Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sentinel00 · 09-20-2002, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Corwin:
But then knee-jerk uberskepticism based on principle instead of science is just so much more FUN isn't it?

Corwin, what is "chi?" Please describe chi. How does it get in our bodies? How does it's flow affect our bodies? What tools or devices can be used to measure chi and its flow? How, exactly, do the needles of acupuncture re-align chi? Are they special needles? Is there a way to re-align chi without the use of needles? Does chi react chemically with our bodies?

Since you seem to prize science so much, I doubt you'll have trouble answering these questions using evidence and research.

Pseudonymph · 09-20-2002, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Learn to accept that if you don't understand something, the correct response is to study it, not disregard it offhand.

[/QB]

I agree 100%

And I get the feeling that in regards to things like this...far too often people simply just dismiss something becuase it seems a little foreign to them, not based on the facts...which we all love right?

[/mybottomline] Acupuncture worked...for me and virtually everyone else I know that has tried it. Whoopdedo for us right? But hey, we got releif and results, no medication, no addictions...nothing but a natural healing method that worked effieciently and painlessly. [mybottomline/]

So what's wrong with that? What's the aversion to something that helps a great many people.

I'm not saying it helps everyone. Just like chiropractic works for some people, it did absilutley nothing for me. But I don't dismiss it as "junk science" just becuase I didn't get the results I wanted.

$.02 USD

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: SirenSpeak ]

Mad Kally · 09-20-2002, 07:54 AM

Quote:

posted by Corwin:
However, the body isn't a closed system, and (with a few exceptions I suppose... no accounting for individual taste...) nobody in their right minds is going to stand there while you blast enough water up their recutm for it to make any difference for long enough for it to make any difference.

The gastro-intestinel (GI) system can be closed off easily. (nose, mouth and anus) What if you were under anesthesia and we pumped enough water up there? Would you burn to death or spontaneously combust?

Dr Rick · 09-20-2002, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mad Kally:
The gastro-intestinel (GI) system can be closed off easily. (nose, mouth and anus) What if you were under anesthesia and we pumped enough water up there? Would you burn to death or spontaneously combust?

The last time there was that much water around, Noah had to build himself an ark.

Mad Kally · 09-20-2002, 07:56 AM

Quote:

posted byt Siren:
I have also found that since acupuncture is still so mysterious to many people

Uneducated people. What is it you don't understand about the placebo effect?

Mad Kally · 09-20-2002, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rbochnermd:


The last time there was that much water around, Noah had to build himself an ark.

Yeah, where's that Amie? She can prove it too..

Dr Rick · 09-20-2002, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SirenSpeak:
Si what's wrong with that? What's the aversion to something that helps a great many people.

Skepticism is not synonymous with "aversion."

Rick

Pseudonymph · 09-20-2002, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rbochnermd:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Insulting people who disagree with you is unscientific, irrational, and just plain rude.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes it is, neither you nor Corwin should do it, but if you do, I'll once again respond in kind.

Rick

And then...

Quote:

Corwin is full of shit because he is ignorant and intellectually dishonest.

How was that provoked?

What exactly are you trying to accomplish by repeatedly coming to this thread and, having lost your objectivity long ago, continuing to spew insults and not keep the conversation productive?

alek0 · 09-20-2002, 08:02 AM

>It may work, and I never claimed it didn't; >objective clinical studies are useful, and >anectodal evidence is not a substitute for >objective evidence.

There are objective studies which show positive results. And there are studies which show that it doesn't work. Instead of saying so clearly, you have compared acupuncture to prayer and faith healing. Is that objective and scientific?

>That's ironic; You're the one posting studies in >favor of your view.

Read the disclaimer in my post. I am not claiming that it works, I have clearly acknowledged that there are studies with contradictory results. I have only provided some positive refs. because nobody else bothered to do so.

>Yes it is, neither you nor Corwin should do it, >but if you do, I'll once again respond in kind.

And where did I tell anyone that he/she was full of it?

>I never once claimed acupuncture was >ineffective. It's dishonest of you to post a >response filled with so many strawmen.

You have compared it with prayer and faith healing. Shall I assume that you consider these possibly effective as well?

Pseudonymph · 09-20-2002, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mad Kally:


Uneducated people. What is it you don't understand about the placebo effect?

Kally maybe you should search for my threads regarding Anti-depressants and my study of them. If you remember, you attacked me there for arguing the placebo effect. Look back at your own arguments.

Calling me uneducated is hardly productive. I have been studying the non-effects of medicine (esp psychological) in school for quite awhile now, so I definently have a background into this.
Take that for what you will....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-20-2002, 08:02 AM	#119
alek0 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 640	>It may work, and I never claimed it didn't; >objective clinical studies are useful, and >anectodal evidence is not a substitute for >objective evidence. There are objective studies which show positive results. And there are studies which show that it doesn't work. Instead of saying so clearly, you have compared acupuncture to prayer and faith healing. Is that objective and scientific? >That's ironic; You're the one posting studies in >favor of your view. Read the disclaimer in my post. I am not claiming that it works, I have clearly acknowledged that there are studies with contradictory results. I have only provided some positive refs. because nobody else bothered to do so. >Yes it is, neither you nor Corwin should do it, >but if you do, I'll once again respond in kind. And where did I tell anyone that he/she was full of it? >I never once claimed acupuncture was >ineffective. It's dishonest of you to post a >response filled with so many strawmen. You have compared it with prayer and faith healing. Shall I assume that you consider these possibly effective as well?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.