Topics Topics Edit Profile Profile Help/Instructions Help Member List Member List Edit Profile Register  
Search Last 1|3|7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

La Fee. Good, Bad or Ugly?

Sepulchritude Forum » The Absinthe Forum Archive thru June 2002 » Archive Thru May 2002 » La Fee. Good, Bad or Ugly? « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through May 02, 2002  
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Mr_Carfax
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 11:54 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

True- but this doesn't necessarily preclude a biological reaction. And as was demonstrated, it just wasn't this particular chemical, they observed the effect in a number of substances, some biological ie DNA.

Herin lies the problem, you cannot simplfy this to an argument of simple dose-response in a closed system. The factors that would need to be considered are the physics of water - a whole field of study in itself, the physiological response threshold to such conglomerate molecules, dose form, formulation rationale, dosing regime, metabolism and the nature of any response and its role in health outcomes.

From a strict scientific point of view, yes you want to be able to establish these things. From a applied healthcare point of view, frankly it is not the same level of concern (although certainly a concern if we need to consider interactions). Under evidence-based-medicine paradigms if you could demonstrate suitable evidence for the efficacy of a particular treatment, homeopathy or orthodox, it would be potentially unethical to discount it's use purely on the basis that the science behind it's efficacy has not been worked out.

If this was the case, there would be the cessation of use of large number of prescription medicines that are used "off-label" for conditions other than what they are approved for - often in situations where the reasons behind their therapeutic actions are also unknown and theoretical.
_Blackjack
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 11:11 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

The problem with this (I just took a brief look at it) seems to be that this particular chemical produces larger clumps as it is more diluted, so, while there may be a few chemically active clumps in the solution, even MORE of the volume will be nothing but water.
Mr_Carfax
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 9:45 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

"Homeopathy, by definition, is bunk. "

Now Blackjack, that is less than an enquiring scientific mind :-p

...just because the "theory and philosophy" does not meet current scientific expectations, does not mean that meaningful clinical outcomes are not achieved....

one statement you made...

"Some of the tinctures are so dilute that it is quite possible that not one single molecule of the "active" chemical will end up in a "dose". "

there was some interesting research which has come out of Korea (by German researchers not specifically looking at homeopathy) which indicates the assumption that serial dilution producing a point where not one single molecule exists may not be strictly true.

http://www.chemsoc.org/chembytes/ezine/2002/milgrom_feb02.htm

I managed to download the original published article before the journal removed free access and it has intrigued a number of analytical chemists I know (maybe we can entice Don back into the fray...)

Not saying it is THE explanation- but I think it demonstrates that "facts" are often only as good as the absence of possible evidence to the contrary...it certainly provides a good foundation to justify further research IMO
_Blackjack
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 7:52 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Homeopathy, by definition, is bunk. It refers specifically to the practice of using HIGHLY dilute herbs and other substances thought to cure by stimulating the same responses in the body as the diseases. As I said, the preparations used are far too dilute to do anything.

The term "homeopathy" is often used to refer to a wider range of "alternative" medical practicies in particular the use of herbal drugs, but that is not an accurate usage. There are merits to some "alternative" medical practices, but homeopathy ain't one of them.

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html
Mr_Rabid
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 6:04 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

I guess that depends on the practitioner. Friend of mine's mom is a homeopath, and she knows her shit.

He once made the mistake of drinking from the wrong bottle for his daily dose of tonsil medicine. Picked up the cayenne instead.

His teeth even hurt.

Once we both came home with a severe sunburn from the beach. She gave us these leetle tiny white pills. Sunburn gone the next day, like, gone gone. Being a redhead, I was impressed by this (I have a few permanent scars from the sun.)
_Blackjack
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 3:46 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post


Quote:

When asked how much content was actually contained in most homeopathic medicines, I finally got instuctor to admit that it can actually, by the FDA, be considered NIL, and that they call it using the "spirit of the plant". gah!



Yup. Some of the tinctures are so dilute that it is quite possible that not one single molecule of the "active" chemical will end up in a "dose". That's mighty expensive water...
Wolfgang
Posted on Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 12:59 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

"homeopathic absinthe", that's a good one !

Here's my new official absinthe test : Take a poor malnutritioned guy from the third world with a belly full of worm and give him the bottle to drink. At best if it's true absinthe he should feel better, at worst, if it's not absinthe, he will still feal better for some time from the booze anyway. Just don't tell him how much you paid for the bottle, he could have bought a house in his country for the same price.

(now please keep you moralistic comment to yourself, this is a joke, it's suppose to be funny...ha well...ok).

Administration Administration Log Out Log Out   Previous Page Previous Page Next Page Next Page