Recreational drugs FAR less likely to kill than prescribed drugs!

[dalebert]

I'll take whatever homeopathy crap anyone wants me to take for however long they want me to take it if they pay for the medicine. I'm not going to pay however much some quack wants to charge for some placebo pills. I take daily medication so it'll be easy to just throw in one or two or three or 10 more pills to my daily routine. I'm not the slightest bit worried about water, or milk pills or whatever having any harmful effects on me. In fact, I'd prefer not to even know what the particular homeopathic medicine is supposed to treat. Don't even tell me. Take them out of the box so I can't read what it's supposed to "cure". That will give a more objective result.

If you want, I'll even take like a fourth of a tablet a day! (a 75% cost savings) OMG, that would be insanely dangerous! It's an even smaller amount of the ingredient. So like, if there's a pill to cure boils and I take a fourth of the recommended dose, then I should be exploding with boils by the end of the treatment!

[mackler]

I didn't realize there would be such interest in this.  I'll be in NH in time for PorcFest.  Maybe we can get together enough volunteers to do an actual double-blind study with a statistically valid sample size.

[Dylboz]

Stephen Barrett??????

LMAO!!!!!!!

great source

Kola

Why, exactly? Has he gone after your herbal and NA practices too? He seems to be very well qualified, respected by his peers and the scientific community, as well as active in private activities to educate against fraudulent and unscientific health claims made by doctors and nutritional supplement manufacturers. He is exactly the sort of person that we would need in a future stateless society to evaluate the claims made by providers of remedies and treatment, especially if they do not do their own independent trials and research (remember? we're not forcing that on them anymore) to evaluate the efficacy of their products. Like Underwriters Laboratories for medicine. While it's clear that he has worked with the government as well, that is not his exclusive role, and he does private, chartable (donation supported) work almost exclusively, so I'm not about to discredit him as a FDA or Big Pharma stooge. Regardless, you are free to hold whatever opinion you like of him, but note that he also backs up all his assertions with original source material, so you can consult that and draw your own conclusions.

[kola]

He seems to be very well qualified, respected by his peers and the scientific community, as well as active in private activities to educate against fraudulent and unscientific health claims made by doctors and nutritional supplement manufacturers. He is exactly the sort of person that we would need in a future stateless society to evaluate the claims made by providers of remedies and treatment, especially if they do not do their own independent trials and research (remember? we're not forcing that on them anymore) to evaluate the efficacy of their products.

This really shows how much you  REALLY know. You seem like a bright guy. Why not find out who Barrett really is before you worship his "work". (gag). He has a very interesting track record.

Its pretty tough but I will try and stop laughing.

Kola

[kola]

 

but note that he also backs up all his assertions with original source material, so you can consult that and draw your own conclusions.

Yes. He is famous for listing HIMSELF as the source. LOL!

This is too funny.

You probally should quit now. It's making you look ridiculous. Honestly.

Kola 

[Dylboz]

OK... And where would I start? There is a campaign by woo woo practitioners to libel the guy online, that much is clear. I'll look at whatever you recommend, but that wont say anything at all about all the sources he links to, which are also extensive, respectable and scientific. Chuckle away, bro. But if you think there's something I should see about the guy, link it. Otherwise... :roll:

[Dylboz]

but note that he also backs up all his assertions with original source material, so you can consult that and draw your own conclusions.

Yes. He is famous for listing HIMSELF as the source. LOL!

This is too funny.

You probally should quit now. It's making you look ridiculous. Honestly.

Kola 

Show me where, I have not seen it on his site. But look, even if I reject the guy outright, there are at least 3 articles with the exact same information and a whole host of sources I can list right now. In fact, here you go:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/nov/16/sciencenews.g2
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/the-pseudoscience-behind-homeopathy.ars/
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/000225.html

And this relates to our little "experiment":
http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-05/belgium.html

PS - Dalebert, I fixed yer Karma!

[kola]

I will leave it up to YOU to find out the TRUTH about "NON doctor" Stevie-boy Barrett.

I am done jumping thorugh hoops.

Better yet, just keep using him as a reference. Its funny.

and btw... don't address your homeopathy comments to me. I told you several times I am not interested.

Kola

[Dylboz]

I will leave it up to YOU to find out the TRUTH about "NON doctor" Stevie-boy Barrett.

I am done jumping thorugh hoops.

Better yet, just keep using him as a reference. Its funny.

Kola

Show me the hoop. I haven't seen you jump, not once. It's cool, though. I'm used to that line. Every "Truther" does that same dance. They make a claim, you ask for evidence, they wont provide it. You make a claim, providing evidence, and they shoot the ad hominems at you AND your source.

World keeps on spinning, 'round and 'round.


Oh, wait.

and btw... don't address your homeopathy comments to me. I told you several times I am not interested.

Dude, I was asking about the guy and showing you his information stacks up against anyone's as well as his sources. I was asking for evidence the guy was a charlatan, nothing to do with Homeopathy. He's dead on about Homeopathy, though, so why should I suspect he's a liar?

[kola]

Well then keep using Quackwatch.com as your source of information.

Isn't that what all the top scientists and peer review reseachers use?

ROFL!

[Dylboz]

Well then keep using Quackwatch.com as your source of information.

Isn't that what all the top scientists and peer review reseachers use?

ROFL!

Just one of many. Many, many, many.

[Dylboz]

It's routine marketing practice for homeopaths to denigrate mainstream medicine. There's a simple commercial reason for this: survey data show that a disappointing experience with mainstream medicine is almost the only factor that regularly correlates with choosing alternative therapies.

OK, mackler, maybe you're not dumb, just manipulated by these cynical snake-oil salesmen who take advantage of your disappointment with real doctors (who, like any profession, vary widely in their skill, manner and personality). I'm sure there's a story about what happened, that sent you running into the arms of alternative "medicine." I'm curious.

[StrongArm]

So who is this kola guy, and why is he such an asshole?

[Kat Kanning]

Who are you?

[StrongArm]

I live in NY, and I'm thinking of moving, but I want to see what the people are like first.