To help follow discussions, the most recent ten comments on blog posts are shown below with the latest comments first.
Older/newer comments can be viewed by clicking on the links at the bottom.
Clicking on the post title will take you to that blog post page and clicking on the comment author and date will take you straight to that comment.
by Edzard - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:50
Ahhhhh That's what Mosley stated: "There haven’t been that many proper scientific trials looking at the benefits of kombucha itself but..."
by Don - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:32
Prof Tim Spector and Dr Michael Mosley appear to disagree with your findings ..
by Edzard - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:39
I do not have this information; to give a verdict about permanent harm, it would be too early anyway. I don't hope anyone has died; statistically, this would be very unlikely - the death rate of measles is 1 in 5 000.
by Sandra - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:33
For comparison purposes, out of the 587 documented measles cases, how many suffered permanent physical or mental harm? Did any of these measles cases result in death?
by Siva Canjeevaram - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:38
“If it bleeds it can be killed” said the Dutch in predator. (His wise is proved because he became a governor, politics and business needs understanding of the bullshit around you) People say about Reiki “electromagnetic” “energy” blah blah If it is physical energy then it can be sensed and measured. I wish they power thier home refrigerators with reiki. (Funny) The problem with reiki is there is no objectivity. My 6 yr o can tomorrow start a reiki business. Oh..? You have a goon cartel? To control that, never mind about objectivity. As far the harmless , if you consider other people wasting thier money and efforts as well as hopes is “not a harm” (or a benefit to people like us, we can make money from these fools) then it is “not a harm”
by Siva Canjeevaram - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:25
Ok I am compassionate enough to answer you. Unlike you I honest to myself. I am not part of the 20% because I am not yet wiser like the 20% but I am sure I am in higher range. I call it the “effortless life” not sure if you get the point. Maybe you are just a hourly wage worker and won’t inderstand what I say. Second I have the guts to face the challenges and I have proven to myself. The very act of me not going to stuff like reiki , lottery etc is a proof. For eg my children when we went to the local school for registration there was a “lottery” I refused to let my children’s fate decided by lottery. It can be argued. But there is a sentence called “most likely” Master sergeant Farrell says “with readiness and discipline we can be masters of fate” I guess you believe in he energy. Nothing wrong keep living. There are murderers , crazy people and rapists living with belief and justification
by Siva Canjeevaram - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:17
Vedic secret mantras? The western hippies have this “cultural hijack” from yoga to sushi. It is like the Kumars and Guptas now making mashed potatoes and Yorkshire pudding and eating it with chicken curry.
by Siva Canjeevaram - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:14
Oh, ..you want to judge me? Why? Because your existence is dependant on how I am perceived in your brain? Why is it not the same thing for me? Now tell me who is the person “who don’t care” for me people like you only give me the confidence in what I am pursuing. That things really are not tough as I thInk. Keep it coming. I have learning value in that
by Siva Canjeevaram - Sunday 17 June 2018 14:11
In what way your question / and an answer will strengthen or support your position or mine? Explain please
by Osteopathie Praxis im Klinikum Karlsruhe - Sunday 17 June 2018 12:33
Siva Canjeevaram I appreciate your considerations about the stupidity of others. As you are a wise man knowing a lot about stupidity I suppose you are belonging to the wealthy 20% (=not being stupid!) ?? If not I am doubting your competence to judge.
by Siva Canjeevaram - Saturday 16 June 2018 16:15
1000 people a day? I have seen bigger gathering of stupid people than that
by Siva Canjeevaram - Saturday 16 June 2018 16:13
Everything in this world is only an economic struggle. It can be god, politics, therapies or anything. People who know this make money and live with less efforts then the people who don’t know this. Ever wondered why the wealth of this world is concentrated with the 20%? Because most of the population is stupid, lazy, cowards or dishonest people.
by Edzard - Sunday 17 June 2018 12:17
Speculation is not a hypothesis, neither is it a basis for plausibility, I think.
by Julian Money-Kyrle - Sunday 17 June 2018 11:58
While it doesn't seem very likely to me, I would not have thought this was completely biologically implausible. I'm sure it is possible to hypothesise mechanisms whereby traumatising the skin in this way can have biological effects. For instance, if it alters blood flow within subcutaeous fat, this may affect oestrogen levels (oestrogen being metabolised in fat) and therefore also LH and FSH. Or perhaps there are systemic effects following on from the local inflammation visible in the photograph, with release of any number of acute phase proteins, growth factors and other chemical signals associated with tissue damage. Such a response might be an interesting area for basic research (probably somebody has already looked into it with regard to burns and other forms or skin trauma). Nature is much more devious that we give her credit for, and our knowledge of physiology is far from complete. However, I certainly wouldn't want to base treatment on such ideas without a lot more evidence.
by wheels5894 - Saturday 16 June 2018 12:41
Given the risks and the lack of biological plausibility - NO!
by Frank Collins - Saturday 16 June 2018 11:44
I know the answer; it is a form of witchcraft espoused by charlatans or the deluded, both of which have no understanding of even basic science.
by Jacque Goudergue - Sunday 17 June 2018 03:54
@Cindy Galloway well said
by Björn Geir - Saturday 16 June 2018 12:05
We seem to have yet another gullible reader of Gary Null, Natural News, Mercola and similar fake-information dumps designed to scare people to buy snake-oil. Here is a good response to the common fallacy about murderous medical doctors: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/death-by-medicine/ The most important issue is that modern medicine saves fantastically more lives and so called alternative medicine cannot replace medicine, not more than flying carpets can replace aeroplanes.
by Jashak - Friday 15 June 2018 08:39
Dear Sandy, it seems that you have not understood the message. I do not know if the statistic that you mention (200:1 ratio of fatalities Western med: Acupuncture) is correct or not. But even if your comment would be true that "(...) inappropriately trained and practicing medical practitioners Are the problem", then the answers must be: *IMPROVE THE TRAINING/EDUCATION of the evidence-based medical practitioners *SUPPORT SERIOUS SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH on health issues. The answer CANNOT be to promote CAM (homeopathy, acupunture, TCM, etc. etc.) which: *Contradict science & logic *Have no prooven positive effect (beyond placebo, which is not reliable) *Involve serious risks (at the very least, delay of an effective treatment. Wost case as mentioned in this blog: death). BTW, the statement to fist "do no harm" is NOT correct, because many necessary treatments first do harm (e.g. in all cases of surgery). The important thing is that the benefit must outweigh the "harm", i.e. the ratio of benefit vs. risk must be positive to promote a treatment. For acupuncture (and all other CAM), this ration is negative, because clinical RCT studies show that it just does not work efficiently (beyond placebo, that is).
by Frank Odds - Saturday 16 June 2018 09:40
@Xraylfh Sadly, your blog seems to be invisible to many outside the USA. "Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism."
by Xraylfh - Saturday 16 June 2018 07:38
I have an entire blog dedicated to medical myths, as well as other things. Chicagonow.com/health-care-mythologies Check it out.
by S. Cox, MD - Friday 15 June 2018 20:50
Pharmacies and "Health" Food stores that sell unproven or fake remedies should be forced to advertise the truth. One example could be "HOLE FOODS, A GREAT SOURCE FOR PROVEN AND UNPROVEN REMEDIES, (ask your licensed physician or pharmacist the difference).
by Rich Wiltshir - Friday 15 June 2018 07:37
To help one person avoid taking a bogus path is something our dear Professor should be proud of. To have helped uncounted people avoid washing money and health down the drain is something our dear Prof should be applauded for. I've no doubt his friends and loved ones are proud of him, but thanks for giving me the opportunity to to express how much I appreciate Edward Ernst decades-long labours.
by Simon Baker - Friday 15 June 2018 19:03
Homeopaths are literally unable to exercise critical thinking about any of the mutually contradictory claims of their various schools of thought and that disability extends to other modes of SCAM. It’s hard for a homeopath to criticise radionics or remedies recorded onto CDs because their advocates have exactly the same evidence base as the normal homeopaths.
by Simon Baker - Friday 15 June 2018 18:59
Never mind the quality, just look at the dates on those studies. This is archaeology not modern medical science. Have they just given up?
by Rich Wiltshir - Friday 15 June 2018 18:38
Homeopathy's proponents undermine the industry they strive to promote. Their claims and arguments are flawed by incredible assertions, ignorant factoids, incompetent analyses and intended misdirection. They, this includes you Greg, do a disservice to their cause with such transparently unfounded diatribes. To persuade us, specifically me, otherwise please deliver credible claims, demonstrable facts, competent analysis and honest evaluation.
by RichardR - Friday 15 June 2018 13:36
I'm afraid that 'critical, rational thinking' is way over the horizon in homeopathic circles, and that any 'self-cleansing' of homeopathy is something that doesn't happen in this universe at all. As long as homeopaths in general won't even dismiss or distance themselves from utterly ludicrous things such as shipwreck-based remedies, diluted light of Saturn, homeopathic sound files and many, many more examples of human foolishness, one can only dream of the day that these people will actually engage their critical faculties and start using their brain in a rational manner. (At which point they won't be homeopaths any more...)
by Greg - Friday 15 June 2018 12:12
Professor Frank Odds, it you up to your old rhetorical tricks again. I have been writing comments on Professor Ernst's posts for some time now, obviously I don't expect you to have read them all but if you read just a few then you should know that your statement: 'Why is it that we never see the same self-critical attitude among SCAM proponents?' is WRONG. As I mentioned before Frank, it is tough to decide whether you or Bjorn are at the top of the table. (Dr Rawlins and Thomas are close behind but I doubt they will catch you and Bjorn).
by Edzard - Friday 15 June 2018 10:33
by Frank Odds - Friday 15 June 2018 10:12
Are there any homeopaths aware of the huge intellectual industry among professional scientists and physicians/surgeons to critique research publications? All around the planet, informal groups within institutions meet within the umbrella characterization of 'journal clubs' to bash newly published papers in the participants' specialist fields. At national and international medical meetings, speakers reviewing treatment possibilities for particular diseases commonly describe weaknesses in published clinical trials. ('Big Pharma' even plays a positive role in this context: company A will often sponsor meetings where speakers explore the flaws in trials describing competitor company B's drug.) The journal clubs are usually aimed at strengthening the self-critical faculties of PhD students and postdocs. The bigger meetings typically have the goal of providing a balanced assessment of state-of-the-art diagnosis and treatment of particular diseases. It's amazing how often a publication once thought to be of high quality is brought down to size because of an omission or even a major flaw that's spotted by one or more other investigators. These exercises in serious critical thinking and research appraisal make science (and science-based medicine) a wonderfully stimulating and exciting pool in which to swim. One's research efforts always need to be self-critical. Edzard Ernst's critiques on this blog are one-man examples of this type of rational critical thinking. Many of the frequent commentators are equally adept and often offer devastating pin-pricks that burst pseudo-medical balloons in specialist medical fields. Why is it that we never see the same self-critical attitude among SCAM proponents? The list of references from the Faculty of Homeopathy is typical of every branch of pseudo-medicine. Promotional, uncritical and dissembling to the point of untruth. It has been pointed out many times before that SCAM-artists are seldom critical even of branches of Big Snakeoil other than the one they practise: it's almost as if there's a conspiracy among non-medics to support even the most lame-brained treatment claim.
Newer comments → ← Older comments