Valentine Pontifex

I read somewhere that the introduction of Viagra, a medicine for impotence that actually works has decreased the demand in Asian markets for quack medicines for impotence made from parts of African animals and thus has indirectly helped in conservation efforts.

Clutch

VP,

Good point. But why would Asians stop taking those other remedies? Er... unless they never worked anyhow, and were part placebo, part conspicuous consumption...

Stand by for this to be ignored, according to the Oriental Mystery Knows More Than Western Science narrative of our media.

Butters

This may seem like a naive question, but I'd really like to know. As I understand it hoemopathy is supposed to work, because if something is dissolved in water, that water retains a "memory" of that substance, even if it's dilluted to the point that no actual molecules of the substance remains. But water is recycled all the time, and every piece of water has had millions of different substances dissolved in it, why dosen't it carry these memories also?

ps418

LoL! (how true!)

You sound like you could use some chakra manipulation. That's what my runes say, anyway. But a magnetic hat should probably work fine, if you cannot locate your power crystals. . .

Tenpudo

You know, one of my friends was telling me about this during Thanksgiving. Of course, she started out with, "You know, Viagra has really been helping some endangered species make comebacks!"
It took some time for her to make what she really meant heard over the peanut gallery that ensued...

gymmarty

Indeed Butters, if the homeopathy people are right (insert gratuitous laugh) then water must have a 'memory' of every single substance in existence.
IT IS A MAGICAL CURE-ALL!!!!!!!!! (Booming Moses has just come down from the mountain style voice)

I am now going to start selling meta-memory water cure-alls for only $9999.9999 a bottle, and I should get the approval of homeopathists world wide!!!
MMMUUUUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Oxymoron

I read in New Scientist today that the Horizon/Randi experiment has been called into question, in particular for the small sample size (40). The statisticians questioned say that this isn't nearly big enough to justify a positive or negative result.

LordSnooty

Randi just copied the tests of that big fat woman, though. I assume that meant he used the same sample size as she did.

Why would those experienced scientists choose a sample size that was too small anyway?

Paul

Valmorian

While in theory, I agree that a larger sample size should have been used...

...just how many objects do you need to drop to realize gravity works?
...how many hands need to be submersed in water to discover water is wet?
...How many burnt pieces of toast do you need to produce to show that bread burns?

and especially..

...how many harmless solutions do you need to make to prove that diluting a substance dilutes its effect?

tronvillain

*shrugs* A sample size of forty is large enough to justify a positive or negative result if you are looking for a strong enough effect. If you were testing whether or not a bullet through the heart kills somone, I think a sample of forty would probably satisfy you. Anyway, I suppose proponents of homeopathy could simply claim the effect is too weak to be detected with a sample size of forty...