Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

Wait!

Homeopaths are suggesting SMALL doses of arsenic!  But by their core doctrine, that would be EVEN MORE POWERFUL! 

/snark

Nevermind that the first "law" on that page looks an awful lot like sympathetic magic to me.

[NJW2000]

Well, the rule of minimum doses applies here, its true. Very important to use just so little arsenic it doesn't damage the organism, or else it will only cause the exact damage the illness was going to anyway.

RE Homeopathy: a friend of mine who I view as actually more knowledgeable, if less thoughtful, than I, surprised me with his views on herbal remedies/homeopathy. It was unclear, as he told me his mother was into both, quite what the situation was, but it transpired that USSR shit healthcare had lead to her learning a buncha "herbal remedies", which are apparently disgusting, and he felt as ineffective as homeopathy. While I'm sure proper-well funded and researched National Health Services will be superior to both, herbal remedies are just cures made from herbs, while scientology is alternative medicine, so has not been proved to/has been proved not too work, as far as I'm aware. Also, herbal remedies are often based on non-rigourous science done by amateurs, while homeopathy is just logically bollocks.

[wierd]

Herbalism is not the same as homeopathy at all.  Many herbal remedies have been found to be clinically effective. The problem with herbal preparations are manifold however:

1) Skill of practitioner is suspect. Very few skilled herbalist exist; nearly all adhere to some hokey pseudomagical doctrine instead of rigorous empiricism.
2) Dosage and potency are almost impossible to standardize.
3) Counterfeit/false herbal preparations abound!

So, while genuine cinnamon (Ceylon cinnamon) may be clinically useful in treating diabetes, you end up with people hawking the much cheaper "cinnamon" (Cinnamon Cassia, that causes liver damage) instead, and not even knowing, because of point number 1 above.

On top of that, they wont get the dosage right, because you cant guarantee the concentration of the active volatiles in the cinnamon bark used to make the preparation.

What eliminates all of those problems?

Regulations on compounding and drug safety.
Refinement of the active compound.
Standardized dosage preparations.

But then you have-- Dun dun dun-- MODERN MEDICINE!

[scrdest]

Well, the rule of minimum doses applies here, its true. Very important to use just so little arsenic it doesn't damage the organism, or else it will only cause the exact damage the illness was going to anyway.

Except that 100% depends on a naive and outdated view of how various toxins work.

In some cases, the logic is sound - after all, early vaccination operated on that principle before the advent of techniques to make it less of a 'CRITICAL FAILURE, you get sick earlier or at all!' crapshoot.

In others... it doesn't. Arsenic, for instance. What happens is that arsenic is chemically similar to phosphorus - which forms the backbone of the nucleic acids - enough to be 'mistaken' for phosphorus when nucleic acids are synthesized, except since it's also is quite a bit larger than phosphorus, so it causes the RNA to get stuck in the pores of the nucleus, meaning no proteins and so cell is kill, and in case of organisms, the export of proteins is halted and organism is thoroughly kill.

In extremely small doses, it's not *lethal* because the number of fucked up RNA is small enough that enough function is maintained and so the damage is within the tolerances, but it's still damage.

[Graknorke]

What happens is that arsenic is chemically similar to phosphorus - which forms the backbone of the nucleic acids - enough to be 'mistaken' for phosphorus when nucleic acids are synthesized, except since it's also is quite a bit larger than phosphorus, so it causes the RNA to get stuck in the pores of the nucleus, meaning no proteins and so cell is kill

I will never be able to view arsenic poisoning as anything but hilarious ever again. Thanks scrdest.

[scrdest]

What happens is that arsenic is chemically similar to phosphorus - which forms the backbone of the nucleic acids - enough to be 'mistaken' for phosphorus when nucleic acids are synthesized, except since it's also is quite a bit larger than phosphorus, so it causes the RNA to get stuck in the pores of the nucleus, meaning no proteins and so cell is kill

I will never be able to view arsenic poisoning as anything but hilarious ever again. Thanks scrdest.

Mission. Fucking. Accomplished.

[NJW2000]

Well, the rule of minimum doses applies here, its true. Very important to use just so little arsenic it doesn't damage the organism, or else it will only cause the exact damage the illness was going to anyway.

Except that 100% depends on a naive and outdated view of how various toxins work.

In some cases, the logic is sound - after all, early vaccination operated on that principle before the advent of techniques to make it less of a 'CRITICAL FAILURE, you get sick earlier or at all!' crapshoot.

In others... it doesn't. Arsenic, for instance. What happens is that arsenic is chemically similar to phosphorus - which forms the backbone of the nucleic acids - enough to be 'mistaken' for phosphorus when nucleic acids are synthesized, except since it's also is quite a bit larger than phosphorus, so it causes the RNA to get stuck in the pores of the nucleus, meaning no proteins and so cell is kill, and in case of organisms, the export of proteins is halted and organism is thoroughly kill.

In extremely small doses, it's not *lethal* because the number of fucked up RNA is small enough that enough function is maintained and so the damage is within the tolerances, but it's still damage.

Even when the quality of scientific explanation is very high, I'm sure that the rule of minimum doses does apply to explaining jokes, otherwise joke is kill

[scrdest]

Even when the quality of scientific explanation is very high, I'm sure that the rule of minimum doses does apply to explaining jokes, otherwise joke is kill

You have put me in a rather awkward position here.

With no offence intended, I did not see anything implying you were joking in the post to which I replied.

[Reelya]

I just randomly found out homeopathy advocates... advocate (for lack of a better word) using *arsenic* for chronic fatigue. I guess it would guarantee a long, long rest, but the dosage they use is way too low for that.

The "dosage" is zero. They take a small amount then dilute it to nothing, and claim this has strengthened the effect beyond belief, via some sort of magic. Make of that what you will. They're basically selling magical water that used to have something in it, but doesn't anymore, and claiming "water memory" holds the effect via magic.

Also, herbal remedies are often based on non-rigourous science done by amateurs, while homeopathy is just logically bollocks.

I'd separate bullshit modern hippie/wicca herbal treatments from traditional treatments. The traditional treatments often have something going for them, and it's where many of our modern medicines originated.

[Graknorke]

You should be careful around homeopathy, my aunt nearly overdosed on it. She drank a whole glass of water. Risky stuff.

[scrdest]

I just randomly found out homeopathy advocates... advocate (for lack of a better word) using *arsenic* for chronic fatigue. I guess it would guarantee a long, long rest, but the dosage they use is way too low for that.

The "dosage" is zero. They take a small amount then dilute it to nothing, and claim this has strengthened the effect beyond belief, via some sort of magic. Make of that what you will. They're basically selling magical water that used to have something in it, but doesn't anymore, and claiming "water memory" holds the effect via magic.

I think you missed the joke about the long rest and dosage being too low.

[MaximumZero]

You should be careful around homeopathy, my aunt nearly overdosed on it. She drank a whole glass of water. Risky stuff.

I wonder if that works with steak. Hmm...

[Descan]

I'd separate bullshit modern hippie/wicca herbal treatments from traditional treatments. The traditional treatments often have something going for them, and it's where many of our modern medicines originated.

Well, yes. But when I have a headache, I'm not going to chew on willow bark, I'm going to take an aspirin.

[Furtuka]

Also, herbal remedies are often based on non-rigourous science done by amateurs, while homeopathy is just logically bollocks.

I'd separate bullshit modern hippie/wicca herbal treatments from traditional treatments. The traditional treatments often have something going for them, and it's where many of our modern medicines originated.

This sooo much. Speaking as someone whose family has been selling and using traditional chinese/vietnamese herbal medicine for generations.

[wierd]

I dunno.  I distance myself from the Chinese herbal medical tradition because it too relies on hokey pseudo-magic.

Namely, the whole "Warming/cooling" (and various other paired opposites) theorem behind it. Saying something like "White melon is cooling, and thus good for fever" is nonsense to me.  Saying something like "FOO compound found in white melon has been found to suppress inflammatory response by the immune system, and thus is useful for treating fevers" is much better to me.

Outdated ideologies need to be put out to pasture, not enshrined.