janic wrote: We are in the field of health as aviation and the navy are in the field of mechanics related to displacement, without more, it is not for tomorrow that we will send an aircraft carrier in space.
However, we can compare them. Example: I have to go as quickly as possible from France to the USA. What will be the fastest means of travel (plane or boat)?
So how we can compare the speed of healing between treatments A and H!
Or compare the depths that planes can reach compared to submarines. (unfortunately some planes win on this ground, but with all its passengers dead)
janic wrote: Apart from this one, rather interesting, but that you probably haven't read until the end, the rest is pretty hollow, heartbreakingly poor!
That is to say?
That the sites indicated are a pity of heartbreaking indications.
janic wrote: Tests 2 and 3 are measures of toxicity, only phase 3 begins to measure their relative effectiveness, since it is only in phase IV that the effects will really be measured (benefit / risk ) on the entire population (real guinea pigs!). Reread the protocols in question.
Fact! It's very clear:
A clear dark then!
Nice quotes, but incomplete since they do not indicate the toxicity tests carried out on paying PAID goods for that! (Often students in need of money or unemployed, while there are lots of healthy researchers who would only ask to serve as guinea pigs by checking, on themselves, their products.)
Ah, they're afraid of being poisoned,
them !
.But no analysis of these apart from the discourse coming from the laboratories which alone carry out the tests and draw the conclusions that neither the ANSM nor any state authority verifies their veracity since they are not equipped for the make. It is called being judge and party, including for Boiron and others.
Now and this is the bottom of the subject what about these protocols concerning H?
Only the so-called toxicity tests remain common and therefore, officially, no toxicity is recognized for H provided that there is at least a dilution at 10.000 ° or an official recognition of a possible action because we are very far from the number of Avogadro (6x10 power 23), so often criticized.
Then, even if certain H practices do it (in opposition to the very principle of H) the treatments are individual and cannot be applied to targeted groups regardless of the number in randomized trials. Hence the impossible comparison between the protocols that BP wants to impose via governments and those of H or other therapies elsewhere. [*]
Only phase IV is also common, that is to say in sick populations whose effects can be measured on therapeutic efficacy and even toxicity.
As for pharmacovigilance, it lists barely 10% according to itself.
janic wrote: When an industrialist uses blackmail for employment, there is never any question of the efficiency of industrial processes,
Why not; They can use several arguments to defend their business.
Find a single industrialist, (you don't have to work in these sectors then), using the argument of process efficiency, for job blackmail. For example, a large automobile manufacturer will never criticize its own manufacturing (leaving this aspect to its competitors) as a reason for dismissal.
[*] a small nuance however! When a group has the same characteristics, similinum, the same product can then be applied to it as demonstrated by the results on cholera, in America and recently in Haiti and already cited.
https://planete-homeopathie.org/homeopathie-et-cholera/http://www.homeopathe.org/Docupdf/veratrum.pdfIn 1854 epidemic in Genoa Benoît MURE (1809-1858) treats eight hundred seventy-four cholera patients, he loses seventy-four. He publishes the names of the cured patients in the newspapers, which makes him expelled from the city where said the population marched by shouting homeopathy or death
Constantin Hering (1809-1880) Cholera raged in Saint Petersburg in 1866 During this epidemic a temporary hospital was entrusted to Dr. Hering
in a populous neighborhood. He had 10 beds that were never empty. In 8 weeks Hering did not have to deplore the loss of a moribundly arrived patient against a mortality of 30% in other establishments. Stupor and dismay when we learned that Hering had used homeo remedies
mainly Veratrum album (homeopathic library 1870 volume III page 208, Baillière editeur Paris)https://grotius.fr/l%E2%80%99homeopathi ... Swn0_kzbIUhow can homeopathy be humanitarian?
Jean-François Masson: Homeopathy is perhaps an alternative medicine - an appellation which I don't like very much - but it is certainly not a soft medicine, nor a slow medicine. First and contrary to popular belief, homeopathy is an ultra-fast acute medicine, much more than a chemical medicine. This is what convinced me at the start of my career to pursue this path. It can cure emergency vomiting and acute diarrhea, ear infections, tonsillitis, pneumonia and fevers. It is effective in the treatment of several tropical pathologies - diarrhea, parasitosis… Second, on common pathologies - otitis, bronchitis, gastroenteritis etc. - homeopathy is as effective in France as in Africa. Six million children die in the world of "avoidable" death. This means that they are victims of diseases that could be treated. They succumb to it because antibiotics are unavailable or counterfeit, and the terrain very weak. If you teach people there to react quickly to bronchitis, otitis, or diarrhea, this is a big step forward. Thirdly, homeopathy also consists in toning the patient's terrain, and contributes to the decrease in the frequency of outbreaks of viral hepatitis for example.http://sphq.org/histoire/etc ...
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré