Well?
A homeopath? Sounds like a gay axe murderer…
You’re not far off
I’ve tried it before. Never noticed that it worked in any way, and it seems pretty unlikely to me that it really does work. Can’t say I understand some people’s obsessive fear of a little superstition in the world though. As superstitions go, assuming it really doesn’t work at all, homeopathy is one of the most benign superstitions I can think of. Actually, it may be positive, if by believing in it people stay off the hard stuff and do what amounts to nothing instead.
If by hard stuff you mean real medicine, then I can’t see how you’d come to that conclusion.
I imagine (using the technical definition of “homeopathy”), the theory has some validity.
In an uncorrupted immune system (if you can find such a thing any more), antibodies are formed that basically match the antigens. But those same antibodies are not 100% restricted to only combating that exact antigen and nothing else. They attack anything “close enough”. Similarly with other aspects of health, like exercise, by introducing muscle building effects (which are efforts to weaken the muscles that they react counter to), other muscles besides the exact ones that were targeted get developed as well. The body tends to counteract by general category of problem.
The theory is that by taking the body to a little more extreme than any one ailment might be causing, the body will counter act sufficiently to destroy the ailment. Obviously that wouldn’t always be true. If someone was dieing from cyanide poisoning, giving the person something else to help take more oxygen out of his blood is certainly not going to help the situation.
So for the theory to work, it has to be a case of “if it doesn’t kill you, it will make you stronger”. There are many ailments that fit into that category. They basically function by encouraging the body to counteract the entire range of problems rather than merely attempt to target one exact problem at a time if that problem happen to be sensed as severe enough to create a reaction at all.
The government does it to society all the time - create a small problem so that big laws can be put into place for all time.
Not in all cases, that’s not what I meant to say. But the emphasis on more and more medicines, in practically any combination whatsoever, is unhealthy. Many good “conventional” doctors recognize this and tell people to try not taking so many medicines. There’s nothing crazy about it at all. People are addicted to taking anything and everything, all the time. It’s huge business for the pharmaceutical companies, but sure, let’s all gang up on homeopathy. It’s exactly the diversion these companies desire.
I don’t think homeopathy is really an answer. It’s more like fooling people into not wasting anti-biotics by making them drink a small amount of water.
I don’t think it’s really an answer either.
Homeopathy is more than that. But more importantly, those “minute doses” end up being nearly immeasurably small. They could not, under essentially any circumstances, bring about any effects. The idea of this dilution was (and still is) to bring out the spiritual essences of the compounds.
From skepdic: His method of treatment might seem very modern: Find the right drug for the illness. However, his medicines were not designed to help the body fight off infection or rebuild tissue, but to help the vital spirit work its magic.
The reason I ask this here, is that I can see how it might appeal to those more metaphysically inclined. I personally think that it is about the least beneficial (does nothing that a placebo wouldn’t do equally well) treatment plan for any disease, but that it is less directly harmful than many others.
Placebos cure mental illness all the time captain.
Homeopathy costs more than doing nothing.
What is being called “the spirit” is merely the “behavior” (that is all that the word “spirit” ever meant) or in this case, the counter-reaction that the body takes so as to become more immune.
Getting an immunity shot is that exact same thing.
He actually said “immaterial spirit”, which shits all over that silly idea.
“immaterial spirit” is every “spirit”.
Have you ever heard of a “material spirit” (other than in movies)?
Behavior is considered an “immaterial” thing, but of course such things depend entirely upon your epistemology.
What’s the “behavior” of penicillin? Move on, this isn’t going to work. You do it all the time and no one cares/agrees with you.
I called this guy being a ‘skeptic’ fanatic like last week. He is one of those people who has to be railing against some fringe topic or another. I haven’t found one post of his that is otherwise.
How about you fuck off if you don’t have anything to contribute?
Why am I even posting? You have ESP. Go ahead and read my mind to find out where to stick it. 
I remember a little while ago I posted this thread about how cannabis oil is a panacea (or close to it) and everyone responded with the same beat-to-shit colloquialisms.
Fast forward to now. Tommy Chung cures his cancer using the very method from the -same- guy I talked about.
My point? Most skeptics have literally no idea what they are talking about and think emotionally (“I feel like it would be impossible for something to cure cancer and me not know about it, so I will deny it”).
The same thing will happen with homeopathy. Eventually the secret (the cannabis oil thing was discovered by pharmaceutical corporations in the 20’s lol) behind how it should work will breach the public knowledge threshold.
That is assuming free (enough) communication such as what exists now continues for a while—which is quesionable.
Where there is smoke there is almost always a legitimate fire.