Talk:List of scientifically controlled double blind studies which have conclusively demonstrated the efficacy of homeopathy

From RationalWiki

Contents 1 Molecular memory of water 2 tumbleweeds 3 Who would pay for this study? 4 Homeopathic vets 5 Well that explains why my internet has been so sluggish today

[edit] Molecular memory of water

Here is your proof and it is scientific http://br.geocities.com/criticandokardec/benveniste01.pdf. Excuse me why I "vigorous" shake my bottled water, Lol.-- ^{I am the Alpha}TimS_{and the Omega!}. 15:43, 17 October 2007 (EDT)

I'd argue we don't need "conclusively" as much as "weren't invalidated by later studies"...but that's wordy.--PalMD^-Goatspeed! 15:42, 26 July 2007 (CDT)

It's wordy anyway Doc. But I wanted to remove wiggle room for some that might have shown a marginal advantage over placebo. But if you want to improve it please go ahead. --Bob_M (talk) 15:45, 26 July 2007 (CDT)

Might get a visit from sshh you know who. KEEP^quiet! 16:16, 26 July 2007 (CDT)

Nice article, shame about the title KEEP^quiet! 16:18, 26 July 2007 (CDT)

Yes, it at least needs a lot less caps. How about "(List of )scientific proofs for the efficacy of homepathy"? The part in parens is optional I think. human^{be in} 18:27, 9 September 2007 (CDT)

[edit] tumbleweeds

Nice one!!! We should have a template that includes crickets chirping an tumbleweeds blowing around... human^{be in} 18:33, 9 September 2007 (CDT)

[edit] Who would pay for this study?

How about a list of double blind studies on homeopath, whether or not efficacy was demonstrated.

Double blind studies cost money. Who is going to pay for this? Heart♥Gold^{Swarm like a hive} 17:11, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

Presumably, someone who doesn't want homeopathy considered a pseudoscience. --Kels 17:36, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

Such studies have been carried out. They have not shown any benefit for homeopathy.--Bob_M (talk) 01:32, 30 July 2007 (CDT)

This site is hilarious. You guys not only present the facts, but in an entertaining manner. Bravo. ^{— Unsigned, by: 99.235.46.169 / welcome this user / contribs}

Thank you. We try. --RA ^sflm 23:21, 24 February 2008 (EST)

I protest, until you have gone through all existing scientifically controlled double blind studies concerning all topics, and present explanations as to why they do not conclusively demonstrate the efficacy of Homeopathy, this is not a fact. --84.109.54.156 17:03, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Additionally, are we REALLY sure the Holocaust happened? Until we have gone through every photo taken during World War 2 and all documents, we can't conclusively demonstrate the efficacy of the Holocaust, this is not a fact.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 17:06, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

ARRGHHH!!!! (facepalm, facepalm, facedesk). There is no requirement in science for "100% disprove-ism". The null hypothesis in any good study of homeopathy should run along the lines of "homeopathy will have no effect on (useful operational health measure)." The null hypothesis will either be supported or non-supported by the data. Also, Bayesian analysis must be applied, especially given that the theory behind homeopathy is so damned improbable. At this point, given the data, and the lack of plausibility, it's pretty damned clear that homeopathy is a bunch of bullshit.-- -PalMD ^{--4 out of 5 doctors recommend RW for gas pain} 17:17, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

The lancet did a meta analysis in 2006 and came up with no effect above placebo.--Bob^{bing up} 17:20, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Actually, now that I think about it, there are thousands of tribal religions. We need to put disclaimers about inaccuracy on our atheism page until we have reviewed each religion's claims for validity, until we can conclusively demonstrate the efficacy of atheism in each instance.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia ruat coelum} 17:21, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Good point. We need to examine all the fairy data as well before we dismiss it! Or perhaps we should suggest that it it the people who are presenting these remarkable ideas who have the obligation to present the remarkable evidence --Bob^{bing up} 17:33, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, we do have a rather comprehensive (though far from complete) list of gods that atheists and Christians don't believe in... ħuman 20:53, 1 July 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Homeopathic vets

When Homeopathic vets, of whom there are a growing number, put an animal down, do they use terribly small gun or an infinitessimal dose of something completely harmless?Simon 20:02, 15 December 2008 (EST)

Hehe. I've heard radio ads for them on my liberal talk radio... they dilute the lead 10X300 and hold it near the animal's head... no, wait, homeopathy cures all, they never have to put down an aminal! ħuman 20:41, 15 December 2008 (EST)

[edit] Well that explains why my internet has been so sluggish today

Reddit link to this site got picked up, largest single day traffic spike we have ever had. About three times what the Lenski debacle hit us with. Good news is the site didn't crash! tmtoulouse 05:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

International coverage :). 216.221.87.112 21:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear goat. -- 21:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I wondered what it was - the slow down started last night, I think. What's funny is that this is probably the shortest article on RW! It's only four words longer than its title. Cool. ħuman 21:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, its been a pretty significant traffic spike, the fact that we are up and running still and not ground to a halt is a testament to moving to a private server as well as the hard work Nx put in making sure that the caching system worked to keep the processors free. tmtoulouse 21:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)