Need Backup in an Argument Against Quackery

  • Thread starter C. jejuni
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Argument
In summary, the conversation is about a debate over the validity of a Royal Raymond Rife's apparatus that supposedly measures the "biofrequency" of a person or object. One person argues that the concept is pseudoscientific and lacks any real data to support its claims, while the other argues that it can be used to determine a person's health. However, there is confusion over the exact frequency range that can be measured and the lack of scientific credentials behind the claims. Ultimately, the conversation concludes that the idea of "biofrequency" lacks substance and should be rejected.
  • #1
C. jejuni
1
0
First sorry if this is to some extend kind of against the rules, especially considering that technically this thread is debating pseudoscience. I just need someone with "scientific credentials" to backup my argument.

The issue is about a certain Royal Raymond Rife's apparatus supposedly able to measure the so called "biofrequency" of a person, or anything to begin with. Coffee supposedly also has a frequency (interestingly otherwise processed food allegedly measures at "0 hz"). :confused:
My opponent also claims that from this the health of a person may be deduced, but this is irrelevant to my plea here.

My argument is obviously that it's complete hogwash and it's just picking up noise.

Which exact range of the frequency spectrum ought to be measurable is unclear. A "study" conducted by the founder of Young Essential Oils talks about frequencies just a few hz in, while my opponent is generally talking about several mhz. It may just be a misunderstanding.

Given the pseudoscientifical background, I was obviously not able to find any hard data. Some people involved in other quackery are criticising a product by another company in the same vein here, but he seems to be concerned about their scientific credentials. :uhh:

Either way I just need you to show that this thing cannot work as intended and that thus the idea completely lacks any substance. Alternatively you can just point me towards credential sites who deal with the issue.

Or you can laugh at this and straightforward reject it. That would send a clear enough message I think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you measure precise enough, you can measure all sorts of frequencies (more precise: a broad spectrum) of processes somewhere in a human body (both mechanical and electrical). That does not mean that they would have any relation to anything interesting. There are certainly some frequencies that are relevant - your heartbeat, for example. But I guess that's not what "biofrequency" means.

Or you can laugh at this and straightforward reject it.
You can certainly laugh at any claims related to a "biofrequency".
There is absolutely no indication that any of those claims would be backed by proper experimental data.

Anyway, we are the wrong forum to discuss those crackpot theories.
 

1. What is quackery?

Quackery is the promotion of false or unproven medical treatments or products, often by individuals who do not have medical training or qualifications.

2. Why is it important to have backup in an argument against quackery?

Having backup in an argument against quackery is important because it allows you to support your claims with evidence and facts. This can help convince others to avoid falling for false or potentially harmful treatments.

3. What types of evidence can be used as backup in an argument against quackery?

There are several types of evidence that can be used as backup in an argument against quackery, including scientific studies, expert opinions, and statistics. Personal anecdotes and testimonials should be used with caution, as they may not be reliable or representative of the general population.

4. How can we identify quackery?

There are a few red flags that may indicate quackery, such as treatments that promise a quick or miraculous cure, lack of scientific evidence or support from medical professionals, and high costs or pressure to purchase products. It is always important to thoroughly research and critically evaluate any medical information or treatment before accepting it as true.

5. What are the potential dangers of falling for quackery?

Falling for quackery can have serious consequences, including delaying or avoiding necessary medical treatment, wasting money on ineffective or potentially harmful products, and experiencing negative side effects. It is important to always consult with a qualified medical professional before making decisions about your health and well-being.

Similar threads

  • Electrical Engineering
2
Replies
41
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
605
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
138
Views
5K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
46
Views
7K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
3
Replies
100
Views
6K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • General Engineering
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top