4 ms·

Has there been any paid studies into a herbal cure with no opportunity to patent, own, exploit, I say no, I could ask Google but I get the feeling I don't need

by tudorw 10y ago

Has there been any paid studies into a herbal cure with no opportunity to patent, own, exploit, I say no, I could ask Google but I get the feeling I don't need to. This has no bearing on it's efficacy, round here people throw 'anecdotal' around as if they believe it to be synonymous with meaningless, this is nonsense, much research has been inspired by a wealth of anecdotes, in fact, afaik off label use of pharmaceuticals is also kind of 'anecdotal', these drugs have not been tested for the off label use, it's a body of anecdotal evidence, albeit supplied by 'trusted' professionals that allows physicians to use it to treat conditions it was never designed for.

archgoon 10y ago
If this reasoning is valid, we might as well accuse you and the grand parent of being internet kratom sellers, who have a vested interest in convincing HN readers of the benign nature of Kratom. In any case, your reasoning is completely invalid. Here, for example, is an article from pubmed which argues: "While several cases of toxicity and death have emerged in the West, such reports have been non-existent in South East Asia where kratom has had a longer history of use. We highlight the possible reasons for this as discussed in the literature. More importantly, it should be borne in mind that the individual clinical case-reports emerging from the West that link kratom use to adverse reactions or fatalities frequently pertained to kratom used together with other substances. Therefore, there is a danger of these reports being used to strengthen the case for legal sanction against kratom. This would be unfortunate since the experiences from South East Asia suggest considerable potential for therapeutic use among people who use drugs." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27178014 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27178014
r_smart 10y ago
The sheer amount of bullshit that gets peddled by charlatans and hucksters is the very reason people don't trust anecdotal evidence around here. Or individual testimony. Look at any scam product, how its claims are supported and compare them to your cause du jour. What makes your claims more or less valid than previous scams? What gives your cause the credibility that those ones lacked? Your claims could very well be true, but if you can't support them, then I'm going to just file them into the 'Snake Oil' drawer and move on.
- danblick 10y ago
  That sounds fair, but to be honest I don't trust the government's official bullshit either. What gets accepted as the officially-sanctioned wisdom is too easily influenced by special interests ("bootleggers and Baptists"), power grabs, and political convenience (marijuana laws and minorities).
  - r_smart 10y ago
    Oh, I agree with you and the classification of marijuana is a great example. The government line on that seems totally divorced from reality, even if it is to remain illegal.

by tudorw 10y ago

archgoon 10y ago

If this reasoning is valid, we might as well accuse you and the grand parent of being internet kratom sellers, who have a vested interest in convincing HN readers of the benign nature of Kratom. In any case, your reasoning is completely invalid. Here, for example, is an article from pubmed which argues: "While several cases of toxicity and death have emerged in the West, such reports have been non-existent in South East Asia where kratom has had a longer history of use. We highlight the possible reasons for this as discussed in the literature. More importantly, it should be borne in mind that the individual clinical case-reports emerging from the West that link kratom use to adverse reactions or fatalities frequently pertained to kratom used together with other substances. Therefore, there is a danger of these reports being used to strengthen the case for legal sanction against kratom. This would be unfortunate since the experiences from South East Asia suggest considerable potential for therapeutic use among people who use drugs." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27178014 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27178014

r_smart 10y ago

The sheer amount of bullshit that gets peddled by charlatans and hucksters is the very reason people don't trust anecdotal evidence around here. Or individual testimony. Look at any scam product, how its claims are supported and compare them to your cause du jour. What makes your claims more or less valid than previous scams? What gives your cause the credibility that those ones lacked? Your claims could very well be true, but if you can't support them, then I'm going to just file them into the 'Snake Oil' drawer and move on.

danblick 10y ago
That sounds fair, but to be honest I don't trust the government's official bullshit either. What gets accepted as the officially-sanctioned wisdom is too easily influenced by special interests ("bootleggers and Baptists"), power grabs, and political convenience (marijuana laws and minorities).
- r_smart 10y ago
  Oh, I agree with you and the classification of marijuana is a great example. The government line on that seems totally divorced from reality, even if it is to remain illegal.