{"id":7874,"date":"2020-08-26T20:21:19","date_gmt":"2020-08-26T18:21:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/netzwerk-homoeopathie.info\/?p=7874"},"modified":"2020-10-22T14:33:15","modified_gmt":"2020-10-22T12:33:15","slug":"die-wahrheit-ueber-homoeopathie-rbb-nix-drin-na-und","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/netzwerk-homoeopathie.info\/en\/die-wahrheit-ueber-homoeopathie-rbb-nix-drin-na-und\/","title":{"rendered":"“The Truth …. about Homeopathy” (German TV channel rbb) – Nothing inside, so what?"},"content":{"rendered":"Lesedauer \/ Reading Time:<\/span> 7<\/span> min<\/span><\/span>
\"Three
Three times nothing – remains nothing<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The decidedly homeopathy-friendly programme “Die Wahrheit \u00fcber Hom\u00f6opathie” (The Truth … about Homeopathy) by the German television channel rbb, first broadcast on 25 June and repeated by channel tagesschau 24 on 20 August, we have already honoured by publishing of one of our followers’ excellent letter to the editors. However, the programme contains so many misleading and partly false statements in detail that it is impossible to justice to all that in a summary article.<\/p>\n

A particularly strange statement, outspoken by a professor of medicine, cannot remain unquestioned in our opinion. Prof. Tom Bschor has a considerable reputation, is a specialist in psychiatry and psychotherapy, was chief physician in renowned clinics and a long-standing member of the Drug Commission of the German medical profession. Statements by such personalities carry weight, especially in a publicly broadcast TV programme, which is designed for the effect of concise statements.<\/p>\n

What exactly is it about?<\/p>\n

Prof. Bschor makes the following statement from min. 32:54:<\/p>\n

“But I do not think it is a convincing argument to say “there is nothing in it and it can’t have any effect at all. That has never convinced me before. 200 years ago we did not know radioactivity and could not imagine it, and yet it had a strong effect …”.<\/p>\n

At first we assume, although it is a little difficult to do so in the context of the last sentence, that this statement was falsified by an unfavourable editing and Prof. Bschor perhaps referred exclusively to a psychological effect. Otherwise we would be unable to explain how such an absurd statement comes about:<\/p>\n

If it were indeed the case that a substance could cause a specific effect even when it is not present, then we would have a huge problem for large parts of our lives. Not only with alcohol-free beer or decaffeinated coffee, where alcohol and caffeine have been removed so that they no longer have any effect. Strictly speaking, this concept – no effect without an active ingredient – is essential for our very existence:<\/p>\n