Much ado about nothing

[Blog of Reason]

Discussion thread for the blog entry "Much ado about nothing" by rabbitpirate.

Permalink: http://blog.leagueofreason.org.uk/reason/much-ado-about-nothing/

 

[obsidianavenger]

at most i think you could justify a disclaimer saying "this product had not been shown to work in scientific settings" or something... quell any sort of false advertising... but to ban the shop from carrying it seems silly. however with enough consumer pressure they might choose to drop the products just to end the controversy...

but i mean... 2 seconds... 2 seconds of quality research would show that the claims of homeopathy are bullshit. if people don't want to make that effort why shouldn't this company be making money off it? lol...

 

[Aught3]

Certainly a worthy cause. Providing a choice between effective medicine and non-effective woo is not really about consumer choice. If the executives of the company really thought that then they are failing in their duty to do their best for a customer. What it's really about is tapping into the growing alt-med market and making a quick buck of some sucker.

 

[Niocan]

It sounds like they just want to keep their work as unbias as they can, which is something rather noble if you ask me.. If there wasn't a consumer demand for them they wouldn't offer it; But you want to force them to induce bias into their work by taking a stance? It's a business, you're free to make the choice to not support them if you don't like them for whatever reason..

 

[rabbitpirate]

It sounds like they just want to keep their work as unbias as they can, which is something rather noble if you ask me.. If there wasn't a consumer demand for them they wouldn't offer it; But you want to force them to induce bias into their work by taking a stance? It's a business, you're free to make the choice to not support them if you don't like them for whatever reason..

I actually agree with you, to a point. I am not sure that I would have gone as far as asking them to remove the products if I was running this thing but I still think this is a good first step. You are right, if there is demand for a product then it would be bad business not to offer it. However I feel that they should be honest about what they are offering. Just as cigarettes carry a warning label saying that they will probably kill you I think that homeopathic treatments should carry a warning saying that they have not been shown to work in any way what so ever. If people still wish to buy them then, as with cigarettes, they are free to do so but equally do so knowing the facts about what they are buying.

So yes, I agree that Boots should be allowed to sell them if that is what people want. However I think they could do so in a much more responsible way that lets the buyer know exactly what they are getting. I doubt that this petitiion will have the effect of getting them to remove the product, but maybe it will get them to rethink the way they sell it and that is an aim I am happy to put my name to.