revenge of the Pith - Homeopathic Dark Forces return

[Deetee]

The JACM is trying to strike back after all the recent criticism, so it seems.
Someone is trying to alert all the media as there has been some stuff in the Daily Mail as well as the BBC.


http://www.genengnews.com/news/bnitem.aspx?name=1110054XSL_NEWSML_TO_NEWSML_WEB.x ml

Full text available here:
http://www.liebertonline.com/toc/acm/11/5
(I haven't read any of it as yet, but trying...)


Also see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/4454856.stm
which is about this article:
http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/acm.2005.11.793

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

See also;

http://www.badscience.net/?p=188

[Mojo]

And here (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=47833).

[Deetee]

The bad science link gives the Press release about the study.
It says
“One of the criticisms levelled at homeopathy is that it only works because
of the length of the consultation. But in fact the appointment times at
Bristol Homeopathic Hospital are very similar to those for other specialties
at United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust such as rheumatology, neurology and respiratory medicine and are substantially less than for psychiatry.”


Well I doubt this is true. As someone who works in hospital practice I can assure you that conventional medicine usually allocates 20-30 min max for new consultations, and GPs get 7 and a half minutes.

And guess what? The Bristol Homeopathic Hospital tells us the following:
All patients treated at this hospital receive a "package of care" comprising a new patient appointment of roughly one hour's duration
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/4/4

So....they lie, unashamedly.....

Edited to add - I see the Spence article says patients recieved 45 minute appointments.
So they still are untruthful, when this is 2-3 times the length of new appointments in the NHS.

Edited to further add!
His own hospital web site states this:
Your First Appointment
The initial homeopathic consultation will involve more detail and will take longer than most other medical consultations you are used to, between 45 minutes and 1 hour in duration. (emphasis mine)

http://www.ubht.nhs.uk/homeopathy/Patient%20info/Information%20for%20Patients.htm

[Deetee]

Bloody hell!

Who let Kumar loose on the Bad Science response section?!

[Mojo]

Rolfe.

But she did apologise.

[dogbite666]

This is a typical 'experiment' by homeopaths. Any of us open minded critical thinkers can immediately see that they would have got the same results if they repeated the experiment with a control, such as a placebo. Of course this makes no different to a crowd of homeopaths who have a vested interest in showing that homeopathy works.

What really annoys me about this is the irresponsible reporting by the BBC, they only report the sceptical remarks of Professor Matthias Egger in the last paragraph. It is because of reporting like this that such things as homeopathy gain credit with the credulous. What a shame.

John.

[Rolfe]

I'm having trouble keeping up with two different threads on this. But maybe the other is too contaminated by Kumar? Can we pick one and stick with it?

Rolfe.

[geni]

There is a fairly solid pattern for most forms of woo in the media. You build it up then you knock it down. Then you build it up again and repeat. Provides a continious audence.

[Mojo]

There is a fairly solid pattern for most forms of woo in the media. You build it up then you knock it down. Then you build it up again and repeat. Provides a continious audence.And, of course, the woos will point to all the positive coverage, and stick the cuttings up on their websites and shop windows, while pretending anything negative doesn't exist.

[Kumar]

I'm having trouble keeping up with two different threads on this. But maybe the other is too contaminated by Kumar? Can we pick one and stick with it?

Rolfe.

It is also not "beyond my reach", but still I like "old is gold" or say "Gold is old, still better". You may like to entertain changing/new reseaches & keep everything in process, but how much one can read/study/manipulate/think politically/contradict...etc. There can/should be a limit to fight with nature/God/society upto which these can tolerate/accomodate. But then???

For Objective Validity of any thing/system-- Natural laws (universal), Social laws of the land (on world, country & comminity's level) and personal laws(on personal/family level) can be applicable at primary level WHERAS for Subjective validity--Science, Pure sciences, Modern science, Alternative systems, Homeopathy etc. can be applicable at secondary level.

For & on what, we are fighting/discussing/spending our time--objective or subjective????

[MRC_Hans]

white noise:nope:.

Hans

[Mojo]

It is also not "beyond my reach", but still I like "old is gold" or say "Gold is old, still better". You may like to entertain changing/new reseaches & keep everything in process, but how much one can read/study/manipulate/think politically/contradict...etc. There can/should be a limit to fight with nature/God/society upto which these can tolerate/accomodate. But then???

For Objective Validity of any thing/system-- Natural laws (universal), Social laws of the land (on world, country & comminity's level) and personal laws(on personal/family level) can be applicable at primary level WHERAS for Subjective validity--Science, Pure sciences, Modern science, Alternative systems, Homeopathy etc. can be applicable at secondary level.

For & on what, we are fighting/discussing/spending our time--objective or subjective????This won't wash, Kumar. We know you can produce much more intelligible English than this. Only a few days ago you posted something on the Bad Science website that, while nonsense, was at least intelligible nonsense. This is just gibberish.

If you have anything to contribute, please do so in intelligible language.

[MRC_Hans]

Bloody hell!

Who let Kumar loose on the Bad Science response section?!At least they seem to know how to handle him. They simply ignore him. Perhaps we ought to try that, too ;)?

Hans

[Kumar]

This won't wash, Kumar. We know you can produce much more intelligible English than this. Only a few days ago you posted something on the Bad Science website that, while nonsense, was at least intelligible nonsense. This is just gibberish.

If you have anything to contribute, please do so in intelligible language.

Just update more comments;

http://www.badscience.net/?p=188

:)

[Complexity]

It is also not "beyond my reach", but still I like "old is gold" or say "Gold is old, still better". You may like to entertain changing/new reseaches & keep everything in process, but how much one can read/study/manipulate/think politically/contradict...etc. There can/should be a limit to fight with nature/God/society upto which these can tolerate/accomodate. But then???

For Objective Validity of any thing/system-- Natural laws (universal), Social laws of the land (on world, country & comminity's level) and personal laws(on personal/family level) can be applicable at primary level WHERAS for Subjective validity--Science, Pure sciences, Modern science, Alternative systems, Homeopathy etc. can be applicable at secondary level.

For & on what, we are fighting/discussing/spending our time--objective or subjective????

My dearest Kumar,

I would like to respond to something that you were trying to say, but I'm going to have to insist that you have more respect for language and thought than you have shown so far.

English is an extraordinarily rich language and has words for many subtle shades of meaning. Learn to use it. If you continue to misuse it, we can only conclude that you are using the language to obfuscate or to try to hide the fact that the Emperor (you) has no clothes (ideas worth spitting at).

I'm going to take you through a series of baby steps.

First, you are never to use the slash ('/') again. Find the right word and use it properly - don't smear words around.

Go ahead and give this a try. Don't waste any energy on the content of the sentences that you write for now. Remember - baby steps.

Most sincerely,
Complexity

[Kumar]

My dearest Kumar,

I would like to respond to something that you were trying to say, but I'm going to have to insist that you have more respect for language and thought than you have shown so far.

English is an extraordinarily rich language and has words for many subtle shades of meaning. Learn to use it. If you continue to misuse it, we can only conclude that you are using the language to obfuscate or to try to hide the fact that the Emperor (you) has no clothes (ideas worth spitting at).

I'm going to take you through a series of baby steps.

First, you are never to use the slash ('/') again. Find the right word and use it properly - don't smear words around.

Go ahead and give this a try. Don't waste any energy on the content of the sentences that you write for now. Remember - baby steps.

Most sincerely,
Complexity

Ok, thanks I like it.

[MRC_Hans]

Ok, thanks I like it.By which Kumar does not mean "I enjoy it", but "I will copy it", again meaning he will try to comply.

...But I won't hold my breath.

Hans

[Kumar]

By which Kumar does not mean "I enjoy it", but "I will copy it", again meaning he will try to comply.

...But I won't hold my breath.

Hans

Are you insulting me?:D

Ok; means, I accept it.

I like it; means I like this idea.

Then???

[Mojo]

Are you insulting me?:D

Ok; means, I accept it.

I like it; means I like this idea.

Then???Then, if you like the idea, suggested in complexity's post, of trying to make your posts make some sort of sense, perhaps you ought to be making some sort of effort to that end.

Or did you mean that you like the idea, also mentioned in the post you were replying to, of deliberately using unintelligible language in order to obfuscate?

[kmortis]

Then, if you like the idea, suggested in complexity's post, of trying to make your posts make some sort of sense, perhaps you ought to be making some sort of effort to that end.

Or did you mean that you like the idea, also mentioned in the post you were replying to, of deliberately using unintelligible language in order to obfuscate?

I'm starting to think that it would be worth our collective whiles to offer an "English for woos" (or some such applicable title) for our less-critical-thinking populous. I know that there are quite a few non-native English speakers amongst us, and they do quite well; a few "Engrish moments", sure but over all better than some of us native English speakers.

[Mojo]

I'm starting to think that it would be worth our collective whiles to offer an "English for woos" (or some such applicable title) for our less-critical-thinking populous. I know that there are quite a few non-native English speakers amongst us, and they do quite well; a few "Engrish moments", sure but over all better than some of us native English speakers.The thing is that Kumar seems to be able to produce perfectly intelligible English when he wants to (or as BSM puts it, when he's been visited by the Good Grammar Fairy). It just seems that he often doesn't want anyone to be able to tell what he's saying.

[MRC_Hans]

Are you insulting me?:D
Not this time, but stay tuned.

Ok; means, I accept it.

I like it; means I like this idea.

Then???
Then, if you were to behave rationally, you would follow it henceforth.

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

The thing is that Kumar seems to be able to produce perfectly intelligible English when he wants to (or as BSM puts it, when he's been visited by the Good Grammar Fairy). It just seems that he often doesn't want anyone to be able to tell what he's saying.To be fair (although I don't know why I should), I think reading and writing, even typing, English requires quite an effort for Kumar. Not an exuse not to his best, of course.

Hans

[kmortis]

The thing is that Kumar seems to be able to produce perfectly intelligible English when he wants to (or as BSM puts it, when he's been visited by the Good Grammar Fairy). It just seems that he often doesn't want anyone to be able to tell what he's saying.

Well, my comment wasn't just directed toward Kumar, but the collective of those whose English skills make them difficult to read.

[Complexity]

Quick point of clarification - I have great respect for someone learning a second language (especially English) and being brave enough to use it to communicate in a forum. The quality of English that is used by many of our non-native-English writers is great.

My problem with Kumar's use of English is that he is competent to use English fairly well but often either chooses not to or doesn't bother to.

Kumar frequent poor use of English is either intellectually lazy or intellectually dishonest.

He needs to learn to communicate well if he wants us to invest any time in examining and responding to his ideas.

[Ducky]

Welcome Complexity.

I'll fill you in on it sine you're new: Kumar isn't intellectually lazy, but he most certainly is intellectually dishonest.

But feel free to play with the troll. They can be amusing sometimes.

[Rolfe]

He needs to learn to communicate well if he wants us to invest any time in examining and responding to his ideas.Unfortunately, bitter experience teaches us that we can't entirely help responding to him anyway. Hans suggested it's because something in our subconscious simply can't believe that anyone can really be that stupid and live.

Rolfe.

[Complexity]

Hi, Fowlsound and Rolfe,

Never fear - I think we're kindred spirits. I've been lurking for quite some time.

I don't for a minute believe that Kumar is only intellectually lazy - I think he believes that he's conning some of us by his "clever" misuse of language, pretending to being superior to us by alluding to ideas of his that our language is incapable of expressing, hoping that we're dazzled by his word-juggling, smirking at how we've let him put one over on us.

If I thought that there anything at all of interest behind his language, I'd do what I could, as kindly and gently as I could, to uncover it and let it gleam in the sunlight.

Kumar, however, has nothing to offer me except insultingly inept wordplay, and I think he's well aware of that.

My few messages to Kumar are better understood as statements of position to the community rather than wrangling with a fool.

I'm pretty sure that troll-play will grow tedious quickly, although I reserve the right to behave foolishly and rise to the bait occasionally.

I just got a new kitten yesterday, trying to replace a twelve-year-old cat that died a few weeks ago. We haven't decided on a name yet. I would love to shrink Kumar a bit and give him to my kitten to play with.

Can you imagine the dialog?

"purrrrrrr... [claws extending] meooooooowww!"

"kitty/cat/goddess/wench/feline/supplicant, if/when/unless/until/forsooth you/we/they address/invoke/supplicate/threaten/communicate/telegraph/yell with/at/beside/unopposed/supportively, they/we/ewe celebrant/supplicant/ant/fornicant/applicant, I/eye/aye/we/oui/wee could/wood/should/gonna fenestrate/demonstrate/tear/rip/open/unseal you a new..."

"[slash]"

"[spray]/aaargh/protest/[ooze]/cosmic/laughing/ahhhh.../[drip]/stock"

Not, of course, that I wish any evil upon Kumar - for all I know, he's a kindly old fool - but I'd like to extend the circle of my kitty's acquaintance as quickly as possible. I don't want her to have too much respect for people - I certainly don't.

[Kumar]

There may not be a limit of idocies in PMA......

[Kumar]

Welcome Complexity.

I'll fill you in on it sine you're new: Kumar isn't intellectually lazy, but he most certainly is intellectually dishonest.

But feel free to play with the troll. They can be amusing sometimes.

I feel bit pitty. Anyway, i compensated and done my duty. Rest was in HIS hand. Feel sorry. Try changing the emotions.

[Physiotherapist]

Fowlsound,

Kumar is not a thing or an object to be played with. He is a human being just like the rest of us and should be afforded that same courtesy.

You may not agree with the things that he says and you are both perfectly entitled to your own opinions and to disagree. However, this is beginnning to sound a little vindictive.

I thought that this was a discussion forum? This thread certainly does not read like a discussion at present!

[Mojo]

Kumar is not a thing or an object to be played with. He is a human being just like the rest of us and should be afforded that same courtesy. He is entitled to the same level of courtesy as he shows everyone else.

[Kumar]

Physiotherapist,

Thanks. Not to blame or claim. Poor guy has been deviated.

His-others choice/luck.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Kumar is not a thing or an object to be played with. He is a human being just like the rest of us and should be afforded that same courtesy.

That is true, but he has also deliberately distorted, lied and misled consistently over his posting career. For myself, I'd like to shake him out of it and give him the chance to make a positive contribution by exhibiting a little honesty.

Everyone initially extended him enormous courtesy and spent huge amounts of time trying to explain things to him. He merely threw it all back in their faces.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Physio,

One other thing is that I remain unsure that Kumar is 'real' in the usual sense. I think it may well be a persona created for fun. I may choose to respond to 'him' as if he is real, but I reserve that doubt.

[Kumar]

Poor guys. Mistaken minds due to poor emotions.

Their choice/luck or nature's system against which, I always have to surrender.

[Mojo]

Poor guys. Mistaken minds due to poor emotions. In what way are you suggesting people here are mistaken? Do you have any evidence to back up your suggestion?


Their choice/luck or nature's system against which, I always have to surrender.This depends on how you define "nature's system?"

We have a system by which we attempt to describe how the natural universe works. It's called the scientific method. You might like to try it sometime.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Poor guys. Mistaken minds due to poor emotions.

Their choice/luck or nature's system against which, I always have to surrender.

Present evidence to support your assertions.