Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

"If you get into a car accident in China," I say, "an ambulance will take you to a hospital where they will treat you with western medicine. Why do you think that is?"

You keep bringing up antibiotics but it's the category of drugs with the most widespread use (animal agriculture) with one of the strongest cases for being drastically under-regulated - they stop working if things become resistent to them and we spray them everywhere like candy. Also you keep acting as if getting a prescription is some sort of actual barrier or burden for non-prescription drugs, which is particularly funny after the whole fiasco with wegovy off label prescriptions before the active ingredient was approved for obesity/launched for obesity. These are not real barriers, even when they probably should be.

We're not talking about rights here. You claimed, and I quote, "You can buy whatever you want unless the DEA has an issue with it." I am simply pointing out that that is not true. Whether it should be true as a matter of right is irrelevant to that factual question.

> you keep acting as if getting a prescription is some sort of actual barrier or burden for non-prescription drugs

Um, no, I said no such thing. Obviously having to get a prescription is not a barrier or burden for non prescription drugs. But, as you yourself have pointed out, a huge number of those non-prescription drugs, for which there is no barrier or burden, don't work. And, as you have also pointed out, routing around things like prescriptions to get, for example, antibiotics means you can't trust the product. So there are barriers and burdens in the way of getting things that do work and can be trusted. Which was my point, and which contradicts your original claim that I responded to.

The question of whether there should be all these barriers and burdens in the way of buying things that work and can be trusted is a separate question. Your argument for why there should appears to be that without such barriers more harm would be done. Of course there will always be people who make stupid choices, and giving people more freedom by removing barriers and burdens will increase that. But you are not recognizing the other side of the barriers and burdens, which is that they prevent people from making good choices, choices that could save their lives. For example, look up the harm done in preventable deaths by the FDA's slowness in permitting beta blockers.

The post you responded to that advocated a libertarian approach was saying, in effect, that, on net, the harm done by regulation is greater than the harm done by individual people making bad choices in the absence of regulation. I happen to agree. You apparently do not. But I do not see that you have given any reason to believe that the opposite is true. I certainly don't see anything in what you've posted that makes the opposite claim the slam dunk that you appear to think it is.

I mean, this is the allure of all quackery, conspiracy theories, cults, and other forms of "alternative" facts: The mainstream doesn't want you to know this secret that I'm sharing with you! Doctors hate this one simple trick! Your financial planner is lying to you, but if you buy my seminar, you'll learn the truth! The government is silencing us through mainstream social media, but if you come to Social Network Blah, you will be able to hear the truth! Employment is a scam, but if you join Amway you can learn the real truth about business and your own boss! My religion offers the truth that the rest hide from you!

Somehow, human beings have become vulnerable to "Truth FOMO" and when these guys really get their hooks into you and you start to base your very identity on their truth, well, you can't back out of it without invalidating your entire identity.