Lol but happy to comment on it anyway. Let's just say they graded the evidence almost identically, but framed it slightly differently in the reporting
-
-
Always happy to comment upon the deception of the second report. And on the key differences.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There were remarkably few differences in methodology. The main difference that I can see is in interpretation. I suspect you'll be very disappointed to find that neither report supports the use of homeopathy for any conditions
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I agree, sir. With the exception of the methodology involved in ranking evidence for reports; since I couldn't locate a literature review protocol in my search. What strikes me as the oddest is the interpretation of assigned grades. -->pic.twitter.com/oin7MEASqs
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
--> Encouraging here, falling flat there. For the same grades. That smacks of subjectivity. I am quite interested in reading Dr? Theriault's explanation on this as he has assured us.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
It smacks of a note of reliability of evidence. Not of its results. C in NHMRC means low risk of bias
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Incorrect again. C grading means "some support for the hypothesis but care should be taken in its application". It is the lowest grade that allows for any statements to be made other than "no evidence"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Intriguing, considering that this report was secret, and the conclusions of the 2015 team.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I suspect from that statement that you've misunderstood both reports, but that's no longer particularly surprising
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
A large part of the 2015 report talked about how bad most of the evidence on homeopathy was, and how the few B grade studies were almost universally negative, which is common in popular treatments with no effect
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Since I can only assume you've never read it, here's the statement from the NHMRC on homeopathy Note, it doesn't say "homeopathy doesn't work", it says "there's no evidence that homoepathy works" which are very different statementspic.twitter.com/qMnTA7oF45
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.