Bad Back issues & Bowen Treatment

So how do you decide which people to believe and which not?

A significant number of people believe:
That homeopathy is real and effective
That praying to Mother Teresa can cure terminal cancer
That ibuprofen is an effective anti-inflammatory and painkiller

How do you eliminate the first two?

Well here's a thing, if I came on and said there's a guy in Southampton giving away free <insert boat of your choice> if you answered a couple of simple questions that I then went on to detail, would that anedotal account be any more meaningful in improving you circumstance?

For some of us, anecdotal advice from folk who's opinion we respect is more valuable than that from nhs hirelings, as it was from my interwebchum Max the windsurfer... It's just opinion, detailed in a helpful post on a bulletin board, act on it, or act on it not, most readers here are bright enough to make their own decision without some representative from the Association of Narcissistic Authoritarian Logic Trolls helping them out with the decision making process.

Edited by iGRF - 22 Dec 15 at 12:13pm

That's a very noble & buddhist idea Mr Peaky... striving to be happy (according to my missus who's a member of SGI...google it..) Happy Christmas One & All!!! 

Let's face it Ben, there are two posters here who say it worked for them. According to you there is no quantifiable study out there to prove what they say. My idea would be you get two posters who have tried it and think it's a crock of sh*t to post back, then there's a real debate, not this pseudo scientific process bullsh*t from the sidelines...

Originally posted by Roger Originally posted by bustinben You can know. A<span style="line-height: 1.4;"> placebo controlled double blind trial does just that.  You take a large enough group of people, you randomise them into two groups, you subject half to the treatment, half to a pretence at the treatment. </span> You measure the outcomes and you apply the proper statistical methods to verify that your result didn't happen by chance. http://i-base.info/ttfa/8-clinical-trials-and-research/8-7-randomised-double-blind-placebo-controlled-trials/ Double blinding is not always possible depending on the treatment in question, but it's the standard that should be aspired to. I'm genuinely interested in how you know that what you feel in your own body is not placebo.  You'd be the first person in history to be able to do that.  The placebo effect is amazing, strange, and incredibly effective seeing as it is basically nothing.   Red pills are more effective than white ones, how much you pay changes the amount of pain relief you feel, placebo injections are more effective than placebo pills, but neither are as effective as placebo operations... All of these things have been measured properly in repeatable studies. Apart from the fact that when the results of the "Gold Standard" placebo controlled trial are published the good and the great of the medical profession will not agree on the results and argue for and against the outcomes, should have been done this way, or that way, sample size not big enough, not in western europe, average age too high, why did they exclude group A, B etc and why did they include group C, D etc and on and on and on.....I've seen it too many times to believe there is not doubt in every set of data, and to be honest most medics seem to rely on the experiences of their patients. Don't care what the data says, if it works for their patients they will continue to use it...There are also widely publicized campaigns based on zero data. For example 5 portions of fruit and veg a day, I doubt there is a person in the UK who hasn't heard that and most probably believe it is backed by extensive data, fact is it's just a made up number to encourage us all to eat more fruit and veg.

There is truth in all of that. And just because there is a study doesn't mean the matter is settled. Studies vary greatly in quality. I read one the other day that claimed that homeopathic arnica had a statistically significant effect. Then I read more closely and discovered they had redefined the meaning of stastically significant. Oh and that it had been funded by a company that makes homeopathic arnica.

It's a jungle out there, but at least if you understand how these things work you stand a chance.

Edited by bustinben - 21 Dec 15 at 11:04pm