On Jun 28, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote:
I don't see how this is a workable distinction.
It's not the treatments that are sincere or not
- it's their practitioners. I'm sure there are
lots of sincere homeopaths - but who's to say
that there aren't a few who know that the remedies
don't work (better than any placebo) but sell
them anyway?
Likewise, how do you know that [[Jomanda]] wasn't
sincere and acting in good faith? And how can you
know that practitioners of [[Chelation therapy]]
aren't sincere? Both are currently in the quackery
category.
I believe my point was that the practitioners of [[Chelation therapy]]
are quite sincere and include a good number of serious research
scientists and physicians. I'm not really sure why it's in Quackery
except that perhaps some uses might qualify as an alternative
treatment, in which case it illustrative of the apparently total
confusion between the two categories.
Laurascudder