new photo blog

i started this blog in 2006, and it's shifted along with my interests through the years. it's been witness to a lot of learning for me...

still, i feel that i need a home for my photography -- so from now on, i'll be posting my pictures on the journal on my reworked website. if you like my photos, you might decide to follow me there!

my first post is here -- check it out!

as for this blog, i'm not sure what will happen. i don't think i'm willing to let it go, and certainly i'll keep it as an archive, but i need some time to figure it out.

for those of you that pop in from time to time, thanks for the visits and encouragement.

Monday, August 13, 2012

homeopathy doesn't work

at three men make a tiger, an analysis of why the proposed mechanisms for the efficacy of homeopathy are physically impossible.

the conclusion:


from what we've discussed, we can see that homeopathy simply can't exist without violating some basic physical and chemical laws; yet still, it thrives based on dodgy arguments.many clinical trials investigating the efficacy of homeopathy have failed to show any benefit of the therapy beyond a placebo effect. evidence suggests that patients who receive benefit from homeopathy may do so because of the non-specific effects of the therapeutic encounter; the act of getting a 'treatment' and being listened to is enough to mitigate some symptoms on a psychological basis

the arguments and analysis i put forward here and in the review paper indicate that homeopathy is impossible and proposed mechanisms are simply not valid in reality.despite this, some proponents claim that scientific criticism of homeopathy is ignorant and unnecessary as it is ‘grounded on assumptions differing from the traditional scientific ones’ (m. teixeira, 2011) , but this is an incredibly dishonest and self-insulating position; homeopathy fails on both a clinical and a theoretical level, and one cannot insulate it from criticism by dismissing investigation. the problem is not the scientific method or evidence-based practice – it is that homeopathy has been shown to have zero efficacy and, as this work and other establish, there is no reason it should. to add insult to injury, there is a level of hypocrisy when proponents of homeopathy dismiss the scientific method, yet claim to have scientific studies only when it verifies their belief. introducing questionable epistemological objections should be seen as no more than weak rhetoric to hold an untenable position. to summarise, homeopathy suffers from the doubly fatal flaw of not being supported by clinical evidence and not being physically plausible. because of this, the author suggests that promoting homeopathy as a valid therapy would be highly questionable in a clinical environment.


but you have to read all of it.

via butterflies and wheels

No comments:

Post a Comment