Not to say homeopathy works, but they probably know way too much about the pharmaceutical industry to fully trust it anymore.
this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Skeptic
1265 readers
3 users here now
A community for Scientific Skepticism:
Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.
Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.
Things we like:
- Civility
- Thoughtful discussion based on evidence and facts
- Humor
Things we don't like:
- Personal attacks or disrespectful attitude
- Wild speculation on events with no evidence
- Low-effort comments and posts
Other communities of interest:
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Is it possible that he is just throwing everything at it? I don't think I've read anywhere that he is ignoring any doctors or treatment. I feel like maybe everyone is just hyperfixating on this one avenue.
Same thing happened to Steve Jobs. He tried to cure cancer by eating only fruits. Although it does make sense his treatment was apple based.
What's crazy is that his cancer had a high survivability (iirc one of the only pancreatic cancers that are not a death sentence).
Because they're used to not having the rules apply to them. A doctor tells them something they don't want to hear? Well, obviously they can go somewhere else to find a "cheat code" that will let them bend the rules in their favor. It's just another way they try to cheat the system, but other than access to all the best doctors, procedures, nutrition, they're not really any better off than the commoners.
Because the elite are in on the grift.
Charles was just diagnosed with cancer. I guess he's going to find out what Steve Jobs found out.
My brother once made an interesting point about why Steve Jobs chose fake medicine. What he said was, from memory, "Every other time in his life that people told him what he was doing was a bad idea that would end in disaster he ended up making a few billion dollars."
Oh wow! Its full of value for shareholders!
Only a homeopath or one among every other kind of treatment because he can afford it as he is rich as fuck?
The minor saving grace of homeopathy (I can't believe I'm saying this), is that it can give hope, and the downstream effect of positive emotion can help people recover more quickly. (link)
Where this falls apart, are cases where the money being charged for this positivity are extortionate, where people are encouraged to only seek alternative medicine, and where the effects are treated as something other than helping you feel better.
It's downright distressing when you see somebody forgoing treatment that has a good chance of actually curing things, because someone is actively selling them on homeopathic benefits far greater than feeling better.
Edit: I just realised, I'm not on my home instance, I'm on a skeptic board. So I will clarify, I do think it's a bunch of quack, but belief in it may help some people.
Even if it's just one other "treatment" it's still bad. Not just because it's a waste of money, but there can be interactions. Certain foods change how drugs act, and who knows what weird remedies they would suggest that are harmful.
Then if this quack is on the team of specialists, the real doctors have to either waste time listening to garbage, or waste time trying to convince Chuckles to ignore the garbage.
Not to mention the fact that it's possible that they might not make certain suggestions when they know a scam artist is throwing doubt into the actual scientifically backed process.
When people say "why not try everything?" this is why. You can't follow a real treatment plan and psudo-nonsense at the same time.
This is the likely truth. Prolly has like 40 specialists trying every type of treatment under the sun.
until this moment, I felt bad for him (as a person, because I’m not a psychopath who lacks empathy).
from now on, he gets what he deserves for making the dumbest decision possible which will guarantee his death despite his privileged access to the best medical care available to humankind.
the worst part is that many cancer patients will now be seeking homeopaths because the royal family can't be wrong
Reminds me of Nancy Reagan’s astrologer.
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-nancy-reagan-astrology-20160306-story.html
He has been told since birth that God appointed him and his family to be the heads of state of the country and to rule over millions of people; is it any surprise that it's easy to believe nonsense?
Anything that ends the monarchy quicker is fine. Biggest case of Stockholm syndrome ever.
It will not end, it will only begin. The monarchy under the queen was very popular. As Charles took over, it lost a bit of its prestige, as Charles has too much bad publicity in the last three decades. But it was okay to let people turn away für some years as it was clear that there will be a Second Lady Diana Moment as soon as William and Kate will take over. People Loooove them. They will be the reason the boulevard press will survive the next three decades. Mark my words: Monarch in the UK is not dying but will just awake new under W+K - especially in miserable times like these. People cling to that shit like it is their own live, because some people include it into the center of their own life.
inbred lol
quite literally
I am unshockingly OK with his decision. You do you Charlie!
As happy as I am to see any royal loose their power, in whatever way is necessary, this will encourage a lot of people to continue to believe that sugar pills will heal them.
“Loose their power” and “Lose their power” have two completely different meanings.
English is not my first language, please enlighten me
Lose would imply that they no longer had power, in past tense "He lost his power".
Loose would imply that he used his power "He let loose his power"
Or in another context, if you lose your dog, it's gone missing.
If you let loose your dog, it's like you've released the lead, and told it "bite that man in the bum".
Loose (verb) = "to let loose" = "to free" (verb), so "loose their power" implies freeing or expressing their power. (Having power)
Lose (verb) = "to not have any more" (lost), so "lose their power" implies no longer having their power. (Not having power).
"Loose" and "lose" are completely different words. "Loose" is commonly written incorrectly online for "lose", so many English speakers make this mistake when writing it.
Editing to add that "loose" is very rarely used as a verb in the way described - it's archaic and nobody would use it in conversation - it is normally an adjective meaning "not tight". The main thing is to remember that "lose", like "lost" is spelled with a single "o" and "loose", like "not tight" has two.
Oh! I get it now, thank you :) I'm realizing after the fact that the spelling of these have confused me before, now it makes sense why!
Don’t feel bad, the spelling confuses a lot of native speakers as well.
This whole "loose/lose" thread exemplifies a big difference in feel between exchanges in Lemmy vs reddit. One takes the opportunity to educate, the other never misses a chance to ridicule.
In a sane world, the first sentence of the headline would end with "as court jester". Hopefully those are still around.
