Amber necklace for teething baby

Teenie_D

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Homoeopathy doesn't work. Straight, been proved beyond all reasonable doubt.
Millions of people can certainly be wrong.

And I don't think people are being aggressive, more like the other way round tbh. If you say about someone you think is being rude, it might be better than targeting everyone who doesn't agree with you.

But it hasn't been proved that it doesn't work. It may be unexplained but that is totally different to it not working. Like I said we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one, and I most certainly am not being aggressive, just getting fed up with the tone of some peoples posts because we dare use something that isn't the norm!

Gingham_R wrote: »

I also have no problem with people choosing to put beads round their babies' necks. I think there are associated risks that are not insubstantial but I also think that mothers who care enough to spend money on things they have no proof of are pretty desperate to help their babies and I get that. Been there done that.

I also believe that every mother here wants what is best for their baby, however we choose to do that and I take extreme offence to the accusation that I'm calling women child abusers, being aggressive and rude.

You need to calm down. I DISAGREE. I think there are associated risks. THAT'S ALL.

An apology would be appropriate, please.

And actually yes I do apologise, I used your quote for the first part but the rest of what was said wasn't necessarily aimed at you although I do object to people telling me that I must be wrong because scientists say it doesn't work so it must be right. I know with my own child that it does work I have seen the change in his mood, this is not a placebo and i don't believe it is pure coincidence either, how can he be really upset and grouchy and within about 20mins or so of putting the necklace on he has totally calmed down and is no longer in pain. I didn't use one with my DD and by crikey I wish I had, she wouldn't have suffered as much as she did if I had.

I still don't understand what your issue is with it? You have said several times that we shouldn't be putting necklaces round our babies necks and yet you have just said here that you don't have a problem with it? I just honestly don't understand why people can't accept that this is something that many of us believe in? And with that I am saying no more on the matter. You will never change my mind and I will never change yours.

Redouble

Gingham_R wrote: »

That's what I was trying to do.

I have outlined several potential risks as well as pointing out the lack of proven benefits. That's all I've tried to do, respectfully and calmly.

Sorry, my post was not aimed at you

mildred1978

Teenie_D wrote: »

I know it is extremely difficult to understand how, along with homeopathy actually works but surely millions of people can't be wrong??

I wish you were my friend.

I could buy you a box of chocolates, eat them all, give you the empty box and you'd be thrilled. Well, the box must 'remember' having chocolate in it, right? :rotfl:

Teenie_D

mildred1978 wrote: »

I wish you were my friend.

I could buy you a box of chocolates, eat them all, give you the empty box and you'd be thrilled. Well, the box must 'remember' having chocolate in it, right? :rotfl:

^^^^^ and this is what I'm talking about completely rude, totally uncalled for posts like this *shakes head*

Gingham_R

Teenie_D wrote: »

I still don't understand what your issue is with it? You have said several times that we shouldn't be putting necklaces round our babies necks and yet you have just said here that you don't have a problem with it? I just honestly don't understand why people can't accept that this is something that many of us believe in? And with that I am saying no more on the matter. You will never change my mind and I will never change yours.

Thank you for your apology. Accepted with thanks.

I don't have a problem with it. And I haven't said anywhere that you shouldn't be doing it. I HAVE said that I think it's inherently dangerous. However, I also know that mothers make choices and try to minimise risks and I would rather leave that to mothers to decide based on their situation. I'm not here to tell people what they can or cannot do.

I DO accept that lots of people believe in it. Whether people believe in it or not doesn't make it factual or safe.

A baby I love dearly was in a terrible accident last year. It made me look long and hard at risks, what they mean and which ones are acceptable to me. We have to balance risk and benefit. You think there are mystical benefits to this material. I don't. Therefore there is no benefit therefore the risk is unacceptable. For you the equation is different.

Lotus-eater

Teenie_D wrote: »

But it hasn't been proved that it doesn't work. It may be unexplained but that is totally different to it not working. Like I said we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one,

Homoeopathy.

It has totally been proved! Nothing to do with unexplained, it's been explained as a placebo effect, nothing more. Time after time.


Not only does it not take a PHD to work out that it can't possibly work, with the best will in the world...... it can't possibly work! It's an insane idea!
I'm all for natural, I'm all for alternative anything..... but not this.





I did a little research on the net yesterday, as these necklaces and the idea about amber in general fascinated me so much. I found people buying these necklaces from anywhere (despite many fakes being around apparently), people saying they got synthetic ones and they still worked!
This is not possible if you take into account the (possible) reasons they could work.
The people that did say they made no difference, were just ignored.

A great deal of people saying how great they were, seemed to be selling them, or knew someone who sold them, I checked on several forums and it seemed to be the case all over.

Lotus-eater

mildred1978 wrote: »

I wish you were my friend.

I could buy you a box of chocolates, eat them all, give you the empty box and you'd be thrilled. Well, the box must 'remember' having chocolate in it, right? :rotfl:

Teenie_D wrote: »

^^^^^ and this is what I'm talking about completely rude, totally uncalled for posts like this *shakes head*

Do you not understand how Homoepathy is supposed to work?

A_Phoenix_of_Tangerine

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Do you not understand how Homoepathy is supposed to work?

Obviously hasn't even bothered researching the topic which she is so keen to defend.

Gingham_R

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Do you not understand how Homoepathy is supposed to work?

It's a funny joke in the right situation but maybe it hit a nerve in a volatile discussion?

onlyroz

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Do you not understand how Homoepathy is supposed to work?

I didn't actually know how homeopathy was supposed to work, but I've now had a bit of a read of the British Homeopathic Association's website and had a good old chuckle to myself. :T