Labour leadership

[SpookyFrank]

Eta - you think that the placebo effect only works on stupid people????

No, but I do think only stupid people buy homeopathic remedies.

 

[gimesumtruf]

What if Corbyn lays the Libyan disaster, Ukraine murders, and dissing parliament at Camerons door where they belong at question time.
Corbyn can do it while gently reminding Cameron about his exemplary shite refugee policy. Just don't mention Camerons own Oskar Gröning, IDS.
Cameron has had an easy ride from Labour imho.

 

[maomao]

I don't hold with charging sick, vulnerable and (lets be fair to them) stupid people large sums of money for a placebo no.

He voted in favour of NHS homeopathic provision once, 5 years ago and doesn't seem to have said anything outright in favour of homeopathy. May just have been voting for provision of alternative medicines on the NHS without having looked into homeopathy in particular. Has anyone got anything more revealing on the matter?

 

[rekil]

They have racked up an impressive bodycount tbf.

 

[Orang Utan]

No, but I do think only stupid people buy homeopathic remedies.

In 1954, a paper in The Lancet said that the placebo effect was only useful in treating 'some unintelligent or inadequate patients'.

 

[andysays]

which is why I presume the idea is to have it on the nhs

Eta - you think that the placebo effect only works on stupid people????

Didn't say it would. Might cut the UK's drugs bill if prescribed appropriately though. Or don't you hold with the placebo effect?

TBH, I'd rather anyone who wanted homeopathic "medicines" had to pay for them themselves than that they were available on the NHS.

And I thought the placebo effect was taking something which you are told actually has a significant dose of some sort of effective substance in it, rather than which you believe has had its water molecules altered by some nonsensical woo. It's a little misleading to mention the placebo effect in relation to homeopathy, IMO

 

[cesare]

Clearly the media missed a trick by not making a HUGE FUSS about this homeopathy malarkey.

 

[two sheds]

No, but I do think only stupid people buy homeopathic remedies.

How about someone who believed that a homeopathic remedy helped their headaches? Would they be stupid if they preferred slightly coloured water over painkillers?

And no I don't believe homeopathy works beyond the placebo effect. I find the ridicule of it slightly strange though - seems like it could be the least-cost remedy to some medical problems.

 

[J Ed]

Clearly the media missed a trick by not making a HUGE FUSS about this homeopathy malarkey.

Graunid mentioned it a bit, just didn't get much traction. Tories can hardly mention it when Hunt supports it, can they?

 

[J Ed]

How about someone who believed that a homeopathic remedy helped their headaches? Would they be stupid if they preferred slightly coloured water over painkillers?

And no I don't believe homeopathy works beyond the placebo effect. I find the ridicule of it slightly strange though - seems like it could be the least-cost remedy to some medical problems.

I get the ridicule, and homeopaths DO take advantage of vulnerable people. Have you seen how much the sugar pills in Boots and Holland and Barett cost? It's like £25+ in some cases.

 

[cesare]

Graunid mentioned it a bit, just didn't get much traction. Tories can hardly mention it when Hunt supports it, can they?

It was probably not worth making a fuss over.

 

[two sheds]

TBH, I'd rather anyone who wanted homeopathic "medicines" had to pay for them themselves than that they were available on the NHS.

And I thought the placebo effect was taking something which you are told actually has a significant dose of some sort of effective substance in it, rather than which you believe has had its water molecules altered by some nonsensical woo. It's a little misleading to mention the placebo effect in relation to homeopathy, IMO

I don't think you have to be told there is a 'significant' dose, I'm not sure you need to believe it at all - it works on subconscious level I think.

Errm it's misleading to mention the the placebo effect when it's the placebo effect that causes some people to say that they've had good effects from homeopathy?

 

[two sheds]

I get the ridicule, and homeopaths DO take advantage of vulnerable people. Have you seen how much the sugar pills in Boots and Holland and Barett cost? It's like £25+ in some cases.

Indeed, best to make it available on the NHS then as that nice Mr. Corbyn seems to believe drive the charlatans out of business.

 

[mauvais]

TBH, I'd rather anyone who wanted homeopathic "medicines" had to pay for them themselves than that they were available on the NHS.

And I thought the placebo effect was taking something which you are told actually has a significant dose of some sort of effective substance in it, rather than which you believe has had its water molecules altered by some nonsensical woo. It's a little misleading to mention the placebo effect in relation to homeopathy, IMO

Why on earth would the science of the false belief matter? You either believe in its capacity to make you better or you don't.

I'm no certainly fan of homeo, but placebos have a place, IMO. Conversely, some of the rabidly anti-homeo people don't do themselves any favours either.

 

[andysays]

Clearly the media missed a trick by not making a HUGE FUSS about this homeopathy malarkey.

You still haven't really grasped how this homeopathy business works, have you?

(that's the last joke I'm making along these lines, BTW)

 

[two sheds]

Conversely, some of the rabidly anti-homeo people don't do themselves any favours either.

Yep there's a certain arrogance in the belief that the placebo effect only works on stupid people.

 

[andysays]

I don't think you have to be told there is a 'significant' dose, I'm not sure you need to believe it at all - it works on subconscious level I think.

Errm it's misleading to mention the the placebo effect when it's the placebo effect that causes some people to say that they've had good effects from homeopathy?

Why on earth would the science of the false belief matter? You either believe in its capacity to make you better or you don't.

I'm no certainly fan of homeo, but placebos have a place, IMO. Conversely, some of the rabidly anti-homeo people don't do themselves any favours either.

OK, let me try again.

What I understand by the placebo effect is when someone is given a pill which contains nothing, but which they are told contains a significant amount of a substance (eg aspirin) which has been proven to have a physical effect. Because they genuinely think they've taken something which is significant in reducing headaches, some people will experience a reduction in their headache.

But with homeopathy, the patient knows there is no significant amount of any substance. The only way it might be a significant effect is if they actually believe the mystical woo about water molecules re-aligning. In this sense, it's akin to witch-doctory - it only works if you believe something which it's totally irrational to believe.

(of course, there was a time when witch-doctory was a rational thing to believe, because it was the generally culturally accepted way of doing things, so I have no doubt that something similar to the placebo effect could and did work in those circumstances, but given our general cultural acceptance of science based medicine and other phenomona, anyone in modern society who believes in homeopathy is, IMO, utterly irrational)

Here, for what it's worth, is the start of the Wiki entry

A placebo (/pləˈsiboʊ/ plə-SEE-boh; Latin placēbō, "I shall please" from placeō, "I please" is a simulated or otherwise medically ineffectual treatment for a disease or other medical condition intended to deceive the recipient.

Apologies for the de-rail. I've had more than enough homeopathy for now...

 

[mauvais]

What I understand by the placebo effect is when someone is given a pill which contains nothing, but which they are told contains a significant amount of a substance (eg aspirin) which has been proven to have a physical effect. Because they genuinely think they've taken something which is significant in reducing headaches, some people will experience a reduction in their headache.

But with homeopathy, the patient knows there is no significant amount of any substance. The only way it might be a significant effect is if they actually believe the mystical woo about water molecules re-aligning. In this sense, it's akin to witch-doctory - it only works if you believe something which it's totally irrational to believe.

They do believe it, at some level - just as I don't need to be a pharmacology expert to have faith in a medicine. Also, that it is irrational to you is not valuable to the patient. Hell, even if it was irrational to the patient themselves, it might not mean anything. If you look at behaviours like OCD and phobias, that something is logically irrational or unscientific is not a helpful remedy.

 

[andysays]

They do believe it, at some level - just as I don't need to be a pharmacology expert to have faith in a medicine. Also, that it is irrational to you is not valuable to the patient. Hell, even if it was irrational to the patient themselves, it might not mean anything. If you look at behaviours like OCD and phobias, that something is logically irrational or unscientific is not a helpful remedy.

Fair enough - I don't regard rationality as something which can simply be individualised - it has a social/cultural context.

IMO, an individual belief in homeopathy in our social/cultural context, however genuine it might, is utterly irrational and shouldn't be encouraged by any science-based system of collective healthcare. And that really is all I have to say on the subject on this thread...

 

[treelover]

The London Mayor told The Mail on Sunday: ‘Labour is deranged if it thinks Jeremy Corbyn is the answer to its problems or Britain’s.

‘He is a cross between Lenin and Worzel Gummidge. His economic policy would leave us penniless and his foreign policy would leave us defenceless.’

Pot and kettle

 

[free spirit]

placebo isn't about the believe that a pill has xyz substance in it, it's a belief in the power of whatever they're taking / using to cure or improve whatever illness they have. It's the belief that's important not the precise nature of what they believe in.

Applies to homeopathy as much as placebo pills, also applies to faith healing etc etc.

It's only when a medicine's impact is actually greater than the placebo effect that it can be viewed as directly being medically effective.

 

[wayward bob]

It's a myth, isn't it?

not at all - red placebos are more effective than other colours and they've even showed positive response to placebo surgery. if you have a non-uk proxy you can watch this horizon doc.
.

 

[two sheds]

But with homeopathy, the patient knows there is no significant amount of any substance. The only way it might be a significant effect is if they actually believe the mystical woo about water molecules re-aligning. In this sense, it's akin to witch-doctory - it only works if you believe something which it's totally irrational to believe.

Again no, I don't think so. All it needs is (for example) for a doctor in a doctory-type voice to say 'take these, you'll feel better'.

The placebo effect is nothing like witch doctory at all, so neither need homeopathy be. I see the placebo effect as the mind (in the short term at least) curing the body - nothing to do with stupidity or witch doctors.

And on your point about anti-malarial homeopathy pills btw, drugs companies have said their drugs cure all sorts of things that they've turned out not to cure - should we reject all drugs because of that?

(of course, there was a time when witch-doctory was a rational thing to believe, because it was the generally culturally accepted way of doing things, so I have no doubt that something similar to the placebo effect could and did work in those circumstances, but given our general cultural acceptance of science based medicine and other phenomona, anyone in modern society who believes in homeopathy is, IMO, utterly irrational)

I'd say that anyone who believes that homeopathy has an effect outside the placebo effect hasn't looked at the science. But you're going further than that - you're suggesting that anyone in modern society who believes in the placebo effect is utterly irrational, too. Sorry, you're wrong.

The placebo effect is *fundamental* to science based medicine - every single trial is measured against the placebo effect. (You clearly didn't know that ).

Apologies for the de-rail. I've had more than enough homeopathy for now...

Well you brought it up

 

[free spirit]

The only real argument in favour of homeopathy on the NHS that I could support would be to treat those who were insistent on needing some form of medical intervention every time they have a sniffle, rather than doling out anti-biotics because they insisted on them.

Vit C tablets would be a better bet for that though.

 

[JimW]

Labour didn't lose in 1984 because of Michael Foot. That's a myth put about by the Tory press and Nu Labour revisionists. It lost because of the Falklands and Thatcher channelling Churchill. Foot was actually quite popular and Labour was doing well in the polls until the Falklands.

Saw an article linked yesterday that tackled those myths: 1983: the biggest myth in Labour Party history | Red Pepper

 

[SpookyFrank]

What if Corbyn lays the Libyan disaster, Ukraine murders, and dissing parliament at Camerons door where they belong at question time.
Corbyn can do it while gently reminding Cameron about his exemplary shite refugee policy. Just don't mention Camerons own Oskar Gröning, IDS.
Cameron has had an easy ride from Labour imho.

When you read the tory spiel about their 'well-oiled attack machine' (yes that's a direct quote from CCHQ) it looks like they've got complacent in the absence of any kind of effective opposition. They may be able to attack people, but that doesn't mean they can win arguments against people who refuse to engage in mudslinging.

It doesn't seem like the concept of actually winning arguments has even occurred to them tbh. It's all about scaring the shit out of people, hence the repetition of the word 'security' in their 'we're all dooooooomed' statement in response to Corbyn's election. It's a direct appeal to people's fears, fears that the papers have been doing their very best to create. But the press has failed to defeat Corbyn, all the Blairite royalty has failed to defeat him, and the tories certainly haven't been able to halt his rise. Hopefully this shows that everyone is getting sick and tired of soundbites and fearmongering, and they want to listen to someone who can talk coherently about things that actually matter.

I think the tories have underestimated what they're dealing with here. They're also a bit delusional about how strong a grip on power they can possibly have with the backing of only 25% of the electorate.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The only real argument in favour of homeopathy on the NHS that I could support would be to treat those who were insistent on needing some form of medical intervention every time they have a sniffle, rather than doling out anti-biotics because they insisted on them.

Vit C tablets would be a better bet for that though.

Doctors who prescribe antibiotics to people who don't need them should be struck off, no matter how whiny the patient. Give them fucking sugar pills if you have to fob them off ffs.

 

[ViolentPanda]

i'm loving this! Labour are DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You've got the political acumen of a brick.
Bless.

 

[ViolentPanda]

He looks like he's been hit in the face with a wet copy of the Morning Star.

Nah, that's definitely a "somebody's Great Dane has just shat in my shoes" look.

 

[two sheds]

The only real argument in favour of homeopathy on the NHS that I could support would be to treat those who were insistent on needing some form of medical intervention every time they have a sniffle, rather than doling out anti-biotics because they insisted on them.

I'd even disagree with this (although yes of course to cutting anti-biotic use). If you can alleviate symptoms of any (appropriate) sickness that is not life-threatening and isn't going to get any worse while you try different treatments, then I'd be in favour of trying it there, too, if the patient is up for it.

In the great majority of cases where it *doesn't* help, then you try something else - do different alternative treatments that are effective because of the placebo effect work on different people, for example?

But yes I'm happy for the derail to be over.