Roland,

Good to see that you have had this epiphany, leaving aside the fact that it 
took an article in the Economist for that to happen. I guess the pinch of money 
is much more painful and effective in driving most people away from stupidity 
than that of reason and evidence. Yes, 60 billion dollars is too much to spend 
on moonshine. But my concern is not just the money that is wasted. It is the 
lies that are told in its support, and against real medicine, in its name. 

As far as religion is concerned, while it might be a much bigger faux business 
than quackery, there is a deeply personal element to it that I have no desire 
whatsoever to take away from anybody, nor can (and should) I or anybody else. 
Dawkins and Hitchens are misguided in believing that they can do so. It is 
enough for me that nobody has yet dared to call it alternative science, and the 
number of confused priests who delude themselves that they are real or 
alternative scientists is negligible.

Cheers,

Santosh


--- On Tue, 5/24/11, Roland Francis <roland.fran...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Santosh has been proved right all
> along. His long-running battle against
> alternative medicine on Goanet has been borne out by a
> latest article in the
> Economist.
> 
> Here are the points made in the article:
> Alternative medicine is 95% bunk. It is the slight placebo
> effect that had
> people fooled.
> All bogus claims should be cracked down on. The word
> "alternative" is
> misleading.
> Placebos can bring relief - though only in one's mental
> state.
> Alternative medicine practitioners (Santosh's quacks)
> provide care and
> concern to the patient, nothing else.
> Money spent on quackery spawns a huge industry. That is a
> lot of money spent
> on only placebos.
> 
> Here is the Economist link:
> http://www.economist.com/node/18712290
> 
> There go all the "ventoz" for chest colds and the flaming
> spoons applied to
> naked flesh to cure jaundice that Goa grandmas swore by.
> 
> What next Santosh? All belief in a loving God and Creator
> misplaced? Shades
> of Dawkins and Hitchens entering the closed minds....
> 
> Roland.
> Toronto.
> 

Reply via email to