13 Comments

  1. Brian Lang

    It would be nice if you could go back and fix some of the grammatical errors…

    Reply

    • Ah yes. Some howlers, hopefully mostly fixed now. Thanks.

      Reply

      • Excellent read, learned a lot thanks!
        Just noticed this”Error 5: He They”

        Reply

  2. Nice work! But you had me at Muscovy Duck.

    Reply


  3. High five to you!
    My “defamatory” article is similar to yours, I wrote about Oscillococcinum and the crazy Korsakovian process… be careful, Boiron is watching us !!
    🙂
    Thanks for the support!

    Reply

  4. Evidence, schmevidence! I wouldn’t even go into the detail until they proved the really important thing: that it actually has an effect on the condition it’s supposed to be treating. Afterwards, we could try to find out how.

    But so far, no proof that it works.

    Reply
  5. Anonymous

    nice, comprehensive debunking of the mind-boggling stupidity that is oscillococcinum. If I may, allow me to introduce a couple of links that strengthen your points regarding Bennveniste’s and Montagnier’s work on water memory. 

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/01/the_nobel_disease_meets_dna_teleportatio.php
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/11/measuring_contaminants_and_concluding_th.php 

    Reply

  6. Fantastic article. Thank you for writing this, and hat tip to S.G. for the link to here!

    Reply

  7. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (British Pharmacological Society)
    Oscillococcinum in the treatment of influenza (1989) British Homoeopathic Journal
    Oscillococcinum in patients with influenza (1998)Cochrane
    Oscillococcinum for influenza (2003) FULL TEXT // Oscillococcinum reduces the length of influenza illness by 0.28 days  i.e. approx 7 hours

    Reply

    • So, no significant effect, then, which is in line with expectations and indeed the laws of physics (unlike homeopathy, which contradicts both). Thanks for that.

      Reply

Leave a Reply