Why does homeopathy scare big pharma?

[ABC2019]

ABC2019 »08/12/20, 13:12

well I agree with you on your sources, I have the same

Ah yes ? Of the kind ?

of the same kind as you, in particular the sites of representative bodies of homeopaths. You know them as well as I do.

What sites, so that interested people can get information!

I have already answered you on this point, I will indicate them to other interested people when they ask for them - but if you want to give them yours, do not deprive yourself.

"National Library", on the other hand, I would point out to you that it is not a source, it is a library. Should learn to give quotes.

Another stupid reasoning! What is a library? A place where there are books sorted by subject, yes, yes, you can check it out for yourself. So you get your ass out of your chair and go to consult them on the spot, it's free!

it's just not called "giving referrals", that's all.

you want to laugh once more! Does your sect have only that to offer you? Name individuals who run after a magical action and where have you hidden the hundreds of thousands of testimonies from the field?

these people there practiced homeopathy and therefore they know perfectly the "testimonies of ground".

Ah, ah, ah, oh, oh, oh! If they knew the testimonies in question, they would not have returned their jacket, but they would have sought advice from the doctor with a long practice, in order to verify its veracity on patients. But if they've been content with their own failures, that's sure they can't think of anything else.

Obviously they practiced unlike you, so sorry I trust them more than Mr. Bras-which-regrows-with-vegetable-juice-and-which-heals-with-sugar.

are religions part of the medical field? All the H are doctors graduated in allopathy, not believers in magical actions, otherwise it is to accuse doctors A of doing the same! You accuse them if I understood

I didn't say that religions are part of the medical field, I'm just telling you that religions prove that it's okay to convince hundreds of millions of people of the existence of things that aren't no supporting facts. It's just a factual finding.

Nothing new or special. If patients see improvement in A the doctor will attribute this to his medicine, same in H. Are these objective facts or not?
Even that you should be able to figure it out… though ?!

You only have to read the references I gave you to understand that in reality this is not how H. walking: no more than the belief in vegetable juices and the prayer to Jesus Christ to make an arm grow back, since there is no documented experience where it happened, precisely.

[Janic]

ABC2019 »08/12/20, 14:53

Janic wrote:
What sites, so that interested people can get information!

I have already answered you on this point, I will indicate them to other interested people when they ask for them - but if you want to give them yours, do not deprive yourself.

No problem, I have all my time, but there will come a time when you have to let go!

it's just not called "giving referrals", that's all.

It's called indicating sources that can be consulted by the hundreds in which There are references and testimonials from the field, not hollow AFIS-style talk

you want to laugh once more! Does your sect have only that to offer you? Name individuals who run after a magical action and where have you hidden the hundreds of thousands of testimonies from the field?

these people there practiced homeopathy and therefore they know perfectly the "testimonies of ground".

Ah, ah, ah, oh, oh, oh! If they knew the testimonies in question, they would not have returned their jacket, but they would have sought advice from the doctor with a long practice, in order to verify its veracity on patients. But if they've been content with their own failures, that's sure they can't think of anything else.

obviously they practiced unlike you so sorry i trust them more

Except that I have said it over and over again, I am not one of the practitioners and therefore my opinion is more than secondary, it is that of the thousands of H professionals that counts and that you do not want to hear about.

are religions part of the medical field? All H's are allopathic doctors, not believers in magical actions, sinon is to accuse doctors A of doing the same!You accuse them well if I understood

I didn't say that religions are part of the medical field, I'm just telling you that religions prove that it's okay to convince hundreds of millions of people of the existence of things that aren't no supporting facts. It's just a factual finding.

Inapplicable in a comparison without reason because precisely the facts are indeed in support, in spite of your denials of pathological ignorant. But if you say that it is applicable to big pharma medicine, there I am: 157.000 deaths per year from cancer in France. It's more than a broken arm and no vegetable juice.

Nothing new or special. If patients see improvement in A the doctor will attribute this to his medicine, same in H. Are these objective facts or not?
Even that you should be able to figure it out… though ?!

You only have to read the references I gave you to understand that in reality this is not how H. market :

What references? You don't know anything about H medicine and you know better than thousands of H that that's not how it works? Vain!
We always expect real references from real homeopathic practitioners, not two disappointed by their own practice! Cited by AFIS for lack of better, that is to say nothing!

[ABC2019]

ABC2019 »08/12/20, 14:53

Janic wrote:
What sites, so that interested people can get information!

I have already answered you on this point, I will indicate them to other interested people when they ask for them - but if you want to give them yours, do not deprive yourself.

No problem, I have all my time, but there will come a time when you have to let go!

it's just not called "giving referrals", that's all.

It's called indicating sources that can be consulted by the hundreds in which There are references and testimonials from the field, not hollow AFIS-style talk

still not, indicate "the national library" without giving a precise reference, it is not called "indicating sources".

But since you suck at scientific methodology, it's not very surprising.

you want to laugh once more! Does your sect have only that to offer you? Name individuals who run after a magical action and where have you hidden the hundreds of thousands of testimonies from the field?

these people there practiced homeopathy and therefore they know perfectly the "testimonies of ground".

Ah, ah, ah, oh, oh, oh! If they knew the testimonies in question, they would not have returned their jacket, but they would have sought advice from the doctor with a long practice, in order to verify its veracity on patients. But if they've been content with their own failures, that's sure they can't think of anything else.

obviously they practiced unlike you so sorry i trust them more

Except that I have said it over and over again, I am not one of the practitioners and therefore my opinion is more than secondary, it is that of the thousands of H professionals that counts and that you do not want to hear about.

yes and there are also hundreds of thousands of priests and imams who teach religion to billions of people, and that proves what?

are religions part of the medical field? All H's are allopathic doctors, not believers in magical actions, sinon is to accuse doctors A of doing the same!You accuse them well if I understood

I didn't say that religions are part of the medical field, I'm just telling you that religions prove that it's okay to convince hundreds of millions of people of the existence of things that aren't no supporting facts. It's just a factual finding.

Inapplicable in a comparison without reason because precisely the facts are indeed in support, in spite of your denials of pathological ignorant.
[/ Quote]
no there is certainly no reliable fact to support it, no more than for religions, otherwise it is quite obvious that you would quote them precisely, instead of saying "it is in the national library".

Oh by the way, there are also treatises on theology at the National Library ... and that doesn't prove anything about the veracity of religions either.

What references? You don't know anything about H medicine and you know better than thousands of H that that's not how it works? Vain!
We always expect real references from real homeopathic practitioners, not two disappointed by their own practice! Cited by AFIS for lack of better, that is to say nothing!

if you systematically refuse all the references that do not go in your direction, why do you ask for them?

[Janic]

ABC2019 »08/12/20, 14:53

Janic wrote:
What sites, so that interested people can get information!

I have already answered you on this point, I will indicate them to other interested people when they ask for them - but if you want to give them yours, do not deprive yourself.

No problem, I have all my time, but there will come a time when you have to let go!

it's just not called "giving referrals", that's all.

It is called indicating sources that can be consulted by the hundreds in which there are references and testimonies from the field, not hollow AFIS-style talk.

still not, indicate "the national library" without giving a precise reference, it is not called "indicating sources".

My old man, you're really crazy! if a library has 1.000 works in reference, indicate these 1000 on a topic, Christophe would certainly not be happy, especially since these works can also give 100 each which would make 100.000, etc ...

But since you suck at scientific methodology, it's not very surprising.

You are certainly not the most qualified on this subject, you are so messy and constantly contradict yourself!

obviously they practiced unlike you so sorry i trust them more

Except that I have said it over and over again, I am not one of the practitioners and therefore my opinion is more than secondary, it is that of the thousands of H professionals that counts and that you do not want to hear about.

yes and there are also hundreds of thousands of priests and imams who teach religion to billions of people, and that proves what?

It proves that if you compare medicine to these people, there is something to worry about, since all patients would then be in the hands of a so-called scientific sect. Indeed, what does that prove? How crazy you are!

Inapplicable in a comparison without reason because precisely the facts are indeed in support, in spite of your denials of pathological ignorant.

no there is certainly no reliable fact to support it,

according to you who don't know anything about it, which clearly shows that you have a little bike in your head.
That you say and repeat without any supporting facts, if not your fantasies!

no more than for religions, otherwise it is quite obvious that you would quote them precisely, instead of saying "it is in the national library".

These facts are established on healings as with all medicine (there is not only BP in the world) and all, without exception, are based on their healings, not on any claims.

Oh by the way, there are also treatises on theology at the National Library ... and that doesn't prove anything about the veracity of religions either.

And medical treatises, and what does that prove?

What references? You don't know anything about H medicine and you know better than thousands of H that that's not how it works? Vain!

We always expect real references from real homeopathic practitioners, not two disappointed by their own practice! Cited by AFIS for lack of better, that is to say nothing!

if you systematically refuse all the references that do not go in your direction, why do you ask for them?

I do not refuse any reference, as long as they are not pipeautées by BP and like the AFIS which does not represent anything on the world medical level, it is all the same not the WHO!
So present your antiH references (the only ones you know) and we will compare them to the proH testimonials.

[ABC2019]

My old man, you're really crazy! if a library has 1.000 works in reference, indicate these 1000 on a topic, Christophe would certainly not be happy, especially since these works can also give 100 each which would make 100.000, etc ...

stupid remark, why are you asking me then? obviously nobody ever said that it was necessary to be exhaustive, it suffices to give 2 or 3 references to basic works or to founding articles which explain the method followed or some irrefutable results.

But since you suck at scientific methodology, it's not very surprising.

You are certainly not the most qualified on this subject, you are so messy and constantly contradict yourself!

since you yourself don't have any qualifications to make judgments about the scientific quality of people, yours are totally indifferent to me (or even I take that as a compliment from a clown like you).

obviously they practiced unlike you so sorry i trust them more

Except that I have said it over and over again, I am not one of the practitioners and therefore my opinion is more than secondary, it is that of the thousands of H professionals that counts and that you do not want to hear about.

yes and there are also hundreds of thousands of priests and imams who teach religion to billions of people, and that proves what?

It proves that if you compare medicine to these people, there is something to worry about, since all patients would then be in the hands of a so-called scientific sect. Indeed, what does that prove? How crazy you are!

Above all, it proves that the veracity of a speech is not measured by the number of faithful, but by the rigor of its proofs, a concept which obviously escapes you completely.

These facts are established on healings as with all medicine (there is not only BP in the world) and all, without exception, are based on their healings, not on any claims.

too bad then that you are not able to cite a single reliable source ... it's really nerd, Mr. Bras-qui-repousse-avec-du-vegetable-et-qui-curing-avec- sugar.

So present your antiH references (the only ones you know) and we will compare them to the proH testimonials.

I have already given you some, I am waiting for yours "pro H" (real ones, with links, or titles and references of articles).

Individual "testimonies" are worth nothing, any more than to prove that religions are true; it is perfectly clear that they can be completely biased by psychological bias. It is precisely to avoid that that we have developed objective scientific methodologies.

[Janic]

ABC2019 »08/12/20, 16:51

janic wrote: My old man, you're really crazy! if a library has 1.000 works in references, indicate these 1000 on a topic, Christophe would certainly not be happy, especially since these works can also give 100 each which would make 100.000, etc ...

stupid remark, why are you asking me then?

I'm not asking you especially! whoever has studied this H, does not need other references, but you are in such a hurry to denigrate that you do not even read what we write to you, you read half of it, you do not understand anything and you answer (when you answer) next to the plate.
So when you tell bullshit like all the ignorant of a subject, it is legitimate to ask yourself where you come from!

obviously nobody ever said that it was necessary to be exhaustive, it suffices to give 2 or 3 references to basic works or to founding articles which explain the method followed or some irrefutable results.

It has been done, largely done, but you do not care, what you are looking for, only, is to denigrate like your AFIS sect, as bad as you ... on this subject, I do not prejudge the rest.

But since you suck at scientific methodology, it's not very surprising.

You are certainly not the most qualified on this subject, you are so messy and constantly contradict yourself!

since you yourself have no qualifications to make judgments about the scientific quality of people,

Thank you ! As you write, I have no more qualifications than you. But the doctors, who are my only reference, yes! and by their side you are no match!

Yours are totally indifferent to me (or even I take it as a compliment from a clown like you).

Same !

obviously they practiced unlike you so sorry i trust them more

Except that I have said it over and over again, I am not one of the practitioners and therefore my opinion is more than secondary, it is that of the thousands of H professionals that counts and that you do not want to hear about. So your two clowns are no match!
However, despite the measures to prevent the training of homeopaths, there are more and more who do so, in France or elsewhere.

yes and there are also hundreds of thousands of priests and imams who teach religion to billions of people, and that proves what?

It proves that if you compare medicine to these people, there is something to worry about, since all patients would then be in the hands of a so-called scientific sect. Indeed, what does that prove? That you're barjo

!

Above all, it proves that the veracity of a speech is not measured by the number of faithful, but by the rigor of its proofs, a concept which obviously escapes you completely.

A concept that escapes you just as much, especially since you consider that it is the most numerous "scientists" who are right. Harmonize your concepts. For the proofs, it is enough to verify them on the patients, it is not new and noted, verified by qualified doctors, which is not your case !!

These facts are established on healings as with all medicine (there is not only BP in the world) and all, without exception, are based on their healings, not on any claims.

pity then that you are not able to quote a single reliable source ...

Too bad you don't know how to read 'especially! but don't ask too much of yourself, it's really nerd!

So present your antiH references (the only ones you know) and we will compare them to the proH testimonials.

I have already given you some, I am waiting for yours "pro H" (real ones, with links, or titles and references of articles).

It's already done, just read them!

Individual "testimonials" are worth nothing,

This is the maximum level of bullshit! Completely stupid as reasoning, without individual testimonies, there is no longer any inventory of the effects of treatments, whatever they may be. Go tell that to a classic doctor!

It is precisely to avoid that that we have developed objective scientific methodologies.

but he is really stupid to eat hay!
All doctors who have graduated from medical schools in all countries have been trained in these objective scientific methods. Stop taking them for idiots, when it's you who don't know anything! How many years of medicine have you done for THE to judge?

[ABC2019]

It has been done, largely done, but you don't care ...

you're just a big liar, you never gave one.

Thank you ! As you write, I have no more qualifications than you. But the doctors, who are my only reference, yes! and by their side you are no match!

big liar again, you don't believe in doctors who don't believe in H. ....

A concept that escapes you just as much, especially since you consider that it is the most numerous "scientists" who are right.

big liar a third time, that's what invoked the number H., I never spoke of number.

Completely stupid as reasoning, without individual testimonies, there is no longer any inventory of the effects of treatments, whatever they may be. Go tell that to a classic doctor!

a doctor can very well see a placebo effect, it remains a placebo effect. And you still haven't said how much active ingredient there is in a 15 CH granule.

[Obamot]

The arms fall to me ... (And to proffer insults to everyone, will not make them push back ...)

You have to stop talking about placebo since it is a subject of which you still COMPLETELY ignore the fundamentals.

You have to stop even posting at all! Slippery ground for a lobbyist relying on outdated notions of the 18th^e century!

[Remundo]

good Champions Janic and ABC2019

you are already at 2 official warnings each ... But I'm not in a bad mood tonight ...

Be careful, you are both on the edge of the 3rd ...

I lock

Good night