Homeopathy refers to treatment of symptoms by extremely diluted versions of poisons that are thought to create those symptoms. I'll defer to The Amazing Randi for a nice explanation of why that doesn't make any sense.
(Video: YouTube)
CommentaryMy favorite part: "Non habit-forming." Except for the people who have a habit of buying homeopathic "remedies."
See Also
- Mole as a unit of substance.
- Avogadro's constant for the number of atoms or molecules in a mole.
indicates a link to a different website.
3 comments:
In effect, they're treating the illnesses with placebos.
It still bothers me slightly that people just accept the placebo effect as a "scientific mystery". It's been studied since the 70s, you'd think that someone would have made some progress by now on figuring out some of the mechanisms involved.
@Beth Israel Director: In fact, there has been much research done on the placebo effect and at least one experiment where researchers were able to see the placebo effect in action in the spine (for pain reduction). There will be a post on this subject next week.
@The Metaist:
I know the placebo effect works. That's why clinical pharmaceutical trials have a placebo group in addition to the control group (depending on the situation, of course). My point merely is that everyone is still willing to just accept it as a "scientific mystery", and that bothers me.
I suppose part of what bothers me, at the root of it, is that most people too often dismiss something as false just because it can't be empirically proven, and yet accept other things that can't be empirically proven because those things fit into their personal belief system. And while the placebo effect has been empirically proven, and is therefore a different situation, the accepting of it as a "mystery" still makes me wrinkle up my nose.
To give an illustration - my tai chi instructor believes in "chi". Chi is not something that can be understood with a "western" mentality. Chi can't be quantified, to my understanding, nor can it be understood by its mechanics. It can only be understood by its function. (The "western" mentality being one that looks at HOW things work, the "eastern" mentality looks at WHAT they do). The best definition of chi that I have ever seen is translated as "energy on the point of becoming material". Many people laugh at the idea of some "invisible" energy field around us, and at the idea that some people can "feel" it. It's definitely not empirical. And at the same time, he's an Athiest. How can you easily deny the existence of one non-empirical idea while embracing another?
Post a Comment
In addition to comments, please indicate any typographical errors or issues related to this post.
Or you can contact me in private.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.