10th September 2004, 11:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 11th September 2004, 12:24 AM by Dark Jaguar.)
Why does the opinion of the tester have anything to do with it? The testers are doing it solely to expose the truth, no matter what it is. They DO believe it's not true, but that doesn't affect them. A good test doesn't care what the opinions of the testers are. These tests are like that. Even if the tester was 100% certain there was NO way it could be true ever (that would actually be bias), these tests wouldn't be affected, because they are double-blind tests.
As of yet, testing the contents isn't what they do. Instead, they test the medicine's effectiveness. They apply this medicine to a large number of people.
Here's how the test works. What they do is have a massive assortment of samples. Half of the samples are homeopathic mixes. The other half is plain water. In order to prevent the actual tester from affecting the results in any way, the tester has no idea which is which, or what patients are getting what mix. The patients ALSO have no idea if they are getting the water or the medicine in question, so their mental state will have no affect on the results either. This is why it's called double-blind testing, because neither the tester or the testee has any idea of a certain crucial part of the test. Anyway, the tester doesn't know, but instead the people, a decent number of them checking each other, prepare the samples. They mark all the samples with a letter/number combo (something that's totally unintelligable to either party, since the marking isn't a code so much as randomly chosen) and mark down on a list which ones are water and what's the treatment. The patients themselves ALL have been thoroughly tested to assure they ALL suffer the same condition (they must be absolutly positive they all have this condition and have been properly diagnosed as such) and have the same symptoms. The reason they all have to suffer the same thing and that it must be confirmed is fairly obvious.
Anyway, with all this preparation, it's obvious they are serious about it. They aren't just humoring them, they really are trying to find out the truth. So, the test commences. They give them all their sample, assigned by the testers, not the mixers, and remember neither the testers nor the patients have any idea which samples are the homeopathic remedy or which is the water. They then proceed to moniter them and ask how they are feeling a significant time later. Some of them really are feeling better, but what percentage of the people who feel better are the ones who took the homeopathic remedy?
Well the final element of the test is applied. The original mixers come out with their master list. They then match up the patients with the sample they took, which is matched up with the chart showing which was and was not the placebo. Well, when all is said and done, unfortunatly, the homeopathic remedy failed the test. Those who felt better fell evenly on both sides (half were taking water and the other half the "remedy"), in fact VERY evenly, WELL within what's allowed by chance. That said, the remedy was tested and found to be no better than chance. This means that the remedy has no healing affect greater than straight water, meaning it has no healing affect at all. It is pure junk. Now, this was a large sample, but larger samples mean greater accuracy, right? Well, this test has been repeated many times, and sadly it always fails.
It would have been incredible if it turns out that the medication actually has a real effect that showed it wasn't just chance. It would not only be a major boon for medicine, but physics in general! It would truly be a revolutionary chance to our understanding of how the world works. Sadly, it would seem that's not the case. It would seem this particular thing is false, and that it's conjecture on how the world works is merely wishful thinking...
You see, they really DO want to find out the truth about how the world works. They aren't this secretive council attempting to stifle new thought. I mean, they would be out of a job if they stopped finding out new stuff :D. No one pays a scientist that tells the world stuff it already knew after all :D.
Edit: I failed to mention something, but some people bring this up so I thought I might. Yes, the people representing homeopathy have a huge say in the matters concerning the tests. Namely, they are there to confirm that the various patients have the disease as well, and they are allowed to provide all the samples, mixed themselves in any way they should please, so they can make them in as favorable conditions as they should want. They are also told of all the steps and their approval of the method is confirmed before the test takes place. This is to assure that everything is as favorable for the claimant as possible so that any failure cannot be later blamed on the scientists rigging the tests or the conditions being somehow faulty. Any failure with these rigurous tests can only then be blamed on the claim being false.
As of yet, testing the contents isn't what they do. Instead, they test the medicine's effectiveness. They apply this medicine to a large number of people.
Here's how the test works. What they do is have a massive assortment of samples. Half of the samples are homeopathic mixes. The other half is plain water. In order to prevent the actual tester from affecting the results in any way, the tester has no idea which is which, or what patients are getting what mix. The patients ALSO have no idea if they are getting the water or the medicine in question, so their mental state will have no affect on the results either. This is why it's called double-blind testing, because neither the tester or the testee has any idea of a certain crucial part of the test. Anyway, the tester doesn't know, but instead the people, a decent number of them checking each other, prepare the samples. They mark all the samples with a letter/number combo (something that's totally unintelligable to either party, since the marking isn't a code so much as randomly chosen) and mark down on a list which ones are water and what's the treatment. The patients themselves ALL have been thoroughly tested to assure they ALL suffer the same condition (they must be absolutly positive they all have this condition and have been properly diagnosed as such) and have the same symptoms. The reason they all have to suffer the same thing and that it must be confirmed is fairly obvious.
Anyway, with all this preparation, it's obvious they are serious about it. They aren't just humoring them, they really are trying to find out the truth. So, the test commences. They give them all their sample, assigned by the testers, not the mixers, and remember neither the testers nor the patients have any idea which samples are the homeopathic remedy or which is the water. They then proceed to moniter them and ask how they are feeling a significant time later. Some of them really are feeling better, but what percentage of the people who feel better are the ones who took the homeopathic remedy?
Well the final element of the test is applied. The original mixers come out with their master list. They then match up the patients with the sample they took, which is matched up with the chart showing which was and was not the placebo. Well, when all is said and done, unfortunatly, the homeopathic remedy failed the test. Those who felt better fell evenly on both sides (half were taking water and the other half the "remedy"), in fact VERY evenly, WELL within what's allowed by chance. That said, the remedy was tested and found to be no better than chance. This means that the remedy has no healing affect greater than straight water, meaning it has no healing affect at all. It is pure junk. Now, this was a large sample, but larger samples mean greater accuracy, right? Well, this test has been repeated many times, and sadly it always fails.
It would have been incredible if it turns out that the medication actually has a real effect that showed it wasn't just chance. It would not only be a major boon for medicine, but physics in general! It would truly be a revolutionary chance to our understanding of how the world works. Sadly, it would seem that's not the case. It would seem this particular thing is false, and that it's conjecture on how the world works is merely wishful thinking...
You see, they really DO want to find out the truth about how the world works. They aren't this secretive council attempting to stifle new thought. I mean, they would be out of a job if they stopped finding out new stuff :D. No one pays a scientist that tells the world stuff it already knew after all :D.
Edit: I failed to mention something, but some people bring this up so I thought I might. Yes, the people representing homeopathy have a huge say in the matters concerning the tests. Namely, they are there to confirm that the various patients have the disease as well, and they are allowed to provide all the samples, mixed themselves in any way they should please, so they can make them in as favorable conditions as they should want. They are also told of all the steps and their approval of the method is confirmed before the test takes place. This is to assure that everything is as favorable for the claimant as possible so that any failure cannot be later blamed on the scientists rigging the tests or the conditions being somehow faulty. Any failure with these rigurous tests can only then be blamed on the claim being false.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)