Chinahand Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Give it a rest man. We get you hate anything that doesn't have a double blind study with numerous experiments. However some people clearly do and for them, it works, as the mind is a very powerful tool so live and let live and go and have a beer. Hate? What a strong word. How do you know if something has a genuine effect, rather than you miss-attributing the effect to something which in fact hasn't contributed. There are lots and lots of instances where something hasn't "done for a person", but where they attribute it incorrectly. Unscrupulous companies trick people out of billions of pounds annually with this "very powerful tool" and if people were given the tools to correctly identify what has made them well, rather than relying on sugar pills, I think that would make for a healthier society. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence isn't perfect, but it is a hugely powerful source for good and for advancing evidence based health care. Far more than any attempts to push astrology into the NHS without a full understanding of its effects. If it works better than a placebo in a controlled double blinded experiment I'll happily support its use. Til then it's just hearsay and wishful thinking and deserves no more respect than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Give it a rest man. We get you hate anything that doesn't have a double blind study with numerous experiments. However some people clearly do and for them, it works, as the mind is a very powerful tool so live and let live and go and have a beer. Hate? What a strong word. How do you know if something has a genuine effect, rather than you miss-attributing the effect to something which in fact hasn't contributed. There are lots and lots of instances where something hasn't "done for a person", but where they attribute it incorrectly. Unscrupulous companies trick people out of billions of pounds annually with this "very powerful tool" and if people were given the tools to correctly identify what has made them well, rather than relying on sugar pills, I think that would make for a healthier society. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence isn't perfect, but it is a hugely powerful source for good and for advancing evidence based health care. Far more than any attempts to push astrology into the NHS without a full understanding of its effects. If it works better than a placebo in a controlled double blinded experiment I'll happily support its use. Til then it's just hearsay and wishful thinking and deserves no more respect than that. No more respect 'from you.' However you don't speak for everyone, just one end of a sliding scale and others have a differing view. If someone wants to spend money on homeopathy for instance and it works for them, who are you to say that it is a waste of money? It may be the mind that's the key, it may be the homeopathy itself, it may be a combination of both, it may be a whole number of factors but if it works, it works. If people want to shun allopathic medicine and search for alternatives, perfectly understandable, however wacky they are, then fine. You'll waste your life chasing your tail praying to the god of double blinded experiments and causative factors. A sugar pill may well be strong enough to 'cure' an ailment if the mind believes in it strongly enough, which tells us that our healing power is within us all, however we choose to tap into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ah what the heck ... it's Friday and so why not just enjoy some Tim Mitchin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Lxxx - While I don't object to an individual pursuing "alternative medicine" (otherwise know as stuff that has not been proven to work or has been proven not to work) I do object to public bodies spending money on it. I think that is also the point that Chinahand is making. In both the cases he has cited on this thread it is Government Departments spending public money on things that have not been proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 If someone wants to spend money on homeopathy for instance and it works for them, who are you to say that it is a waste of money? It may be the mind that's the key, it may be the homeopathy itself, it may be a combination of both, it may be a whole number of factors but if it works, it works. Reminds me of the Jimmy Carr joke: - How can you tell if your house is haunted? - It isn't! Replace house/haunted with homeopathy/works... I concur with China & manxman, if it concidentally "works" for you, fine, but don't try and commercialise it to the masses... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Lxxx - While I don't object to an individual pursuing "alternative medicine" (otherwise know as stuff that has not been proven to work or has been proven not to work) I do object to public bodies spending money on it. I think that is also the point that Chinahand is making. In both the cases he has cited on this thread it is Government Departments spending public money on things that have not been proven. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 If someone wants to spend money on homeopathy for instance and it works for them, who are you to say that it is a waste of money? It may be the mind that's the key, it may be the homeopathy itself, it may be a combination of both, it may be a whole number of factors but if it works, it works. Reminds me of the Jimmy Carr joke: - How can you tell if your house is haunted? - It isn't! Replace house/haunted with homeopathy/works... I concur with China & manxman, if it concidentally "works" for you, fine, but don't try and commercialise it to the masses... If it coincidentally works for a lot of people, which it seems to do, then it's no longer a coincidence. I've no affiliation to homeopathy, just playing devils advocate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 If it coincidentally works for a lot of people, which it seems to do, then it's no longer a coincidence.I've no affiliation to homeopathy, just playing devils advocate. Fair enough, but given that it doesn't work for lots of people kinda spoils the position. Let's not argue, and have a homeopathic beer instead! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 If someone wants to spend money on homeopathy for instance and it works for them, who are you to say that it is a waste of money?That's fine until it's doing someone more harm than good. Like the chancer in the OP that's selling bomb detection units that are supposed to save lives. Detecting bombs and drugs with straws gets people killed. You can't say that's harmless? Likewise with drugs, if people think magic water is curing their cancer and stop taking their evil pharma drugs, they'll die sooner. That's not harmless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I really hate what Tim Minchin represents - as I see it. For me he represents the cocky arrogance of mostly non scientists and fans of science. Reminds me of mid period Marxists - who believed that Marxism was a provable science and that it therefore trumped all other belief systems. But mostly according to texts which were too complicated for the people who talked about them to actually have an objective option about. Science is not nearly as objective as many science fans think it is. In many cases it is just another belief system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 If it coincidentally works for a lot of people, which it seems to do, then it's no longer a coincidence. How many is a lot of people? Half? One in ten? One in a hundred? One in a thousand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Millions of people take homeopathic remedies etc. Lxxx thinks because they feel they are getting something out of it then it must have an effect. Considering his political views that's a bit strange! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Everyone laughed at Eric Slag when he started chewing trees to cure his headaches. Very early in terms of human civilisation he called his discovery 'Asprin', and they even laughed at the name, because it sounded rude. He made a fortune, lived the high life, women, fast cars...the works. Though he died young, tragically killed in a multiple Pile up with Dick Dastardly, the Gruesome twosome, Professor Pat Pending and his brother Ermin. RIP the Slag brothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I really hate what Tim Minchin represents - as I see it. For me he represents the cocky arrogance of mostly non scientists and fans of science. Reminds me of mid period Marxists - who believed that Marxism was a provable science and that it therefore trumped all other belief systems. But mostly according to texts which were too complicated for the people who talked about them to actually have an objective option about. Science is not nearly as objective as many science fans think it is. In many cases it is just another belief system. Fair enough if you don't like him but he openly states in that video linked to by Chinahand that science changes its view based on what is observed. It does not outright rule anything out and even from time to time challenges its own fundamental "laws" such as the Theory of relativity. Yeah, that's right, one of the fundamental laws of science is still called a theory! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 If it coincidentally works for a lot of people, which it seems to do, then it's no longer a coincidence. How many is a lot of people? Half? One in ten? One in a hundred? One in a thousand? Does it matter? The point is that for more than one person it seems to work. Never tried it myself but it seems to be a lot more popular than just a few wacky folk practising in their commune. Prince Charles for example is a vocal supporter of the woo-woo and I would imagine (with his wealth, privileges and access to information) that he's more than capable of forming an intelligent opinion rather than being led by the nose by charlatans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.