Question about Memory Storages?

[rppa]

There is some 'self healing mechnisam' in our bodies.

Yes, there is.

That's why a certain number of patients will get better even if you do nothing at all.

My previous point was apparently not made clearly enough. Let me rephrase:

HOMEPATHY IS EQUIVALENT IN EFFICACY TO DOING NOTHING AT ALL

 

[Kumar]

Yes, there is.

That's why a certain number of patients will get better even if you do nothing at all.

My previous point was apparently not made clearly enough. Let me rephrase:

HOMEPATHY IS EQUIVALENT IN EFFICACY TO DOING NOTHING AT ALL

Without strong & measurable side/adverse/toxic effects along with real effects, how can you judge that effects are by healing substance, placebo & self-healing( self or by initiation) Under DB studies, people can also behave on individual basis, both groups can get anything as real effects, placebo & self healing (self or by initiation) along with easily noticeable & measurable 'other adversities'. How you decice, what is from what?

Btw, whether chemicals costituents of medicines, are traced & found existing or accumulated in blood/other tissues on blood tests?

 

[Donks]

Without strong & measurable side/adverse/toxic effects along with real effects, how can you judge that effects are by healing substance, placebo & self-healing( self or by initiation) Under DB studies, people can also behave on individual basis, both groups can get anything as real effects, placebo & self healing (self or by initiation) along with easily noticeable & measurable 'other adversities'. How you decice, what is from what?

That's why you have a control group. You compare the effects of the people receiving the "treatment" and those receiving a placebo. If it's the same, then there is no effect from the "treatment."

Btw, whether chemicals costituents of medicines, are traced & found existing or accumulated in blood/other tissues on blood tests?

My guess is, for most chemicals, yes you can find them through tests. At least until the body gets rid of them.

 

[Kumar]

That's why you have a control group. You compare the effects of the people receiving the "treatment" and those receiving a placebo. If it's the same, then there is no effect from the "treatment."

Yes, but you know side/adverse/toxic effects of concentrated & not yet-adapted/habitual to body chemicals can be easily visible & measurable. So the effect of these can be easily noticed in treatment groups. These can also differenciate somewhat as per individality. Wheras real healing effects can be initiated by body's self healing/immune system--which may not be bit difficult to relate. How can we then differenciate in real, placebo & initiated effect by self healing? Healing effects can be there in all these real, placebo & initiated--with easily measurable adversities or least adversities. Anyway it is a complex understanding. Probably, we may have not considered initiation of self healing/immune system, when making theory of so named as "placebo effect", as it can be initiated by specific thoughts & by initiations by remedies/other healing substances.

My guess is, for most chemicals, yes you can find them through tests. At least until the body gets rid of them.

Let us take "alcohol" or other addictives in blood. These remains present in blood of a habitual/addictive person. Why then this presence do not show similar mental behaviour at non-drinking times? Is this presence is due to excess ingestion or body holds for some purpose or unable to clear on daily basis? Whether addiction & advesities are progressive & are due to this excess presence or by effects on immediate taking?

 

[Donks]

Yes, but you know side/adverse/toxic effects of concentrated & not yet-adapted/habitual to body chemicals can be easily visible & measurable. So the effect of these can be easily noticed in treatment groups. These can also differenciate somewhat as per individality. Wheras real healing effects can be initiated by body's self healing/immune system--which may not be bit difficult to relate. How can we then differenciate in real, placebo & initiated effect by self healing? Healing effects can be there in all these real, placebo & initiated--with easily measurable adversities or least adversities. Anyway it is a complex understanding. Probably, we may have not considered initiation of self healing/immune system, when making theory of so named as "placebo effect", as it can be initiated by specific thoughts & by initiations by remedies/other healing substances.

This has nothing to do with "side/adverse/toxic effects of concentrated & not yet-adapted/habitual to body chemicals." By your own admission, TRS and homeopathy has no/least side effects. A testing of a homeopathic remedy vs placebo would involve no chemicals. You'd have 2 groups, a control group receiving the placebo (sugar pill) and the group receiving the "remedy." If the effects are the same in both groups, then any effect in the "remedy" group was purely from the placebo effect.

 

[Kumar]

This has nothing to do with "side/adverse/toxic effects of concentrated & not yet-adapted/habitual to body chemicals." By your own admission, TRS and homeopathy has no/least side effects. A testing of a homeopathic remedy vs placebo would involve no chemicals. You'd have 2 groups, a control group receiving the placebo (sugar pill) and the group receiving the "remedy." If the effects are the same in both groups, then any effect in the "remedy" group was purely from the placebo effect.

I mean, HRs/TRs being with least adversities can show effects or no effects depending on skill, beliefs & individuality, but not strong & easily measurable side/adverse/toxic effects. So these cn be mistaken or misinterpreted. However, these are indicated to have shown effects in their communities of bigger group,s till some fails due to skill beliefs, mistakes, individualities, secondary/alternative considerations alike mal-nourished/unattended child etc. Anyway 30-50% results or more depending on skill, beliefs, right prescriptions, individal assesments, competent authorities involvements with equivelant preferances, means & capabilities to standardize these systematically & deeply can raise this figure.

 

[Jocce]

Is it due to that HRs have least adversities

Let's try this from another angle Kumar. In conventional medicine there is a very strict control system in place that can discover both positive effects and negative effects. Homeopathy does not have those controls.

I hear a lot of talk about success stories where homeopaths claim they have cured people. But I hear none about when homeopathic treatment has NOT helped. Now a couple of questions to you Kumar:

How many failed attempts has homeopaths made when they try to cure their patients?

How many have died from their disease because the homeopathic treatment didn't work?

How do these figures compare to the results of modern medicine?

Saying that a treatment that doesn't work (homeopathy) is not dangerous is downright stupid. It can be LETHAL if it keeps the patient from getting real treatment by convincing them that it actually works.

 

[Kumar]

Let's try this from another angle Kumar. In conventional medicine there is a very strict control system in place that can discover both positive effects and negative effects. Homeopathy does not have those controls.

Yes, that can be an injustice to it, so may be backing behind.

I hear a lot of talk about success stories where homeopaths claim they have cured people. But I hear none about when homeopathic treatment has NOT helped. Now a couple of questions to you Kumar:

How many failed attempts has homeopaths made when they try to cure their patients?

Failures & success can be there with any system. It is the work of comperent authorities to declare a system's existance & valdity. Courts are also there. If any system still exist--it means it has passed through all these controls. Now it is the choice, experiance & preferance of any pateient to take any 'made valid' system'.

How many have died from their disease because the homeopathic treatment didn't work?How do these figures compare to the results of modern medicine?

I don't have any such data, but I know it has not yet universally banned. Some Deaths or failures due to any healing substance of any system, didn't worked OR due to worked differently by adversities related to it--does not make any sense in consideration of 'good & bad' can be with any system or substance unless given directly by "GOD'.

Furthur, figures/datas can be dependent of belief, preferance & means given etc. so can not be comparable--si irrelavant. Anyway, you can try by google search.

Saying that a treatment that doesn't work (homeopathy) is not dangerous is downright stupid. It can be LETHAL if it keeps the patient from getting real treatment by convincing them that it actually works.

Yes, it can be provided, today's modern world, who are taking these are fools or illitrates. Moreover, every patient compare risk/benefit ratio before taking any treatment. People know what & when to take & what & when not. Still competent authorities & jurisdictions control are there. They may be having better eyes, understanding & means to handle all such possibilities, if there. You know several medicines are banned due to this consideration.

 

[MRC_Hans]

*snip*

Failures & success can be there with any system. It is the work of comperent authorities to declare a system's existance & valdity. Courts are also there. If any system still exist--it means it has passed through all these controls.

Completely wrong. And I think you know it. Authorities do not go out and check up on every existing system. You know that homeopathyhas not been passed by authorities.

Now it is the choice, experiance & preferance of any pateient to take any 'made valid' system'.

So you think it is alright to cheat people as long as you don't force them?

I don't have any such data, but I know it has not yet universally banned.

Because it has not been approved. There is no approval to withdraw.

Anyway, you can try by google search.

The Kumar method [tm].

Yes, it can be provided, today's modern world, who are taking these are fools or illitrates. Moreover, every patient compare risk/benefit ratio before taking any treatment.

So if people choose by themselves, Kuamr thinks it is OK to cheat them.

Hans

 

[steenkh]

It is the work of comperent authorities to declare a system's existance & valdity.

But you also know that no competent authority has validated homoeopathy?

Moreover, every patient compare risk/benefit ratio before taking any treatment. People know what & when to take & what & when not.

They do? Do you really think that it is generally known that homoeopathy consist of pure sugar-pills? Or that there is no evidence that it has ever worked? How can patient compare the risk/benefit ratio without this knowledge?

Most supporters I have talked to have been shocked to hear that even homoeopaths acknowledge that there is not a single molecule of active ingredient left in a homoeopathic solution, or that homoeopathic pills are just sugar-pills sprayed with water. Most deny that it can be true. If the supporters do not know this, how about the general populace?

 

[Kumar]

Mr.Hans, steenkh,

I don't think you are right in your saying. Homeopathy is approved at least in Pakistan/India--some other countries also approve it. Many colleges, approved degrees just equivalent to a doctor's degree, application of homeopathic treatments in big hospitals etc.--all are with approvals. Most of the people taking this treatment that since minimal chemicals so minimal adversities atre there in homeopathy. I don't understand, why we think that modern people are so ignorant.

"Belief can also be of much importance in healings"

 

[Dan Beaird]

Mr.Hans, steenkh,

I don't think you are right in your saying. Homeopathy is approved at least in Pakistan/India--some other countries also approve it. Many colleges, approved degrees just equivalent to a doctor's degree, application of homeopathic treatments in big hospitals etc.--all are with approvals. Most of the people taking this treatment that since minimal chemicals so minimal adversities atre there in homeopathy.

Approved is not the same thing as validated. You just don't seem to understand the difference. Everyone on this planet could believe in homeopathy and every government might approve of it and it would still not work. Great, it doesn't work with the least amount of adversities, but it still doesn't work.

I don't understand, why we think that modern people are so ignorant.

Some modern people are ignorant because they have not learned the lessons that history has taught. They insist on living by instinct instead of reason in the best traditions of the dark ages.

"Belief can also be of much importance in healings"

Yes. This is called placebo effect. That's all there is to homeopathy. It's as effective as faith healing or any other version of lying to a patient to make them think they are getting treatment when they are not.

 

[rppa]

Most supporters I have talked to have been shocked to hear that even homoeopaths acknowledge that there is not a single molecule of active ingredient left in a homoeopathic solution, or that homoeopathic pills are just sugar-pills sprayed with water. Most deny that it can be true. If the supporters do not know this, how about the general populace?

I didn't know that.

I mean, I knew that homeopathy involved diluting things down to the point where there was no active ingredient left.

But when I saw the "homeopathic" shelf at Whole Foods, a store I like, I thought "surely they don't mean THAT kind of homeopathy. These are vitamins and herbal supplements and for some odd reason they're using the word like other people use 'organic'".

It actually took the recent exchanges in Randi's column to wake up to the fact that good old Whole Foods really is selling sugar pills as herbal supplements, cold remedies, and who knows what else.

 

[steenkh]

It actually took the recent exchanges in Randi's column to wake up to the fact that good old Whole Foods really is selling sugar pills as herbal supplements, cold remedies, and who knows what else.

You know, as the saying goes: "It takes about 14 days to get rid of a cold with a remedy, and it takes about two weeks to get rid of it without a remedy!" Nowhere is this more true than with homoeopathic remedies.

 

[Kumar]

Approved is not the same thing as validated. You just don't seem to understand the difference.
Some modern people are ignorant because they have not learned the lessons that history has taught. They insist on living by instinct instead of reason in the best traditions of the dark ages.

Yes. This is called placebo effect. That's all there is to homeopathy. It's as effective as faith healing or any other version of lying to a patient to make them think they are getting treatment when they are not. [/B]

Validation is a problem of science. In practical experiances, this is approved.

I don't think million of modern people can be so ignorant.

Boy these remedies can also be effective "on belief". Hunger, need & belief in any made can be more effective that force feeded.

 

[rppa]

Validation is a problem of science. In practical experiances, this is approved.

Do you mean unscientific remedies don't need to be validated?

I don't think million of modern people can be so ignorant.

As usual, what you "think" or "feel" is patently untrue. Many millions of modern people are appallingly ignorant.

Boy these remedies can also be effective "on belief".

Yes, but doing nothing at all is equally as effective as these remedies. In other words, if you do nothing at all, some people will feel better.

Sometimes in English we say "well, it's better than nothing." But actually, homeopathic remedies are not "better than nothing". They are exactly as good as "nothing".