Comments on: University of Westminster debase science degrees

By: nash

nash — Mon, 19 May 2008 22:18:45 +0000

As someone else has pointed out, swearing at traffic lights makes them turn from red to green. I’ve tried it and it works.

By: HappyGilmore

HappyGilmore — Mon, 19 May 2008 21:01:42 +0000

Homeopathy doesn’t make any sense to me, to be truly honest. However, i have tried it in the past with total disbelief, and it worked. Sometimes, you see, I just like to think out of the box, maybe something works or maybe not. J

By: nash

nash — Sat, 17 May 2008 10:54:28 +0000

HappyGilmore

I wasn’t making fun of you. I asked what “phatophysiology” was. When it comes to pseudoscience degrees it is hard to tell the difference between a typo and a “new” science.

With your study of pharmacology how do you reconcile the fact that larger doses of substances have a larger effect with the homeopathic theory of dilution and shaking increses effect?

How can you reconcile pathophysiology with with homeopathic theories?

By: HappyGilmore

HappyGilmore — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:17:51 +0000

The post you are referring to is mentioning ‘rubbish degrees’, plural, generally implicating that all degrees held at wmin are are rubbish.

Also I haven’t said I studied there, that is your suggestion, is it too scary to know that out there are doctors that approve this type of professions/ studies?

And in particular response to Nash: thank you for making fun of my dyslexia, although as you surely know I was talking about pathophysiology…

As in regards to David’s article, I do agree that material can not be considered scientific. I can also inform you that the same material has been sourced from a presentation lecture on what is avaialble out there, it is not part of the Homeopathy course or any other BSc. Also the timetable is not realistic, I have just checked with a source studying there….I think that, unfortunately, David has done a copy and paste of what he liked to publish, not presenting the whole picture.

With my kindest regards,
John

By: gimpy

gimpy — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:55:05 +0000

HappyGilmore, David Colquhoun has presented some course material from that ‘degree’. It is clear that it is a load of unscientific bollocks. Why don’t you read his post?

By: nash

nash — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:22:59 +0000

HappyGilmore

Even though your course takes 4 years, it is not science. If it was science related then it would be a BSc.

What is phatophysiology? It is not listed as a module in the course list.

With your study of pharmacology how is the fact that larger doses of substances has a larger effect with the homeopathic theory of dilution and shaking increses effect?

By: Mojo

Mojo — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:34:57 +0000

Gimpy wrote, “Alternative medicine has long debased the ideals and principles of science in private and in public.”

Of course, some homoeopaths are so good at it that they can successfully debase against 20-40 different people concurrently:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=35#comment-779

“It is a matter of record.”

By: HappyGilmore

HappyGilmore — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:32:04 +0000

Unfortunately I can see you speak with no knowledge of the subject.

I would invite everyone to search this website http://www.wmin.ac.uk and look out for the university programs for this degrees, that are, btw, Bachelors in Science for a reason…..

4 year course study in 3, including not only physiology and anatomy, but also phatophysiology, differential diagnosis, pharmacology and more, including final exams. These are all core modules.

Not to mention final dissertation based on meta-analysis reviews……..

Sorry but your reasoning here is leaking from all sides…haahhahahaha

By: Dr* T

Dr* T — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:43:21 +0000

**sound of boiling blood**

It’s quite incredible. And farcical. University of Westminster is a joke.