Nov 19 2012
Getting NCCAM’s money’s worth: Some results of NCCAM-funded studies of homeopathy
You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Getting NCCAM’s money’s worth: Some results of NCCAM-funded studies of homeopathy”.
11 Responses to “Getting NCCAM’s money’s worth: Some results of NCCAM-funded studies of homeopathy”
[...] More: Science-Based Medicine » Getting NCCAM's money's worth: Some … [...]
Ugh! Reading this kind of stuff makes me so embarrassed to be a stone’s throw away from the University of Arizona. There is really good research being done there, too, I promise you!
It’s funny how some members of Congress like to rant about certain perfectly legitimate scientific investigations which they, in their ignorance, fail to see the value of. I wonder what all the “fiscally conservative” types think of the work of NCCAM? To think that Big Bird should go the way of the dodo rather than NCAAM is such a topsy-turvy situation.
I commend you for taking the time to dissect these studies–most of the gobbeldy-gook reminded me of a couple of papers I wrote in a Myth, Magic and Ritual class (anthropology requirement–nothing to do with buying into woo, not in my day anyway) that attempted to make some faux-intellectual comment on the work of Claude Levi-Strauss, who is pretty much considered to be unfathomable.
I guess it’s better to have college students sniffing homeopathics rather than glue–or whatever is popular these days among the sniffer types, but that wasn’t the aim of the study, was it?
Did I tell you how my (then) husband-to-be went to see a homeopath? Well, his mother, who is very much into woo, arranged the appointment and we went there mostly to make her happy. Anyway, this homeopath (and an MD from a respectable university, no less) struck us as rather mentally unstable. And when she almost started jumping up and down with joy upon learning that my husband-to-be had dandruff, we just left. And never came back. And of course never bought all those fancy homeopathic remedies that she recommended.
I posted a comment on Dr. Gorski’s *friend’s* blog earlier today, about NCCAM’s funding of research and I linked to the last comment I posted on the NCCAM blog.
Who would have thought that my earlier post would have generated a reply from John Killen, Jr., M.D., the Deputy Director of the NCCAM?
Is it a coincidence…or is *someone* (cough, cough), (John Killen, Jr., M.D.), “lurking” on these blogs?
http://nccam.nih.gov/comment/327#comment-327
@lilady:
Yes, I noticed that and was impressed…. that he responded, not with the response itself though. It left much to be desired IMO.
I also noticed that he did not at all respond to my post. I followed up with another one asking him to and narrowing it down to the first question I would like answered if that is all he can manage for the time being. I guess we shall see what happens.
That second quoted abstract is impressive all right — impressive as a load of b.s. But what on earth does a “Homeopathic Constitutional Type Questionnaire” contain? Ok, so I had to Google that.
The first and most popular hit asks for age and sex and then…face shape, followed by “Loves to travel” yes or no, then height but with no measurements, just four choices: short, petite, normal or tall. (This is stuff of a quality reminiscent of drunken toddlers.) Then it moves onto questions one must rate one to four such as “Cry Readily for no Reasonable Cause,” “Cry When Thanked,” “Cry When Nervous or From Anxiety” and all in a way that would cause a cold-reading carnival fortune teller to spit in disgust.
But take not my word, go see the show yourself:
http://www.homeopathyandmore.com/menu/Constitution/personality1.php
And do get to page two which begins with all the crying and ends 172 questions later with “Can not cover neck even in the cool weather.” (My favorite section is “Fears” especially when it asks to rate one’s fear of ghosts.)
Loops back to Sally Fallon, eh? I’m shocked.
I went to the NCCAM website today and posted back at Dr. Killen…still in moderation, though.
Here’s Iris Bell (not to be confused with the comedienne Iris Bell), on YouTube, with “Homeopathy Debate II” at U. Conn., 2007. Dr. Steve Novella was in the first part of the debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYO6nNQGe1M
nybgrus and I posted at Dr. Killen at NCCAM and we both received answers from him:
https://nccam.nih.gov/research/blog/niche#comments
Jeez…he just blew us off. He and Dr. Briggs at the NCCAM really don’t give a rap that they are wasting taxpayer money to fund homeopaths like Dr. Iris Bell for 10 years and a total of $3,000,000 to “educate” traditional health care providers to understand CAM modalities.
I made two suggestions to Dr. Killen:
“I have two suggestions for the NCCAM:
Firstly, why not award grants to the CDC and State Health Departments’ Reference Laboratories, to conduct sophisticated laboratory tests on homeopathy “medicine”…to finally determine that water has no memory, water that has undergone multiple succussions beyond Avogadro’s number has not one molecule of the original substance diluted in the water.
Secondly, I would suggest that NCCAM assign their computer technology staff to this blog’s comment section, to make it more user friendly. It is very disconcerting to have to use slash marks to delineate paragraphs and to read those same paragraphs.”
I’m beginning to think that a suggestion by “Orac” at the Respectful Insolence blog to just “nuke” the NCCAM is the only recourse to eliminate this parasitic center at the NIH.
Interestingly, Dr. Killen has opted to not publish my most recent comment and instead simply reply in a short paragraph essentially writing me off. I was a tad hopeful a more meaningful discourse may have arisen from this but it seems not. Also, I did not save what I had written, so it is likely lost.
http://nccam.nih.gov/comment/378#comment-378