You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

fubarobfusco comments on Open thread, Nov. 10 - Nov. 16, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: MrMind 10 November 2014 08:32AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (194)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 11 November 2014 06:27:14PM 0 points [-]

For instance, if most homeopathic treatments are not submitted to the FDA, they would not have a chance to reject them.

Comment author: Jiro 11 November 2014 07:14:57PM 2 points [-]

Actually, one of the sponsors of the act that created the FDA was a homeopath and he wrote in an exception for homeopathy, so homeopathic treatments don't have to prove they are safe and effective.

Also, keep note of who this question would falsely mark as biased. Someone who opposes homeopathy and correctly knows that experts also oppose homeopathy, who tries to reason the first way, would be marked down as biased, because he answered in a way favorable to his own position but contrary to the facts. Yet answering the first way doesn't mean bias, it just means he ignored the agenda of the person asking the question.