Waaaay offtopic

[James Knott]

Hugh Reilly wrote:
>> From: James Knott <james.knott-bJEeYj9oJeDQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org>
>> Reply-To: tlug-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org
>> To: tlug-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org
>> Subject: Re: [TLUG]: Waaaay offtopic
>> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:13:01 -0500
> 
> 
>> One person I'd never believe is a naturopathic "doctor". Naturopathy 
>> is based on a bogus belief that a tiny amount of something that causes 
>> the same symptoms as a disease will cure or prevent it.  The problem 
>> is, that the doses generally prescribed are physically impossible.  
>> For example a common dilution of the "medicine" is 10X or divided with 
>> water or alcohol 10:1, 10 times.  The problem with this amount of 
>> dilution, is that the number of molecules gets in the way.  In order 
>> to consume one molecule of the substance, you'd have to drink several 
>> thousand gallons of water.  They also have another dilution of 100C, 
>> which is 100:1 100 times, which is even more impossible.
> 
> 
> You're mistaking naturopathy for homeopathy.

Quite so.  My mistake.

  Plus, your world-view is
> getting in the way. The  truth is, there are "mysteries" which science 
> as-we-know-it cannot explain. The fact that science ("official" science, 
> anyway) cannot explain homeopathy has no influence whatsoever on the 
> thousands of people worldwide who benefit from its practice. Science is 
> not yet finished explaining the world to us; it's evolving, and so are 
> we. Keeping an open mind is good survival instinct.

Bottom line, is much of that so called "medicine" cannot show any 
benefit in comparitive tests.  As for not knowing all about the world, 
the only way to change that is to study.  If someone has an idea, they 
should try to show some supporting evidence.  I don't know if you recall 
something called "Essiac".  It was supposed to be a cancer cure, 
developed by a woman, who lived up near Huntsville.  She appeared almost 
30 years ago, with her claims.  She wanted the provincial government to 
pay her a large amount of money for her cure, before she'd allow any 
tests or provide any info on it.  She had nothing to show it was 
effective, other than her own claims.  The government turned her down, 
but a private company paid her.  Last I heard they were suing her for fraud.

With a scientific approach, a claim and any supporting data is examined 
by others.  Sometimes this process fails, but overall, it results in the 
advancement of knowledge.  If someone has a claim, the onus is on them 
to prove their claims, not on someone else to prove them wrong.


--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml