Talk:Homeopathy/Archive 16: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>John R. Brews
(placebo response)
imported>Peter Schmitt
(Moratorium extended by EC:D-2012-002)
Line 3: Line 3:
<br>
<br>
The Secretary of the Editorial Council, [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 04:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC) </div>
The Secretary of the Editorial Council, [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 04:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC) </div>
The moratorium has been extended by another year. [http://ec.citizendium.org/wiki/EC:D-2012-002 EC:D-2012-002]. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


<hr><br>
<hr><br>

Revision as of 19:20, 19 January 2012

This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Catalogs [?]
Video [?]
Signed Articles [?]
 

The moratorium has been extended by another year. EC:D-2012-002. --Peter Schmitt 01:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)



I protest the fact that this article has not been approved by any homeopath. What is the idea in not allowing an expert in the field approve an article (since that was what Citizendium was created for in the first place)?—Ramanand Jhingade 13:29, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me that some discussion should be provided of reputable views of homeopathy. For example, Dr. Weil who says: "Dr. Weil feels that homeopathy has value, even if it merely evokes a placebo response. If that response does indeed heal then it has great value - in other words, rather than discounting the placebo response, physicians should exploit it as a safe, effective way to treat disease." John R. Brews 15:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)