to think amber necklaces are a load of bollocks?

[PancakeBum]

And that if I had severe toothache I'd rather take a fucking painkiller?

Surely even if they ARE releasing these "oils" or whatever they're meant to do to help with teething then you are using an untested substance on your baby? And are they not a choking hazard?!

Or am I just being grumpy because I come from a family of homeopaths who all irritate the life out of me?

However, I can't see how we can say we currently know everything there is to know about the properties of amber.

Well, we already know it's a dinosaur DNA preservative, maybe it's the bug DNA and proteins that soothe the babies.

Not knowing all the properties of amber wouldn't stop anyone from observing an effect it has. Understanding how it works is not necessary to show that it reliably does.

Given amber teething necklaces popularity and the general market there is for baby products, someone could make a shed load (more) money by proving their effectiveness with some simple research.

I simply raised the point of my credentials to highlight the fact that amber necklaces have no scientific rationale

That doesn't even make sense. It's not just that they don't have a scientific rationale, its that the claims made are anti scientific and we know them not to be possible.
If you were actually a scientist you would understand that.

You use them, you think they did something. If you had any scientific background you would be able to tell us all what it is you think they did and a possible way they could have done it. You don't need any proof at all, just a hypothesis of how it might have been possible.

But you can't do that.

They are silly. But has any child ever actually choked to death on one? Both sides seem hilariously over the top

abc7chicago.com/news/toddler-strangled-by-teething-necklace-at-daycare/1549995/

www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/amber-teething-necklace-warning-after-toddler-nearly-strangled/news-story/92f5e9585cea634d417598745049ae96

Amber teething paraphernalia pisses me off a lot more than it should.

I generally try and adopt an ‘each to their own’ policy with regards to fellow parents, but I can’t help but do a massive inner eye roll when I see a baby with amber on.

At least one child has been strangled and another choked, with many near misses.

No possible benefits and definite risk of harm, its a no brainer isn't it?

It always amazes me that people expect science to be done backwards.

“OK, we don’t have evidence that amber beads are effective, but science doesn’t know everything about them, so....?”

Not knowing “everything” about something in no way justifies believing anything you like about them. Science doesn’t operate that way.

Make a claim, form a hypothesis, try to prove it wrong, test, test, test and see what we’re left with. In the case of all woo claim we are left with - it’s all complete crap. But people don’t like that so out comes the “Well, science doesn’t know everything”.

More woo bollocks here... I know of a child whose mother makes her wear one at 5 because it helps with eczema...

If I ever won £100 million on the Euromillions lottery, or otherwise came into oodles of cash, I think I'd set up a foundation to commission research into all these "woo" claims to see if I could demonstrate whether they do or don't work. It would be fun.

I simply raised the point of my credentials to highlight the fact that amber necklaces have no scientific rationale.

You seem remarkably reluctant to state these credentials.

It's not just that they don't have a scientific rationale, its that the claims made are anti scientific and we know them not to be possible.
If you were actually a scientist you would understand that.

More than that, @speakout seems to be pretty anti-science herself. It's unusual to have a 'research scientist' who keeps comparing the Scientific method to a religion.

Not knowing “everything” about something in no way justifies believing anything you like about them. Science doesn’t operate that way.

I don't personally believe anything about them. I'm simply not totally closed to the idea that they might help.

I have no personal experience of them, I know of no research around the topic, I've no stake in them working, but no reason to close down debate around them either.

Isn’t it a bit like luck? You can be as scientific as you like and know that your lucky socks aren’t lucky. But you still might wear them and feel like they’re lucky.

They’re pretty ridiculous, though, aren’t they? I haven’t seen any parent who uses them on their baby to pop one on for a headache.

If I ever won £100 million on the Euromillions lottery, or otherwise came into oodles of cash, I think I'd set up a foundation to commission research into all these "woo" claims to see if I could demonstrate whether they do or don't work. It would be fun.

James Randi did something similar. They don't.

If any of you is willing to donate an amber necklace (and a good fake as negative control) I'm willing to investigate if they're any good for period pain as ibuprofen.

I'm totally open to the idea that amber teething necklaces might work. However there is not a single credible theory put forward for how they might work. There is no evidence at all that they work beyond the placebo effect. I'm not interesting in shutting down debate, but there's no debate actually happening here.

However there is not a single credible theory put forward for how they might work

It's possible that what's behind it is so far beyond our understanding at this point that we're not even close to articulating what that theory might be. I'm not saying that's the case, I'm saying it's possible.

Which is why, as a starting point, I'd be more interested in looking at it from an anthropological/historical point of view.

I'm not interesting in shutting down debate, but there's no debate actually happening here.

I agree you're not, you're a good person to debate with. What I object to are the people who shout 'IT'S TOTAL BOLLOCKS' on threads like this and move on.

Anything that captures the imagination of the public like this I find interesting to look into further, even if the reason for capturing their imagination turns out to have nothing at all to do with scientific efficacy. There's something going on, whether that's related to psychological needs, cultural shifts, or something else entirely.

This might interest you, @LaurieMarlow

sciencebasedmedicine.org/amber-waves-of-woo/

It's possible that what's behind it is so far beyond our understanding at this point that we're not even close to articulating what that theory might be. I'm not saying that's the case, I'm saying it's possible.

Anything is possible in theory.

I'll postulate the existence of a particle that I'll call bollockion and that it's trapped by amber. It's properties mean that they work on gum pain receptors but not anywhere else in the body.

I'm thinking of hoarding loads of pure amber, grind it to a fine powder and speed it up in CERN against a teething baby.

There's something going on, whether that's related to psychological needs, cultural shifts, or something else entirely

Very interesting indeed, but sadly also a choking hazard.

What if I tried to convince you that dangling babies over balconies was good for their gums? Still interested and consider it a possibility?

Thanks assassinated, that was an interesting read.

What if I tried to convince you that dangling babies over balconies was good for their gums? Still interested and consider it a possibility

I haven't once said I'd use them or that they work. I'm interested in why people think they do and what lies behind that.

I'm simply not totally closed to the idea that they might help.

So, you wouldn't be closed to the idea that dangling babies might work either?

You can object all you like to the “It’s all total bollocks” crew (inc. moi) as much as you like, but we’re right. They don’t work. It’s been proved.

It really, really aggravates me when people keep trotting out the nonsense about being closed/open minded.

If something has been proven not to work then being “open” to the idea that it still might is in fact “closed minded”. You (general “you” not specifically you) are closed to the facts. And “science doesn’t know everything” doesn’t assist because if there was something to a woo claim, it is science that would reveal it.

We are seeing this with the vaccines/autism problem. It’s been proven that MMR does not cause autism but because of the illogical, backwards method of thinking that allows people to think they are “open minded” by ignoring what research has shown to be true, some children are not being vaccinated against diseases that could harm them.

So, you wouldn't be closed to the idea that dangling babies might work either?

I haven't seen this as used by anywhere by any culture as a popular means of relieving teething pain, so it's of no interest.

SIL buying one for her PFB who she posted 56 photos of in xmas day was the final straw for me and I deleted her from FB - idiot I also thought what an awful choking hazard.

You're only open to ideas that people have perpetuated despite no evidence whatsoever?