and i hope you learn something from the following
http://www.randi.org/jr/200511/111805setback.html

sorry i have to go out now. will write more tomorrow

On Dec 30, 2007, at 1:54 PM, homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com wrote:

>
>>
>> I'm sure you'll learn something from the following:
>>
>> 'http://www.quantec.ch/english/biocom...y_quantec.html'
>> (http://tinyurl.com/7uwd8)
>
> and i hope you learn something from the following
>> In 2003 a group of pharmacologists of the University of Leipzig
>> claimed
>> to have proven the efficacy of high-potency homeopathic Belladonna
>> solutions (D32, D60 and D100). The authors, Franziska Schmidt, Prof.
>> Karen Nieber and Prof. Wolfgang Suess had done in-vitro-experiments
>> with
>> tissue from the rat intestine. Even before the publication of their
>> positive results
> the homeopathic community was so enthusiastic about
>> this new proof of homeopathy that in 2003 the three authors were
>> awarded
>> the "Heinrich-Reckeweg-Preis" (worth 10.000 Euros) of the
>> International
>> Society of Homotoxicology
>> ('www.uni-leipzig.de/presse2003/homoeopathie.html'
>> (http://www.uni-leipzig.de/presse2003...opathie.html)).
>> Skeptics soon pointed out that the study was seriously flawed
>> ('www.xy44.de/belladonna' (http://www.xy44.de/belladonna)) and
>> complained with the dean of the faculty where the results were
>> produced.

Can you explain in what way this study was said to be flawed? It would
be great to be able to read that letter to the dean. Is that possible,
or even a summary?

>> Nothing happened for quite a while, but now the German
>> Pharmacistś
>> Journal (Deutsche Apothekerzeitung) reports in its latest issue (2005,
>> vol. 145, no. 44, pp. 24f.) that the authors have now admitted that
>> their study was flawed;

Again, what flaw(s) did they describe? Without knowing that, it's hard
to comment...
Thanks,
Shannon

>> and that, as a consequence, the publication has
>> been withdrawn from the journal Biologische Medizin and the Reckeweg
>> Prize has been returned. Indeed, the award notice was removed without
>> comment from Niebeŕs homepage in the night from November 8 to 9,
>> 2005.
>>
>
> http://www.randi.org/jr/200511/111805setback.html
>
> sorry i have to go out now. will write more tomorrow
> '' (http://tinyurl.com/7uwd8)
>
>
> --
> gimpyblog
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> gimpyblog's Profile: http://www.otherhealth.com/members/gimpyblog.html
> View this thread: Gimpy, Blogs and All
>
>

A bad study doesn't proven anything.

Richard Knapp
EAS - Data Warehouse Group
University of Missouri
615 Locust Street #200
Columbia, MO 65201
573-882-8856
knappr (AT) umsystem (DOT) edu

-----Original Message-----
From: homeopathy-bounces (AT) homeolist (DOT) com
[mailto:homeopathy-bounces (AT) homeolist (DOT) com] On Behalf Of
homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 1:54 PM
To: homeopathy (AT) homeolist (DOT) com
Subject: [H] Re: Gimpy, Blogs and All


>
> I'm sure you'll learn something from the following:
>
> 'http://www.quantec.ch/english/biocom...y_quantec.html'
> (http://tinyurl.com/7uwd8)

and i hope you learn something from the following
> In 2003 a group of pharmacologists of the University of Leipzig
claimed
> to have proven the efficacy of high-potency homeopathic Belladonna
> solutions (D32, D60 and D100). The authors, Franziska Schmidt, Prof.
> Karen Nieber and Prof. Wolfgang Suess had done in-vitro-experiments
with
> tissue from the rat intestine. Even before the publication of their
> positive results... the homeopathic community was so enthusiastic
about
> this new proof of homeopathy that in 2003 the three authors were
awarded
> the "Heinrich-Reckeweg-Preis" (worth 10.000 Euros) of the
International
> Society of Homotoxicology
> ('www.uni-leipzig.de/presse2003/homoeopathie.html'
> (http://www.uni-leipzig.de/presse2003...opathie.html)).
> Skeptics soon pointed out that the study was seriously flawed
> ('www.xy44.de/belladonna' (http://www.xy44.de/belladonna)) and
> complained with the dean of the faculty where the results were
produced.
> Nothing happened for quite a while, but now the German
Pharmacistś
> Journal (Deutsche Apothekerzeitung) reports in its latest issue (2005,
> vol. 145, no. 44, pp. 24f.) that the authors have now admitted that
> their study was flawed; and that, as a consequence, the publication
has
> been withdrawn from the journal Biologische Medizin and the Reckeweg
> Prize has been returned. Indeed, the award notice was removed without
> comment from Niebeŕs homepage in the night from November 8 to 9,
> 2005.
>

http://www.randi.org/jr/200511/111805setback.html

sorry i have to go out now. will write more tomorrow
'' (http://tinyurl.com/7uwd8)


--
gimpyblog
------------------------------------------------------------------------
gimpyblog's Profile: http://www.otherhealth.com/members/gimpyblog.html
View this thread: Gimpy, Blogs and All

Might be exposed, might not.

Richard Knapp
EAS - Data Warehouse Group
University of Missouri
615 Locust Street #200
Columbia, MO 65201
573-882-8856
knappr (AT) umsystem (DOT) edu


-----Original Message-----
From: homeopathy-bounces (AT) homeolist (DOT) com
[mailto:homeopathy-bounces (AT) homeolist (DOT) com] On Behalf Of
homeolist (AT) otherhealth (DOT) com
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 12:38 PM
To: homeopathy (AT) homeolist (DOT) com
Subject: [H] Re: Gimpy, Blogs and All


> AND the pharmaceutical companies will ensure this will never be the
> case, not because it lacks scientific evidence, but because they will
> lose millions and all their power. NO WAY will they allow that, and
for
> that reason and that reason only THEIR SCIENTISTS are going to "prove"
> no matter what that homeopathy cannot work.

Christine, I know you are trying to rationalise your beliefs by
invoking the existence of a grand conspiracy but there is no conspiracy,
it is your beliefs that need rethought. Scientific findings are written
up in papers and submitted to journals so their veracity can be assessed
by the judgement of their peers. If there was a conspiracy it would be
rapidly exposed unless you are suggesting that the hundreds of thousands
of scientists who publish in respectable journals are part of a
conspiracy? I don't know why you flat out reject the rationality of
science but I urge you to open your mind to the explanations of science.


--
gimpyblog
------------------------------------------------------------------------
gimpyblog's Profile: http://www.otherhealth.com/members/gimpyblog.html
View this thread: Gimpy, Blogs and All