• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Homoeopathy on the NHS

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #41
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    Mich explains it better.

    doesn't begin to but never mind...it's sunny outside.

    Comment


      #42
      Originally posted by FSM with Cheddar View Post
      That's not diluted enough. It should be the equivalent of 1 drop in the Atlantic ocean.
      IIRC its more than that - one drop in more water than all the water on the earth put together? And it has to be pure water too.
      "Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. "


      Thomas Jefferson

      Comment


        #43
        Those who slag off the pharma companies need to understand that it is a high risk (financially) to develop drugs due to the various regulatory hurdles involved. It usually takes several years and costs billions to bring a drug to the market. So you can't blame them for wanting a return on investment.

        In addition, there is a market incentive to develop drugs that will benefit the largest number of people as these generate the most revenue.

        The system is not perfect by any means, but the drugs developed so far have prolonged and enhanced human lives immeasurably over the last few decades. For example a diabetic can now expect to live to a ripe old age. As recently as our grand parents' era, a diabetic would not live beyond their 40s.
        Hard Brexit now!
        #prayfornodeal

        Comment


          #44
          Originally posted by sasguru View Post
          Those who slag off the pharma companies need to understand that it is a high risk (financially) to develop drugs due to the various regulatory hurdles involved. It usually takes several years and costs billions to bring a drug to the market. So you can't blame them for wanting a return on investment.

          In addition, there is a market incentive to develop drugs that will benefit the largest number of people as these generate the most revenue.

          The system is not perfect by any means, but the drugs developed so far have prolonged and enhanced human lives immeasurably over the last few decades. For example a diabetic can now expect to live to a ripe old age. As recently as our grand parents' era, a diabetic would not live beyond their 40s.
          Case in point is the new "wonder pill" all over the news, everyone is raving about it but the drug companies are staying well clear. Research has been carried out but with the demand expected to exceed supply, nobody wants to get their hands burnt if there are any "problems"
          Who has time? Who has time? But then if we do not ever take time, how can we ever have time?

          Comment


            #45
            Originally posted by stingman123 View Post
            Case in point is the new "wonder pill" all over the news, everyone is raving about it but the drug companies are staying well clear. Research has been carried out but with the demand expected to exceed supply, nobody wants to get their hands burnt if there are any "problems"
            What wonder pill?
            Hard Brexit now!
            #prayfornodeal

            Comment


              #46
              Originally posted by sasguru View Post
              What wonder pill?
              This one - "The Polypill"

              http://www.nursingtimes.net/whats-ne...007687.article


              Heart attacks and strokes could be cut by half through the use of a ‘polypill’, which contains a mixture of five different drugs, research has said.


              Scientists found that if the ‘magic bullet’ pill, called Polycap, was given to a population of healthy adults with just one factor, like raised blood pressure, smoking or obesity, the number of cardiovascular problems, including strokes and heart attacks, could plummet.

              Professor Malcolm Law, from the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine in London, said a polypill would be more affordable and could reduce the cost of doctors’ appointments, blood and cholesterol tests, and treatment.

              ‘These drugs are off-patent and cost pennies,’ said Professor Law. ‘You might be talking in terms of 50p a day. There’s no way its going to drain resources,’ he said.

              The researchers in India did not look at death rates, but it was the most in depth study of the pill to date. More than 2,000 people aged between 40 and 80 were studied.

              Each year almost 200,000 Britons are killed by diseases in the heart and arteries. One in five of all deaths before age 75 in men and 10% in women are due to cardiovascular disease.
              Who has time? Who has time? But then if we do not ever take time, how can we ever have time?

              Comment


                #47
                Watch out aTw will come on in a min and regale you with the merits of homeopathy.

                Have mentioned this before, but a few years back I went to what I thought was a proper private clinic for an allegy test due to persistent mouth ulcers over a few years and it turned out to be some ridiculous crank new age thing and I got these stupid homeopothy tablets. Total nonsense, yet bizarely the condition immediately improved. Couldn't be in the mind as I thought it was all total cods. Coincidence?

                New Scientist has recently suggested it might not all be such crud as previously thought:

                http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1532
                bloggoth

                If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
                John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

                Comment


                  #48
                  Originally posted by sasguru View Post
                  Those who slag off the pharma companies need to understand that it is a high risk (financially) to develop drugs due to the various regulatory hurdles involved. It usually takes several years and costs billions to bring a drug to the market. So you can't blame them for wanting a return on investment.

                  In addition, there is a market incentive to develop drugs that will benefit the largest number of people as these generate the most revenue.

                  The system is not perfect by any means, but the drugs developed so far have prolonged and enhanced human lives immeasurably over the last few decades. For example a diabetic can now expect to live to a ripe old age. As recently as our grand parents' era, a diabetic would not live beyond their 40s.
                  Naivety beyond belief.

                  I guess the scandals of drug companies releasing drugs after assessing that the profit from releasing a drug would outweigh the cost of law suits and bad publicity as a result....or withholding details of side effects....or illegal practice in clinical trials, are all figments of peoples' imagination???

                  I was working for a certain German pharmaceutical company when one such scandal hit (no prizes for guessing which), so I know what I am talking about. If you seriously think pharmaceutical companies are ethical (without being forced to be), you sir are talking out of your backside.

                  Think on this. There is no market incentive for curing something. There is huge market incentive for developing a drug that alleviates symptoms, but that have to be taken over a long period - especially if you have to take another drug that alleviates the side effects of taking that drug.
                  Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus

                  Comment


                    #49
                    By the way, there's a difference between homeopathy and herbal/natural remedies (which can contain compounds which actually help cure you).

                    Nice article on homeopathy here:

                    http://arstechnica.com/science/news/...homeopathy.ars

                    Comment


                      #50
                      New Scientist doesn't deserve to have the word "Scientist" in it's title at the moment.

                      At best, they should put the word pseudo in front of it. But I think a better title would be New Misleader.

                      They have been deliberately releasing misleading and headline grabbing articles, which bare little relevance to the scientific facts.
                      Originally posted by cailin maith
                      Hang on - there is actually a place called Cheddar??

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X