+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 125
  1. #51
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    No fan of homeopathy has yet been able to explain that to me. And I've asked a few!
    Nor why they don't do it to alcohol... There's a fortune to be made there!

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lambjam For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (28-10-2013),Boobycino  (29-10-2013),Miados2007  (28-10-2013)

  3. #52
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    It isn't an opinion if it is science, It is evidence. It depends. If there are a few studies done on a subject, I'll still keep an open mind. But if there are thousands and thousands of studies done by different scientists in different ways and they all come to the same conclusion, then yes - I'd tend to go with the evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by SAgirl View Post
    So time and time again on BH I see women arguing the so called 'facts' of science.

    I'm no scientist myself and although I know a lot about certain topics, there are heaps of things I don't know and don't 'research' either, unless its something I am interested in or directly affects me.

    I'm genuinely curious about people's beliefs in so called scientific facts. I mean often there have been things which scientists have apparently researched and 'proven' only for us to be told years later that they were wrong!

    To be honest, I often feel like I'm being made to feel stupid just for not agreeing with someone's opinion based on their apparent knowledge of 'scientific fact' and I just can't be bothered to research it myself and argue my point. (Sometimes I just like to give MY personal view or experience and leave it at that, whereas others seem to believe they are ALWAYS right and keep arguing their point and throw in the words 'scientific research' etc)

    I can see I'm going to be made to feel stupid here for my apparent lack of knowledge but oh well. Lets try play nice, I'm just curious.

    Do you believe everything science has 'proven' and WHY

  4. #53
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    It is one study, with 53 people in it. To form any kind of opinion either way you would need more studies, with more people showing the same results. Are there any other studies? Or are you really trying to get people to say they either agree or disagree that homeopathy is effective based on one study with 53 people?

    Quote Originally Posted by Meg2 View Post
    The journal is peer reviewed. The study wouldn't be published in that journal if the methodology was flawed in the eyes of the independent scientific reviewers. So if the scientists who work in the field were happy with a sample size of 53, who are you to say that it is too small?
    Last edited by beebs; 28-10-2013 at 17:25.

  5. #54
    FearlessLeader's Avatar
    FearlessLeader is offline Winner 2013 - Most Memorable Thread
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10,724
    Thanks
    2,498
    Thanked
    9,116
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleetwood View Post
    I don't know if I believe 'everything science has proven' because I don't know everything science has proven. I do however, have much much more faith in the opinions or research of someone who is well studied in a field, than someone who has no real knowledge or background in a given area.

    Evidence based/peer-reviewed work doesn't come from nowhere. People devote their entire careers to research. So I think it's very relevant and even required to refer to actual opinions/facts/research during a discussion on scientific or otherwise topics. I really hate it when people dismiss scientific evidence, as though they know more than people well studied in those areas (not saying you do OP, just generally speaking). It's incredibly disrespectful.

    So, if its scientific fact coming from genuine credible sources I am much more inlined to believe that than joe blogs next door with no scientific background, yes.
    Hr

  6. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,953
    Thanks
    3,680
    Thanked
    1,949
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    No.

    Or maybe the better way of saying it is i think they sometimes "make" science fit the preferred theory without looking at the evidence objectively- popularity and money are involved after all. I think some scientists put their own true feelings /opinions aside and bow to popular opinion.

  7. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Busy-Bee View Post
    I think (and I will be the first to admit I could be wrong here) that the tapping has to be done in a particular way, something like 10 times on a leather strip so random taps and bumps don't 'work'.
    From http://www.classichomeopathy.com/remedies/howmade.html (please note the spelling error which I have not removed because I found it highly amusing)

    Succussion is essential. It has been proven that just diluting the material is ineffectual for making homeopathic remedies. Each dilution must be shaken violently with impact in order to become an effective remedy.

    Succussion can be as simple as holding the vile containing the solution and pounding it against a book on a desk (with a lid on, of-course). This is now a 1X potency. X stands for ten in Roman numerals. To make a 2X potency you take one part of the 1X potency again adding it to nine parts of the diluting solution (alcohol, and water) in a vile with a lid, and then succus it. Seccussion is done at a minimum of 100 times per each level of dilution starting from the very beginning. This process continues until the desired potency (strength) of the remedy is attained.

  8. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SoThisIsLove View Post
    No.

    Or maybe the better way of saying it is i think they sometimes "make" science fit the preferred theory without looking at the evidence objectively- popularity and money are involved after all. I think some scientists put their own true feelings /opinions aside and bow to popular opinion.
    You're talking about falsified studies? It does happen. This one springs to mind:
    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...ethics-science

  9. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (28-10-2013),lambjam  (28-10-2013),MrJones&Me  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013)

  10. #58
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    I does happen, but not that often. I think a lot of the time, people don't believe findings made by scientists because it goes against their own bias and beliefs. It's easier to think scientists are dodgy, money grubbers etc, rather than change your own views and values.

    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    You're talking about falsified studies? It does happen. This one springs to mind:
    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...ethics-science

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to beebs For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013)

  12. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    This is more current than that one study- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20402610
    "CONCLUSIONS:
    The findings of currently available Cochrane reviews of studies of homeopathy do not show that homeopathic medicines have effects beyond placebo."
    That particular paper did not review the same condition from the report that I posted. I'd like to see more info re the one I posted rather than write it off altogether

  13. #60
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    It isn't an opinion if it is science, It is evidence. It depends. If there are a few studies done on a subject, I'll still keep an open mind. But if there are thousands and thousands of studies done by different scientists in different ways and they all come to the same conclusion, then yes - I'd tend to go with the evidence.
    Interpreting data is a matter of opinion. Not all scientists agree on everything but I hope they are open minded. Research is also proven to have been wrong and what we thought was evidence can be incorrect

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    Meg2  (29-10-2013),SoThisIsLove  (28-10-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. No science minister for the first time since 1931
    By Atropos in forum General Election Discussion
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 17-09-2013, 13:54
  2. Is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Anti-Science?
    By Maybelline in forum Immunisation & Vaccines
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-06-2013, 12:43
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-12-2012, 17:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
WaterWipes
Give your babies bottom a gift this Xmas! They are the only wipe made using just water and a drop of grapefruit seed extract and may help avoid nappy rash. Check out the great reviews on bubhub and see our website for more info and availability.
sales & new stuffsee all
CarmelsBeautySecrets
Growing your own natural nails is easy. Years ago, I devised a simple and very effective technique which really helps boosts the nails' growth in as little as three days! And most importantly keeps them that way.
featured supporter
Softmats
Softmats specialises in safe, non-toxic, and durable play mats. The international Premium Dwinguler™ Play Mats and Premium Bubba Mat™ range of floor spaces are the best quality in the world.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!