|
|
Post by danielquinn on Jul 31, 2014 13:56:16 GMT
That survey seems to suggest that Gp prescribe pure placebos' for people who have a mental issue . This would allow them to argue it was in the patients best interests , indeed under the mental capacity act they could do so if the person was classified as a patient .
however , if the person given a pure placebo complained the gp would be in trouble if they had mislead the patient unless it was in the patients best interests to do so and such an argument is only valid with serious psychological issues . It would not work with a normal punter .
if injury arose out of poor prescription it would be prima facia negligence .
This is why the test was done anonymously , it is potentially unethical and against the law.
Additionally , the survey doesn't say to what extent the patients were mislead and uses a very broad definition of placebo- if you go to your doctors with the shits and he prescribes a pro biotic drink I don't consider that to be placebo .
what the survey highlights is the complexity of dealing with 60 million people not widespread use and belief in the efficacy of placebos .
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jul 31, 2014 14:32:01 GMT
Articles in New Scientist early 2010 say Placebos work when the punters know they are placebos.
Proven
|
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Jul 31, 2014 14:49:04 GMT
Articles in New Scientist early 2010 say Placebos work when the punters know they are placebos. Proven It isn't - work on what - There is questionable evidence placebos work on mental conditions . There is no evidence that they work on organic ,biological illness -
nobody here would take a placebo for a heart attack .
And if that is the level of proof you require , good luck to you . Any chance your a judge and we have met to my detriment 
|
|
|
|
Post by chukka on Jul 31, 2014 16:39:15 GMT
what are you smoking ?
|
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Jul 31, 2014 16:40:57 GMT
Whatever it is I don't want any. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 17:07:25 GMT
Whatever it is I don't want any.
Don't worry, it's a placebo 
|
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Jul 31, 2014 17:11:00 GMT
Whatever it is I don't want any.
Don't worry, it's a placebo
Brilliant.  |
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Jul 31, 2014 17:19:31 GMT
Quality retort gents. Mods it should be noted that the above 3 post constitute ad homien and is analogous to the same response doc bunsen was subjected to when people disagreed with him but didn't have the intellectual capacity to respond to what he said. So they attacked him and he attacked back. In deference to this forum I have different tactics so please don't moderate thier posts. Gents got anything relevant to say? I bet you a 50 quid to cancer research none of you have Of course should your post turn to shit then it will be your 50 quid. |
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Jul 31, 2014 17:23:41 GMT
Quality retort gents. Mods it should be noted that the above 3 post constitute ad homien
Is a sense of humour allowed in Marxism ? |
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on Jul 31, 2014 17:26:28 GMT
I don't mind the banter. I was making a point Rd can no longer make.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2014 17:34:22 GMT
I don't mind the banter. I was making a point Rd can no longer make. If RD hadn't acted like a 7 year old he would still be a member, which is a shame because I enjoyed my brief discussion with him about objectivism v subjectivism. Can we please stop using the phrase "ad hominem", it comes across as pretentious and I don't like it  . Can we talk about Marxism now - or is this banned under the no politics rule? |
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Jul 31, 2014 17:34:54 GMT
I don't mind the banter. I was making a point Rd can no longer make.
I must say I read what his forum (and you) say about us on here and it's hardly complementary. If those are your true feelings why do you post here so often ? |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 31, 2014 18:32:03 GMT
Mods it should be noted that the above 3 post constitute ad homien In view of their light-heartedness, I let it ride. You did laugh, too?
Oh, and you've given us a lot of your Marxism politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jul 31, 2014 18:49:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Jul 31, 2014 20:20:31 GMT
I don't mind the banter. I was making a point Rd can no longer make. |
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 1, 2014 7:59:59 GMT
Articles in New Scientist early 2010 say Placebos work when the punters know they are placebos. Proven It isn't - work on what - There is questionable evidence placebos work on mental conditions . There is no evidence that they work on organic ,biological illness -
nobody here would take a placebo for a heart attack .
And if that is the level of proof you require , good luck to you . Any chance your a judge and we have met to my detriment
If I had prefect recall I could recite chapter and verse. It's there and proven. What cases ? Don't remember Did it bring people back from the dead ? no Is it a universal panacea for any ailment ? No one said that. The level of proof was enough after seeing it has been researched peer reviewed and questioned. There will always be specifics to disprove anything. Should placebos be given for heart attacks ? Where do you get you ideas from ? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 1, 2014 8:40:02 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 8:49:53 GMT
I've always liked Marcos cars  |
|
|
|
Post by chukka on Aug 1, 2014 10:08:13 GMT
.... didn't have the intellectual capacity ...  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 10:46:44 GMT
.... didn't have the intellectual capacity ... I wouldn't worry about it. There will always be people whose intellect is so vast that us mere mortals have a bit of bother understanding where they are coming from. They usually clubtogether and laugh at us but do deign to give us the benefit of their wisdom from time to time. |
|
.
