08 Apr 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnYes, but did I say that? I am interested in the placebo effect -- after all, it seems to work (refer back to the Prozac article, or studies on homeopathy). "It doesn't really work, it's a placebo" -- well, can't we bottle it? Why not sell a universal panacea called Placebo that cures everything? It might do remarkably well.
Someone attributing a cure to something other than what actually cured them isn't the placebo effect. If I take an antibiotic for an infection and scratch my head twice a day and say "Well, scratching my head cured my infection" - that's not the placebo effect, that's me attributing the wrong factor to what happened.
I don't know how much research int ...[text shortened]... dians be obliged to respect everything? What ridiculous source do you have for that crap?
As for my 'crap' -- I'm making fun of you based on a stereotype of 'nice' Canadians.
I'm genuinely curious where your perception that 'religious cons' get a free ride compared to 'science cons' comes from. I mean, where I live, I don't see that.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI believed prozac was tested and effective, yes, partly because of a belief in science. The ways prozac were found to be ineffective were exactly due to science - hence my belief is affirmed even by its dismissal as being effective.
That is kind of the point. You were quite convinced that Prozac was 'tested and effective' until you read that article, weren't you? Why?
Problem is pure science is invariably corrupted when it's put at the service of the profit motive (Mammon 🙂 ).
Speaking of tumours -- did you say you know of a pill, or anything, that will make them go away?
We all do trust people and have to - we all can't be experts in medicine, etc. We bring our cars to mechanics because we know they are trained to fix cars. We don't give our cars gas with a little homeopathic pill and tell it "You'll get a better alternator now" to fix it.
I am no doctor, nor a medical expert. Through a quick google search I found this:
http://www.seattlecca.org/patientsandfamilies/pediatricCare/pediatricCancer/BrainCancer/Treatment/
Plus others.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnA 50% cure rate is better than expected, but I hope it gets much better.
I believed prozac was tested and effective, yes, partly because of a belief in science. The ways prozac were found to be ineffective were exactly due to science - hence my belief is affirmed even by its dismissal as being effective.
We all do trust people and have to - we all can't be experts in medicine, etc. We bring our cars to mechanics because ...[text shortened]... rg/patientsandfamilies/pediatricCare/pediatricCancer/BrainCancer/Treatment/
Plus others.
Look, I'm not knocking the achievements of science. It's just that it's a servant, not a master, and servants do what their masters tell them.
My cancer Google search brought up the issue of carcinogenic cell phones. Funny how there's not been the slightest suspicion of a move to ban them. Some things are truly sacrosanct.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnActually a lot of research has been done and is being done and it most definitely is a valuable cure. In fact, for a surprisingly large percentage of diseases, it is the best cure to date.
I don't know how much research into the placebo effect is being done, I think it might be worthwhile to do some, but not because it's a valuable cure.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageScience is a process and it's currently the best process we have to differentiate things that work from things that don't work. If people abuse the process then things won't work as they should.
My cancer Google search brought up the issue of carcinogenic cell phones. Funny how there's not been the slightest suspicion of a move to ban them. Some things are truly sacrosanct.
From what I've read, there hasn't been any legitimate conclusive evidence linking cell phones and cancer.
I know there have been claims and I don't doubt that you can find many claims on it, but the question still remains. I would definitely want to first see a true correlation - then they'd have to determine a causal relationship.
Frankly, there shouldn't be a move to ban cell phones - not yet. Not based on what I have seen since when I did a google search just now on "cancer caused by cell phones" I got about as many articles admitting that we don't know and those that say that there is no cause as those that say there are.
Of course, it would be silly to ban something based on a google search.. but the verdict on the effect of cell phones is really still out.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadI know there has been already, but I'm curious as to which diseases you're referring to?
Actually a lot of research has been done and is being done and it most definitely is a valuable cure. In fact, for a surprisingly large percentage of diseases, it is the best cure to date.
I know I've read that some doctors have admitted to giving their patients a placebo when they suspect their issues are psychological rather than actually physical.
However, for most physical ailments, a placebo affect just won't cut it outside of raising the person's spirits - which does help.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI remembered that I never responded to this.
I'm genuinely curious where your perception that 'religious cons' get a free ride compared to 'science cons' comes from. I mean, where I live, I don't see that.
I believe the article that I posted shows that at least in that state this changed, but it mentions that there was a "religious exception" that had been removed.
I think religious reasons are getting less of a free ride as we go. I do get from people I've met in real life and on the inter-web that a lot of people seem to make fun of the ridiculous "new-age" crap, but then they suddenly understand why someone might use a faith-based cure even if they wouldn't.
I know that's not scientific at all, but it is the impression I get.
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by PsychoPawnThe placebo effect does work for almost all diseases. I am not saying it is an instant cure, I am saying that it helps. I think the placebo effect has a lot to do with the raising of the persons spirits that you mention and that it helps with almost all ailments.
I know there has been already, but I'm curious as to which diseases you're referring to?
However, for most physical ailments, a placebo affect just won't cut it outside of raising the person's spirits - which does help.
Most doctors know that a patient gains some significant benefit just by visiting and talking to a doctor.
The human body is capable of healing itself to a very high degree.
Many diseases are very effectively cured or treated by direct treatment eg malaria, tuberculosis, cancer, many bacterial diseases and in most cases treatment is essential ie the patient will die or get worse without treatment.
However there are many diseases - the common cold for instance - for which we do not have an outright cure, but the medication mostly assists the body to fight off the infection, or simply reduces the symptoms while the body does the actual healing.
With HIV in the past in Zambia, being told you were HIV positive was considered a death sentence by most people. The result was that a lot of people died soon after discovering their status. Nowadays, simply because there is treatment available, people are living much longer without treatment!
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadReminds me of a study I read about recently: the condition of heart patients told they were being prayed for worsened.
With HIV in the past in Zambia, being told you were HIV positive was considered a death sentence by most people. The result was that a lot of people died soon after discovering their status. Nowadays, simply because there is treatment available, people are living much longer without treatment!
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageDo you think that was because they worried more (why do I need prayers?) or because they thought is was in Gods hands now and stopped trying?
Reminds me of a study I read about recently: the condition of heart patients told they were being prayed for worsened.
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think it supports my point that even with something as serious as heart problems that probably all required medical treatment and / or surgery, the placebo effect is still an important factor and can make a significant difference in the treatment.
The former.
The placebo effect is not just about taking a pill filled with chalk and somehow magically being cured by the chalk. It is about convincing a patient that they are being treated and will get better. This effect can be achieved by empty pills as well as other means including the right attitude from the doctor and family members and friends. I suspect that even prayer by the right people in the right way would not necessarily have the same effect as the one you described.
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadWe accept life within the womb can be done away with, we accept in
I agree. But his point was:
Originally posted by PsychoPawn
[b]The problem is that our society respects faith more than things like magnetic therapy, even though they are both equally (in)effective in treating ailments.
You see a nut who believes in God is given more tolerance for nutty behavior than us atheist nuts.[/b]
some states that people can just end their own lives for whatever
reason they have, we accept a lot of things and reject many too.
You have the perfect balance in mind on where humanity can and
cannot make up its own mind on what is and is not important? If you
can tell me why your views should be pushed againsts anothers
because it does not suit your personal tastes I'd like to read your
arguments.
Kelly