User Tools

Site Tools


en:misc:talk-saine-novella-question01

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
en:misc:talk-saine-novella-question01 [2013/09/03 07:51]
legatum
en:misc:talk-saine-novella-question01 [2013/09/16 09:17] (current)
62.65.168.3
Line 448: Line 448:
  
 Incidentally,​ it is a strange fact how detractors of homeopathy rely so much on expert opinion when they recognize it to be the least valuable level of evidence. From earlier time until now, professed experts on homeopathy, whom skeptics have relied on, have been found to be shams and/or the evidence they advanced against homeopathy have been shown to be flawed, like we have seen above with the French Academy of Medicine, Holmes, Shang et al., the //Lancet// editors, Edzard Ernst, etc. Incidentally,​ it is a strange fact how detractors of homeopathy rely so much on expert opinion when they recognize it to be the least valuable level of evidence. From earlier time until now, professed experts on homeopathy, whom skeptics have relied on, have been found to be shams and/or the evidence they advanced against homeopathy have been shown to be flawed, like we have seen above with the French Academy of Medicine, Holmes, Shang et al., the //Lancet// editors, Edzard Ernst, etc.
 +
 +{{anchor:​homeopathy_statistics}}
  
 ===== Statistical Analysis of the Epidemiological Evidence ===== ===== Statistical Analysis of the Epidemiological Evidence =====
en/misc/talk-saine-novella-question01.txt · Last modified: 2013/09/16 09:17 by 62.65.168.3