Nezchan
Are you sure you're a scientist?
It had nothing to do with geocentrism or numerology or feng shui or whatever superstitious rubbish you want to name.
This is all very deep into "brains falling out" territory, and makes me question your understanding of science in the first place.
“ Whenever people attack not the idea — but its source — you know they've hit the brick wall of their intellectual limitations. “ Dr. Idel Dreimer,
This the 2’nd comment that attempt to belittle my qualification as a scientist, even though my field of study have nothing to do with the Idea we are arguing here.
Scientist are human too. They have personal opinions about everything in the world Not everything they have an option on are based on scientific evidence. For example:
- Sir Isaac Newton: his obsessions with Biblical numerology, astrology, and a quest for the Philosopher's Stone.
2- Alfred Russel Wallace (Darwin’s pal ): Co-discoverer Of Natural Selection. He had views on spiritualism.
3- French astronomer Camille Flammarion was another believer in spiritualism and reincarnation
and much more….
We should ignore all Newton’s contribution to science, because he is stupid! He believed in astrology. Or Maybe he had a “"brains falling out" … Right ? ;)
Acupuncture has been shown to be ineffective in clinical trials, giving no more than a placebo effect.
1- Most conventional treatments are not evidence based According to the BMJ’s Clinical Evidence, conventional treatments are categorised in the following way when the research literature supporting their use is examined: Beneficial: 11%, Likely to be beneficial: 24% , Trade-off between benefits and harms: 7% , Unlikely to be beneficial: 5%, Likely to be ineffective of harmful: 3% ,Unknown effectiveness: 50%. So a measly 11% of conventional treatments have strong evidence of their effectiveness and safety whereas the vast majority are not evidence-based and some are even known to be harmful.
2- Scientific Evidence in General is a bit shaky: According to Professor John Ioannidis’ very well-respected and highly cited article on research methods, most published research findings are actually false ( Check this paper : “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”. Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005)). For a variety of reasons, including funding sources, poor research design, and good old bog standard bias, most published research findings end up being unrepeatable and/or overturned. And it is on these very results that the entire institution of evidence-based conventional medicine is poised.
3) The Problem with Drug Money: As touched on in the Ioannidis paper, funding source, and not just good old fashioned scientific investigation of reality, significantly affects which conclusions research studies come to. And thus we’re forced to face some unpleasant facts, namely that biomedical research funded by the pharmaceutical industry consistently over-estimates the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals as compared to reality 11 12 and that the majority of biomedical research is funded by the pharmaceutical industry.13 Oh dear.
4) does it have scientific base? ““An evidence-based approach to medicine, as previously discussed, means looking at the scientific evidence from clinical trials and other sources in order to decide best medical practice. The systematic review is often the final stage of evidence-based medicine, whereby a conclusion is drawn from all the available evidence. . . In each case, the wholly independent Cochrane Collaboration presents its conclusions about the effectiveness of whatever is being systematically reviewed. Hopefully this background to the Cochrane Collaboration has helped to convey its reputation for independence, rigour and quality.” (Check this paper : Singh, D. S., & Ernst, P. E. (2009). Trick or Treatment? Random House).
5- Acupuncture Improves Many Biomarkers:
A)“The Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Acupuncture and Their Relevance to Allergic Rhinitis: A Narrative Review and Proposed Model”. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine”. McDonald, J. L., Cripps, A. W., Smith, P. K., Smith, C. A., Xue, C. C., & Golianu, B. (2013).
B)“Neural substrates, experimental evidences and functional hypothesis of acupuncture mechanisms”. Cho, Z. H., Hwang, S. C., Wong, E. K., Son, Y. D., Kang, C. K., Park, T. S., et al. (2006). Acta Neurologica Scandinavica.
C)“This brings us to an interesting situation: any provably safe and effective alternative medicine is not really an alternative medicine at all, but rather it becomes a conventional medicine.” (“Trick or Treatment? “.(Singh, D. S., & Ernst, P. E. (2009). Random House.
I don’t claim all the above are my words, Its from an article in the subject
P.S: In a civil rational argument, don’t take it personal. I advise you to argue ideas without personalizing the discussion or dragging your opinion about the person your arguing with instead of the idea it self. It makes you look bad. Its fine that other people have a different opinion then yours, you dont need to attack them or belittle their intellegence because of it.
I no longer want to participate in this discussion with you. It’s taking an ugly turn.
I’m used to it though, as we say in the States “When they can’t use their words or intellect, they call you names“.
last edited at Jun 21, 2017 3:45PM
