Violeta
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,971
Pharmaceutical politics. No use wasting your time trying to debate against it.
Welcome to Phoenix Rising!
Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.
To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.
A spokesperson for Australian Homeopathic Association has released a statement today conceding that they are “baffled” by the concept of cordial.
“It just doesn’t add up,” says AHA spokesperson James Douglas, “the more water you put in, the more it tastes like water, at 1 part cordial to 10,000 parts water, it tastes indistinguishable from water and nothing like the ‘super cordial’ we anticipated.”
Pharmaceutical politics. No use wasting your time trying to debate against it.
Just to mention, homeopathy does not depend on "molecules" for its effectiveness. It's based on vibrational frequencies, so it doesn't matter (to those who believe in homeopathy and/or vibrational medicine) whether there are any original molecules left in a preparation.
I find it interesting that so many people cannot imagine vibrational frequencies being able to work, but have no problem believing prayer, meditation, and/or other forms of spiritual endeavor do. It may have to do with varying degrees of sensitivities people experience. Perhaps the more aware people are of energies in their environment, the more likely they are to believe in the efficacy of homeopathy. Though I'm not Jewish, I myself like to tune into the uplifting energies in the air during the fasting day of Yom Kippur.
What about vibrations from music, or sound, or colors, or even love? Certain music relaxes me and I experience it as being very healing and therapeutic. I’ve noticed that bright red colors (cars) actually make me cringe in the pit of my stomach and temporarily make me feel ill. And I believe a huge reason many people prefer "home cooking" is because of the love that goes into the food by the preparers (usually the mothers). None of these experiences are based on molecules.
I’ve heard about people who’ve used vibrational and energetic principles to recover from CFS. But they just go back to their normal lives, and choose not to set themselves up for ridicule on an online forum. Whether a person believes in homeopathy or any thing else, I think it's incumbent on us to not be overly critical of their beliefs, as it often parallels their own spiritual experiences and orientations.
I realise you will just label me as another closed minded denier but it really is just maddening sometimes to read this stuff. ......... Frankly it starts to get insulting that we seem to be pitied and looked down on because we cant open our minds...
The memory of water, for example, has absolutely no scientific basis theoretically or in research. It is at best a theoretical construct, a theory about some possibility that doesn't fit any current scientific paradigm. It might be true if we discover something that significantly alters our understanding of basic science. Such things have happened. If sellers want to be clear that their therapy is based on an unsubstantiated theory not scientific fact, and someone chooses to believe the theory and try the therapy, no harm done (assuming the therapy is not dangerous).
Hi @skipskip30,
I have to say, it was rather stunning to wake up to your above comments this morning. My first thought was, “Who is this?” Who would make such strong–even strident–statements regarding how they “realise” I will label them? Where in the world is that coming from? Is this somebody who’s been fuming about my posts for a long time, and decided to finally do a vent about some of my perspectives?
Since it generally takes me most of the day to become somewhat coherent, I didn’t look into who you were until this evening. I discovered you’re new here on this forum, having been here for less than a month. So I doubt it’s been a culmination of my posts that got you so upset. Instead, it was mostly likely the post on this thread you highlighted.
I don’t know whether you’ll believe this, but I can assure you I do not consider those who think differently than me–on homeopathy or any other matter–to be close minded, or pitied, or to be looked down on. I consider myself to be very tolerant and respectful of other’s points of view on just about any topic. To each their own is my philosophy. So, I’m sorry if you felt offended by my post–it was never my intent to insult you or anybody else.
You might be surprised to know that I’ve never had much success with homeopathy. A general pattern is that just about every remedy I've tried stirred things up for me for a while--even somewhat intensely–with up and down cycles for a few days, only to eventually settle in at my previous status quo. But I do know that for me it has the power to stir things up. So it’s relatively easy for me to believe the testimonials of others who say it’s stirred things up for them, and left them better off as a result. – Just my take.
-
Regarding your introductory post entitled, 22 years of feeling awful. I didn’t see it when you first posted it, but would like to welcome you to the PR forum. I hope the consultant you have in mind to see works well for you.
All the Best, Wayne
Does it matter who they are? It shouldn't, if you have any substantial response to make the central issue.I have to say, it was rather stunning to wake up to your above comments this morning. My first thought was, “Who is this?”
A little late to the party...Well, homeopathic remedies would seem to, at least, be effective as placebos. Science is slowly accepting that placebos may actually have some therapeutic relevance. Meanwhile, many drugs on the market are now seen as no more effective than placebos which seems to imply that their effectiveness may be entirely due to the placebo effect. How something like this gets reconciled when it comes time to decide what does or doesn't get banned, is way beyond me.
One of the greatest placebo hype examples to date was a 2010 study which purportedly proved that the power of mind over body is so stupendous that a placebo — a fake medicine, a sugar pill — works even when you know it’s a placebo.the only critical analysis I’m aware of, by Dr. David Gorski, and he nails it:
Even though they did tell their subjects that the sugar pills they were being given were inert, the investigators also used suggestion to convince their subjects that these pills could nonetheless induce powerful “mind-body” effects. In other words, the investigators did the very thing they claimed they weren’t doing; they deceived their subjects to induce placebo effects.
In other words, can you “impress” patients into feeling better? Hey, maybe! Is it a non-deceptive placebo if you do it by saying “this fake medicine is really awesome”? Is it a non-deceptive placebo if you do it by saying “this fake medicine is really awesome”?No. That’s just a regular placebo — very old school. There’s really nothing new here.