Talk:Natalie Grams

This is far too biased
This article focuses nearly exclusively on her anti-homeopathic campaign. Where is the discussion of how many people she harmed prior to abandoning homeopathy? She's not a victim here, in fact I'd guess she made a nice living in "palliative care" with homeopathic mumbo-jumbo. It is admirable that the was able to admit she was wrong, but it speaks poorly about her and the German medical system that such rubbish was and is uncritically accepted and taught there. It is not as if she didn't have the opportunity to learn the facts BEFORE she treated her first patient, and the facts are there is simply no scientific justification for homeopathy nor is there any benefit which isn't associated with placebo effects (including the laying on of hands, with its known benefits).98.21.208.72 (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * @User:98.21.208.72
 * As far as my reading tells me there is sufficient discussion of homeopathy's known ineffectiveness in the appropriate pages here. As far as your specific concerns about her it seems unlikely that :anyone would have grounds to object if you were to add some cited criticism of her pre-activist work. Rap Chart Mike (talk) 18:45, 23 May 2018 (UTC)