Neal's Yard Remedies grilled by Guardian readers

[Mojo]

The Guardian's "Ethical Living Blog" has a "you ask, they answer" series. This week it features Neal's Yard Remedies. They have quite a lot of questions, including quite a few questioning the ethics of selling medicines without evidence that they work, but for some reason, although they apparently said they were "working on replies" yesterday, none seem to have appeared yet. It's now almost 24 hours since the first question ("How do you validate the medical efficacy of your 'remedies'?") was asked. This has been contrasted with the progress of the previous thread in the series.

They obviously didn't remember what happened to the Barefoot Doctor a few years back (discussed on the JREF Forum).

[Mojo]

If you wanted to ask them any questions, don't bother.

They've run away:

have just had a chat with NYR.

Unfortunately, despite previous assurances that they would be participating in this blog post, I've now been told they 'will not be taking part in the debate'.

[chaggle]

If you wanted to ask them any questions, don't bother.

They've run away:

Some great questions and comments there anyway.

My favourite question:

Canocola:

Dear Neal's Yard,
I notice you sell kaolin. If I eat enough of it, will I be able to shit crockery?

My favourite comment:

Benulek:

I was picturing two grumpy hippies pacing around Covent Garden, one saying to the other, 'what the f*** did you agree to this for?'

[polomint38]

Don't go to that Neal's yard, this one is much better



http://www.nealsyarddairy.co.uk

Nice Cheese, yummy.

[Nukapai]

Oh, that was so Thank you; funniest thing I've read in a while.

[Mojo]

Follow-up: The PR lessons from Neal's Yard Remedies public debate U-turn.

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Funny, first time I've seen this.

I feel Clifford is possibly wrong in this instance though.

There is no benefit to the company from responding. Anything they do say will be furhter pulled apart as there is absolutely nothing credible they can say to those questions. Or maybe they should have got some MPs to lie for them.

From the company's perspective, they've probably done the right thing. What were they thinking off in the first place though? Well free advertising and more promotion I guess.

[Mojo]

Blog homeopathy horror hammers hippy herbalists

Graun abandons Q&A after subject hides under bed

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

My favourite quote from the whole page doesn't mention homeopathy though.

What's ethical about foam bath costing £39.15?
I was under the assumption ethical meant something was non-exploitative (amongst other things).

Pretty much sums it up for me.

[Dubious Dick]

"I saw you coming" H. Enfield

[Trinoc]

What's ethical about foam bath costing £39.15?
I was under the assumption ethical meant something was non-exploitative (amongst other things).

Sainsbury's and Tesco moth sell "basic" shampoo, shower gel, foam bath and soap at about a quarter of the price of even their own cheap brands (typically under a quid a bottle). If you want nice smells you can add stuff like Tea Tree oil - a bottle from a health food shop lasts for years - or whatever smell you like. Nearly 40 quid is definitely taking the piss.

[Croydon Bob]

Nearly 40 quid is definitely taking the piss.

Yeah, I only paid £25 for my wombat-piss bath oils.

[polomint38]

Yeah, I only paid £25 for my wombat-piss bath oils.

I did wonder what that odour was at SiTP was 8)
Weirdly I found it quite refreshing