Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof - Or Any Proof...

This was posted by Anonymous in response to my post yesterday; I think it worth featuring:

It's interesting how skeptics always use the scientific / clinical trial approach when arguing against homeopathy; and now you've compared it to the idea that 400 years ago, we thought the earth was flat; but it never occurs to you that maybe science doesn't no everything about the properties of the universe or matter - for that matter - and that maybe clinical trials are limited by what science understands now?

Perhaps you could explain to me then why water, when frozen at different altitudes exhibits unique crystal structures - then when thawed and re-frozen at much lower or higher altitudes, it maintains the same original crystal structure? Perhaps you could explain why the ultra-violet spectrum water exhibits microscopically is unique based on the homeopathic substance present in the dilution?

The truth is, there are very good reasons why homeopathy doesn't work in clinical trials. The main one is that clinical trials don't work in homeopathy!

The fact is, homeopathy requires individualized diagnosis and treatment - it's not a one size fits all method. Equally important, it requires a completely different definition of the term "works". What works? How does it work? What to expect?

You're free to go on filling your body with chemicals and believing everything the pharmaceuticals are feeding you... keep drinking the cool-aid. Ultimately, what I'm suggesting is that you are the one with your head buried in the sand. You are the one ignorant of the facts.

------------

Anonymous: It’s not at all interesting that sceptics use the scientific / clinical trial method of testing – it’s eminently logical as that’s how we test claims. What’s really interesting is how the magic brigade persists in maintaining that magic defies testing. The argument that the test is not applicable to whatever brand of magic is being touted is a bit hackneyed and frankly intellectually bankrupt. It’s the favoured cry of the religious zealot.

Trials of efficacy have nothing to do with the applicability of science to what is known now. It’s binary – either it works (beyond placebo), or it doesn’t. It’s a basic double-blind, randomised trial and not some wild thought experiment from the outer realms of theoretical particle physics.

I have found nothing on t’internet about your ice crystals, so please point me in the right direction for the research; however, I fail to see the relevance. The ultra violet thing is, I presume, something to do with the paper by Manju Lata Rao, which has been refuted a number of times – see Dr. Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science blog for an example from 10 years ago. Seems not all was as it appeared and two graphs that were meant to be different (and the proof) were in fact the same when subsequently analysed. In essence, part of the result was faked, whether knowingly or unknowingly.

Those who promulgate nonsense have a habit of finding one initial paper that supports their thesis and then neglect to look at the mountain of follow-up research that fails to replicate the results of that single paper. It suits their purpose to use science when it supports their view, but ignore it when it doesn’t. It’s called bias and is a perfectly natural human condition.

I’m not particularly a fan of Big Pharma, as they have a lot of ethical questions to answer, but so do homeopaths and all who knowingly purvey sugar pills for profit or make unsubstantiated and potentially dangerous medical claims. Pharma does make big money, but given all the testing that has to be done the cost of developing drugs that are proven to save life and be safe is phenomenal. It can cost billions to develop a single drug and that cost has to be recouped at a profit in order to fund the next round of research. For every drug that makes the grade, hundreds or thousands fall by the wayside.

No-one in the UK can afford to criticise the cost of medication – we get charged £6 odd by the NHS for something that would cost you a fortune if paid for privately. Yes, it’s clawed back in tax, but it’s a drop in the ocean when shared amongst us all, rather than being levied solely on those in desperate need. Without Big Pharma you could say goodbye to any research into cures for cancer or AIDS and a lot of people would be dead long before their revised lifetime following treatment for diabetes, high cholesterol and high blood pressure.

Having said that, there is an argument to nationalise the big drug companies; however, government is spectacularly unwilling to do that as there would be an ethical conflict of interest when the research is being scrutinised by the same body that’s doing it – i.e. the government. In any case, innovation only thrives in a competitive environment, and we all know that the dead hand of nationalisation stifles any innovation. No drugs of any significance came from the former Soviet Union or China.

James Randi offered $1m to anyone who could prove homeopathy works. The prize has yet to be claimed, despite many attempts. Surely someone among all the practitioners can prove it works?

Science has never claimed to know everything – there are areas science will never penetrate; any scientist will tell you that. That’s why science exists – to push the boundaries of knowledge beyond their current limits. Sometimes science charges up blind alleys, sometimes there’s a paradigm shift. Many times the old guard conspire to prevent publication of stuff that refutes their long held views on which they established their reputation; however, the scientific method triumphs in the end.

The real mystery is why placebo works at all, and no-one has yet come up with the full answer. The placebo effect must not be dismissed, as it’s an important weapon in the medic’s arsenal; however, it must not be used as a first line of defence, as it only works in a small number of cases.

So – bring on the proof and I will believe. To date that has been conspicuously lacking. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof – or simply any proof beyond anecdote.

On another matter; yesterday I took possession of some clove flavoured e-juice for my e-cigarette. Heavenly and most excellent! Reminds me of Indonesian kretek cigarettes, to which I was addicted at one time.