Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells 
Author Message
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells


Quote:


> >> Meaning it's just water. Meaning it would be a physical impossibility
> >> for them to work in this Universe. Well, unless the disease was caused
> >> by thirsty.

> The publication doesn't look credible to me:
> http://www.***.com/ ~spandido/

> It doesn't even show on PubMedCentral (both publication and article).

> My conclusion still stands that H2O doesn't have memory.

Did you read all 7 pages from this study from the International Journal of
Oncology :
http://www.***.com/
Why don't you think it is credible? Most of their clinical studies in their
journal are strictly traditional oncology.
http://www.***.com/ ~spandido/IJO-March-05.htm

http://www.***.com/ ~spandido/IJO-February-05.htm
I suppose unless it is a US publication we should discredit it. I know it's
not on PubMedCentral, but even studies that are done here aren't always on
there. Not all homeopathic remedies are liquid, by the way. They also come
in tablets. Regardless, I'm just glad that the tumors shrunk because brain
cancer is a horrible disease.



Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:16:03 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:

> Ok, let me clarify. The paper didn't show that homeopathy works. It
> *might* have shown that certain substances, namely Ruta, work. For the
> paper to show that homeopathy works, they would have to perform two
> experiments, one with non-diluted Ruta (non-homeopathic) and the other
> with diluted Ruta (homeopathic). According to homeopathic faith, 1
> nanogram of diluted Ruta should be more potent that 1 nanogram of
> non-diluted Ruta. Now, if 1 nanogram of diluted Ruta worked and 1
> nanogram of non-diluted Ruta did not, then the experiment would have
> vindicated homeopathy claims. However, in the case of the referenced
> paper, this experiment didn't take place.

I would agree with you that water doesn't have memory, so
dilution to levels where there is nothing in typical
dosages except water, cannot work.

I would disagree with you that the logic shows homeopathy cannot
work.  Typical homeopathic dosages are not diluted to the
point where there is not even a single molecule present.
Therefore the dosages can indeed work, and this has
nothing at all to do with water not having memory.

As to studies, there have been a number of studies
of homeopathy done.  Sometimes they show that homeopathy
works by placebo effect.  Sometimes they show that
various homeopathic medicines work.

Right now, there is a "study du jour" around that
shows, yet again for the Nth time, that homeopathy
doesn't work.

But this study changes absolutely nothing.

For I am not willing to discount the fact that all "placebo
effect" studies are done by people with vested interests.
This is not open to argument -- if you are simply
unable to think independently and/or just don't have
any common sense, I am not interested in teaching how.

A third party study (with no vested interests either
way) would be more convincing to me.

Until such a study is available, the available facts,
such as the wide prevalance of homeopathy in various
countries, would indicate to me that it does work
in many instances.  That doesn't mean its theories
are all correct.  That just means it works in
many situations.

This is like chiropratic -- its theories may not be
correct.  That has nothing to do with whether its
practice works.

Homeopathic theories are not without any substance.
Vaccination is a homeopathic approach.  (Pre-treatment
in this case, with minute amounts of disease-causing
material.)  It's well known to work.



Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:42:58 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells
"This is not open to argument -- if you are simply unable to think
independently and/or just don't have any common sense, I am not interested
in teaching how."

And this is an example of being "open", no thanks.  Some people are so
open minded it goes in one ear and drains out theother.

"A third party study (with no vested interests either
way) would be more convincing to me."

What were the vested intrests of the most recent article saying there is
nothing to it?  The condition you mention is in principle impossible
making your notions forever safe.

"Until such a study is available, the available facts, such as the wide
prevalance of homeopathy in various countries, would indicate to me that
it does work in many instances.  That doesn't mean its theories are all
correct.  That just means it works in many situations."

And so is astrology.  Why didn't you say so in the first place, this kind
of proof nails it and it must be valid, after all, all those facts build
up over time and the lack of research in support becomes meaningless.



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 00:33:23 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:

> "This is not open to argument -- if you are simply unable to think
> independently and/or just don't have any common sense, I am not interested
> in teaching how."

> And this is an example of being "open", no thanks.  Some people are so
> open minded it goes in one ear and drains out theother.

You misunderstand "open-mindedness".  An open-minded individual
is open to valid arguments, keeping one's own preconceptions
open to being proved wrong.  Idiocies and wrong arguments
are not accepted as part of being "open".  In fact, an open-minded
individual is one that rejects ALL wrong arguments, whether
one's own or of others.

This was simply a statement of interest (despite the presence
of the keyword "open" that your knee-jerk response was keyed
off of!)  If you are unable to think independently and are
not motivated enough to try, or are not able to understand
the issues because of a total lack of experience with
the world and are not motivated enough to try to learn, I
am not motivated enough to discuss this with you.



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 03:12:40 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells
"You misunderstand "open-mindedness".  An open-minded individual
is open to valid arguments, keeping one's own preconceptions
open to being proved wrong.  Idiocies and wrong arguments
are not accepted as part of being "open".  In fact, an open-minded
individual is one that rejects ALL wrong arguments, whether
one's own or of others."

I understood perfectly, I thought a poke at an obvious closed mind on it's
own terms was amusing.  In the issue at hand of the cancer homopathetic
"cure", to be proven wrong was to show the article was an almost useless
bit of trash as far as science goes.  My claim that homopathetic gibberish
is false has yet to be shown wrong by anything shown here yet.

"If you are unable to think independently and are not motivated enough to
try, or are not able to understand the issues because of a total lack of
experience with the world and are not motivated enough to try to learn, I
am not motivated enough to discuss this with you."

Why didn't you say first thing I had met my academic and scientific
better,
it would have saved us much time.  Skip the arrogant posturing, where is
the beef about homopathetic truth claims?



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 03:54:16 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:

> >I would disagree with you that the logic shows homeopathy cannot
> >work.  Typical homeopathic dosages are not diluted to the
> >point where there is not even a single molecule present.

> The homeopaths would say that the more you dilute the more potency the
> thing would be.

Obviously, at some point "more dilutation" won't
work.  But it's possible that catalytic effects
may be at work in some cases, and larger amounts
of the material may hinder the catalytic effects.

Whatever the theory, in actual practice a homeopath
will give you a particular potency of the medicine,
and will not actually dilute it any more in order
to get you better faster!

So they don't really believe a 100 times more "potent"
medicine will actually work 100 times better or faster.

Therefore the usage of the word "potency" in homeopathy
is clearly not the same as we understand it in normal usage.
It may be nothing but a measurement word.



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:53:04 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:


>> Ok, let me clarify. The paper didn't show that homeopathy works. It
>> *might* have shown that certain substances, namely Ruta, work. For the
>> paper to show that homeopathy works, they would have to perform two
>> experiments, one with non-diluted Ruta (non-homeopathic) and the other
>> with diluted Ruta (homeopathic). According to homeopathic faith, 1
>> nanogram of diluted Ruta should be more potent that 1 nanogram of
>> non-diluted Ruta. Now, if 1 nanogram of diluted Ruta worked and 1
>> nanogram of non-diluted Ruta did not, then the experiment would have
>> vindicated homeopathy claims. However, in the case of the referenced
>> paper, this experiment didn't take place.

>I would agree with you that water doesn't have memory, so
>dilution to levels where there is nothing in typical
>dosages except water, cannot work.

>I would disagree with you that the logic shows homeopathy cannot
>work.  Typical homeopathic dosages are not diluted to the
>point where there is not even a single molecule present.

Yes, they are.  Anything over 24X or 12C is diluted to the point
where there's nothing left of the original.

Quote:
>Therefore the dosages can indeed work, and this has
>nothing at all to do with water not having memory.

They can if they're less than 24X/12C.  Many are not.  If something is
only 1X, I'd argue that calling it "homeopathic" is just perverse,
since a 1:10 dilution leaves plenty of the original present, but that
wasn't supposed to be a "potent" remedy in the original approach.

Quote:
>As to studies, there have been a number of studies
>of homeopathy done.  Sometimes they show that homeopathy
>works by placebo effect.  Sometimes they show that
>various homeopathic medicines work.

Well, they mostly show that the homeopathic medicines appear to work
better than placebo, with 95% probability.  I've yet to see a well-
done study that shows a really dramatic effect for the homeopathic
remedy, despite various testimonials.

Quote:
>Until such a study is available, the available facts, such as the
>wide prevalance of homeopathy in various countries, would indicate to
>me that it does work in many instances.  That doesn't mean its
>theories are all correct.  That just means it works in many
>situations.

The same argument can be made for astrology.  How could all those
astrologers stay in business if it didn't work???

Quote:
>This is like chiropratic -- its theories may not be correct.  That
>has nothing to do with whether its practice works.

True.  But its theories are almost certainly wrong.

Quote:
>Homeopathic theories are not without any substance.

Pun intended?

Quote:
>Vaccination is a homeopathic approach.

A popular claim, but basically false.

  -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
     These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
     "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
                                 -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:21:25 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:


>> >I would disagree with you that the logic shows homeopathy cannot
>> >work.  Typical homeopathic dosages are not diluted to the
>> >point where there is not even a single molecule present.

>> The homeopaths would say that the more you dilute the more potency the
>> thing would be.

>Obviously, at some point "more dilutation" won't work.  But it's
>possible that catalytic effects may be at work in some cases, and
>larger amounts of the material may hinder the catalytic effects.

What "catalytic effects?"  Are you positing a new mechanism for how
homeopathy should work?  On what basis?

In any event, your claim that at some point "more dilution won't work"
flies in the face of classical homeopathy, although I've read that
Hahnemann himself started to wonder about that after a while.

Quote:
>So they don't really believe a 100 times more "potent"
>medicine will actually work 100 times better or faster.

Not in that kind of linear relationship, but it's a foundation of
classical homeopathy that "more dilute" means "more potent."

  -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
     These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
     "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
                                 -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:24:04 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:

> >So they don't really believe a 100 times more "potent"
> >medicine will actually work 100 times better or faster.

> Not in that kind of linear relationship, but it's a foundation of
> classical homeopathy that "more dilute" means "more potent."

I am saying the word "potency" means something different in
this context, perhaps nothing more than a measurement of dilution.

Otherwise, a practitioner with a vial of medicine could
dump it in a bucket of water to treat thousands more
people at less expense.

But if "Arnica 30" (less dilute) is indicated, the practitioner
will not give you "Arnica 3000" (more dilute) to get
faster or better effects.

The "30" here just tells the practitioner what level
of dilution is to be used.  More dilute is not
better or faster.  Only more "potent", which
is a homeopathy-specific keyword, and not
"potent" as it is generally understood.



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:05:19 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:

> >Until such a study is available, the available facts, such as the
> >wide prevalance of homeopathy in various countries, would indicate to
> >me that it does work in many instances.  That doesn't mean its
> >theories are all correct.  That just means it works in many
> >situations.

> The same argument can be made for astrology.  How could all those
> astrologers stay in business if it didn't work???

Because at one point astrology did work!  Not
only that, it was EXTREMELY useful to the public.

How do you think people figured out the seasons
and when they should plow the fields and
when they should sow seeds and so forth?  They
used to ask the astrologers, and the
astrologers could give them the correct
answers.  The astrologers could even figure out
events like eclipses etc.

The people therefore developed faith that astrologers could
"predict the future".  This turned, typically, into
blind faith in the minds of the non-independently
thinking people.  They then started asking astrologers
for other kind of predictions.  The astrologers had
some money-hungry KOL types.  Hence astrology bifurcated
into astrology and astronomy, and thus a once
extremely useful vocation, now lingers on
uselessly in a very {*filter*}ed fashion.

[Hmmm, I wonder where I am seeing a similar
trajectory...]

Quote:
>Vaccination is a homeopathic approach.

> A popular claim, but basically false.

Why?  It uses minutes amounts of a substance that
causes symptoms similar to the disease itself,
a la homeopathy.

[And judging from typical messages in this
thread, I guess the success of vaccination has
proved all of physics wrong or something.]



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:41:11 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells
"The astrologers had some money-hungry KOL types.  Hence astrology
bifurcated into astrology and astronomy, and thus a once extremely useful
vocation, now lingers on uselessly in a very {*filter*}ed fashion."

To a degree correct, the difference was that astrology went down the path
of science.  Homopathetic "{*filter*}" is now a perversion of a faith based
medical model lacking even the most primitive scientific confirmation. The
bottom line in all this is where is the beef in it?  Going on about it in
various rhetorical fashions is not it's salvation, where is the
scientifically based research to support even one of it's truth claims?  
Can we focus on answering that question?



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:48:28 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells
Homopathetic truth claims find no salvation in this rhetorical tap
dancing.  Where is the scientific evidance which supports even one of it's
truth claims?  Shall we focus on answering that question?  Rearranging the
deck chairs as to meaning of "potent" on the hhomopatthetic titanic
affords no rescue.

"I am saying the word "potency" means something different in this context,
perhaps nothing more than a measurement of dilution.

Otherwise, a practitioner with a vial of medicine could dump it in a
bucket
of water to treat thousands more people at less expense.

But if "Arnica 30" (less dilute) is indicated, the practitioner will not
give you "Arnica 3000" (more dilute) to get faster or better effects.

The "30" here just tells the practitioner what level of dilution is to be
used.  More dilute is not better or faster.  Only more "potent", which is
a
homeopathy-specific keyword, and not "potent" as it is generally
understood."



Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:54:01 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells

Quote:

> "The astrologers had some money-hungry KOL types.  Hence astrology
> bifurcated into astrology and astronomy, and thus a once extremely useful
> vocation, now lingers on uselessly in a very {*filter*}ed fashion."

> To a degree correct, the difference was that astrology went down the path
> of science.  Homopathetic "{*filter*}" is now a perversion of a faith based
> medical model lacking even the most primitive scientific confirmation. The
> bottom line in all this is where is the beef in it?  Going on about it in
> various rhetorical fashions is not it's salvation, where is the
> scientifically based research to support even one of it's truth claims?
> Can we focus on answering that question?

There is a bunch of literature on both sides of this controversy.
If you are already closed minded about which side you will
fully trust and which side you will fully distrust, you can
hardly do an objective analysis, can you?


Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:52:52 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells
"There is a bunch of literature on both sides of this controversy. If you
are already closed minded about which side you will fully trust and which
side you will fully distrust, you can hardly do an objective analysis, can
you?"

I can't claim to know all that has been written, but what I have seen on
both sides is no contest at all.  In short the homopathetic camp has no
science to support it's truth claims.  If there is something in
contradiction to this I will be happy to review it.  It has nothing to do
with being "open" it has to do with a lack of science and failure to
support basic truth claims.  Science is not a public opinion poll where
one opinion is as good as another nor about how warm and fuzzyand trustful
it might make one feel.  It is about how well the evidence based on
standard research methods can continue to support what is claimed..  You
must have seen the recent review of homopathetic "research" that was done
to evaluate it's validity, shall we start with it as the specific focus of
this discussion?



Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:03:03 GMT
 Homeopathic Remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells
Where is the "scientific proof" that most of the {*filter*} your GP MD gives you
work?

Do you taek Aspirin or other analgesic for a headache? Where the proof for
your placebo pills to work? Aspirin is just a waste of money and you are a
pharm giant propaganda sucker. Where;s your proof?

Take your bullshit arguments and use them on your kids, {*filter*}.


Quote:
> Homopathetic truth claims find no salvation in this rhetorical tap
> dancing.  Where is the scientific evidance which supports even one of it's
> truth claims?  Shall we focus on answering that question?  Rearranging the
> deck chairs as to meaning of "potent" on the hhomopatthetic titanic
> affords no rescue.

> "I am saying the word "potency" means something different in this context,
> perhaps nothing more than a measurement of dilution.

> Otherwise, a practitioner with a vial of medicine could dump it in a
> bucket
> of water to treat thousands more people at less expense.

> But if "Arnica 30" (less dilute) is indicated, the practitioner will not
> give you "Arnica 3000" (more dilute) to get faster or better effects.

> The "30" here just tells the practitioner what level of dilution is to be
> used.  More dilute is not better or faster.  Only more "potent", which is
> a
> homeopathy-specific keyword, and not "potent" as it is generally
> understood."



Tue, 26 Feb 2008 06:39:06 GMT
 
 [ 194 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]

 Relevant Pages 

1. homeopathic remedy : Hot News. homeopathic remedy for mucus,homeopathic remedy for vomiting gastric distress,earache homeopathic remedy,homeopathic remedy 15 ch,sepia homeopathic remedy

2. Virus selectively kills p53-deficient cancer cells

3. Hot peppers selectively kill lung and pancreatic cancer cells

4. Toxicology - How statins cause cell death: Statins induce calcium-dependent mitochondrial permeability transition

5. Interleukin-2 induced T-cell apoptosis and taurine prevention in a cell line

6. 1998: attachment of infectious B. burgdorferi strain N40 to primary cultured cells, including brain cells

7. Oxidative-stress signals to cell death in brain neurons

8. [Fwd: Genistein Induces Apoptosis in Lung Cancer Cells]

9. 15-LOX-1: a novel molecular target of NSAID-induced apoptosis in colorectal cancer cells


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software