."

Actually, the laws of chemistry state that there is a limit to the dilution that can be made without losing the original substance altogether. This limit, which is related to Avogadro's number, corresponds to homeopathic potencies of 12C or 24X (1 part in 1024). Hahnemann himself realized that there is virtually no chance that even one molecule of original substance would remain after extreme dilutions. But he believed that the vigorous shaking or pulverizing with each step of dilution leaves behind a "spirit-like" essence\ufffd"no longer perceptible to the senses"\ufffdwhich cures by reviving the body's "vital force." Modern proponents assert that even when the last molecule is gone, a "memory" of the substance is retained. This notion is unsubstantiated. Moreover, if it were true, every substance encountered by a molecule of water might imprint an "essence" that could exert powerful (and unpredictable) medicinal effects when ingested by a person.




And don't bother telling me it's the AMA's fault it'll never be tested. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. It fails the smell test, no point in shoving some down your throat as well.
New oes this work in acceptable form?
[link|http://www.jleukbio.org/cgi/content/full/68/4/503|http://www.jleukbio....ent/full/68/4/503]
since echinacea is sold as a homeopathic product and wasnt invented by smith kline et al.
It might help you to know that eli lilly was rapidly investigating a lot of these substances for patentable use.
thanx,
bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New The answer is no.
[link|http://www.webmd.com/content/article/109/109218.htm|Web MD]:
The herbal remedy echinacea may not live up to its reputation for fighting colds.

Echinacea was tested against the common cold virus in healthy college students. Apparently, the herbal remedy flunked. It didn't seem to prevent or treat colds.

The report appears in The New England Journal of Medicine. The researchers included Ronald Turner, MD, of the University of Virginia's medical school.
Alex

Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law than those who make the law. -- Sophocles (496? - 406 BCE)
New Echinacea found effective after all . . .
[link|http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-echinacea25jun25,1,4172844,print.story?ctrack=2&cset=true|Los Angeles Times]
The herbal remedy echinacea can prevent colds and speed recovery from runny noses, coughs and other symptoms, according to a study published Sunday [in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases]that could renew interest in the discredited product.

The analysis of 1,600 patients pooled from 14 previously published studies found that echinacea reduced the chances of catching a cold by 58% and shaved 1.4 days off the duration of a cold, researchers said.
Of course those who claimed no effect are claiming "bad science" and these guys are "right back at ya". I'm sure that as in 99.83% of medical and nutritional disputes both sides are right on at least that one point.

[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New "Where is that quote from?" you ask . . .
. . and then quote a perfect example of it. If that's the brand of cool-aid you've been drinking, that arguement will seem flawless.

On the other hand, scientists working with water memory [link|http://www.raydionics.com/water.html|Example], [link|http://www.valdostamuseum.org/hamsmith/newtech2.html|Example] are finding things may be a little more complex.

The AMA has never gone to Congress claiming outright that homeopathy doesn't work, but always with this same argument, "They can't explain why it would work in 'scientific' terms" - in other words, in the terms the AMA has defined. Here is a further exposition on this approach [link|http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/10755530050120637|Letters].
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New No homeopathic remedy has ever passed a double-blind test.
In short, no-one's ever scientifically demonstrated that it does anything at all.

The mechanism itself is irrelevant until it can be demonstrated that a mechanism exists.

Box's example is pure placebo, and I'd bet a bottle of Black Sheep Bitter on it.


Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]
Expand Edited by pwhysall July 22, 2007, 05:05:46 PM EDT
New Not difficult to find articles that differ with you on that.
Here's the first one that came up: [link|http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/13/19/19.html|Homeopathic Research Update]. Lots of references at the bottom.

I am also aware there are double blind tests of homeopathic remedies by allopathic researchers that came up statistically invalid. I imagine they tend to pick some of the more marginal claims to test, consciously or subconsciously, since that would be the natural tendency to assure you get the results you expect.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=28
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New although when it comes to picking doctors
graduate from only certain american medical schools with the exception being unam mexico city if an internal specialty was aquired. Residency must be at certain recognisable US hospitals. Must be a woman with small hands.
thanx,
bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Re: No homeopathic remedy has ever passed a double-blind tes
Ah, another impromptu flight on the Fanciful Musings on Immortality dirigible :-0

Andrew has expressed the dilemma with his characteristic clarity, pretty much freed of Popular opinions and their circular 'proofs' - ever in search of that elusive Certainty thing. Can add only a couple anecdotal ingredients to the consomm\ufffd:
(Is AMA allopathy <VS> All Other approaches ..a dish which should be eaten cold, too?)

Note that Samuel Hahnemann (also Moshe Feldenkrais / his 'method' for dealing with body, skeletal problems) -- were both physicists. They really did appreciate the usual numbers and how to lie/not-lie with stats -- as they also witnessed the oft absurd pronouncements (and results) of the 'advice' of the later-on, much more numerous allopathic religious=exclusive practitioners. Guess what: they did Experiments! to test their theories. Imagine that. Hahnemann's lore is largely an encyclop\ufffddic compilation of very-many Boolean choices: amidst numerous "observable symptoms" and even personal habits of the patient. He could not 'force it simpler'. Apparently.

As Andrew also points towards - a history of US medicine will reveal that the formation of the 'AMA' was largely about [std Machiavelian approach; offerings to Moloch, pre-spreadsheet] -- doing all things possible, however scurrilous -call 'em All 'quacks'- to achieve monopoly.

Currently, AMA retains that Windows-status, but we are seeing that mind-lock losing ground here, not only because of the absurd costs for the most trivial of 'procedures'. Many more %MDs are eschewing membership in their State AMA orgs -- retaining only the necessaries as permit them to practice at all, obtain painkillers, etc.

I too do physics, remain Skeptical of most things -- the more earnest an emotional Pitch-for: the less I accord Brownie points for trying. I've tried some homeo; experienced a negative-proof! too. That is, later on, when I indulged in a substance known to ~neutralize that remedy: almost instantly 'felt' unfamiliar/inexpressible 'things going on' within -- not extreme but Evident. (There was no such 'clue' upon imbibing the original Remedy.)

Anecdotal too:
A pair of cats with diagnosed FIV, given "months.." to survive by your Standard-allopathic Vet. Recommended treatment: extinguish and flush. (We do a lot of that here, when the cute-puppy needs replacement with a new one to keep little Kevin amused for a few weeks.)

A couple so-called 'Remedies' employed and a diet of particularly junk-free food, over the past ~12 years ... suggested to the also traditionally-Skeptical 'kitty staff' person: hmmmm - anything Tuit?
'Course one of this pair, whom I've nicked Scaredy Cat is weird on several levels. But she had been abused as a kitten.
(Imagine.. "abusing a kitten", eh. What must that reveal.)

And no, Peter - this constitutes neither proof nor Proof - nor can it sustain Disproof (in its various stages of personal-Belief.) It [the story] just IS, unless you want to consider my drain bramaged: I've witnessed most of this history. I say..

Guess the Euros are even dopier than the denizens of Bushland, judging by the large presence of alt. approches to health maintenance on the Continent - including Homeo. (But then, whoever believes that popularity connotes efficacy - well..)

Oh, BTW, deranged-one:
DCs, Osteopaths are Not synonyms for 'homeopathic tendencies' -- merely are these another 'Alternative' approach to maintaining health. That is an important distinction IMO: The AMA is dedicated to treating symptoms of what they call 'diseases' - small potatoes (time OR money) is spent on the Idea of "maintaining robust Health".

Note finally that, claimed 'cure rates' for various maladies: are oft tied to a "5 year survival" metric, with little clarification of the kind of liff experience, as the dying is somewhat put-off. (Personally I'd prefer death to some of these as produce a medical-Guantanamo-liff - thankyouverymuch.)

Nothing IS simple about any of this stuff. Engage in a battle of (imagined) Opposites - at your own peril. I prefer to observe, acknowledge the [still] massive ignorance of the species on most aspects of body survival: and place my bets, right-->at any time of need. I can't think of a single person to whom I could mindlessly delegate such a decision. YMMV.


Ashton
Medicine chest: aspirin. Band-Aids\ufffd. Ethyl-, Iso- alcohol. Tinct. Iodine. Floss.
And occasional samples of those Fun sought-after pills, (leftovers not wasted by someone - on mere pain suppression.) Drugstores would starve if ...

New oooh, medicine chest comparisons
rubbing alchohol
hydrogen peroxide
iodine
kelocort (artificial skin)
badaids, bandages, compression bandages,surgical tape, assorted ace bandages, different exoskeletal supports
witch hazel
magnesium oxide
tiger balm
aspirin ibuprofin acetiphinomen
assorted antibacterial ointments
camphor
menthol
eucolyptus oil
hemostats, assorted needles and thread
various prescription items

even tho I live on the road system with lots of drugstores close by I still have the old habits of being self contained
thanx,
bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
New Minimal
  • Antibiotic ointment - generic
  • Three tubes Airborne tablets (may work, may not - but always worth a try)
  • 1-ounce amber glass stoppered bottle Uranium & Sodium Acetate (empty)
  • Toothpaste
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New W.T.F. ?
was 'Uranium & Sodium Acetate' all about? re going into anyone's body...
That this is also a mixture, thus unlikely as a chem. reagent == ???
I'm all Ferenghi.

(And funny-you-should etc.)
I have still, a CP Merck? bottle of Uranium Acetate, plus some other U- compounds and miscl. alkaloids, oddities, like a Ra-containing phosphorescent vial -- but these are all in the garage! and suitably contained/marked.

(There's even a note inside, lest some future salvager imagine mindless disposal. Guess I'll soon have to consider the likely eptness of current crop, pre-need: redo in Chinese as well as Spanish?)

New Re: W.T.F. ?
The Uranium Acetate bottle is there purely for the benefit of persons who snoop in other people's medicine cabinets. It's so old the label says "1 ounce" rather than being in grams.

I don't keep my little bottle of Pure Arsenic Crystals in there because it's actually full of Pure Arsenic Crystals.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
     get headaches? - (boxley) - (33)
         Here's one - - (Ashton) - (5)
             well shoving the blood flow to new areas usually works - (boxley) - (2)
                 ^RTFM^ -NT - (Ashton) - (1)
                     duh oh! -NT - (boxley)
             Another one: - (admin)
             Wife's comment: - (admin)
         Their commercials give me a headache! -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         So it's water, right? -NT - (pwhysall) - (25)
             ? no. 99.9%wax n other stuff -NT - (boxley) - (24)
                 99.9999% wax (and other meaningless stuff) - (crazy) - (23)
                     works in the case of someone alergic to most - (boxley) - (22)
                         Actually, no - (crazy) - (21)
                             Im glad the PC editors on wikipedia have nailed Homeopathy - (boxley) - (3)
                                 sigh (for both anti-WP responses) - (crazy) - (1)
                                     As a jumping off point for non-controversial subjects . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                                 Ah, otheopaths vs allopaths - (crazy)
                             Citing Wikipedia on anything the least bit controversial . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (16)
                                 Impossible to know? - (crazy) - (15)
                                     Ah! an unbiased source :) - (Andrew Grygus) - (14)
                                         I don't ask you to accept the source - (crazy) - (4)
                                             oes this work in acceptable form? - (boxley) - (2)
                                                 The answer is no. - (a6l6e6x) - (1)
                                                     Echinacea found effective after all . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                                             "Where is that quote from?" you ask . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                                         No homeopathic remedy has ever passed a double-blind test. - (pwhysall) - (8)
                                             Not difficult to find articles that differ with you on that. - (Andrew Grygus)
                                             http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=28 -NT - (boxley)
                                             although when it comes to picking doctors - (boxley)
                                             Re: No homeopathic remedy has ever passed a double-blind tes - (Ashton) - (4)
                                                 oooh, medicine chest comparisons - (boxley) - (3)
                                                     Minimal - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                                                         W.T.F. ? - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                             Re: W.T.F. ? - (Andrew Grygus)

Powered by isospin!
140 ms