Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

www.Wiki4Cam.org

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • www.Wiki4Cam.org

    Do you know how Wikipedia, the world's most used encyclopedia defines 'Homeopathy'? Read this:

    Claims to the efficacy of homeopathic treatment beyond the placebo effect are unsupported by the collective weight of scientific and
    clinical evidence,[7][8][9][10] although advocates of homeopathy point to studies of the effects of compounds diluted almost out of
    existence.[11][12] Common homeopathic preparations are diluted beyond the point where there is any likelihood that molecules from
    the original solution are present in the final product; the claim that these treatments still have any pharmacological effect is thus
    scientifically implausible[13][14] and violates fundamental principles of science,[15] including the law of mass action.[15]
    Critics also object that the number of high-quality studies that support homeopathy is small, the conclusions are not definitive, and
    duplication of the results, a key test of scientific validity, has proven problematic at best.[16] The lack of convincing scientific
    evidence supporting its efficacy[17] and its use of remedies without active ingredients have caused homeopathy to be regarded as
    pseudoscience;[18] quackery;[19][20][21] or, in the words of a 1998 medical review, "placebo therapy at best and quackery at worst."[22]

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy

    Do you know that nearly all Complementary & Alternative Medicine (CAM) articles on Wikipedia, including the one that you practice, are
    heavily biased against CAM therapies? Everything that does not fall into the realm of modern medicine has been labeled as pseudo-scientific
    or unscientific at Wikipedia.

    Wikipedia is among the top 10 websites globally. Through it millions of people who use internet to search for alternative medicine are
    being systematically exposed to anti-CAM data. At the time when the world is rushing towards alternative medicine, the effort to sabotage
    the alternative medicine cannot be ignored.

    To counter this misinformation, we need a place where the CAM community can build its own knowledge base without the undue interference
    of skeptics. We need a place where the CAM practitioners themselves write articles and create a true picture of its history,
    development, efficacy and positive research.

    To ensure that the alternative medicines is not discredited or disputed unfairly and to create a true encyclopedia for Complementary
    & Alternative Medicine (CAM), Hpathy.com, world's leading homeopathy portal, is announcing a parallel wiki project at www.wiki4cam.org

    We invite you to register at wiki4cam and help us build true information about the CAM modality that you practice.

    If you are a School/College of any CAM therapy or if you are a CAM practitioner and if you are concerned about the anti-CAM propaganda,
    take up the responsibility for creating articles about your CAM therapy at Wiki4CAM. Do not think that someone else will do it. It is
    YOUR responsibility to actively participate in building a true information base about the CAM modality that your practice and teach!

    Please visit http://www.wiki4cam.org now and find out why the CAM community needs to come together and take charge of its own content.

    We request you to forward this information about Wiki4CAM.org to all you alternative medicine friends practicing Homeopathy, Ayurveda,
    Naturopathy, TCM, Herbalism, EFT or any other CAM modality. Wiki4CAM is meant for the whole CAM community.

    Thank you,
    Dr. Manish Bhatia
    "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

  • #2
    Wikipedia biased against CAM? Are you claiming that homeopathy doesn't violate any of the known scientific laws, or require a radical explanation?

    Sure, existing knowledge could be wrong and although a sound proof of homeopathic principles would require some re-writing of physics, that doesn't mean it's a psuedoscience is itself.

    Can you imagine a fair wiki overview article on homeopathy that doesn't mention it's *overwhelming* problems and counter-evidence?

    Comment


    • #3
      Wikipedia biased against CAM?
      "Can you imagine a fair wiki overview article on homeopathy .................................................. ."

      If wikipedia was FAIR there would be NO NEED for Wiki4Cam.org
      Its been slandered by the Randi Skeptic members,Wikipedia is no longer the encyclopedia for Homeopathy or any other Alternative medicine its autointoxicated itself.............................
      "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Saying homeopathy has major problems is slander?

        Originally posted by Gina View Post
        Wikipedia biased against CAM?
        "Can you imagine a fair wiki overview article on homeopathy .................................................. ."

        If wikipedia was FAIR there would be NO NEED for Wiki4Cam.org
        Its been slandered by the Randi Skeptic members,Wikipedia is no longer the encyclopedia for Homeopathy or any other Alternative medicine its autointoxicated itself.............................
        that doesn't mention it's *overwhelming* problems and counter-evidence?
        Finish, please.

        Comment


        • #5
          What problems,What counter evidence?

          Please see link for Scientific homeopathy data:

          Hpathy: Scientific Research Bibliography
          1 2DocQuack More scientific findings Easy Way for Clinics to Validate Hpathy Video of Science in Homeopathy Where is the skepticism?
          1 2 Homeopathy works Identification of Homeo Medicines clinical trial My recent experiments with Homeo med Antidepressant trial publishing bias Arnica vs. diclofenac in DBPC tri


          Let me know when your done reading this I will post more,No problem
          There is over 200+yrs of proof Homeopathy works



          Science and Homeopathy
          The place to post notices and information about the scientific validity of Homeopathy.
          "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Gina View Post
            What problems,What counter evidence?
            You can't remember any threads where anyone has claimed different? Srsly?

            Comment


            • #7
              " Your Holygrail of counter-evidence? ......................................"Is writen on he basis off:


              ................. the public debate on homeopathy is stimulated by media reports that favor a skeptical view of homeopathy, most often based on "complete ignorance" of the subject matter.


              As a result of such negative media coverage, many people "who know nothing" of homeopathy (and very little of the foundations of modern science) hold a critical view of it.

              The people who inform the media range from clueless journalists to professional skeptics who are rarely clueless but often disingenuous in their skepticism.

              The list of such skeptics includes Michael Shermer, Richard Wiseman and Richard Dawkins, magicians such as James Randi, and physicians such as Stephen Barrett and Ben Goldacre


              So Moopet,What is your basis ,What is your expierenence with Homeopathics<what is your education regards Quantum physics/Homeopathy/Energy medicine?
              "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

              Comment


              • #8
                You seem to be unable to answer straight questions.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I have already posted an answer,read it again
                  Or is it an answer you do not want to hear?
                  "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You haven't answered:

                    In this thread - Are you claiming that homeopathy doesn't violate any of the known scientific laws, or require a radical explanation?

                    In this thread - Can you imagine a fair wiki overview article on homeopathy that doesn't mention it's *overwhelming* problems and counter-evidence?

                    In the other thread I could be bothered with (http://www.otherhealth.com/research-...html#post80682) - Which article?

                    Is it possible that you could answer questions on your own, without pasting in links to non-public sites or biased (run by homeopath) sites? Without pasting in swathes of text from other sources? Pasting information to support your position is fine, if you show understanding of what you're saying and can coherently state your case. Can you?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      My long history of posting messages have made me aware of whats commin next.
                      I normally post something or post a reply,then someone asks"can you show a link or proof of what you just said?"
                      Then I have to find a link/document to back up my statement.
                      Anyone can rattle off bullshit/rhetoric about anything on these discussion forums..........................

                      So I am just saving myself one step and posting the direct quote/link...........................Got it!
                      "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gina View Post
                        So I am just saving myself one step and posting the direct quote/link...........................Got it!
                        You appear to not be able to answer a straight question. Again.
                        Why are you being so evasive?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          although advocates of homeopathy point to studies of the effects of compounds diluted almost out of
                          existence.[11][12]
                          I was the one who added the above phrase in Wikipedia's "criticism" paragraph.

                          I have relatives who are practicing homeopathy with good results although I don't do homeopathy because I'll never give up coffee

                          However, I recently read a book from George Vythoulkas about homeopathy and I was amazed to find references to published research about the potency of highly diluted substances. I was skeptic myself, but I found the references here:

                          SpringerLink - Journal Article
                          SpringerLink - Journal Article

                          So, I went to wikipedia to read about homeopathy and was quite surprised to see that homeopathy is being described there as a placebo effect quakery. While it's OK for an encyclopedia to include criticism for homeopathy (see the Britannica article about it), the Wikipedia article was clearly biased to make homeopathy look like snake oil. So I added the quoted phrase and the two references to show that there is evidence that contradicts placebo.

                          My edit was reverted, based on acceptable reasoning. I re-entered the corrected version of my edit. However my 2nd edit was reverted again, this time with the silly argument: "DONT EDIT THE CRITICAL PARAGRAPH".

                          I reverted the previous revert (restoring my edit) and I immediately received a warning on my discussion page User talk:Vyx - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                          The message read: "If you continue to edit war, then you are going to be banned from this article topic.". That was a clear threat but I explained my reasoning to the admin who made the threat.

                          The quoted phrase remained on the article for a few days but then they were both removed completely by an anti-homeopathy fanatic called "Naturezak" who claimed that he "Removed citations which indicated claims, but not instances of claims being used by advocates of homeopathy. The statement of such use was unsupported."

                          I guess I should re-enter the information that supports the instance of the claim (the book of George Vythoulkas) -- but the fanatics of "WikiProject Rational Skepticism" (a Wikipedia group which "Naturezak" is member of) will find another reason to remove. Their goal is to prevent anyone from reading scientific research that might validate homeopathy.

                          I believe there are two reasons that Wikipedia is plagued by these fanatics (they are not even "skeptics" because sceptics would never remove scientific research references)

                          1) Homeopaths are busy researching and practicing, while fanatic skeptics are busy criticizing. You can't research and practice homeopathy with Wikipedia, but you can definitely criticize. So it's natural ground for them.

                          2) There is a "mob" mentality in Wikipedia that deteriorates the quality of such articles as homeopathy. If anyone of those fanatics (even Naturezak) were left alone to write an encyclopedic article about homeopathy, they would eventually come down to something like the Britannica article. However, when they all act together, they see no limits to censoring, defamation and lies.

                          I won't be spending any more time there, although I do hope that a serious admin will have a look on the actions of the "WikiProject Rational Skepticism" group and take appropriate measures.

                          And I really like the idea of creating a wiki where fanatics will not be tolerated.
                          Last edited by Vyx; 16th August 2008, 01:42 PM. Reason: fix typos

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Dear VYX
                            Yes I have heard this same story from many trying to post/edit Wikipedia-Homeopathy information.

                            You are not the only one they have targeted.
                            It is a full time job for the Randi forum member skeptics,You would think these 20 yr olds would have better things to do than post anti-homeopathic rhetoric.

                            This is why the need for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Encyclopedia - Wiki4CAM
                            Thanks for your imput
                            "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              From ZEUS HOMOEOPATHY NEWS aug 2008

                              Dark Days at Wikipedia
                              9th August 2008
                              by Sue Young
                              It is with great regret that Wikipediahas been exposed as deeply prejudiced against Alternative Medicine, such that the homeopathic community has now established its own version, www.wiki4cam.org, to counter the subversive propaganda Wikipedia is pumping out. Shame on them!

                              http://homeopathy.wildfalcon.com/archives/2008/08/09/dark-da ys-at-wikipedia/
                              "Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X