Surely you understand the difference between middle class people taking some sugar and people believing unwaveringly that herbs will protect them from that shotgun.
> Surely you understand the difference between middle class people taking some sugar and people believing unwaveringly that herbs will protect them from that shotgun.
I don't understand it; please spell it out for me because all I see is magical thinking. If you think homeopathy isn't a matter of life and death, you might have not considered the people whose lives could have been saved had they turned to real medicine.
Middle-class white folks taking sugar-water only want the sugar water as long as they're getting their chemo, because, "eh, it can't hurt." This type is, almost, every patient I've ever interacted with.
Believing herbs will protect you from a shotgun is rather more like the crunchy granola nutjobs that take sugar-water instead of their chemo, because "that stuff's just poison." These are a relative rarity, and the worst patients you've ever dealt with, because you get to watch them choose to suffer and/or die.
It's a difference in degree that amounts to a difference in kind.
I don't believe in homeopathy, however I highly doubt it's being used in matters of life and death in any way that has the slightest veneer of respectability.
It may exist, I suspect, but only peddled by shady online gurus.
Sorry, I admit, it's not homeopathy. It's Reiki, which is one step less valid. At least homeopathy is actually interacting w/ your body in a physical manner, even if it just water; Reiki doesn't even do that.
People will hawk anything when the profit motive gets high enough.
So let's take South Africa. This country is often so successful in so many dimensions compared to other African countries that they are commonly excluded from statistics related to its continent...
Given the amount of generalised irrationnality I don't think that qualifies as an equality function when observing human behaviour.
One leads mostly to a lighter wallet (people with access to homeopathy are not particularily underexposed to medical coverage to begin with), the other to a missing limb. In terms of impact I'd argue there's a world of difference to the affected.
I don't understand it; please spell it out for me because all I see is magical thinking. If you think homeopathy isn't a matter of life and death, you might have not considered the people whose lives could have been saved had they turned to real medicine.