en:misc:talk-saine-novella
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
en:misc:talk-saine-novella [2013/04/15 10:47] legatum |
en:misc:talk-saine-novella [2018/07/24 11:04] (current) legatum old revision restored (2013/06/05 07:21) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| {{anchor:s2}} | {{anchor:s2}} | ||
| This is a transcription of a [[http://mediasite.uchc.edu/mediasite41/Play/f45177db9279460797ffe70714a3f5611d|video]] of a talk on homeopathy that took place on the premises of the University of Connecticut, March 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2013. The topic of the talk was //Homeopathy: Great Medicine or Dangerous Pseudoscience?//, the opponents were Dr. André Saine and Dr. Steven Novella. | This is a transcription of a [[http://mediasite.uchc.edu/mediasite41/Play/f45177db9279460797ffe70714a3f5611d|video]] of a talk on homeopathy that took place on the premises of the University of Connecticut, March 22<sup>nd</sup>, 2013. The topic of the talk was //Homeopathy: Great Medicine or Dangerous Pseudoscience?//, the opponents were Dr. André Saine and Dr. Steven Novella. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Following the debate they both agreed to ask each other a question monthly, with the obligation that these Q&A will be posted on their mutual websites. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[en:misc:talk-saine-novella-question01|Question 1 from Dr. Steven Novella to Dr. André Saine]] | ||
| <WRAP center round info 60%> | <WRAP center round info 60%> | ||
| Some minor changes to the order of words have occasionally been made to make this transcription grammatically correct and easier to read. | Some minor changes to the order of words have occasionally been made to make this transcription grammatically correct and easier to read. | ||
| </WRAP> | </WRAP> | ||
| - | |||
| ===== Introduction ===== | ===== Introduction ===== | ||
| Line 461: | Line 464: | ||
| Today, I presented research clearly establishing that the process of serial dilutions and succussion used in homeopathy results in durable and measurable changes in the solutions, therefore supporting the plausibility of UMPs and making it clear that homeopathy can be investigated like any other natural phenomena and completely discredit such blatant statement that 'it doesn’t work because it can’t work'. | Today, I presented research clearly establishing that the process of serial dilutions and succussion used in homeopathy results in durable and measurable changes in the solutions, therefore supporting the plausibility of UMPs and making it clear that homeopathy can be investigated like any other natural phenomena and completely discredit such blatant statement that 'it doesn’t work because it can’t work'. | ||
| - | I also presented basic research //in vitro// and so on. Skeptics carry a great responsibility as for more than 200 years they have stalled scientific progress in one of the most important branches of human endeavors. I hope this is only the beginning of discussion between homeopaths and skeptics. As I said earlier, true scientists should come to the same conclusion as long as they stick to facts and use sound reasoning. | + | I also presented basic research //in vitro// and [plant research showing that UMPs can trigger physiological response and finally I have summarized the clinical, observational and epidemiological research showing the efficacy and real world effectiveness of homeopathy. What more will it take for the scientific community to recognize the validity of homeopathy? |
| + | However, don’t be surprised if skeptics don’t change their view on homeopathy despite the overwhelming evidence in its favor as they are so entrenched in their belief that homeopathy doesn’t work, that it can’t work. | ||
| + | |||
| + | As Goethe said, "You see only what you know." | ||
| + | |||
| + | They have created, for more than 200 years, a giant strawman, by their flagrant misrepresentation of homeopathy, which greatly invalidates all their arguments.]((Due to time constraint, this part of Dr. Saine's written conclusion was skipped during the debate; with his permission, it was included in this transcription)) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Skeptics carry a great responsibility as for more than 200 years they have stalled scientific progress in one of the most important branches of human endeavors. I hope this is only the beginning of discussion between homeopaths and skeptics. As I said earlier, true scientists should come to the same conclusion as long as they stick to facts and use sound reasoning. | ||
| Skeptics are not going come out of the deep hole they have dug themselves and for humanity -- unless they can be self-critical like true scientists. Thank you, thank you, thank you! (audience clapping) | Skeptics are not going come out of the deep hole they have dug themselves and for humanity -- unless they can be self-critical like true scientists. Thank you, thank you, thank you! (audience clapping) | ||
en/misc/talk-saine-novella.1366022838.txt.gz · Last modified: 2013/04/15 10:47 by legatum
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
