Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
zk
ParticipantI wonder if “RatherOpinionated” is a chiropractor.
In my opinion, they’re quacks. The Simpsons summed it up perfectly. Homer goes to a chiropractor. Homer gets his back cracked; he makes his usual noises. Then, looking surprised and sounding a little bit excited, he says, “it feels a little better!” Then the quack says, “come back twice a week for the next 30 years.”
Navy Doc: “there is some evidence based science to what they do.” Well, “some evidence” doesn’t sound very convincing, and what studies I’ve seen are either suspect studies (not placebo-controlled, double-blind), or not peer-reviewed, or funded by (and therefore subject to spin by) chiropractic-related groups. Part of the problem is, you can’t really do a double blind study in this case. I don’t know if you can even do “placebo” chiropractic. And even if you have a chiropractor giving “fake” chiropractic, he (the “doctor”) would know that that patient was in the placebo group. Not to mention that he could “manipulate” the study (pun intended) by purposely worsening the condition of the placebo patients. Which, of course, he would have every motivation to do.
Also, just a few weeks ago, a guy at work’s wife had a stroke. I can’t remember what kind of stroke they called it, exactly, but it was due to some kind of injury to her carotid artery. They don’t know for sure what caused the injury, but they suspect it could’ve been the chiropractic treatment she’d been receiving.
Anyway, it does seem like a great way for a bunch of people to take money from your typical, unskeptical person. I think the quote, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the public” would be more accurately put, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the skepticalness of the public.” It never ceases to amaze me how people consistently believe in something despite a lack of evidence.
ParticipantI wonder if “RatherOpinionated” is a chiropractor.
In my opinion, they’re quacks. The Simpsons summed it up perfectly. Homer goes to a chiropractor. Homer gets his back cracked; he makes his usual noises. Then, looking surprised and sounding a little bit excited, he says, “it feels a little better!” Then the quack says, “come back twice a week for the next 30 years.”
Navy Doc: “there is some evidence based science to what they do.” Well, “some evidence” doesn’t sound very convincing, and what studies I’ve seen are either suspect studies (not placebo-controlled, double-blind), or not peer-reviewed, or funded by (and therefore subject to spin by) chiropractic-related groups. Part of the problem is, you can’t really do a double blind study in this case. I don’t know if you can even do “placebo” chiropractic. And even if you have a chiropractor giving “fake” chiropractic, he (the “doctor”) would know that that patient was in the placebo group. Not to mention that he could “manipulate” the study (pun intended) by purposely worsening the condition of the placebo patients. Which, of course, he would have every motivation to do.
Also, just a few weeks ago, a guy at work’s wife had a stroke. I can’t remember what kind of stroke they called it, exactly, but it was due to some kind of injury to her carotid artery. They don’t know for sure what caused the injury, but they suspect it could’ve been the chiropractic treatment she’d been receiving.
Anyway, it does seem like a great way for a bunch of people to take money from your typical, unskeptical person. I think the quote, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the public” would be more accurately put, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the skepticalness of the public.” It never ceases to amaze me how people consistently believe in something despite a lack of evidence.
ParticipantI wonder if “RatherOpinionated” is a chiropractor.
In my opinion, they’re quacks. The Simpsons summed it up perfectly. Homer goes to a chiropractor. Homer gets his back cracked; he makes his usual noises. Then, looking surprised and sounding a little bit excited, he says, “it feels a little better!” Then the quack says, “come back twice a week for the next 30 years.”
Navy Doc: “there is some evidence based science to what they do.” Well, “some evidence” doesn’t sound very convincing, and what studies I’ve seen are either suspect studies (not placebo-controlled, double-blind), or not peer-reviewed, or funded by (and therefore subject to spin by) chiropractic-related groups. Part of the problem is, you can’t really do a double blind study in this case. I don’t know if you can even do “placebo” chiropractic. And even if you have a chiropractor giving “fake” chiropractic, he (the “doctor”) would know that that patient was in the placebo group. Not to mention that he could “manipulate” the study (pun intended) by purposely worsening the condition of the placebo patients. Which, of course, he would have every motivation to do.
Also, just a few weeks ago, a guy at work’s wife had a stroke. I can’t remember what kind of stroke they called it, exactly, but it was due to some kind of injury to her carotid artery. They don’t know for sure what caused the injury, but they suspect it could’ve been the chiropractic treatment she’d been receiving.
Anyway, it does seem like a great way for a bunch of people to take money from your typical, unskeptical person. I think the quote, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the public” would be more accurately put, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the skepticalness of the public.” It never ceases to amaze me how people consistently believe in something despite a lack of evidence.
ParticipantI wonder if “RatherOpinionated” is a chiropractor.
In my opinion, they’re quacks. The Simpsons summed it up perfectly. Homer goes to a chiropractor. Homer gets his back cracked; he makes his usual noises. Then, looking surprised and sounding a little bit excited, he says, “it feels a little better!” Then the quack says, “come back twice a week for the next 30 years.”
Navy Doc: “there is some evidence based science to what they do.” Well, “some evidence” doesn’t sound very convincing, and what studies I’ve seen are either suspect studies (not placebo-controlled, double-blind), or not peer-reviewed, or funded by (and therefore subject to spin by) chiropractic-related groups. Part of the problem is, you can’t really do a double blind study in this case. I don’t know if you can even do “placebo” chiropractic. And even if you have a chiropractor giving “fake” chiropractic, he (the “doctor”) would know that that patient was in the placebo group. Not to mention that he could “manipulate” the study (pun intended) by purposely worsening the condition of the placebo patients. Which, of course, he would have every motivation to do.
Also, just a few weeks ago, a guy at work’s wife had a stroke. I can’t remember what kind of stroke they called it, exactly, but it was due to some kind of injury to her carotid artery. They don’t know for sure what caused the injury, but they suspect it could’ve been the chiropractic treatment she’d been receiving.
Anyway, it does seem like a great way for a bunch of people to take money from your typical, unskeptical person. I think the quote, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the public” would be more accurately put, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the skepticalness of the public.” It never ceases to amaze me how people consistently believe in something despite a lack of evidence.
ParticipantI wonder if “RatherOpinionated” is a chiropractor.
In my opinion, they’re quacks. The Simpsons summed it up perfectly. Homer goes to a chiropractor. Homer gets his back cracked; he makes his usual noises. Then, looking surprised and sounding a little bit excited, he says, “it feels a little better!” Then the quack says, “come back twice a week for the next 30 years.”
Navy Doc: “there is some evidence based science to what they do.” Well, “some evidence” doesn’t sound very convincing, and what studies I’ve seen are either suspect studies (not placebo-controlled, double-blind), or not peer-reviewed, or funded by (and therefore subject to spin by) chiropractic-related groups. Part of the problem is, you can’t really do a double blind study in this case. I don’t know if you can even do “placebo” chiropractic. And even if you have a chiropractor giving “fake” chiropractic, he (the “doctor”) would know that that patient was in the placebo group. Not to mention that he could “manipulate” the study (pun intended) by purposely worsening the condition of the placebo patients. Which, of course, he would have every motivation to do.
Also, just a few weeks ago, a guy at work’s wife had a stroke. I can’t remember what kind of stroke they called it, exactly, but it was due to some kind of injury to her carotid artery. They don’t know for sure what caused the injury, but they suspect it could’ve been the chiropractic treatment she’d been receiving.
Anyway, it does seem like a great way for a bunch of people to take money from your typical, unskeptical person. I think the quote, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the public” would be more accurately put, “nobody ever lost money underestimating the skepticalness of the public.” It never ceases to amaze me how people consistently believe in something despite a lack of evidence.
ParticipantWell, first of all, Saratogas that sold for over 1mil were mostly in 2005. It’s not 2005 any more.
And Belmonts aren’t that old, really. Some of them were built as late as 2002. They’re bigger than Saratogas, and if they’re selling for $1M for 3476 s.f., then that’ll hurt the comps for Saratoga and DH, I’m thinking.
That said, there are, as mentioned in the other CV thread, still some chumps out there. So anything can happen for any particular house.
ParticipantWell, first of all, Saratogas that sold for over 1mil were mostly in 2005. It’s not 2005 any more.
And Belmonts aren’t that old, really. Some of them were built as late as 2002. They’re bigger than Saratogas, and if they’re selling for $1M for 3476 s.f., then that’ll hurt the comps for Saratoga and DH, I’m thinking.
That said, there are, as mentioned in the other CV thread, still some chumps out there. So anything can happen for any particular house.
ParticipantWell, first of all, Saratogas that sold for over 1mil were mostly in 2005. It’s not 2005 any more.
And Belmonts aren’t that old, really. Some of them were built as late as 2002. They’re bigger than Saratogas, and if they’re selling for $1M for 3476 s.f., then that’ll hurt the comps for Saratoga and DH, I’m thinking.
That said, there are, as mentioned in the other CV thread, still some chumps out there. So anything can happen for any particular house.
ParticipantWell, first of all, Saratogas that sold for over 1mil were mostly in 2005. It’s not 2005 any more.
And Belmonts aren’t that old, really. Some of them were built as late as 2002. They’re bigger than Saratogas, and if they’re selling for $1M for 3476 s.f., then that’ll hurt the comps for Saratoga and DH, I’m thinking.
That said, there are, as mentioned in the other CV thread, still some chumps out there. So anything can happen for any particular house.
ParticipantWell, first of all, Saratogas that sold for over 1mil were mostly in 2005. It’s not 2005 any more.
And Belmonts aren’t that old, really. Some of them were built as late as 2002. They’re bigger than Saratogas, and if they’re selling for $1M for 3476 s.f., then that’ll hurt the comps for Saratoga and DH, I’m thinking.
That said, there are, as mentioned in the other CV thread, still some chumps out there. So anything can happen for any particular house.
ParticipantWell, here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Stanley!
ParticipantWell, here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Stanley!
ParticipantWell, here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Stanley!
ParticipantWell, here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Stanley!
-
AuthorPosts