Homeopathy Does Not Work
Debate Rounds (3)
However, philosophically and psychologically, there is room to discuss the Placebo Effect through Homeopathic therapies and, subsequently, the facts of this practice having real Utility as there are absolutely scientifically measurable results. It becomes a kind of "psychosomatic rehabilitation" and results in well-being have been achieved.
A case could also be made Homeopathic therapies aid in the prevention and use of other possibly "worse" kinds of drugs, with volatile side-effects, typically used in more orthodox medical practices.
If you believe the goal of medicine is to improve health and over all well-being, then you will also have to agree Homeopathic alternative medicine doesn't have to be True, but rather, merely useful and beneficial. If it makes folks feel better I believe that is the point of medicine to a large extent.
But I think medicine and science shouldn't take seriously these frauds and swindlers who sell water and market it as a cure all or whatever they may claim that it cures. Feeling better is all fine and dandy but these companies/people/quacks lie and mislead the public and need to be actively punished like any other business that would do so. These claims must be taken seriously, because they are scientific claims- false scientific claims. They cannot market water as a drug and sell it for a large price. Homeopathy does not work, though just thinking something works might make people feel better or even produce some type of artificial well being, it is not a drug and does not cure anything. I could just as easily sell sand and say that by putting this sand in your toilet, you will feel better. You might in fact feel better, but the claim is no less garbage and not proof that the sand has an effect as anything but 'delusional'.
But for the sake of the debate and keeping it lively, the title of the challenge and debate is, "Homeopathy Does Not Work," and the supporting idea is that all of its attributes also do not work.
So if we have patients reporting that they feel better (I can cite sources of these case studies if you wish), and that their overall wellbeing has improved, then perhaps this kind of alternative therapy has done what medicine is intended to do. In other words, it does in fact "work" ... Contrary to the challenge as the table was set for this debate.
Placebo pills work too in medicine in probably the exact same way. The reason or the way in which they work is interesting because we shouldn't expect them to. It is facinating when you stop and think about it. Really brings to light the possibility of the Mind, psychological attitude and thoughts creating and controling physiological effects, even reversing the ill effects of diseases.
Now had you worded the challenge of the debate slightly differently like, "Homeopathic Medicine is Merely a Placebo," or, "Homeopathic Medicine has No Direct Chemical Influence on Physiology," then you would get little debate from me.
You can think of the procedure as an expensive, intense psychological sessions with use of alternative medicine to produce improved wellbeing, in which case, it does "work".
Again thank you for being a brilliant opponent.
There are many paths up the mountain.
Is it really that uncommon for your primary physician to ask, "How have you been feeling?" Or a therapist?
Example: I have a broken leg. It's a basic fracture that doesn't require surgury or even need to be reset. A simple protective cast is ordered and I am prescribed and given pain medication, the opiate narcotic pain killer Vicodin.
Now with the proper recommended dose the opiate in my blood stream goes straight to work blocking the pain receptors of my nervous system, thus preventing the pain chemicals in my body from being received; the "feeling" of the searing pain from a broken bone is NOT "felt" ... But another curious thing happens, by blocking pain receptors I also receive, as a side effect, feelings and waves of comfort: I am high.. Stoned.. Drugged up.. and it "feels" great!
Most would say, "Well, damn, he just broke his leg, of course, let him take the pain killers until the pain subsides.." or "Who cares if he is high or feels good, he has a broken leg.." or "I'm sure breaking a leg is stressful, hopefully the pain meds give him some relief and comfort.."
Now lets notice and explore a couple of ideas here in the example I have given:
1) The narcotic does nothing to actually repair the broken bone in my leg! The narcotic only merely "tricks" my body that I'm not in pain.
2) Because the drug makes me high, I feel good (despite my broken leg) yet the source (the opiate) is technically synthetic and artificial; least we say superficial as well.. YET, I STILL FEEL GOOD (which is the point).
So now let's distinguish this and contrast this from your views. Sure, the Vicodin is acting directly with the chemistry of my body. But it produces feelings of wellbeing without addressing or curing and mending my broken leg. We could then get very medically and scientifically detailed about how the drug's material chemistry "works". But again, it still doesn't repair and mend the broken bone in my leg, yet it's a justified therapy given to one who has a broken leg.
Further, we know of the healing odds of placebos. Medical therapies do not even have to have a direct chemical influence on the body to have a positive outcome, and produce wellbeing. The brain and mind of the body merely need to believe that it does, and a seemingly unscientific event occurs, the body follows and begins to heal itself.
Major surgeries have been preformed without any chemical sedatives or anesthetics using only suggestive hypnosis!
I don't know how useful it is to equate alternative medical therapies to Jesus, Bigfoot, UFOs, etc. I think that it might be a mistake to qualify all of these subjects equally in the same way.
Your conclusion seems to be that homeopathic alternative therapies must meet certain scientific requirements and standards first before being taken seriously, otherwise they cannot possibly "work". I have shown that to be false. Perhaps the end result (how people feel) should be standard, as it is in all areas of medicine.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jakeross6 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: It was an interesting debate. I enjoyed it. However, con made better points, had better grammar, and I ended up agreeing with him that it does have some benefits and isn't all crazy.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.