SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
No, they are not.They are actual medicine.
You didn't address my point.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No, they are not.They are actual medicine.
I have time.It's a long list.
Data captured by Defense Medical Epidemiology Database shows sharp spikes in miscarriages, myocarditis, cancer diagnoses, Bell's palsy, female infertility.I have time.
I'll need a source, as well.
Are we talking about say, headaches, or something? I got a temporary headache after getting vaccinated, but I wouldn't say that's like, a detrimental side effect or anything. I get the same thing if I eat too much salt.
Of course they are. Are you claiming no herbal remedies have any benefits?No, they are not.
You didn't address my point.
Seeing is believing.I'm sorry but that's not proof. That's an anecdote.
I have time.
Oh Lordy.Data captured by Defense Medical Epidemiology Database shows sharp spikes in miscarriages, myocarditis, cancer diagnoses, Bell's palsy, female infertility.
Of course you can do your own looking:
VAERS - Data
Anecdotes are pretty much useless. How do we know it wasn't caused by the placebo effect? Or something else?Seeing is believing.
So the millions with actual side effects are silenced because, well, because we don't want to hear stories that contradict the official narrative.Anecdotes are useless here.
I'm claiming "herbal remedies" aren't medicine, unless they've been tested and shown to be efficacious in a scientific manner - not by anecdotal guesses.Of course they are. Are you claiming no herbal remedies have any benefits?
The UK is fast becoming a dictatorship from what I've seen
we understand that you think free thinking individuals are odd
That's why we left england
Lol, anything that improves health is medicinal.I'm claiming "herbal remedies" aren't medicine, unless they've been tested and shown to be efficacious in a scientific manner - not by anecdotal guesses.
It was certainly good for us...no more bowing to the queen.Yeah it was good when the fundies left.
Uh nope. You have one, unverifiable story about your wife. That's the thing about anecdotes.So the millions with actual side effects are silenced because, well, because we don't want to hear stories that contradict the official narrative.
Nope again.Same thing happens in the medical field in general. If an alternative cure works for a huge percentage we can just ignore that. " Oh it's just anecdotal."
Eating carrots can improve your health. Are carrots medicinal?Lol, anything that improves health is medicinal.
Win-win then. Charles the First was a queen?It was certainly good for us...no more bowing to the queen.
Lots of foods are medicinal. Fish for example.Eating carrots can improve your health. Are carrots medicinal?
Medical Definition of medicine
1 : a substance or preparation used in treating disease. 2a : the science and art dealing with the maintenance of health and the prevention, alleviation, or cure of disease.
Definition of MEDICINE
Only these weren't. They were rushed through. The mass public were the trial phase and then the negative results were largely ignored.Why do you think, vaccines and other drugs have to be put through rigorous clinical trials over and over before they can ever been approved by any medical body for mass public use?
Of course one only takes medicine when necessary. The problem is that science deniers often do not understand "when necessary'. There is a lot that one can do with proper diet and exercise. But one cannot always do everything. People quite often need modern medicine, and the older that they get the more likely it is that they will need it.Lots of foods are medicinal. Fish for example.
Maintenance of health happens by proper exercise, eating and taking modern medicine only if necessary.
All a study is is a bunch of anecdotes put together. If it's a 300 person trial, it's enough for a study but if you have millions claiming side effects in this case it's ignored... doesn't make sense.Anecdotes are pretty much useless.
Sorry, from what I have seen your claim is false. I doubt if you could properly support it. You probably do not even understand reporting of supposed negative effects. But I would love it if you tried.Only these weren't. They were rushed through. The mass public were the trial phase and then the negative results were largely ignored.