[WikiEN-l] Pseudoscience category - GSPOV

Tue Jun 28 16:28:05 UTC 2005

On Jun 28, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote:
> I don't see how this is a workable distinction.
> It's not the treatments that are sincere or not
> - it's their practitioners. I'm sure there are
> lots of sincere homeopaths - but who's to say
> that there aren't a few who know that the remedies
> don't work (better than any placebo) but sell
> them anyway?
>
> Likewise, how do you know that [[Jomanda]] wasn't
> sincere and acting in good faith? And how can you
> know that practitioners of [[Chelation therapy]]
> aren't sincere? Both are currently in the quackery
> category.

I believe my point was that the practitioners of [[Chelation therapy]] 
are quite sincere and include a good number of serious research 
scientists and physicians.  I'm not really sure why it's in Quackery 
except that perhaps some uses might qualify as an alternative 
treatment, in which case it illustrative of the apparently total 
confusion between the two categories.

Laurascudder