Homeopathy

I like to take fish oil and rub it into my nipples whilst gargling red bull.

ftfy

Interesting. One trial I heard about concluded that pills that were coloured red were significantly more effective than the same ones in green - and both of these were significantly more effective again if delivered to the patient by a "doctor" wearing a lab coat.

sorry about the secondary link- it came up on google- I have currently no access to SCOPUS (http://info.scopus.com/) so couldn't find the article my friend sent to me during our ethics course, but i think that does a decent job of summary.

Seriously... I reckon I feel better when I'm taking fish oil than when I'm not. 100% quantifiable on my own "general wellbeing index"

Seriously... I reckon I feel better when I'm taking fish oil than when I'm not. 100% quantifiable on my own "general wellbeing index"

http://www.badscience.net/category/fish-oil/
http://www.badscience.net/2010/06/the-return-of-a-2bn-fishy-friend/
http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/the-fishy-reckoning/

Cock off hippy... You haven't even finished chapter four and now you're some kind of eminent sceptic.

And I've read that book by the way.

Did you read them?
No.

I used to be given fish oil as a kid. Fuck anyone who does that shit.

Sorry, I didn't realise your post was taking a moral standpoint on poorly facilitated medical trials on children. I thought you were highlighting the reference to the reputable medical trials discrediting it's use as a placebo.

... And no, I didn't read them.

Interesting. One trial I heard about concluded that pills that were coloured red were significantly more effective than the same ones in green - and both of these were significantly more effective again if delivered to the patient by a "doctor" wearing a lab coat.

I've seen/read that somewhere as well, supports the idea that homeopathic remedies are simply psychological.

Sorry, I didn't realise your post was taking a moral standpoint on poorly facilitated medical trials on children. I thought you were highlighting the reference to the reputable medical trials discrediting it's use as a placebo.
... And no, I didn't read them.

Ooh tetchy. Miss your fish oil supplement this morning?

Moral standpoint? I'm opposed to anyone using fish oil. Hug a fish today.

Listen you fucknut!
If you read carefully you will see that I don't have much faith in the effectiveness of homeopathy but have found my experience of their diagnosis rather puzzling as the equipment used often highlighted small ailments which I was aware of but which would not have been obvious to the practitioner.

I was never really fussed about the arguments for or against it as my girlfriend wanted me to go and I was happy to do it. What I thought of it was neither here nor there and although I sometimes take the piss out of the treatment and methods I am in no position to rubbish something I don't understand or have any knowledge about.

So if you want to form an educated opinion about something why don't you go and check it out yourself and then perhaps study up on some subjective research into it. Reading up on other people's opinions doesn't really count and then you can come back and update me with a brief of what you find you donkey

FUCK OFF ... You seriously believe in that some bloke with some dodgy instrument found some ailments ... you are the fucking donkey mate. Doesn't prove fucking anything.

Guess what only real medicine with proven results (i.e. years worth of research on one drug compound that may never even get to being sold to hospitals/chemists) ... Part of my dissertation was into the costs of actually doing real research and it goes into the 10s of millions. Thus why Nerofen is soo fucking expensive compared to Ibuprofen when they are the same drug ... because the company that own Nerofen spent all the money on the research.

Forget about that people with a Medical Degree i.e. Real Doctors have to do 6 - 7 year studying before they get let loose in the wild.

So all this versus some guy with a fucking dodgy sensor kit, which hasn't gone through any rigourous trials before "going on the market"... your the fucknut mate for even considering this bullshit.

No arguments I've heard FOR or AGAINST seem convincing enough to me . . .

Which arguments for and against are you referring to ?

I know this is a totally different topic, but there is some pretty shitty techniques being peddled in mainstream medicine. I think were grossly overmedicated.

Ooh tetchy. Miss your fish oil supplement this morning?

Moral standpoint? I'm opposed to anyone using fish oil. Hug a fish today.

Did that sound tetchy? Sorry dude... I don't really give a fuck about this.

I know this is a totally different topic, but there is some pretty shitty techniques being peddled in mainstream medicine.

Which techniques ?

I think were grossly overmedicated.

Can you expand on this in any way, how are we grossly overmedicated ?

Would you consider the fish oil industry ($2 billion dollars [U.S] annually) to be part of this gross overmedication ?

He's on the fish oils.. smokes 20 a day..

I would enjoy reading a summary (please not a long report as the subject is boring enough) of someone that's actually done some constructive research into the subject. No arguments I've heard FOR or AGAINST seem convincing enough to me and until then, although I personally think it's fishtank fodder, I'll try to keep an open mind about it

you argue like a 12 year old, so i might have to start treating you like a 12yr old.

have you tried: Google Scholar?
no didn't think so.

incidentally- excluding the articles in the journal 'Homeopathy', which we can discredit for obvious reasons we come up with:

A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy
this title means that he's spent time reading all the reviews on the subject and has carefully analysed the results (a translation for you)
chances are, the poor bugger has read many of the primary articles in each of the reviews as well

by:
E. Ernst
Department of Complementary Medicine, School of Sport & Health Sciences, University of Exeter, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter EX2 4NT UK
in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
For you, I'll explain that- its the main journal in the UK in the study of drugs and their efficacy -in a clinical (ie patient facing) environment

summarised by his abstract:
Homeopathy remains one of the most controversial subjects in therapeutics. This article is an attempt to clarify its effectiveness based on recent systematic reviews. Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analysis on the subject. Seventeen articles fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Six of them related to re-analyses of one landmark meta-analysis. Collectively they implied that the overall positive result of this meta-analysis is not supported by a critical analysis of the data. Eleven independent systematic reviews were located. Collectively they failed to provide strong evidence in favour of homeopathy. In particular, there was no condition which responds convincingly better to homeopathic treatment than to placebo or other control interventions. Similarly, there was no homeopathic remedy that was demonstrated to yield clinical effects that are convincingly different from placebo. It is concluded that the best clinical evidence for homeopathy available to date does not warrant positive recommendations for its use in clinical practice.

i've highlighted relevant sections.

link:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118952006/abstract

and finally its been cited 127 times, a fairly good indicator of the quality of the paper, and this is a good paper.

Im sure you're familiar with the so-called "Ritalin debate", Tynan.

Im just messing about with the fish oil.

Im sure you're familiar with the so-called "Ritalin debate", Tynan.

Yep, and other medications for similar disorders, primarily in children, being readily prescribed in the US - and probably often unnecessarily.

Is this what you are referring to when you say we are grossly overmedicated ?

Im just messing about with the fish oil.

Don't mess about with fish oil, it is very very powerful stuff, it can raise your IQ by several hundred points and pop your head open.

^hehehe (was thinking the same).

Who is arguing and what's wrong with 12 year old's?

Pedo.

I have to say, at this juncture, for all the good Ben Goldacre has done in highlighting the benefits of questioning how science is reported, he can be a little overselective in his supporting papers.

Fish (Oil) has benefits...
The scandi's have shown a link (using their supreme medical records) between high fish diet and reduced Alzheimer's onset.
Nurk, E., Drevon, C.A., Refsum, H., Solvoll, K., Vollset, S.E., Nygård, O., Nygaard, H.A., (...), Smith, A.D. Cognitive performance among the elderly and dietary fish intake: The Hordaland Health Study (2007) American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 86 (5), pp. 1470-1478

As does the 'Mediterranean Diet':
Scarmeas, N, Luchsinger, J, Mayeux, R, Stern,Y Mediterranean diet and Alzheimer disease mortality NEUROLOGY (2007);69:1084-1093

^hehehe (was thinking the same).

Pedo apologist.