Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience

uriel1972

(4,261 posts)

15. Start a new thread with evidence...

Reply to Wilms (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:21 AM

Apr 2016

How these people were deceived into accepting treatments without any evidence to support them, by people without qualifications or any kind of process to oversee their work.

There are scandals and failures and people who slip through the systems and others that simply make mistakes. As someone who has worked in the health sector, I would never deny that. Point out to me the sector that does not.

There is no conspiracy here.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Corrupt quacks find a new way to look "respectable..." [View all] Archae Apr 2016 OP

Here's an interesting snip. Wilms Apr 2016 #1

And this has what to do with the price of tea in China? Archae Apr 2016 #2

I'm not defending them. Wilms Apr 2016 #3

So, as usual, you have no purpose here whatsoever. HuckleB Apr 2016 #5

It's amazing that you think that makes the scam ok. HuckleB Apr 2016 #4

I already said I'm not defending them. Wilms Apr 2016 #6

That really doesn't make your post any less silly. HuckleB Apr 2016 #7

I was figuring you guys would put up some links. Wilms Apr 2016 #8

No one is giving any quack a free ride. HuckleB Apr 2016 #9

Did I promote anyone? Wilms Apr 2016 #10

Are you saying you haven't liked plenty of scam supporting OPs? HuckleB Apr 2016 #11

I am not aware of doing any such thing, Huck. Wilms Apr 2016 #12

So you we're not yourself at the time? HuckleB Apr 2016 #13

And anyone who disagrees with you... Wilms Apr 2016 #14

Anyone who can't support their claims. HuckleB Apr 2016 #17

Well we'vebeen through that. Wilms Apr 2016 #21

An anecdotal placebo effect? HuckleB Apr 2016 #22

Lots of placebo effect regardless of modality. Wilms Apr 2016 #25

Yes, but that doesn't justify the creation of scam treatments. HuckleB Apr 2016 #26

Would you have preferred me taking pills for a bad shoulder? Wilms Apr 2016 #27

It appears that you didn't need pills. HuckleB Apr 2016 #28

What is it that I did need, Doc? Wilms Apr 2016 #29

It appears you needed only time. HuckleB Apr 2016 #30

Funny that the "time" I needed had arrived at the same time as the treatment. Wilms Apr 2016 #31

In other words, you really want to believe the placebo is something greater. HuckleB Apr 2016 #32

I'm not interested in "believing" anything. Wilms Apr 2016 #33

It's based on the evidence that you don't acknowledge the science, repeatedly. HuckleB Apr 2016 #34

There you have it. Wilms Apr 2016 #35

You can keep dreaming, since dreams appear your favorite type of evidence. HuckleB Apr 2016 #36

I am not aware of doing any such thing, Huck. Wilms Apr 2016 #37

Start a new thread with evidence... uriel1972 Apr 2016 #15

Did I say there was a conspiracy? Wilms Apr 2016 #19

I exaggerated for effect... uriel1972 Apr 2016 #38

OK. So you exaggerated. Wilms Apr 2016 #40

Sorry, I'm bad with numbers. Can you explain this to me? DetlefK Apr 2016 #16

How many people do quacks save from cancer, stroke, heart attack...? HuckleB Apr 2016 #18

I don't know that number. Wilms Apr 2016 #20

No-one visiting a quack... uriel1972 Apr 2016 #39

Another dose of reality. HuckleB Apr 2016 #23

I certainly agree with a lot of that. Wilms Apr 2016 #24

Yellow Canine PBSD,RVS (Professional BS Detector and Random Vampire Slayer) yellowcanine May 2016 #41