Jump to content
LogicprObe

Homeopathic scum gaoled

Recommended Posts

"It could have been worse. She could have gotten autism. That shit's a fate worse than death."

 

 

As if to prove my point.

For the record, I've got Asperger's, that was more a pisstake of the 'OMG vaccination causes autism!!!' line of thought :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no love or trust in homoeopathy, it does seem incredibly negligent to event attempt the practice but the decision does raise question about the sentence. If these two were absolutely convinced that the treatment would work is sending them to prison really going to be the best way to deal with the situation? They inadvertently killed a person under their care and that implies a distinct responsibility but they didn't set out to kill their child if the reports are to be believed. Is prison the appropriate answer for these people? Punished without question but is this the only answer we have, to throw them away and risk creating a bigger problem down the track with mixed them in the larger prison population?

 

No particular opinion but the statements of 'let them rot' seem to be more directed at the concept of homoeopathy and it's practitioners than the actual people in question.

I'm sure there are people out there who are so stupid that they don't realise driving at great speed, veering between other vehicles and drifting around corners, could kill someone. I mean, a lot of drivers and their passengers have died that way. The drivers, in most cases, probably weren't aware they were putting the occupants of their vehicle at that great a risk. They were too stupid to realise, well, how stupid they were. That doesn't mean that those drivers, assuming they survive, shouldn't go to gaol. They might be stupid and ignorant, but that in no way takes away from the fact they did something wrong.

 

These clowns, these homeopaths, are a danger to the community: evidenced by the fact they have killed a child through their own stupidity. Putting them in prison for a long time sends a clear message: you're dangerous and we don't want you to practice your quackery any more. It sends a clear message to others who get rich off the ignorance and desperation of the ill: the authorities are keeping an eye on you. Quackery is dangerous. If someone who is going to die wants to believe that magic crystals will make their life better, well, bully for them. If someone with nail rot reckons all their problems will go away if they get their foot rubbed by some pothead vegan, good for them. If only quackery was that harmless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting them in prison for a long time sends a clear message: you're dangerous and we don't want you to practice your quackery any more.

I bet they don't see that. They probably just think they're being persecuted for their beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It could have been worse. She could have gotten autism. That shit's a fate worse than death."

 

 

As if to prove my point.

For the record, I've got Asperger's, that was more a pisstake of the 'OMG vaccination causes autism!!!' line of thought :P

 

 

every male has asperger's

 

(and every woman has a hormonal imbalance)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It could have been worse. She could have gotten autism. That shit's a fate worse than death."

 

 

As if to prove my point.

For the record, I've got Asperger's, that was more a pisstake of the 'OMG vaccination causes autism!!!' line of thought :P

 

 

every male has asperger's

 

(and every woman has a hormonal imbalance)

 

Here we go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every other Homoeopathic thread has had many defenders of the faith, where are you all this time?

Killing their kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to say what I think right here:

 

I've been living in Indonesia for four years. I come back to Australia sick as a dog with a fungus that has mutated called candida albicans. This is from my diet. Because of candida albicans, I had various problems such as chronic fatigue, IBS, severe cramps in my arms and shoulders, bad, bad sugar cravings and so on and so forth. My mum had the same thing and was borderline suicidal.

 

 

(edit: Our diet was nothing horrible, one Coke on weekends, pasta, meat and veggies, tim tams etc etc. It was the sugar and pollution from Indonesia. Needless to say, my skin has also cleared up and I no longer have pimples :))

The doctors were prescribing her (top rate doctors) hormone treatment, pills, and powders. And she was getting worse. And I was just going along with my IBS and fatigue (waking up at 11 in the morning, going to bed at 7). We didn't think there was anything wrong with us (besides mum D:). Anyway, Mum meets a naturopath who then tells her kindly to "get the **** off your current diet". Go back to meat, veggies, and absolutely stay off the sugar.

 

It's been 4 months now. Mum has never been happier, I no longer have IBS or fatigue, my dad has lost 10 kilo's from 85 to 75 and looks buffer than everyone else his age and no longer has a beer gut. So I trust my naturopath.

 

 

However, you have to wonder when enough is enough and you need to go get trusted and tried methods of getting better. Mum is a naturopathic NUT now and will not touch anything prescribed by doctors. About two weeks ago, I got a case of conjunctivitis. Mum said "Oh, golden seal oil and salty water will do the trick.". Barely noticeable results. Went to the pharmacy, bought some Chlorsig. Instant results and cured in 5 days.

 

So you need to look at everything in moderation and decide which is better. I hope I made some sense in my structure, but I definitely confused myself. :(

Edited by tezlin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dieting isn't naturopathy.

 

You could've got the same advice from a GP or a dietician.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you need to look at everything in moderation and decide which is better. I hope I made some sense in my structure, but I definitely confused myself. :(

By definition, a doctor that does not investigate the totality of the surrounds of a chronic condition is *not* top rate.

 

Homeopathy and Naturopathy are also two different things, if occluded at times.

 

There is a great deal of holistic practice and basic forensics missing from GPs in Australia. This is irrelevant to the base scientific failings of pseudo-medicine.

Edited by VannA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dieting isn't naturopathy.

 

You could've got the same advice from a GP or a dietician.

But I didn't. I got a pill and a get-well card. A fix for the symptoms, and not for the thing causing the symptoms.

 

So you need to look at everything in moderation and decide which is better. I hope I made some sense in my structure, but I definitely confused myself. :(

By defination, a doctor that does not investigate the totality of the surrounds of a chronic condition is *not* top rate.

 

Homepathy and Naturopathy are also two different things, if occluded at times.

 

There is a great deal of holistic practice and basic forensics missing from GPs in Australia. This is irrelevant to the base scientific failings of pseudo-medicine.

 

Failings of pseudo-medicine? The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world and you're saying the homeopathic/naturopathic medicines are failing? (worded that wrongly, haha. What I meant to say was that a doctor's cure/help does not seem to be working)

Edited by tezlin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Failings of pseudo-medicine? The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world and you're saying the homeopathic/naturopathic medicines are failing? (worded that wrongly, haha. What I meant to say was that a doctor's cure/help does not seem to be working)

 

What?

 

So, you have diet/lifestyle influenced problems, and you're blaming doctors and lauding snake-oil salesmen?

 

This is not a treament/help/cure problem. Nor a problem for science. Its a problem for the population to get off their motherfucking arses and help resolve, and a naturopath is in no better position than a doctor, to help this.

 

I've not gone to doctor in the last 5 years that hasn't told me I should lose some weight. What else do you expect them to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Failings of pseudo-medicine? The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world and you're saying the homeopathic/naturopathic medicines are failing? (worded that wrongly, haha. What I meant to say was that a doctor's cure/help does not seem to be working)

 

What?

 

So, you have diet/lifestyle influenced problems, and you're blaming doctors and lauding snake-oil salesmen?

 

This is not a treament/help/cure problem. Nor a problem for science. Its a problem for the population to get off their motherfucking arses and help resolve, and a naturopath is in no better position than a doctor, to help this.

 

I've not gone to doctor in the last 5 years that hasn't told me I should lose some weight. What else do you expect them to do?

 

It was an example. ;o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry tezlin, but it sounds like you and your mum are gullible twits.

 

"Fix your diet, numbskull!" is not naturopathy.

 

It's common sense, and your doctor is a fool for not advising as such in the first place.

 

I'm guessing that had the doctor known your diet was shitty to begin with, he'd have said much the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dieting isn't naturopathy.

 

You could've got the same advice from a GP or a dietician.

But I didn't. I got a pill and a get-well card. A fix for the symptoms, and not for the thing causing the symptoms.

 

So you need to look at everything in moderation and decide which is better. I hope I made some sense in my structure, but I definitely confused myself. :(

By defination, a doctor that does not investigate the totality of the surrounds of a chronic condition is *not* top rate.

 

Homepathy and Naturopathy are also two different things, if occluded at times.

 

There is a great deal of holistic practice and basic forensics missing from GPs in Australia. This is irrelevant to the base scientific failings of pseudo-medicine.

 

Failings of pseudo-medicine? The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world and you're saying the homeopathic/naturopathic medicines are failing? (worded that wrongly, haha. What I meant to say was that a doctor's cure/help does not seem to be working)

 

You seriously think Australia has the largest number of cancer and disease cases in the world? Really? And you think homeopaths and naturopaths can cure cancer?

 

And diabetes is well known to be a cause of a high-sugar diet, something which definitely is a problem in Western societies but has nothing to do with Western medicine. In fact, without Western medicine you'd probably just die if you got a bad case of diabetes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dieting isn't naturopathy.

 

You could've got the same advice from a GP or a dietician.

But I didn't. I got a pill and a get-well card. A fix for the symptoms, and not for the thing causing the symptoms.

 

So you need to look at everything in moderation and decide which is better. I hope I made some sense in my structure, but I definitely confused myself. :(

By defination, a doctor that does not investigate the totality of the surrounds of a chronic condition is *not* top rate.

 

Homepathy and Naturopathy are also two different things, if occluded at times.

 

There is a great deal of holistic practice and basic forensics missing from GPs in Australia. This is irrelevant to the base scientific failings of pseudo-medicine.

 

Failings of pseudo-medicine? The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world and you're saying the homeopathic/naturopathic medicines are failing? (worded that wrongly, haha. What I meant to say was that a doctor's cure/help does not seem to be working)

 

You seriously think Australia has the largest number of cancer and disease cases in the world? Really? And you think homeopaths and naturopaths can cure cancer?

 

And diabetes is well known to be a cause of a high-sugar diet, something which definitely is a problem in Western societies but has nothing to do with Western medicine. In fact, without Western medicine you'd probably just die if you got a bad case of diabetes.

 

The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world in history. Not in Australia. And I'm getting at the fact that too many doctors prescribe for the symptoms and not for a cure.

 

Without Western medicine we wouldn't have a life expectancy of damn near 80.

Living until 900, anyone?

Edited by tezlin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do understand, right, that if you didn't die of old age and just kept on living, eventually you'd get cancer? The reason more people are getting cancer than they were 30, 50, 80 years ago is we're getting better at detecting it and because, simply, we're living longer than we used to. If you live long enough, you're pretty much guaranteed to get it. Doctors haven't claimed to cure cancer. They haven't claimed to be able to 'vaccinate' against it. I don't see how you can knock them for not doing something they've never claimed to do. They can certainly point at some things that increase one's risk of getting cancer--smoking, for instance--but that's all.

 

Stop parroting the utter shit quacks spout without pausing, for one minute, to think about it.

Edited by Saponification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>.> You didn't just do that, did you?

 

You don't get to use OT pseudo-fact, that has even less actual supporting evidence than most parts, to make an argument in medicine.

 

Diabetes is a lifestyle affliction, for the most part.

Cancer has risk increasers, but is also relatively natural past certain ages.

 

Disease needs to be clarified in general, and is as much related to the fact the population has never dropped, in recorded history.

 

More people equals more incidence.

Non-lifestyle diseased have decreased per capita across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world in history. Not in Australia. And I'm getting at the fact that too many doctors prescribe for the symptoms and not for a cure.

What's your source for that claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do understand, right, that if you didn't die of old age and just kept on living, eventually you'd get cancer? The reason more people are getting cancer than they were 30, 50, 80 years ago is we're getting better at detecting it and because, simply, we're living longer than we used to. If you live long enough, you're pretty much guaranteed to get it. Doctors haven't claimed to cure cancer. They haven't claimed to be able to 'vaccinate' against it. I don't see how you can knock them for not doing something they've never claimed to do. They can certainly point at some things that increase one's risk of getting cancer--smoking, for instance--but that's all.

 

Stop parroting the utter shit quacks spout without pausing, for one minute, to think about it.

If you live long enough, you're bound to get it? Sorry, I can't believe that. The human body is made to stay healthy until the point where it wears out from use, not from developing a disease that kills you slowly and painfully. And if we're getting better at detecting it, are you saying that everyone who lived 30, 50, 80 years ago had the cancer and it just wasn't being found in their bodies? -.-

 

>.> You didn't just do that, did you?

 

You don't get to use OT pseudo-fact, that has even less actual supporting evidence than most parts, to make an argument in medicine.

 

Diabetes is a lifestyle affliction, for the most part.

Cancer has risk increasers, but is also relatively natural past certain ages.

 

Disease needs to be clarified in general, and is as much related to the fact the population has never dropped, in recorded history.

 

More people equals more incidence.

Non-lifestyle diseased have decreased per capita across the board.

It's the Western lifestyle and diet.

 

The largest outbreaks of diabetes, cancer and disease in the world in history. Not in Australia. And I'm getting at the fact that too many doctors prescribe for the symptoms and not for a cure.

What's your source for that claim?

 

The fact that there wasn't an epidemic of diabetes and cancer?

 

 

 

And I can't help but feel that since I'm the only naturopathic support in the thread, that I'm being jumped on eagerly by you rabid dogs. D:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you live long enough, you're bound to get it? Sorry, I can't believe that. The human body is made to stay healthy until the point where it wears out from use, not from developing a disease that kills you slowly and painfully. And if we're getting better at detecting it, are you saying that everyone who lived 30, 50, 80 years ago had the cancer and it just wasn't being found in their bodies? -.-

 

The human body is made to live to see the birth and raise its second generation. 35-40. That's it. That is all that is required to give substantial survival rates, and propogate social memes.

 

The DNA self-repair mechanisms that are responsible for ensuring that new cellular structures are utilizing 'pure' DNA start to fail at about that age, without exposure to ionising radiation or other carcinogens.

 

Liverspots, wrinkles, osteoperosis, all symptoms of similiar problems.

Cancer is the same.

 

http://www.cancerquest.org/index.cfm?page=2405

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×