[p2p-research] shots in the dark/p2p article

[Tomas Rawlings]

> But, echoing Michel's theme of a diversity of issues, here is another item 
> recently in the non-mainstream news, so I don't know how true it is, but 
> this is as an example of what that article suggests is bad in that case but 
> actually may work in *some* cases:
> "Successful Use of Homeopathy In Over 2.5 Million People Reported From Cuba"
> http://homeopathyresource.wordpress.com/2009/01/01/successful-use-of-homeopathy-in-over-5-million-people-reported-from-cuba/
> """
>   
I saw the author of the article speak at the Glastonbury festival this 
year - next door to the 'healing fields' - so had plenty of oppositional 
people in the audience - in the ensuing debate he returned to the same 
point over and over - that beyond the placebo effect there is not a 
single well designed study that offered proof of homoeopathic remedies.  
In the debate plenty of studies were citied but upon examination they 
always lacked a good design; missing a control, tiny sample size, 
designed to generate a false positive etc.

Again, homoeopathic stuff is not something I know anything about, but I 
do think, while the peer review system has it flaws (and again the 
author is merciless in exposing them and medical science scams too) we 
have to have a method that allows us to evaluate ideas beyond personal 
conviction, anecdotal evidence and/or media article.  Anything else 
edges towards denialism; we see this in global warming denial and 
creationism where advocates seem to think that citing opinion polls and 
petitions signed by 'scientists' equates to truth.

All I am arguing for is rigour of approach and evidence .....

-- 
Tomas

-----------------------
Tomas Rawlings
Development Director, FluffyLogic Development Ltd.
web: www.fluffylogic.net
tel: 0117 9442233 
-
Also see:
blog on film & interweb: www.plugincinema.com
blog on p2p, media ecology & evolution: blog.catbot.org
tweet: www.twitter.com/arclightfire