The surprising homeopathy medicines

[izentrop]

Hello,
Is it necessary to continue this discussion which can last a long time, since everyone will remain on his positions.

Janic, I fully understand that you are defending a profession that is well established and that can make you live.

For my part, I am convinced that it is a "medicine" which is not based on scientific bases, but which seeks to justify itself by inventing words like "allopathy" and principles like "similarity" or "dynamization" ", and pseudosciences like" the memory of water ".

Unnecessary justification if the homeopathic doctor is on the board of thedoctor's orders. He is a first doctor and has had his State Diploma of Doctor of Medicine in France.
Whether he prescribes a homeopathic medicine or a placebo to his client does not bother me, because this patient will be relieved to have been taken seriously and will go out partially cured.

[Janic]

izentrop Hello,

Janic, I fully understand that you are defending a profession that is well established and that can make you live.

Error all the way!
a) this "profession" which is not one but only a medical specialty that is not more established than any other officially recognized therapy. On the other hand, I knew all the campaigns of denigration piloted by the pharmaceutical industry of synthesis (putting in question its biological dangerousness). So I find this article in the usual line of the subject, but which marks especially a deep ignorance of the subject.
b) I do not live with homeopathy, using only very, very rarely (I do not take those more than others when there is no justification to use it) By cons I have had several times the opportunity to verify the effectiveness and thank you not to resume the speech of the placebo, it ends up becoming ridiculous.
On the other hand I grant, considering the peculiarity of this therapy, that badly determined and thus badly prescribed that can lead to failures, but it is valid for any technique and any product.

For my part, I'm convinced that it is a "medicine" which is not based on scientific bases, but which seeks to justify itself by inventing words like "allopathy" and principles like "similitude" or "dynamization", and pseudosciences like " the memory of water ".

c) It's all about faith!
But, once again, the "science" always has a metro behind the experience and experience and so it seeks to find an explanation that reflects any phenomenon, but want to explain and achieve it's not the same thing. Hence these attempts with unusual formulas that will remain or disappear, replaced by more adequate formulas as has been done for centuries.

Unnecessary justification if the homeopathic doctor is on the roll of the Medical Association. He is a first doctor and has had his State Diploma of Doctor of Medicine in France .

d) What I say and repeat from the beginning: every doctor, said homeopath, is first and foremost a graduate of the faculty of medicine (therefore allopathic) which determines his ability to heal and that independently from any doctor or other order. On the other hand, the convention only concerns applied rates, not professional competence and many allopathic doctors are not covered by the convention.
Controversies
The Order has and continues to face a number of criticisms, including the functioning of its disciplinary proceedings as well as the various pronouncements that the Board has taken or refrained from making. to take

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conseil_d ... ntroverses

https://www.conseil-national.medecin.fr ... sions-1207
The law has endowed the Order of Physicians an administrative role to enable him to ensure the maintenance of the medical profession's skills and his integrity. this order therefore has no power to judge the value of a therapy, it is clear from the jurisdiction of the real courts of the state.
Indeed, even if it is less marked at the moment with the recognition of certain so-called soft therapies, the councils of the order of the doctors appear more like instances SE protecting by eliminating the dissidents rather than being concerned with the fate and the health of the sick themselves.

Whether he prescribes a homeopathic medicine or a placebo to his client does not bother me, because this patient will be relieved to have been taken seriously and will go out partially cured.

e) That's right, only in part (if it were so simple pharmacies would only sell placebos prescribed by doctors sharing your point of view.) The advantage is that it would not poison anybody and therefore less burrs) but it is valid for any product, including chemical. In the opposite case, no more patients would take medication.

[izentrop]

thank you not to resume the placebo speech, it ends up becoming ridiculous

Compared to oxylocoxynum, I'll let you guess who is the most.
Because at least the first has effects measured by scientists

The placebo effect is essentially linked to two mechanisms: the activation of brain opioid receptors which have analgesic properties and provide feelings of well-being; and the release of dopamine, a substance linked to reward and the anticipation of pleasure. The patient is then in a "positive" neuronal state which favors his healing.
11 genes predisposition to the placebo effect ...

http://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/sante/20 ... tains.html

Is the overall effect of a drug always the result of its pharmacological action and its psychological effect, placebo?

Functional brain MRI data suggest that the effects of drugs and expectations work without interference. It may be thought that drugs, on the one hand, and patients' expectations on the other, produce additive effects by acting on different regions of the brain. The research must continue.

http://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/sante/20 ... acebo.html

[Janic]

Janic wrote:
thank you not to resume the placebo speech, it ends up becoming ridiculous

Compared to oxylocoxynum, I'll let you guess who is the most.

on the one hand the homeopathic pharmacopoeia is not only about oscillo; on the other hand, what is ridiculous is those who speak cleverly about things they do not know.

Because at least the first has effects measured by scientists

To reduce everything to what has been measured is to limit the field of exploration to a few acquaintances, while our ignorance is almost infinite. A little humility would not hurt!
Then again and again, no one can say THE scientists as if in all fields there was unanimity on every subject, on every point. Finally, the work on revitalization, on the memory of water, etc ... is also scientific in nature, even if it is outside a "well-meaning" community. In fact, all work carried out by specialized professionals can be considered as scientific, regardless of the results obtained. After recognition or rejection of the results is often a priori. Einstein's work was not immediately recognized, if only because few understood its formulation and calculations and even now, few understand it but still apply its reasoning.

[Obamot]

Hello,
Is it necessary to continue this discussion which can last a long time, since everyone will stay on their positions

There's only XXXXX that does not change your mind, right?

Well, for a guy who did not know how to align 3 words without making a mistake in French, it is true that there is progress,

► View Text

now you make 3 faults every ten words ..

but in medicine and chemistry, it's always the same threads / posts / arguments in the nuts: what can we draw from positive? Nothing...
"scientifically speaking"(except repetition ad nauseam) not the slightest construction of convincing argument: a real blackbird ...

a video says exactly the opposite of what you're doing (actually it's yours that you have not even been able to decrypt):

If you have taken a medicine, you are tempted to think that it caused the cure:
which is just an illusion ...

https://youtu.be/11YWdGuhSnA?t=1m56s

even your own videos contradict you what a flamboyant flash

[pedrodelavega]

For my part, I'm convinced that it is a "medicine" which is not based on scientific bases, but which seeks to justify itself by inventing words like "allopathy" and principles like "similitude" or "dynamization", and pseudosciences like " the memory of water ".

c) It's all about faith!

There is no question of faith for Izentrop, I understand his statement rather in this sense:
"to convince: To get someone by reasoning or by evidence to agree with a truth, a fact"

[Janic]

There is no question of faith for Izentrop, I understand his statement rather in this sense:
"to convince: To get someone by reasoning or by evidence to agree with a truth, a fact"

everyone can understand what he wants. It remains no less than a belief, except to be a specialist of a subject, it is first of all a belief that what said character corresponds to what we want to hear. is one of the criteria of all faith. But the reasoning, for what corresponds to homeopathy (but it is also valid for others) relies on specific evidence without substituting for each other. To use the cited case of astronomy / biology, each party is convinced that what they discover proves, but is inapplicable to the other. However, this homeopathy by dilution is the antpodes of allopathy and therefore not comparable from the same measurement criteria. As long as this aspect has not been understood, the controversy will last indefinitely.

[pedrodelavega]

But the reasoning, for what corresponds to homeopathy (but it is also valid for others) relies on specific evidence without substituting for each other.

No, there is no scientific proof.

However, this homeopathy by dilution is the antpodes of allopathy and therefore not comparable from the same measurement criteria. As long as this aspect has not been understood, the controversy will last indefinitely.

This is not a story of understanding: This aspect does not make sense.

[Obamot]

mental age 12 years

[Obamot]

I develop or everyone understood?
No tangible argument, peremptory remarks to pull-larigot

No, there is no scientific proof

you think you're a teacher? With an intellectual baggage hamster, do not you think it's a little too ambitious?

This is not a story of understanding: This aspect does not make sense.

Yes indeed
mental age: 8 years

► View Text

Well it's become folklore again here, things were going better since we no longer heard the tandem of idiots reunited: has the clone war started again?