Yet even with these limits, still better than the absolute trash skeptics offer when discussing homeopathy
-
-
Replying to @DrPaulND @brownbagpanty and
On the subject of trash: "homeopathy journal has gotten itself booted from the list of respectable scientific titles thanks to... fishy citations. NHMRC 1 Homeopathy zero.
#showmesciencenotadvertisinghttps://www.statnews.com/2016/06/17/homeopathy-journal-thomson-reuters/ …1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @auscandoc @brownbagpanty and
Perhaps we might stick to studies that are not under investigation by thier own governments for academic fraud, shall we? NHMRC is absolute Trash on this subject, and if you are aware of it's methods and still quote it, you have no business opining on the sciences.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @DrPaulND @auscandoc and
What an odd statement. What specifics of the NHMRC report do you think are "trash"? (Yes, before you ask, I've read it)
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @auscandoc and
In short, the poor choice of reviewers, the failure to differentiate methodologies, the additive method for studies, and the extremely suspicious 150 limit, as well as the completion of the report twice.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DrPaulND @auscandoc and
A poor choice of reviewer is not a methodological criticism. Different methodologies assumes that there are inherent differences between homeopathic treatments, in defiance of Hahnemann's principles. If 150 systematic reviews disagree with you, you're probably wrong
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @auscandoc and
Having biased reviewers, and not including an actual homeopath to work on thodologies of studies is indeed a terrible flaw, but not fatal. The other methods however? Yeah, those are fatal. The report s trash
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DrPaulND @auscandoc and
It's not a flaw in any sense. You don't need an expert in homeopathy to read and evaluate medical systematic reviews, you need an expert in systematic reviews and, ideally, medicine. And as I've point out above, your other criticisms are equally invalid
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
rivalry between homeopathic & allopathic medicine is such that its better to let the homeopaths police themselves & do their own studies. We should copy Germany & Switzerland & make insurance companies pay for both types of medicine too. we'd save ton$ https://www.yourhealthyourchoice.com.au/news-features/complementary-medicine-in-switzerland-now-a-mandatory-health-insurance-service/ …
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @Wallace_Noll @GidMK and
we spend 19% of our GDP on health care & we have extremely unhealthy children, tons of auto-immune disorders & declining life expectancy unlike all the other nations. Yet other nations spend 10-15% of gdp on health care. We need to copy the successful nations & stop failing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I live in Australia. We spend half that on medicine without spending a cent on homeopathy
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.