St Stephen's Day Or Boxing Day, What Do...
ChatterBank0 min ago
Snake Oil
This must be snake oil , of course
https:/
However has anyone in the medical profession , looked at the claims and showed that it is untrue ?
https:/
However has anyone in the medical profession , looked at the claims and showed that it is untrue ?
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Problem is that it's very difficult to prove that something is ineffective -- you can't prove a negative all that easily, in practical science at least. So these *** claims can propagate, unrefuted, for pretty much ever.
Actually, even refuting them properly doesn't shut people up. Anecdotal evidence, and all that. Totally useless, but people will insist on taking hearsay seriously.
Actually, even refuting them properly doesn't shut people up. Anecdotal evidence, and all that. Totally useless, but people will insist on taking hearsay seriously.
There are tonnes of reasons people can get better, ranging from the trivial to the remarkable. The point about a "cure" is that it has to be relatively general, ie useful for more than just one person, so one case isn't really enough to prove anything. On the other hand, it can't be rejected conclusively either.
Still, someone wanting to establish that a miracle cure is useful first has to ask, and reject, the alternative explanations of (among others): regression to the mean (ie, patient just getting better anyway, or looking at the patient at the lowest and highest parts of a cycle of illness); something else responsible other than what you are claiming; misdiagnosis in the first place; an unusual reaction that isn't replicated with other people; placebo.
A few others I might have missed. But just as anyone selling this stuff ought to try and rule it out, you can't really prove it's any one of those either without a possibly expensive set of exhaustive trials that you might have no motivation to perform. Because, after all, miracle cures are usually exactly that.
Still, someone wanting to establish that a miracle cure is useful first has to ask, and reject, the alternative explanations of (among others): regression to the mean (ie, patient just getting better anyway, or looking at the patient at the lowest and highest parts of a cycle of illness); something else responsible other than what you are claiming; misdiagnosis in the first place; an unusual reaction that isn't replicated with other people; placebo.
A few others I might have missed. But just as anyone selling this stuff ought to try and rule it out, you can't really prove it's any one of those either without a possibly expensive set of exhaustive trials that you might have no motivation to perform. Because, after all, miracle cures are usually exactly that.
I presume this is what it is about, should she ever stop talking?
http://
Much less hype but sounds interesting. However, I haven't found anything more recent confirming or rebutting.
http://
Much less hype but sounds interesting. However, I haven't found anything more recent confirming or rebutting.
well here’s what’s in the MIT mix, its called souvenade, no surprises in the ingredients
https:/
Interestingly its made by Nutricia who are a large and well respected manufacturer of therapeutic foods.
The witter woman’s claim is that her wonder food is a junk food and that also it reverses the effects of alzheimer’s which the souvenade spiel does not.
https:/
Interestingly its made by Nutricia who are a large and well respected manufacturer of therapeutic foods.
The witter woman’s claim is that her wonder food is a junk food and that also it reverses the effects of alzheimer’s which the souvenade spiel does not.
Her are the clues that the thing is snake oil:
1: "Conspiracy" - why would anyone conspire to prevent treatment being available?
2: Research assistant for a top doctor - whose name is a secret (until 3 minutes in.
3: "Evidence has emerged" - OK where is this evidence?
4: Anecdotal evidence of anonymous patients
5: Constant use of typical sales spiel - you don't need to be persuaded ho bad Alzheimer's is - or why things would be better if you were cured
6: Blame the president, and mention conspiracy again.
7: Dangling the hook - I'll share the details, but not until you've heard more sales spiel.
8: Doctor Glen Rothfeld has written 9 books, each one targeting a serious chronic complaint, and in each he reveals a miracle cure based on food. You'd think he would have the Nobel prize for medicine 9 times over.
9: You can have the book free - but only if you listen to the entire video.
10: We're curing cancer with food now!
11: Thats' in the book, too.
Ok, I can't watch any more - my wife has stage 4 lung cancer, and this guy wants to treat her with mushrooms.
1: "Conspiracy" - why would anyone conspire to prevent treatment being available?
2: Research assistant for a top doctor - whose name is a secret (until 3 minutes in.
3: "Evidence has emerged" - OK where is this evidence?
4: Anecdotal evidence of anonymous patients
5: Constant use of typical sales spiel - you don't need to be persuaded ho bad Alzheimer's is - or why things would be better if you were cured
6: Blame the president, and mention conspiracy again.
7: Dangling the hook - I'll share the details, but not until you've heard more sales spiel.
8: Doctor Glen Rothfeld has written 9 books, each one targeting a serious chronic complaint, and in each he reveals a miracle cure based on food. You'd think he would have the Nobel prize for medicine 9 times over.
9: You can have the book free - but only if you listen to the entire video.
10: We're curing cancer with food now!
11: Thats' in the book, too.
Ok, I can't watch any more - my wife has stage 4 lung cancer, and this guy wants to treat her with mushrooms.
1 to 15 of 15
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Crosswords8 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago
Technology10 mins ago
Road rules20 mins ago
