Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by KUMAR5, Jan 15, 2022.
I gave you the link!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Sorry I could not understsnd anything from it.
Whoopeeee indeed! It takes a pseudoscience and makes it... even worse? That's quite some achievement.
Homeopathic remedies are based on the energy produced the remedy , which produces a shape in water , and uses the minutest amount of the remedy that does so . The remedy is not chemical based .
Or reality based.
What does the research say ? Papers on the efficacy of Homeopathic Remedies say ?
It says that homeopathic remedies work no better than a placebo.
What research papers are you referring to ?
Plenty already given in this thread. Alternatively, Google it.
One of the curious aspects of this thread is that it continues.
No, really, I keep thinking to settle the title question, but then I notice the word "the".
Q: Do homeopathic remedies contain measurable quantities of the medicine?
A: Sometimes. When naturopathic or homeopathic remedies are recognized to have medical merit, they are adopted into medical practice, e.g., willow bark.
But that's not really what the topic title asks, and then I realize I cannot understand what the actual question is, though it seems to hinge on definitions of "medicine" and "measurable".
But neither is that really the question.
If we consider a point observing↑ a contrast about the inquiry, we might bear in mind that sometimes the purpose of an discussion can be to keep a subject in circulation. Some part of me would urge respondents to hold out until a topic issue is clearly stated; this one ought to have been finished on page one. So if one "goes in for homeopathy, while simultaneously denying that he does", one of the possible explanations is that the point is to keep people talking about a subject. Consider, poor sentence structure resulting in word salad, touchscreen typos akin to a bot programming error, middling and insubstantial arguments that go nowhere, and everybody else is running around to carry the discussion forward.
One of the effects is that these threads read like a range between SEO and politics; part of the point would simply be to keep a topic in circulation. While the actual purpose of this sort of thread remains unclear, its durability, at least, depends on everyone else. I wouldn't tell people to just leave it alone and untouched, but there is also a question of how much energy anyone else should give such discussions.
Until we come to the ultimate truth , Homeopathic's works or it doesn't .
Welcome here. Your observation hold truth. Main reason for long discussion is simply "one sided odd oerceotion by opposite side by making base of odd basis" forgetting that their basis is not yet absolute and complete. So new understsndings can always be possible esp when oractical exoerisnce by well educated and well informed modern people in millions are exoerisnced. They do not want to listen unbiased with equanimity. I presented 6 justifications forbpossibility of other molecular oresence in higher dikutions. These were quite logical in daily life and terms well known in science. I also shown principle on how low dose can work. Also shown practical experiences for efficacy also gave balid study snd test reports links. But instead of evaluating all these with a thanks to me, they started contradincting me due to their idd perceotion backed by invalud theories and studies. All these I justified but consistently remain in vain. All these were in and for science interest not in homeopsthy interest.
So what is odd from my side? If I say thst moon also give light to us but they say no it is just Sun.
Natural Pathetic Dr. Is not about Homeopathic remedies . A Natural Pathetic Doctor is about you . Prevention of disease .
Separate names with a comma.