| 73Q Music Videos | Vote On Clips | Submit | Login   |

Reddit Digg Stumble Facebook
Desc:Homeopath and crazyman John Benneth's first incoherent attack on science based medicine.
Category:Religious, Science & Technology
Tags:medicine, homoeopathy, American Holocaust, John Benneth
Submitted:Simian Pride
Date:04/05/10
Views:965
Rating:
View Ratings
Register to vote for this video

People Who Liked This Video Also Liked:
Bettie Page 'Hip Shake'
Richard Dawkins - The Enemies of Reason
Pumaman Theme
Samurai Spirits (or Showdown) Zero finishing moves
Canadian Yelling at Chinese Train Ticket Agency
Comcast Xfinity's repair trucks may have caused multiple slide offs and collision.
Scientist Man Analyzes Ghostbusters (2016)
Ted Nugent Guitar Lesson
I have a bad case of diarrhea
Gay Cat Marriage Is Legal!!!
Comment count is 8
chumbucket
nothing interesting other than "People Who Liked This Video Also Liked: Rev. Ricky: Evolution Laser Vagina Miami Vice"
Slagathor
I hate homeopathy. Where's my payments from big pharma?
Ersatz
You only get the money from the pharmaceutical industry if you can prove it will benefit you.

You can get a payoff from the homeopathic industry without proof, but the payoff is a bag that used to have money in it.

Robin Kestrel
Novella responds "I will ignore the bulk of Benneth’s personal libel – suffice to say it is beneath contempt. He does make an attempt at an evidence-based argument, but he completely botches it. He argues that there are many studies showing an effect for homeopathic remedies on plants, animals, and cells in culture. This, he argues, rules out the placebo effect.

This is both wrong and misleading. First, Benneth mischaracterizes the scientific argument as – because homeopathy cannot work any study showing an effect is due either to the placebo effect, fraud, or incompetence. I would add bias and chance, but further this is an oversimplification of the scientific position – the conclusion that homeopathy does not work is based both on the lack of plausibility and the poor quality and overall negative nature of the empirical evidence.

Benneth then makes a patently illogical argument – that because the placebo effect is ruled out (false premise) that the critics of homeopathy are wrong. But what about fraud (as with Jacques Benveniste’s lab), incompetence, bias, and chance? This is why we do not cherry pick, but look for a pattern of reproducibility – something which is lacking with homeopathy.

Let us also look further at the placebo claim – this is one I frequently hear. This is a simplistic misconception about the placebo effect, that it is entirely a mind-over-matter result of expectation. In fact, as it is operationally defined in medical trials, placebo effects can include anything other than a physiological response to the treatment, including observer expectation. Someone has to be observing the plants, cells, or animals and their bias counts too.

And, after reviewing the published studies, I do not accept the premise that the evidence supports the efficacy of homeopathy in treating plants. The literature shows mostly small and uncontrolled studies – no solid reproducible effects. Certainly nothing that would justify rewriting the physics textbooks."
kingofthenothing
hooray for YouTube and pathological science.
Xenocide
You have a degree in baloney!
(fires water cannon)
voodoo_pork
^These are for you.

StanleyPain
I'm not even going to Wiki this guy....lemme guess, he isn't certified in anything and probably has an education in something not related to medicine.
Register or login To Post a Comment







Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement