So, does homeopathy actually work?

The big plus with homeopathy—much like Ayurveda—is that it’s holistic and doesn't come with side effects.
Like I've mentioned before, it’s particularly effective for various chronic conditions
(especially respiratory issues), and unlike antibiotics, it won't mess with your other bodily systems. If you're dealing with something acute, sure, you might need antibiotics, but using homeopathic remedies before or after can help stabilize the system...

shadowgardener12 said:Homeopathy includes drops and various other preparations that are mostly administered orally.

🙂

In conventional medicine, we have tablets, lozenges, capsules, syrups... blah, blah, blah. And notice how many different colors they come in. 😁
Oh, and my dad is stronger than yours, too. 😬

Since we are supposedly engaged in a "constructive" debate,

why don't you provide just one single example where a homeopathic method holds an actual advantage over conventional medicine? And please, provide a logical explanation for it.

I previously cited a method borrowed from homeopathy that was integrated into mainstream medicine—one which, by the way, is currently most effective at boosting a doctor's profit margins. I mentioned that because you specifically asked for it (in one of your earlier posts).

shadowgardener12 said:The upside to homeopathy is that, much like Ayurveda, it works holistically without any side effects.

This "hyposensitization" nonsense—this supposed homeopathic method—actually carries nasty, dangerous side effects. It can trigger anaphylactic shock. 🙂

granitebadger25 said:🙂

Standard medicine comes in all sorts of forms—pills, lozenges, capsules, syrups... whatever. You see them in every color imaginable 😁
And hey, my dad is tougher than your dad 😬

... I only brought it up because you guys were looking for it (in an earlier thread)

Oh really? 😁 That's common knowledge... why bring up pills and syrups now?
I don't have time to waste on nonsense like "my dad is tougher than yours." 👍
Haha... unbelievable.
Clearly you're just some spoiled kid, bringing up your daddy alongside a bunch of other random, unrelated points. Maybe that's your level. Mine isn't.

"along with a whole bunch of other things that just don't make any sense... maybe that's just where you're at, because it certainly isn't where I am."

So now you're back at it again, either bragging about it or whining about it... who knows anymore.🙂 🙂

@Jimmy

So, Jimmy, did you actually get a chance to read that article summary I linked? Yes, you did? No, you didn't?

shadowgardener12 said:It’s pretty obvious you’re just some spoiled brat, especially since you keep bringing up your dad alongside a bunch of other totally irrelevant points. Maybe that’s just where you operate, because it certainly isn't my level.

Is this really the standard for all homeopathy supporters?

shadowfalcon33 said:Is this really the standard for all homeopathy supporters?

what do you think?
nah, your true colors are showing pretty clearly over on that other health thread.
👍

this was nothing more than a perfect description of granitebadger25's style... 😉

shadowgardener12 said:You’re clearly just another spoiled little brat...

Oh, wow, shadowgardener12, that is hands down the nicest compliment I've received on this entire board. 😘 😁

By the way, regarding my "style"—I shouldn't have to explain that it's just me poking fun at "Dad," right? Honestly, driftinggull13 does it to me all the time. 😁

And what else am I supposed to do when every single time I try to start a real discussion, you just resort to an ad hominem attack?
👋

granitebadger25 said:Every single time I try to have a discussion, you just resort to ad hominem attacks.

And what other kind should I use? 🤣

shadowfalcon33 said:What other option would there even be? 🤣

shadowfalcon33, you’re acting like just another spoiled brat yourself. 😍 😁

Seriously, shadowfalcon33 and driftinggull13... you hear about some study being done somewhere in the world and suddenly act shocked that things aren't working out here... You skim one paper from some random source and think you've unlocked all the secrets of the universe... meanwhile, you haven't seen a damn thing in reality.
I have no idea where you guys even found those studies...
👍

shadowgardener12 said:Oh come on, shadowfalcon33 and driftinggull13... you guys hear about some study being done out in the big wide world and suddenly you're shocked that we don't have all those answers right here! You stumble upon one single paper from somewhere and suddenly you think you've mastered all the wisdom in the universe... meanwhile, you haven't seen a damn thing of what's actually happening globally.
I honestly have no clue where you two even found such nonsense...
👍

How could I not know? It's because we live in this tiny little bubble. You clearly forgot what you wrote yourself. When someone writes as much "brilliance" as you do, it’s easy to lose track of all that supposed genius you've been spewing. This isn't just one study, it's like the tenth one by now, but hey, what does it matter, right? Even if there were 110 of them, the truly smart people would always be able to tell what's real and what's garbage... the people who actually lived in the real world, not folks from some tiny little social circle, they understand how things work... 😉 .

Unfortunately, that's just how it goes. People like me try to push for a little progress, but of course... there’s always someone ready to jump to the front of the line to complain. Just a bunch of reactionary types. It's the stuff we don't understand that's actually dangerous. And we all know why... 😁

shadowgardener12 said:Come on, shadowfalcon33 and driftinggull13... you hear about some study being done somewhere else in the world and suddenly you're shocked when things don't work out here! You skim one random study and think you've mastered all the wisdom in the universe, even though you haven't seen a lick of real-world evidence.
I have no idea where you two picked up such nonsense...

It seems I can take the answer to my question as a "no." So, you haven't actually read it; you just assume it's wrong.
Actually, if you had bothered to read it, you would see we are talking about 110 different research pairs. 🙂

On a completely different note—if you're going to write in a regional dialect, please at least learn how to do it properly instead of being so half-hearted about it. Oops! I guess that's just your standard style!

shadowgardener12 said:then people like me try to bring a little bit of

Kaj, were you on some union field trip or something, wondering why the rest of the big wide world works the way it does?

Whoa... 110 pairs!
Have you even heard of pre-selection? Or study calibration? If you haven't, then you've clearly never actually run a study before.
Once you show me a few studies from the States, maybe I'll consider looking into it...

Man, honestly... what a total mess, there’s just such a massive language barrier here. It’s not like anyone actually masters a second language perfectly, you know?
I mean, they’re out here speaking Mexican to shadowfalcon33 just so that shadowgardener12 can follow along... 😉

shadowgardener12 said:Have you even heard of preselection? Or study calibration? If you haven't, then you’ve clearly never actually worked on a study before.

I haven't heard of "study calibration"—that sounds like something only homeopathy enthusiasts would use.

As for preselection, I assume you're referring to "inclusion criteria"? Is that right? (So, you suspect they cherry-picked studies to suit their own narrative?) Fine, maybe there are issues there. But honestly, if you want to make a point, here’s an actual argument for you > Go read the abstract, get your hands on the full paper (any major US medical school library carries >), study it deeply, and then come back and say: "Sure, this looks fine, but there's a flaw in this specific part, or a problem with that methodology..." You get me? If you're so confident, write a letter to the editor or submit a commentary to a major American daily newspaper. Do something! That would actually support your case, wouldn't it?

And why on earth would a study from America matter to you specifically?

shadowfalcon33 said:I don't see why research coming out of America would matter to you?

I mean, it’s pretty obvious, right?

In the States, researchers are mostly doing alright—they're financially stable, they have access to independent funding for their big academic projects, and they aren't constantly looking over their shoulders worrying about being bought off by "evil Big Pharma"... you know, those types who might tweak their data just to please a donor. Meanwhile, out in other parts of the world, scientists are basically struggling just to stay afloat, always waiting on the next grant so they don't feel pressured to fudge their results just to survive...

man, shadowfalcon33, you really just don't get it... 🙄