I seriously doubt it works. Homeopathic medicines are diluted till the extent that it is just a one drop of medicine in the whole ocean. How can we accept it to work?
I tend to agree since it is next to impossible to get pure water to mix it with in the first place that is not contaminated to a greater extent than what they agree suppose to add to it. If anything it is the time the person spends talking to the receiver that does more help IMHO.
Depends on your definition of Homeopathy. I suspect many practices being sold on TV to desperate people are shams, but making a blanket statement calling all non-board certified medicine a sham is just stupid. More than one study provides evidence that accupuncture delivers measurable results, yet we have yet to see it become mainstream. I suspect that is true for a variety of other practices which are not considered mainstream.
Homeopathy is based on unfounded principles and is completely unscientific and thus fake. Now, some so-called homeopaths prescribe substances that that do have beneficial effects that are known from "real" scientific knowledge, but that is not homeopathy. Same for chiropractic. The whole discipline is based on bogus, completely outdated principles but a few "chiropractors" do perform some sort of manipulations that have beneficial effects, as a physiotherapist or a massage therapist would, but again, that is not chiropractic.
Not sure what I say, but it works too, I know one very well known doctor here, patients wait in queue from 4.00-5.00 AM for checkups. Personally it worked on me several times.
Haha, I've always called Chiropractors "witch doctors". Use of the word "Scientific" implies many things, including use of statistics in blind tests to verify results. You and I both know that many treatments being used worldwide right now have not had such study, whether for lack of resources, or manipulation by organizations selling more expensive treatments in US emergency rooms. For that reason alone, equating non-scientific to "bogus", is an invalid comparison. Drug companies actively canvas real third world "witch doctors" looking for new cures they can package up and sell, which indirectly lends credibility to practices some would call homeopathy. Its hard to strike a balanced position on this issue. One wants to take a purely "scientific" approach to the question, but when there is as much money involved as there is, its hard, and perhaps naive, not to consider the "business" aspect of western medicine.
By bogus I didn't mean "insufficient studies" (which is important though but not the point now). I mean in both cases, the theoretical framework on which both disciplines were founded is incorrect (outdated, false, superseded by knowledge or whatever we can call it). I don't think I have to start showing links that nobody will read, but I can in case anyone is interested. I don't think it's hard to strike a balanced position. Just need to read what they claim to realise that homeopathy is fake: No, water has no memory, and "like cures like" makes no biological sense (disclaimer: this piece of knowledge has no corporate sponsors)
I think the summary dismissal of all non-western medicine as homeopathy and the dismissal of all all medicine that hasn't gone through exhaustive critical trials as "bogus" is a very unbalanced position, even if there are many many cases where it is true. Citing the "water" people or the Chiropracters is an easy first step, but the argument being made is "many non-tested therapies are scams/bogus, therefore all non-tested therapies are bogus". Obviously that logic doesn't follow. I also despise medicine by the numbers, which is what HMOs and socialized medicine are. Remedies are prescribed on a basis of who had the best sales team(or inside help), and what is most cost effective, not necessarily on what would be most effective. Lets also not forget that "C" students still get to graduate from medical school and practice medicine. Like any business (and it most definitely is a business), it is a game of buyer beware. That applies all the way from your general practitioner to the drug companies.