Jump to content

User talk:Peter morrell: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Please help!: new section
Line 395: Line 395:
==Homeopathy and Religion==
==Homeopathy and Religion==
Despite having me banned for 7 days, I still think it would be a good idea if you were to write a section for consideration for inclusion in the Homeopathy article that highlights the metaphysical side of the homeopathic belief system. Secondly, I'd be grateful for the bibliographic citation for the piece you wrote called "Homeopathy and Religion" to which I have an incomplete record from the SoH website. www.homeopathy-soh.org/for-homeopaths/documents/Journalbackissues.doc I presume that it is not available online and I'd like to order it from the British LIbrary. Thank you.
Despite having me banned for 7 days, I still think it would be a good idea if you were to write a section for consideration for inclusion in the Homeopathy article that highlights the metaphysical side of the homeopathic belief system. Secondly, I'd be grateful for the bibliographic citation for the piece you wrote called "Homeopathy and Religion" to which I have an incomplete record from the SoH website. www.homeopathy-soh.org/for-homeopaths/documents/Journalbackissues.doc I presume that it is not available online and I'd like to order it from the British LIbrary. Thank you.

== Please help! ==

Hi,<br>
By now you must have read the studies/clinical trials I posted about on Schmucky's Talk Page (you can find the same matter on my Talk Page as well);if you haven't, I strongly suggest you read it.
I know that some people will have objections to the ninth study, but I'm sure the other studies should be acceptable, especially if the allegation made by the 'Nigerian Journal of Medicine' that Homeopathy is "placebo therapy at best and quackery at worst" is 'acceptable'.
I request someone to now change the Paragraph in the introduction from, "Claims.....................quackery at worst", to something like, "There is scientific evidence that Homeopathy works...............<br>
I've already done the Home-work:-<br>
There is evidence that Homeopathy works<ref name="Inhibition of lymphoblast transformation test (LTT) in phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) with Phytolacca americana in homeopathic dilution"></ref><ref name="Inquiry into the limits of biological effects of chemical compounds in tissue culture. I. Low dose effects of mercure chloride"></ref><ref name="The effects of Belladonna and Ferrum phosphoricum on the chemoluminescence of human poly-morphonuclear neutrophils"></ref><ref name="Effect of aconitum and veratrumon the isolated perfused heart of the common eel (Anguilla anguilla)"></ref><ref name="Elements of homeopathicpharmacology"></ref><ref name="The effect of homeopathicpreparations on the phagocyteactivity of granulocytes. In vitrotests and double-blind controlled trials"></ref><ref name="Approach to quantitative analysisof the effect of Apis mellifica on the degranulation of humanbasophils cultivated in vitro"></ref><ref name="In vitro stimulation of human granulocytes and lymphocytes by pico- and femtogram quantities of cytostatic agents"></ref><ref name="Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE"></ref><ref name="In vitro immunologicaldegranulation of human basophilsis modulated by lung histamineand Apis mellifica"></ref><ref name="Cytotoxic agents asimmunomodulators"></ref><ref name="Contributions of fundamentalresearch in homeopathy"></ref><ref name="Synergism of action betweenindoleacetic acid (IAA) and highlydiluted solutions of CaCO3 on thegrowth of oat coleoptiles"></ref><ref name="Study of the action ofHahnemannian dilutions ofmercury chloride on the mitotic index in animal cell cultures."></ref><ref name="Dual effects of formylpeptides onthe adhesion of endotoxin-primedhuman neutrophils"></ref><ref name="Effects of homeopathicpreparations of organic acids andof minerals on the oxidativemetabolism of human neutrophils"></ref><ref name="Platelets/endothelial cellsinteractions in presence ofacetylsalicylic acid at ultra lowdose"></ref><ref name="Effect of high dilutions of epidermalgrowth factor (EGF) on in vitroproliferation of keratinocyte andfibroblast cell lines"></ref><ref name="Effects of different homeopathic potencies of Lachesis on lymphocyte cultures obtainedfrom rabbit blood"></ref><ref name="The effect of homeopathicpotencies of housedust mite onthe migration of house-dust sensitivehuman leukocytes"></ref><ref name="The effects of Nux vomicaHomaccord and Atropinum comp.on intestinal activity in vitro"></ref><ref name="Application of flow cytometry to the analysis of the immunosuppressive effect ofhistamine dilutions on humanbasophil action: effect of cimetidine"></ref><ref name="Effects of Podophillum pellatumcompounds in variouspreparations and dilutions on human neutrophil functions in vitro"></ref><ref name="In vivo and in vitro studies on the efficiency of potentized and nonpotentized substances"></ref><ref name="Experiments with the effects ofUbichinon-Injeel and strongUbichinon-Injeel on an acellularsystem"></ref><ref name="Efficacy of the homeopathic drugsSuis and Arnica comp.-Heel® on lymphocyte and phagocyteactivity"></ref><ref name="Influence of dilutions andpotencies of cAMP on differentenzymatic systems"></ref><ref name="Studies of the principles ofhomeopathy; the changeoverfrom in vivo to in vitroexperimental research"></ref><ref name="Determination of the activity of acid phosphatase with cAMP at various potencies"></ref><ref name="Contribution to study of theefficacy of homeopathic potencies of phosphorus"></ref><ref name="Determination of the activity ofacid phosphatase in the presence of Ubichinon comp."></ref><ref name="Biochemical efficacy ofhomeopathic and electronicpreparations of D8 potassiumcyanate"></ref><ref name="Osteoporosis in vitro in rat tibia derived osteoblasts is promotedby the homeopathic preparation,FMS Calciumfluor"></ref><ref name="Thin-layer chromatography (TLC)of homeopathic active constituents"></ref><ref name="Efficacy of a potentisedhomeopathic drug in reducingcytotoxic effects produced byarsenic trioxide in mice"></ref><ref name="Efficacy of a potentised homeopathic drug in reducing cytotoxic effects produced by arsenic trioxide in mice"></ref><ref name="Non-cytotoxic antiviral action of a homeopathic drug"></ref><ref name="Efficacy of a potentised homeopathic drug in reducing cytotoxic effects produced by arsenic trioxide in mice"></ref><ref name="Stimulatory effect of some plant extracts used in homeopathy on the phagocytosis induced chemiluminescence ofpolymorphonuclear leukocytes"></ref><ref name="Difference between the efficacyof single potencies and chords"></ref><ref name="Influence of some homeopathicdrugs on the catalytic activity of uricase, acid phosphatase and thecytosol glutathion-S-transferase"></ref><ref name="Influence of some homeopathic drugs on the catalytic activity of cAMP-dependent protein kinases"></ref><ref name="Neuroprotection from glutamatetoxicity with ultra-low dose glutamate"></ref>, but critics who haven't tried it, say that claims for efficacy of homeopathic treatment beyond the [[placebo effect]] are unsupported by [[scientific method|scientific]] and [[clinical medicine|clinical]] studies<ref name="pmid12492603">{{cite journal |author=Ernst E |title=A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy |journal=Br J Clin Pharmacol |volume=54 |issue=6 |pages=577–82 |year=2002 |pmid=12492603 |doi= |url= http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2125.2002.01699.x/full?cookieSet=1|accessdate=2008-02-12}}</ref><ref name="asthma">{{cite journal |author=McCarney RW, Linde K, Lasserson TJ |title=Homeopathy for chronic asthma |journal=Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) |issue=1 |pages=CD000353 |year=2004 |pmid=14973954 |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD000353.pub2 }}</ref><ref name="dementia">{{cite journal |author=McCarney R, Warner J, Fisher P, Van Haselen R |title=Homeopathy for dementia |journal=Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) |issue=1 |pages=CD003803 |year=2003 |pmid=12535487 }}<br/>{{cite web|url=http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/articles/article.aspx?articleId=197&sectionId=27 |title=Homeopathy results |accessdate=2007-07-25 |publisher=[[National Health Service]] }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13638.html |title=Report 12 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (A–97) |accessdate=2007-07-25 |publisher=[[American Medical Association]]}}<br/>{{cite journal |author=Linde K, Jonas WB, Melchart D, Willich S |title=The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of homeopathy, herbal medicines and acupuncture |journal=International journal of epidemiology |volume=30 |issue=3 |pages=526–531 |year=2001 |pmid=11416076 }}<br/>{{cite journal |title=Homeopathy for childhood and adolescence ailments: systematic review of randomized clinical trials |author=Altunç U, Pittler MH, Ernst E |journal=Mayo Clin Proc. |date=2007 |volume=82 |issue=1 |pages=69–75 |pmid= 17285788}}</ref> and that the ideas behind Homeopathy are scientifically implausible and "diametrically opposed to modern pharmaceutical knowledge"<ref name="shang">{{cite journal |author=Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L, ''et al'' |title=Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy |journal=Lancet |volume=366 |issue=9487 |pages=726–732 |year=2005 |pmid=16125589 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2}}</ref><ref name="Ernst2005"/><ref name="Johnson2007">{{cite journal |author=Johnson T, Boon H |title=Where does homeopathy fit in pharmacy practice? |journal=American journal of pharmaceutical education |volume=71 |issue=1 |pages=7 |year=2007 |pmid=17429507 |url=http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=17429507}}</ref><br>
Thanks in advance for the co-operation.<br>
)[[User:Ramaanand|Ramaanand]] ([[User talk:Ramaanand#top|talk]]) 14:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC) alias Dr.Jhingadé

Revision as of 03:03, 19 March 2008

Articles I have created
Farndon, Nottinghamshire, Antiscience, Antireductionism, Harvey Warren Zorbaugh, Everett Stonequist, Louis Wirth, Professionalization, Frederic Thrasher, Jesse R. Pitts, John Weir, John Forbes, Eugène Galien-Laloue, Edouard Leon Cortes, Everett Hughes, Fiskerton, Nottinghamshire, Kelham, Hoveringham, East Stoke, Nottinghamshire, Society of the Sacred Mission, Thorpe, Nottinghamshire, Hockerton, Sibthorpe, Gonalston, Rolleston, Nottinghamshire, Cotham, Nottinghamshire, Scientific imperialism, Embourgeoisement, Affluentization, Fragmentalism

Articles I have contributed to
Arthur Berry, Seighford, Homeopathy, Samuel Hahnemann, Rupert Sheldrake, Ferdinand Toennies, Howard S. Becker, Robert E. Park, Charles Cooley, Georg Simmel, Radionics, Social exclusion, Marginalization, David Hockney, Kalachakra, Nihilism, Counterculture, Pseudoscience, Deviant behaviour, Scientism, Sierra Leone, Johannes Scotus Eriugena, Hippie, Rajneesh, Georges Sorel, River Manifold, Chicago school (sociology), Leonardo da Vinci, Graffiti, Banksy, Salvador Dalí, Harold MacMillan, Margaret Thatcher, Classical homeopathy, Mandala, Tim Marlow, John Berger, Ways of seeing, W. H. Auden, Peter Blake (artist), Augustus John, Gwen John, Camille Pissarro, Averham, Thurgarton, Gunthorpe, Nottinghamshire, Walter Hilton, Stoke Bardolph, Dylan Thomas, Elston, Bingham, Nottinghamshire, Allen Ginsberg, Stafford, East Bridgford, Kneeton, Buddha, Nidana, Bindu, Samatha meditation, Anapanasati, Jacob Epstein, Francis Bacon (painter), Dhyana, Brahmavihara, Paramita, Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Impressionism, Alexander Rosenberg, Marsha Thomason, Surrealism, Holism, Holism in science, The Fast Show, Simon Day, Quantification, Graffiti, John Howard (artist) Gordon Brown, Shakespearean authorship question, Talk:John Constable, Talk:Gordon Brown, Harold Wilson, Mary Wilson (poet), George Melly, Edward Shils, Arctic Monkeys, The Jam, Burslem School of Art, Robert Mugabe, Drug dynamization, Scientism, Phil Drabble, Kristin Scott Thomas, Don Arden, Licensure, Roy Strong, Biddulph Grange, Edward William Cooke, James Bateman, Packwood, Patti Boyd

/archive 1

Biddulph Grange

  • The images are great, thanks for offering to provide them. However, as the copyright holder you need to tell us specifically what people are allowed to do with the images. The best licenses for Wikipedia are this one and this one. Please can you have a look at the links and tell us if you're happy with them? I can take you through the upload process in three simple steps if you are willing to try again. Thanks Papa November 22:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to use these images as if they are your own property. The copyright is yours. cheers Peter morrell 06:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Original Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
I'm awarding you this barnstar for your help in rewriting the homeopathy article. It is now implemented and hopefully will improve even further in the near future. Great job! Wikidudeman (talk) 14:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Working Man's Barnstar
I'm awarding you this "Working" barnstar as well because you went the extra mile to help me rewrite the Homeopathy article. Wikidudeman (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Talk:Buddhism, I moved our traditional material to a sidebox

Hi Peter - I really hope you don't mind but, because I was getting a little lost among the various titles and subtitles, I took the liberty of moving the traditional material (yours and mine) to a sidebox under the main entry title ("Buddhism and intellectualism"). I didn't think you would mind -- very much hope you don't -- but I've never actually moved another person's material on a talk page, so I would deeply regret it if my doing so offends you in any way. If so, please revert or let me know and I will be happy to do so. I wish you the best, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 18:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter - sorry for my lack of clarity. If you go to Talk:Buddhism#Study_is_one_thing.3B_practice_is_very_much_another and scroll up several inches, you'll see it on the right one-third of the page, with the top-most header being "A Cup of Tea." I placed it there based on timestamps -- you had a text entry of 11:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC) and then the Zen account was timestamped 11:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC), so I thought it appropriate to put them beside each other. Again, I hope this is okay. If not, feel free to change it (of course) or let me know if you'd like me to do so. Thanks again. Best wishes, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 01:32, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Better yet, just go here: Talk:Buddhism#A_Cup_of_Tea. I've reinserted the sectional header tags to the headings for our traditional material. (I had originally removed them because I thought they were interfering with the sidebox's table tags, but, on second thought, I realize I was wrong.) I've made "A Cup of Tea" a subsection (that is, used "===" instead of "==") to signify that it is associated with the overall "Buddhism and intellectualism" thread; however, again, if this is against your intention or best reflection, please please please feel free to revert/undo/re-do any or all of it or instruct me to do so. Thanks again, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 02:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Peter, thanks for your kind and interesting note. FWIW, in terms of myself, like most I guess I started reading about Buddhism in a non-discriminating manner, especially enjoying the writing of Philip Kapleau, Robert Aiken, Joseph Goldstein, Jack Kornfield, Trunga Rinpoche, Lama Surya Das, D.T. Suzuki and Thich Nhat Hanh (to name some of those who immediately come to mind). My practice was Zen initially primarily becuase I found Kapleau's instructions in the Three Pillars of Zen to resonate most for me. I then occasionally participated in a Zen group in my area. Years later I moved and shopped around in my new location with an institutionalized Zen group, an informal vipassana/New Age group, an Order of Interbeing group, a Lama Surya Das group (with whom my wife is still affiliated), and finally settled down with a vipassana/Theravada group, while attending occasional retreats primarily by self-identified Theravadins (e.g., most memorably, a trip to Bhante G.'s Bhavana Society). So, for me, I guess it's primarily been a combination of geography, personality and access to resources (e.g., I find the Theravada canon to be so much more cohesive and more readily accessed from the Internet). Blah, blah, blah me. LOL. Thanks for all your excellent work -- both scholarly and interpersonally. With metta, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts of the Buddhism page

Dear Peter,

Thanks for your message. Nice, that you wrote it.

Yes, maybe we should discuss it.

I reverted the Buddhism article back to your last version dated Sept. 15,
because it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to condone all the information loss.

There was a lot of work done on the version.

Was there any discussion to replace it?

Tashi delegs,

Victor Klimov 16:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Peter, that seems to be a good idea.
However, I do not feel sure that right now I could play a very active role
in such a discussion. Victor Klimov 17:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hallo dear Peter. Thanks for your nice message. Yes, the Buddhism article is currently undergoing a reincarnation, it seems! I personally thought the earlier version (the one before Peter J. made massive changes) was pretty interesting and informative, given some subtractions and deletions and tweakings here and there, but I also think Peter J's version is a good basis for further work. The problem is that not too many editors are actively involved at the moment (and I myself will be very busy over the coming few days). I am interested to know, Peter, what you would like to see added to the entry - how you would like to see its focus or tone shifted, perhaps, or what extra material could be added, or whether we should not be so "nit-picking"? I am not being contrary here: I just am genuinely interested to see how you think we could improve things. Myself, I personally don't like calling Mahayana Buddhism "East Asian Buddhism" - but that discussion has been had and my side lost out! What do you feel about that and similar matters? Anyway, for what it's worth, I myself am happy to work with what Peter J. has provided. But perhaps you would prefer to revert back to the earlier version?? For me, both versions are acceptable, given improvements here and there. Thanks again for contacting me, Peter. I look forward to hearing more of your own views. Best regards. From Tony. TonyMPNS 10:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the advice. There seems to be something in it.
I'll think about it. Victor Klimov 11:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 reverts

Peter, is it not 3 reverts in one day, that are disallowed?
Victor Klimov 12:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Pine

He isn't qualified. Arrow740 22:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone with a degree, or who is recognized as an authority by people in authority. Arrow740 06:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy

Hi Peter! The article is indeed completely messed up by anti-homeopathic sentiments which, although valid and need to be documented, have taken over the article and dominate. They give a seeker the wrong information due to WP:UNDUE. How to fix it? Well, I think the WP:GAR is a good start. I would work there to gain consensus with a group of uninvolved editors, and as I have not edited the article, and know a bit about the topic, that is what I think I should do. You could also start another page on your sandbox (if you do, let me know and all the others who want to contribute positively) and the article can be re-written and presented to the good reviewers as an alternative. All the best! docboat 00:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have said my piece. I expect reaction, but that is a homeopathic response. :) docboat 12:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I figure I'll chime in here as well to express my appreciation for your help in understanding Hahnemann's process. What makes this exercise slightly ridiculous for me is that I have used homeopathic remedies that work, so I'm only trying to figure out what sort of mental blockade is in place that prevents studies from being done to confirm what anyone can confirm for themselves. It's like saying that the sky is blue and people are refusing to look out the window. Whig 08:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Professionalization

Please provide any reliable inline references you can for the article Professionalization. Many thanks! -- • • • Blue Pixel 02:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Belated thanks

I appreciate and accept your offer of truce and collaboration. I apologize for the delay in responding to your message - I felt that it was best for me to stay out of the homeopathy debate for a while. I see that WDM has added the Benveniste material to the article. What's your opinion on how it stands now? Cheers, Skinwalker 22:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy as a FAC

Hi Peter, I've been wondering that since the edit warring on this article seems to be over, if it might have a chance of becoming a Featured Article. As you have put a lot of work into this article and you are one of the editors I can happily work with, I was wondering if you might be able to help with this process? Any thoughts on this would be welcome. Tim Vickers 23:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Peter, its great to work with calm editors like yourself in a constructive manner, without people running about shouting and reverting things every five minutes. Tim Vickers 20:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Tim, I agree. cheers Peter morrell 20:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Commons

The image bank is called Wikimedia Commons and one of the best ways of searching it is with [1]. All the best Tim Vickers 16:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In one word, "mischief"! Tim Vickers 16:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Peter, lost track of my talk page there. The site says "Mayflower is currently undergoing maintenance. It should be back in a few hours. We apologize for the inconvenience. -- Tangotango, Tue Oct 23 04:00:00 UTC 2007" at the moment, I suppose it will be fixed soon, but I don't know when. Tim Vickers 21:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan's Drawn Blank series

Hi Peter, Thanks for adding Dylan's art exhibition to the Bob Dylan article. I've taken the liberty of moving it to the 2000s section, because administrators have already criticised this article for having too many subsections. Another section for a 2 sentence summary seemed wrong, though the info & the references are fascinating. best wishes Mick gold 09:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy

Hi Peter:

I didn't want to put this on the homeopathy talk page.

We were told an hour or two ago that the homeopathy article was back to GA status. We were just having an argument to celebrate. ;o)

Thank you for your input on that page. It is very difficult for Whig. He tries to maintain a neutral POV. Most other people regularly involved have made it known one way or another that they are anti-homeopathy. Because of this, any time the discussion hinges on POV, Whig is facing several others, most or all of whom are arguing against him. However, they are not necessarily arguing the same points. This makes it more difficult, confusing, and frustrating.

To me, it is unbelievable that someone could talk about "circular reasoning, and lack of knowledge about basic science" AND then claim it was NOT a personal attack.

(By the way, I also try to be neutral, but I'm a very minor player in this.) Cheers, Wanderer57 21:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Peter. I got your message. Wanderer57 05:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diligence
For your always careful and excellent edits to Homeopathy Whig 16:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be cool

I am not thrilled with his recent behavior either. Go to his talk page and see. Just make sure that if you are going to gripe that you do it at the appropriate venue. I know it can be tedious and frustrating at times, but have some comfort in knowing that you are sharing this experience with others. :-) -- Levine2112 discuss 19:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Burslem

Thanks for your kind words. I think you have made a good job of the Wedgwood Institute article...it has the right flavour. There is still more to do on Burslem. --Alan 19:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antireductionism

Hi Peter. Adam and I were discussing your article at Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Antireductionism earlier today when I suggested the redirect. Per your edit summary, and from reading the respective articles, I'm not sure how antireductionism differs from holism. Would you come over and talk about it? Thanks! Skinwalker 16:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Antireductionism) Thanks for YOUR POV. If this is so then why was it Adam who made the action? however, in relation to the question, AR is really a suspicion on the part of many, esp in the social sciences, but also in portions of biology, that reductionism is too simplistic for adequately describing complex systems and processes and that it innately oversimplifies and thus distorts and misleads. Especially in ecology and weather systems for example. Such folks do not believe that reductionism inherently can generate the answers it promises: it can prove to be non-insightful. Holism by contrast believes that phenomena in general are best perceived as wholes rather than via analysis of parts. I agree these are close to each other but holism is probably the broader concept and I would say they are different precisely because both terms occur in academic discourse...which kind of justifies their separate inclusion here. Also I would say the AR article is much better than the other one which is very poorly ref'd and too generalised to be of much use. It looks like a rag bag mix of all sorts of odd stuff simply thrown together. I guess you will disagree. What attracts you to fringe theories as you like to call them? and why clean them up when embryogenesis and embryology cry out to be merged but I don't see you two banging on about that. BTW I am a zoologist by training so I disagree with your view of my understanding of what science is. If you do merge them then please merge them proper rather than deleting whole swathes of stuff. OK? cheers Peter morrell

Just wanted to follow up and make sure I understand the difference. As I now understand it, antireductionism is a term for a reaction to reductionism, whereas holism indicates a philosophy of viewing systems as a whole instead of as a collection of components. Holism may or may not be a reaction to a reductionist view, but antireductionism always is. Is this correct? For what it's worth, I agree partially with your opinion on the holism in science article. It needs some cleanup too - there's some uncited fluff in there about orthomolecular medicine, and this is such a broad topic that it may need splitting into holism in various specific disciplines (e.g. holism in physics, holism in ecology, etc). Cheers, Skinwalker 14:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure where you want my reply but here goes. Yes, you seem to have the broad thrust of it. Antireductionists may or may not optionally adopt a holistic approach; what they primarily see are the limitations of the hardline reductionist approach in certain situations, maybe not in all. Holists of course are also antireductionist but do take a holistic view in most if not all situations. One other point is that both take the view that the fragmentalist view science adopts to viewing phenomena (breaking the world into parts and mechanisms of parts) is limited and optional; it is seen merely as one method, rather than the method for gaining understanding about our world. Antireductionists would accept some reductionism some of the time while holists would prefer to gain knowledge through looking at wholes, not through what they regard as the 'illusory' parts. I hope this clarifies. I will try to improve the AR article further as time permits. I did promise to do that some months back but somehow it fell from view. thanks Peter morrell 17:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well at Willen

Dear Peter, noting that you have edited Kelham, SSM, and various Buddhist articles - have you been to the Well at Willen? If not, you might like it. They have strong links with the Buddhists next door. Also, Alistair Mason's book is first rate, and I learned a lot about the CofE from reading about it from that perspective. BTW, it's good to know that more and more people like you are keeping an eye on the wiki for reliability.

-) Oliver Low 17:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whig's block is being discussed at WP:AN/I#Reblocked_User:Whig. -- Tim Vickers (talk) 16:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vernon Scannell

Dear Peter morrell, thank you for your kind message. It did the formatting with pleasure. With kind regards, --BF 18:46, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

related articles

Hi Peter morrell -- I have been drawing in part from the work you did on professionalization for a new series of articles on the history of various occupations, starting right now with women in the workforce, women in the medical professions, and so on. Looks like you might be familiar with these fields; do please contribute if you have time & interest. --Lquilter (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy scales

Peter, I have taken the material we worked out before and distilled some of it into a draft at User:Filll/homeopathyscales. Please take a look at this admittedly very rough text and let me know where I have made some mistakes. I probably should have some more references as well I guess. I want this to explain the potency scales as clearly as we can. Any other material that should be included? Other scales? Even if obscure?--Filll (talk) 16:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No rush, since it is the holiday season

But if you get around to that rough draft we are writing and some of my questions sometime when you get a spare second, I would be grateful. Thanks and best wishes of the season.--Filll (talk) 02:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia search engine

Hi - I saw your comment at an RFC that you needed a search engine for Wikipedia pages. This one works great:

Hope that's helpful. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 08:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Complementary and alternative medicine

Peter Morrell, your worldwide reputation as a medical historian speaks for itself. Editing at complementary and alternative medicine could use the input of such an academic authority. That article needs to be broaden by more of a British perspective on the subject. And, your credentials are impeccable. -- John Gohde (talk) 00:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, John, for your generous comments & kind words, I would not describe myself quite so glowingly; however I will take a look at the article at some point, rather busy right now with non-WP stuff, cheers Peter morrell 07:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Complementary and alternative medicine needs your vote on a merge proposal. Time is of the essence. -- John Gohde (talk) 16:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide refs for Dana Ullman

Please provide refs to support your recent changes to the Dana Ullman article. The appeal to his website is not good enough to back up this information. See the Dana Ullman talk page. I'm not going to fall for any silly "lets see if we can get him to revert 3 times or more" stuff either (this is directed at all those currently stalking my edits, and not directly at you Peter). Thanks --88.172.132.94 (talk) 18:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supplementary statement

I think it might be better if it were a subheading of your present statement. —Whig (talk) 08:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another Homeopathy article

I know it seems like I am constantly starting homeopathy articles in sandboxes, but I promise you I am not forgetting about any of these rough drafts and I intend to turn them all into real articles !

However, some discussion resulted in a suggestion that we should make a wikilinked list of the "main" homeopathic ingredeients or remedies, if such a thing can be determined (we are not quite sure where to look and what "main" might mean exactly, but you know better than us for sure).

We would presumably be looking for all kinds of things; animal, mineral and vegetable (is there anything else?). I am not sure how long the list should be. Ten of each? 20? 50? More?

The talk page for the list to be is at Talk:List of homeopathic remedies. Any suggestions of where we should look to start building up a list would be appreciated. Thanks. --Filll (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding here?

From the homeopathy page. Great masses of seriously deluded folks. Anthon01 (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo

Hi Peter. Thanks for drawing attention to Greenaway's latest effort. I have removed your addition to two pages: Cultural depictions of Leonardo da Vinci and The Last Supper (Leonardo). If you go to the latter, you will see why I removed it from the main page about Leonardo's biography and work. It isn't directly related to either his biography or to his work- it is another artist's creative interpretation of Leonardo's work. There is a long list of interesting news items in relation to this painting, and they are at the painting's page, rather than Leonardo's page. Amandajm (talk) 09:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of that section of the article is to give a brief overview of the history of Leonardo's life as a painter, mentioning only the most significant works and their stylistic development and importance. Believe me, I have enough info on the subject to have banged on for another 50 pages or so, just talking about the artworks. Keeping it down has been an effort. This is the reason why there are 3 other articles on Leonardo, plus monographs on all his most significant work. This is definitely stuff for the monograph, not the main page.
The reason for the reversal is that this information, regardless of how interesting the final product might be, is that the fact that it is being produced tells us nothing the historic figure of Leonardo. It tells us that another artist is doing or has done an interpretation of his work. The animation itself is essentially a display. If we are going to include it, then we can justify mentioning every interpretative exhibition, every book that has been written, every documentary made. This new "light and sound show" might constitute the work of an artists who is well known for these things, but he is not Leonardo da Vinci. The sorts of things that an art historian would refer to as an "important new development" (with relation to that artwork) would be something like the discovery of 15th century archives pertaining to its creation, newly discovered drawings that related to it or an earthquake demolishing the building.
The right way to use this material is to look at it as a new interpretation, and assess its value, in the same way as we would read a book or article or exhibition notes to enlighten us on the subject. This means that once the animation is completed, if a significant new interpretation comes out of it, then one could write something like:
"The gestures of the Apostle James indicate his consternation"(ref) Peter Greenaway blah blah blah blah (/ref)
As I have already pointed out, there is a mass of information that could be said, that is more significant than this. Most particularly, the recent resoration that had a very significant effect on the physical fabric of the work of art, and was subject to a huge amount of controversy. I have not described this process on the main page because it doesn't relate directly to Leonardo. We could write a whole article on that subject alone: see Restoration of the Sistine Chapel frescoes.
Amandajm (talk) 02:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Randy B

Here is Randy's uncivil edits. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthon01 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Anthon, for alerting me to these strange contortions of the English language. His view is an extreme one alright, but should it be excluded was my point? thanks Peter morrell 14:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are saying that calling editors liars, scheming, insane, idiots, guilty of gamesmanship, dirty pool, and being ill-intentioned is ok? I was under the impression the WP:CIVIL policy was to be taken seriously. I find Randy often instigating a devolution of the discussion on the homeopathy talk page. Anthon01 (talk) 15:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by 'devolution of the discussion?' do you mean derailing a discussion by side-issues? I am not saying his behaviour is OK just maybe that we can learn something from it. why not? thanks Peter morrell 15:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you feel we can learn from it? Devolve meaning the discussion breaks down into personal attacks. Anthon01 (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can begin to try and understand why homeopathy makes folks act in this way; what is their problem? It clearly elicits some very strong emotional responses in certain types of persons and we need to know what type of persons they are and why they react in this angry, irrational and energetic manner. How does that sound? Peter morrell 19:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although I consider quite lovely that you are defending Randy B (because I like that you are reaching "across the aisle" here), I agree with Anthon01 that wiki should not tolerate uncivil language or attitudes, especially when the homeopathy articles are under probation. Randy B has received a lot (!) of warnings, including from people who share his POV, and yet, Randy's words have not changed or softened or shown even a modicum of civility. Although you may not be personally offended or put-off by his (and others) civility problems, please know that other editors (especially newer ones than you) might be scared away from his abuse. DanaUllmanTalk 04:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources

Peter Morrell: what Rubin says does not make sense. If they cite the source as reliable they have to believe what the study says. An editor cannnot chose to report only the senteces he/she agrees with .--70.107.246.88 (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sent this message to Tim Vickers. Look at his talkpage.


I was banned because I added this in the lead.

Pharmacists should also be aware that the data assessing the efficacy of homeopathy are mixed—there are rigorous, reproducible studies that show homeopathy is effective,39,42-44 and equally scientifically sound studies that show it is not.270.107.246.88 (talk)

This is writen in the same source with this sentence Johnson T, Boon H (2007). "Where does homeopathy fit in pharmacy practice?". American journal of pharmaceutical education 71 (1): 7. PMID 17429507..

This is a system of medicine that has been in widespread use for the last 200 years, the theory of which is diametrically opposed to modern pharmaceutical knowledge and theories


Now Rubin says that this is no reliable source. Is this true?"--70.107.246.88 (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy and Religion

Despite having me banned for 7 days, I still think it would be a good idea if you were to write a section for consideration for inclusion in the Homeopathy article that highlights the metaphysical side of the homeopathic belief system. Secondly, I'd be grateful for the bibliographic citation for the piece you wrote called "Homeopathy and Religion" to which I have an incomplete record from the SoH website. www.homeopathy-soh.org/for-homeopaths/documents/Journalbackissues.doc I presume that it is not available online and I'd like to order it from the British LIbrary. Thank you.

Please help!

Hi,
By now you must have read the studies/clinical trials I posted about on Schmucky's Talk Page (you can find the same matter on my Talk Page as well);if you haven't, I strongly suggest you read it. I know that some people will have objections to the ninth study, but I'm sure the other studies should be acceptable, especially if the allegation made by the 'Nigerian Journal of Medicine' that Homeopathy is "placebo therapy at best and quackery at worst" is 'acceptable'. I request someone to now change the Paragraph in the introduction from, "Claims.....................quackery at worst", to something like, "There is scientific evidence that Homeopathy works...............
I've already done the Home-work:-
There is evidence that Homeopathy works[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][36][38][39][40][41][42], but critics who haven't tried it, say that claims for efficacy of homeopathic treatment beyond the placebo effect are unsupported by scientific and clinical studies[43][44][45][46] and that the ideas behind Homeopathy are scientifically implausible and "diametrically opposed to modern pharmaceutical knowledge"[47][48][49]
Thanks in advance for the co-operation.
)Ramaanand (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC) alias Dr.Jhingadé[reply]

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Inhibition of lymphoblast transformation test (LTT) in phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) with Phytolacca americana in homeopathic dilution was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference Inquiry into the limits of biological effects of chemical compounds in tissue culture. I. Low dose effects of mercure chloride was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference The effects of Belladonna and Ferrum phosphoricum on the chemoluminescence of human poly-morphonuclear neutrophils was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference Effect of aconitum and veratrumon the isolated perfused heart of the common eel (Anguilla anguilla) was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference Elements of homeopathicpharmacology was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ Cite error: The named reference The effect of homeopathicpreparations on the phagocyteactivity of granulocytes. In vitrotests and double-blind controlled trials was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  7. ^ Cite error: The named reference Approach to quantitative analysisof the effect of Apis mellifica on the degranulation of humanbasophils cultivated in vitro was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  8. ^ Cite error: The named reference In vitro stimulation of human granulocytes and lymphocytes by pico- and femtogram quantities of cytostatic agents was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  9. ^ Cite error: The named reference Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  10. ^ Cite error: The named reference In vitro immunologicaldegranulation of human basophilsis modulated by lung histamineand Apis mellifica was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  11. ^ Cite error: The named reference Cytotoxic agents asimmunomodulators was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  12. ^ Cite error: The named reference Contributions of fundamentalresearch in homeopathy was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  13. ^ Cite error: The named reference Synergism of action betweenindoleacetic acid (IAA) and highlydiluted solutions of CaCO3 on thegrowth of oat coleoptiles was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  14. ^ Cite error: The named reference Study of the action ofHahnemannian dilutions ofmercury chloride on the mitotic index in animal cell cultures. was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  15. ^ Cite error: The named reference Dual effects of formylpeptides onthe adhesion of endotoxin-primedhuman neutrophils was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  16. ^ Cite error: The named reference Effects of homeopathicpreparations of organic acids andof minerals on the oxidativemetabolism of human neutrophils was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  17. ^ Cite error: The named reference Platelets/endothelial cellsinteractions in presence ofacetylsalicylic acid at ultra lowdose was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  18. ^ Cite error: The named reference Effect of high dilutions of epidermalgrowth factor (EGF) on in vitroproliferation of keratinocyte andfibroblast cell lines was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  19. ^ Cite error: The named reference Effects of different homeopathic potencies of Lachesis on lymphocyte cultures obtainedfrom rabbit blood was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  20. ^ Cite error: The named reference The effect of homeopathicpotencies of housedust mite onthe migration of house-dust sensitivehuman leukocytes was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  21. ^ Cite error: The named reference The effects of Nux vomicaHomaccord and Atropinum comp.on intestinal activity in vitro was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  22. ^ Cite error: The named reference Application of flow cytometry to the analysis of the immunosuppressive effect ofhistamine dilutions on humanbasophil action: effect of cimetidine was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  23. ^ Cite error: The named reference Effects of Podophillum pellatumcompounds in variouspreparations and dilutions on human neutrophil functions in vitro was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  24. ^ Cite error: The named reference In vivo and in vitro studies on the efficiency of potentized and nonpotentized substances was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  25. ^ Cite error: The named reference Experiments with the effects ofUbichinon-Injeel and strongUbichinon-Injeel on an acellularsystem was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  26. ^ Cite error: The named reference Efficacy of the homeopathic drugsSuis and Arnica comp.-Heel® on lymphocyte and phagocyteactivity was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  27. ^ Cite error: The named reference Influence of dilutions andpotencies of cAMP on differentenzymatic systems was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  28. ^ Cite error: The named reference Studies of the principles ofhomeopathy; the changeoverfrom in vivo to in vitroexperimental research was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  29. ^ Cite error: The named reference Determination of the activity of acid phosphatase with cAMP at various potencies was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  30. ^ Cite error: The named reference Contribution to study of theefficacy of homeopathic potencies of phosphorus was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  31. ^ Cite error: The named reference Determination of the activity ofacid phosphatase in the presence of Ubichinon comp. was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  32. ^ Cite error: The named reference Biochemical efficacy ofhomeopathic and electronicpreparations of D8 potassiumcyanate was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  33. ^ Cite error: The named reference Osteoporosis in vitro in rat tibia derived osteoblasts is promotedby the homeopathic preparation,FMS Calciumfluor was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  34. ^ Cite error: The named reference Thin-layer chromatography (TLC)of homeopathic active constituents was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  35. ^ Cite error: The named reference Efficacy of a potentisedhomeopathic drug in reducingcytotoxic effects produced byarsenic trioxide in mice was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  36. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Efficacy of a potentised homeopathic drug in reducing cytotoxic effects produced by arsenic trioxide in mice was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  37. ^ Cite error: The named reference Non-cytotoxic antiviral action of a homeopathic drug was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  38. ^ Cite error: The named reference Stimulatory effect of some plant extracts used in homeopathy on the phagocytosis induced chemiluminescence ofpolymorphonuclear leukocytes was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  39. ^ Cite error: The named reference Difference between the efficacyof single potencies and chords was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  40. ^ Cite error: The named reference Influence of some homeopathicdrugs on the catalytic activity of uricase, acid phosphatase and thecytosol glutathion-S-transferase was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  41. ^ Cite error: The named reference Influence of some homeopathic drugs on the catalytic activity of cAMP-dependent protein kinases was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  42. ^ Cite error: The named reference Neuroprotection from glutamatetoxicity with ultra-low dose glutamate was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  43. ^ Ernst E (2002). "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy". Br J Clin Pharmacol. 54 (6): 577–82. PMID 12492603. Retrieved 2008-02-12.
  44. ^ McCarney RW, Linde K, Lasserson TJ (2004). "Homeopathy for chronic asthma". Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1): CD000353. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000353.pub2. PMID 14973954.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  45. ^ McCarney R, Warner J, Fisher P, Van Haselen R (2003). "Homeopathy for dementia". Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1): CD003803. PMID 12535487.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
    "Homeopathy results". National Health Service. Retrieved 2007-07-25.
  46. ^ "Report 12 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (A–97)". American Medical Association. Retrieved 2007-07-25.
    Linde K, Jonas WB, Melchart D, Willich S (2001). "The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of homeopathy, herbal medicines and acupuncture". International journal of epidemiology. 30 (3): 526–531. PMID 11416076.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
    Altunç U, Pittler MH, Ernst E (2007). "Homeopathy for childhood and adolescence ailments: systematic review of randomized clinical trials". Mayo Clin Proc. 82 (1): 69–75. PMID 17285788.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  47. ^ Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L; et al. (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy". Lancet. 366 (9487): 726–732. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2. PMID 16125589. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  48. ^ Cite error: The named reference Ernst2005 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  49. ^ Johnson T, Boon H (2007). "Where does homeopathy fit in pharmacy practice?". American journal of pharmaceutical education. 71 (1): 7. PMID 17429507.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peter_morrell&oldid=199257728"