Is Homeopathy a sham?......... yes

[monica]

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 2

for the sceptic (scepticism's OK - really!)

Does homeopathy work - well, does it?

The test of homeopathy is whether patients get cured - not whether it can be made to fit into a trial who's paradigm provides a way to justify giving potentially lethal drugs to patients as being safe enough to be in their interest (so called 'scientific' trials).Thousands upon thousands of patients the world over swear by homeopathy and they have been treated for virtually all ailments known to mankind

Do you actually know what homeopathy is? Really?

If you don't really know what homeopathy is, how can you make any judgements about it? (hint: you can't) Find out what it is first, not what you think it is. All the disdain, scorn or ridicule I read about homeopathy is based either on assumptions, supposition, ignorance or laziness, or a combination of all four. Much of it is deliberate misinformation masquerading as evidence by those with a vested interest. Is that really the intelligent way to approach a subject? An open mind will be required.

Is homeopathy dangerous? Not compared to orthodox Western medicine, where thousands (*106,000) of patients a year die from the effects of its medicines.

How does homeopathy work?

It's one thing to be sceptical, quite another to be prejudiced. Admitting you don't understand something is the first step to discovery. If you are the sort who prefers to find out for themselves rather than be told what to think, keep reading, if not, keep bleating. It may take time and be challenging to understand but do persevere it will be worth it. Start with the information on this site or explore the web where there is a huge amount of positive information and understanding waiting for you. In my experience sceptics of homeopathy require only one thing to accept homeopathy, and that is to be treated themselves (by a qualified homeopath!) and see it work for themselves.

Is there any proof it works?

Homeopathy has been proven to be effective. Yes proven. The proof is there in medical records across the world - proof. Unequivocal: e.g. the categorical proof that it cures cholera. So what have you to lose by exploring homeopathy, why not see if it works and work out how later?

Can I treat myself with homeopathy?

That really depends what you are trying to treat and how well informed you are. There is no reason that you cannot treat yourself and your family for common acute ailments - if you are well enough informed about homeopathy. On the other hand if you are not well enough informed, i.e. if your prescribing is not effective or the condition more serious than you realise, it can be a case of a little knowledge can be a bad thing if you try to treat conditions that are beyond your experience. Better to consult an expert in the first instance.

What about 'off the shelf' homeopathy?

I do not endorse the new legislation that allows medical claims to be made for specific remedies or combinations of remedies, not because I believe they are dangerous in themselves, but because that is not the correct way to apply homeopathy, it is very 'hit or miss' and the public could quickly become disillusioned with homeopathy if they think that is the best it has to offer... it certainly is not!

Why does homeopathy get bad press?

Why all the hoo hah? Some people really get hot under the collar about how homeopathy just cannot work - a classic case of wearing coloured glasses and proclaiming that everything has to be that colour. Some peope make a living out of knocking homeopathy. Corporate funding and vested interest is allegedly behind a lot of the media reports. I have not yet seen a single article or report or test against homeopathy that does not fall apart when properly challenged. But the challenges go unreported and anyway by then the damage is usually already done; the readers know no better and believe what they read. Yet all the while people continue the world over get cured by homeopathy. So if you want to see the 'good press' on homeopathy not the anti-homeopathy propoganda ( that's what it is) then checkout the alternative health magasines and online resources.

So who's right?

Some very persuasive speakers hold very anti-homeopathy views. As do most chemists and pharmacists (and who seem to think 'science' means 'chemistry'). That is their view and they are welcome to it, but homeopathy works despite their disbelief,. they are simply expressing the limits of their understanding, of their world view, and they are not prepared to accept anything outside of that. It's not an arguement worth persuing with them. As an intellectual debate you can take whichever side you prefer, however if you are unwell and need a cure, then a debate about who's right is not what's needed; what's needed is action: see the (qualified!) homeopath, get your remedy, either it will cure or it won't. Debate over.

[DaveR]

I fully accept that everybody has a right to waste their own money doing whatever stupid thing they want to, and they ought not to be continually badgered about what a fool they are. If they die needlessly as a result of their own stupidity, so be it.

Here's my theory. The explosion in popularity of alternative therapy is a consequence of a combination of self-obsession and high disposable incomes. A large number of people have (or until very recently had) a fair amount of spare cash after paying for necessities. Spending on therapy makes people feel good in the same basic way as buying new shoes or Ipods i.e. the sense of rewarding yourself, rather than any particular utility derived from the product.

Therapy however has a special attraction because it emphasizes your sense of uniqueness ("I have particular problems/sensitivities that conventional treatments can't address"). What's more, the actual process involves a 'professional' therapist further reinforcing this message ("I have to spend a lot of time with you and design a course of treatment that is tailor-made for you). And, it's that same message that is likely to lead to any discernible positive effects - you genuinely do feel better. It's also a lot easier to defend from charges of shallow selfishness than if you are blowing loads of cash on shoes and bags*

So, homeopathy can work, if you are the kind of person who wants it to, or a kid who doesn't know any better. But it is, definitely, just water.

*This suggests that women are more likely to indulge in alternative therapy than men, and I have no idea whether this is generally true. I do believe though that most men don't need to go to a therapist in order to be persuaded that we are the best thing since sliced bread - we know that already. Am I right lads?

[david_carnell]

monica Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 2

> for the sceptic (scepticism's OK - really!)

> Does homeopathy work - well, does it?

> The test of homeopathy is whether patients get

> cured - not whether it can be made to fit into a

> trial who's paradigm provides a way to justify

> giving potentially lethal drugs to patients as

> being safe enough to be in their interest (so

> called 'scientific' trials).Thousands upon

> thousands of patients the world over swear by

> homeopathy and they have been treated for

> virtually all ailments known to mankind

"So called" scientific trials??? You mean double-blind trials that homoeopathy regularly fails? Or peer-reviewed journals that routinely discredit homoepathy for the woo that it is?

>

> Do you actually know what homeopathy is? Really?

> If you don't really know what homeopathy is, how

> can you make any judgements about it? (hint: you

> can't) Find out what it is first, not what you

> think it is. All the disdain, scorn or ridicule I

> read about homeopathy is based either on

> assumptions, supposition, ignorance or laziness,

> or a combination of all four. Much of it is

> deliberate misinformation masquerading as evidence

> by those with a vested interest. Is that really

> the intelligent way to approach a subject? An open

> mind will be required.

Tell us more, Monica....please. I'm serious. Tell me what I'm not seeing here. Explain to me about water having memory. Because I onced pee'd in the shower and now I'm scared water hates me.

> Is homeopathy dangerous? Not compared to orthodox

> Western medicine, where thousands (*106,000) of

> patients a year die from the effects of its

> medicines.

You're sooo right. No-one ever has died from homeopathy. Why? Because it's water. You can't die from a inert, harmless liquid. Unless you drown in your own sanctimony.

> How does homeopathy work?

> It's one thing to be sceptical, quite another to

> be prejudiced. Admitting you don't understand

> something is the first step to discovery. If you

> are the sort who prefers to find out for

> themselves rather than be told what to think, keep

> reading, if not, keep bleating. It may take time

> and be challenging to understand but do persevere

> it will be worth it. Start with the information on

> this site or explore the web where there is a huge

> amount of positive information and understanding

> waiting for you. In my experience sceptics of

> homeopathy require only one thing to accept

> homeopathy, and that is to be treated themselves

> (by a qualified homeopath!) and see it work for

> themselves.

This doesn't answer the question of the first sentence.

> Is there any proof it works?

> Homeopathy has been proven to be effective. Yes

> proven. The proof is there in medical records

> across the world - proof. Unequivocal: e.g. the

> categorical proof that it cures cholera. So what

> have you to lose by exploring homeopathy, why not

> see if it works and work out how later?

We have established this. We believe you. Read Bignumber5's post. But why does it work? Is it because of the magical properties of water and the skill of the homoeopath? Or is it due to time spent talking to patients that GPs can't give combined with the powerful placebo effect?

> Can I treat myself with homeopathy?

> That really depends what you are trying to treat

> and how well informed you are. There is no reason

> that you cannot treat yourself and your family for

> common acute ailments - if you are well enough

> informed about homeopathy. On the other hand if

> you are not well enough informed, i.e. if your

> prescribing is not effective or the condition more

> serious than you realise, it can be a case of a

> little knowledge can be a bad thing if you try to

> treat conditions that are beyond your experience.

> Better to consult an expert in the first

> instance.

How much will this "expert" charge me?

> Why does homeopathy get bad press?

> Why all the hoo hah? Some people really get hot

> under the collar about how homeopathy just cannot

> work - a classic case of wearing coloured glasses

> and proclaiming that everything has to be that

> colour. Some peope make a living out of knocking

> homeopathy. Corporate funding and vested interest

> is allegedly behind a lot of the media reports. I

> have not yet seen a single article or report or

> test against homeopathy that does not fall apart

> when properly challenged. But the challenges go

> unreported and anyway by then the damage is

> usually already done; the readers know no better

> and believe what they read. Yet all the while

> people continue the world over get cured by

> homeopathy. So if you want to see the 'good press'

> on homeopathy not the anti-homeopathy propoganda (

> that's what it is) then checkout the alternative

> health magasines and online resources.

So, if I want to read all the good stuff about homoeopathy I should read about it in advertorials in magazines published by, and for, those involved in the industry? And you have the hypocrisy to moan about "vested interests" of big-pharma.

> So who's right?

> Some very persuasive speakers hold very

> anti-homeopathy views. As do most chemists and

> pharmacists (and who seem to think 'science' means

> 'chemistry'). That is their view and they are

> welcome to it, but homeopathy works despite their

> disbelief,. they are simply expressing the limits

> of their understanding, of their world view, and

> they are not prepared to accept anything outside

> of that. It's not an arguement worth persuing with

> them. As an intellectual debate you can take

> whichever side you prefer, however if you are

> unwell and need a cure, then a debate about who's

> right is not what's needed; what's needed is

> action: see the (qualified!) homeopath, get your

> remedy, either it will cure or it won't. Debate

> over.

If you're ill you won't care who is right?! You might if you use woo instead of actual medicine and suffer the consequences. Debate over? I think not. Not by a long chalk.

[Brendan]

Oh Christ are we on to this again?

Tell you what guys, I?m off to start a Science vs Religion thread. ;-)

[monica]

David we all have a right to own beliefs and opinions, LRon asked me to explian Homeopathy, my post was not to convince it was to explain. I have done it.

This will go on and on for years to come. Look forward to reading the rest of the debate.

[snorky]

monica Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 2

> for the sceptic (scepticism's OK - really!)

> Does homeopathy work - well, does it?

> The test of homeopathy is whether patients get

> cured - not whether it can be made to fit into a

> trial who's paradigm provides a way to justify

> giving potentially lethal drugs to patients as

> being safe enough to be in their interest (so

> called 'scientific' trials).Thousands upon

> thousands of patients the world over swear by

> homeopathy and they have been treated for

> virtually all ailments known to mankind

>

> Do you actually know what homeopathy is? Really?

> If you don't really know what homeopathy is, how

> can you make any judgements about it? (hint: you

> can't) Find out what it is first, not what you

> think it is. All the disdain, scorn or ridicule I

> read about homeopathy is based either on

> assumptions, supposition, ignorance or laziness,

> or a combination of all four. Much of it is

> deliberate misinformation masquerading as evidence

> by those with a vested interest. Is that really

> the intelligent way to approach a subject? An open

> mind will be required.

>

> Is homeopathy dangerous? Not compared to orthodox

> Western medicine, where thousands (*106,000) of

> patients a year die from the effects of its

> medicines.

>

> How does homeopathy work?

> It's one thing to be sceptical, quite another to

> be prejudiced. Admitting you don't understand

> something is the first step to discovery. If you

> are the sort who prefers to find out for

> themselves rather than be told what to think, keep

> reading, if not, keep bleating. It may take time

> and be challenging to understand but do persevere

> it will be worth it. Start with the information on

> this site or explore the web where there is a huge

> amount of positive information and understanding

> waiting for you. In my experience sceptics of

> homeopathy require only one thing to accept

> homeopathy, and that is to be treated themselves

> (by a qualified homeopath!) and see it work for

> themselves.

>

> Is there any proof it works?

> Homeopathy has been proven to be effective. Yes

> proven. The proof is there in medical records

> across the world - proof. Unequivocal: e.g. the

> categorical proof that it cures cholera. So what

> have you to lose by exploring homeopathy, why not

> see if it works and work out how later?

>

> Can I treat myself with homeopathy?

> That really depends what you are trying to treat

> and how well informed you are. There is no reason

> that you cannot treat yourself and your family for

> common acute ailments - if you are well enough

> informed about homeopathy. On the other hand if

> you are not well enough informed, i.e. if your

> prescribing is not effective or the condition more

> serious than you realise, it can be a case of a

> little knowledge can be a bad thing if you try to

> treat conditions that are beyond your experience.

> Better to consult an expert in the first

> instance.

>

> What about 'off the shelf' homeopathy?

> I do not endorse the new legislation that allows

> medical claims to be made for specific remedies or

> combinations of remedies, not because I believe

> they are dangerous in themselves, but because that

> is not the correct way to apply homeopathy, it is

> very 'hit or miss' and the public could quickly

> become disillusioned with homeopathy if they think

> that is the best it has to offer... it certainly

> is not!

>

> Why does homeopathy get bad press?

> Why all the hoo hah? Some people really get hot

> under the collar about how homeopathy just cannot

> work - a classic case of wearing coloured glasses

> and proclaiming that everything has to be that

> colour. Some peope make a living out of knocking

> homeopathy. Corporate funding and vested interest

> is allegedly behind a lot of the media reports. I

> have not yet seen a single article or report or

> test against homeopathy that does not fall apart

> when properly challenged. But the challenges go

> unreported and anyway by then the damage is

> usually already done; the readers know no better

> and believe what they read. Yet all the while

> people continue the world over get cured by

> homeopathy. So if you want to see the 'good press'

> on homeopathy not the anti-homeopathy propoganda (

> that's what it is) then checkout the alternative

> health magasines and online resources.

>

> So who's right?

> Some very persuasive speakers hold very

> anti-homeopathy views. As do most chemists and

> pharmacists (and who seem to think 'science' means

> 'chemistry'). That is their view and they are

> welcome to it, but homeopathy works despite their

> disbelief,. they are simply expressing the limits

> of their understanding, of their world view, and

> they are not prepared to accept anything outside

> of that. It's not an arguement worth persuing with

> them. As an intellectual debate you can take

> whichever side you prefer, however if you are

> unwell and need a cure, then a debate about who's

> right is not what's needed; what's needed is

> action: see the (qualified!) homeopath, get your

> remedy, either it will cure or it won't. Debate

> over.

rubbish.

[mockney piers]

You haven't convinced or explained though, just misdirected, while chucking a host of straw men about.

And maybe 100,000 people have died from so called western medicine, but a drop in the ocean from the hundreds of millions who's lives have been improved, transformed or saved by it.

Give me bonjela over anrica (or whatever) for a mouth ulcer any day of the week.

And as for cholera, would that be homeopathic water with salt and sugar added? Amazing the power of homeopathy.

How's it coming along with that AIDS treatment?

[Jeremy]

Do the believers in homeopathy think that it can work on sceptics? Is there a possibility that the treatment could work, even if the patient fully expects it not to?

[LRon Hubble]

Monica

yes, i asking how it works you didn't answer.

so, how does work? by what mechanism?......is it magical?

LRon

you may wish to read about logical fallacies. There are so many incorrect statements irrelevant arguments in your post its quite astounding.

[citizenED]

sorry to go back but, yes BN5's post was in support of some aspects of homeopathy.

LRon "The homeopathy element of homeopathy treatment.....does not work. fact" I totally agree. But I also can't see how you could extract the homepathy element out of the homeopathy treatment.

Sean: "many people who use homeopaths genuinely report feeling better. fact." BN5 invited us to make of that what you will. I think that is quite clear; homeopathy has worked for those people.

The placebo effect is a phrase that has resonance here. I think the important word is not "placebo" but "effect"

[Mark]

On reading the Lancet (after it was suggested in a previous thread) the latest paper on Homeopathy asked "Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects?

Survey said... "This finding is compatible with the notion that the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects."

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)67177-2/abstract

I also notice that the FAQ and answers given earlier were from this site written by a a classical homoeopath so some may say he is biased towards homeopathy.

Are there any unbiased references that state that homeopathy effect works any more than a placebo effect?

[KalamityKel]

Dont know if Skeptics.org has been suggested, referenced, looked into and then thrown out as more "rubbish" by both sides of the argument?

I always thought that Homeopathy, correct me if I'm wrong monica, is supposed to work alongside existing treatment or help those wishing to find an alternative but not a complete replacement for medicial needs.

How many who disregard methods practised have actually experienced any of it and with an open mind?

Should we disregard hypnotherapy too? Same ideas of suggestion...

[SeanMacGabhann]

L Ron Hubble

To be fair to monica here, you are merely asking the same set of questions many of the rest of us have asked here in the past. The same accusations of "magic" and "woo" have all been bandied about and it has become frequently fraught - and monica has, at length, set out here stall

Now, I don't agree with her stall but it seems unfair to make her go through all the same hoops again - you can read here responses on previous (loooong) threads

Here is one... monica answers plenty on here and we sceptics give plenty back

As to the question why do some of us get so upset by people who believe in homeopathy - for me, it's not the homeopathy itself. It's the ability that humans have to suspend rationale which bothers me so - the ability to be led by what we WANT to believe rather than what is true and real. So, apart from practitioners of homeopathy, we have many people saying "what harm does it do .. leave them be". Well, I would argue that believing what we want to believe has historically (and hysterically) been very harmful

So whether it's homeopathy, religion, the belief that the country is "flooded" with immigrants who all get priority housing, McCarthyism, witchcraft trials, Tobacco companies, pharma companies, national socialism yadda yadda yadda - it's not so much the perpetrators of these things that bothers me - it's the ability for large numbers of people to be suckered in and believe whatever they are told. Saying something isn't true doesn't make it so.

Do people get better after homeopathic treatment? Absolutely! Is it that homeopathic treatment and the memory of whatver substance that caused the recovery? As opposed to the many other likely factors (natural regression to the mean, kindly human contact, more time with same etc) - I very much doubt it. But I'm open to being proved wrong. And that means tests and trials - just saying it is not good enough

[Jeremy]

In response to KK, I would happily try homeopathy! If a practitioner is reading this who wants to try to cure my asthma free of charge (in the name of research) let me know.

[Mark]

KalamityKel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Should we disregard hypnotherapy too? Same ideas of suggestion...

Hypnotherapy's different. You make people believe something, a false memory if you will, so that they feel different at the next experience that they are seeking therapy about. An example: If someone feels nervous speaking in public a typical induction and session would involve them imagining themselves speaking in front of people and feeling confident. The next time they do it for real they remember the false memory and should feel better.

You can't hypnotise someone who can't be hypnotised, they have to be open to suggestion. Hypnotherapy works on the mind and the way people think, not on purchasing a small bottle of remedy water.

[edited once]

[LRon Hubble]

SeanMG,

hey, i asked a question and it wasn't answered,

ive always wondered how someone who practices (or wants to) justifies the mechanism element of homeopathy to themselves. The dilution, the proving... for these to work it has to be magical.

so i asked if Monica thought it was magical

LRon

sorry if this has been talked about before but im genuinely interested in this...

[Huggers]

Homeopathy worked on my dog and he was sceptic. Oh no, sorry he was septic.

[SeanMacGabhann]

L Ron

I'm merely suggesting that whilst you wait for monica to come back (if she does) you could read here previous answers to that very question in previous threads

[LRon Hubble]

SeanMB

noted..... will do!

LRon

[antijen]

surely as I've said earlier we ourselves must look for the cure within ourselves regardless of what medicine is our choice. Cant put a link up (my sons out) but look up georg groddek he helped meny people who were diagnosed terminally ill back to good health after hospitals gave up on them. DaveR mentioned it being for people with money, personally the most I have paid for a homeopath remedy (which by the way I've only used a couple of times) and a consultation is ?1, as the woman used a sliding scale for charging, she also came to my house when my son was really ill and absolutly refused any money. I would be very wary (know a livings got to be made) of anyone who was involved with healing and charging where only the rich could go. Jeremy what medicines if any do you use for your asthma, have you tried any herbs.

[woofmarkthedog]

Ah ha

[bignumber5]

Gosh, hasn't this moved on a bit since my last contribution?! Apologies for not getting back into the whole business a bit sooner - i don't have much time for posting these days.

To clarify my last post and it's intended message, since this appears to have been debated in my absence, homepathy is an absolute sham: There is no decent evidence (and by decent, I mean SIGN grading system for the hierachy of evidence applicable to heathcare) to support the underlying practice. Someone pro-homeopathy on this thread has actually used the phrase "entitled to their beliefs" to support their adherence to it, and I think if you admit that homeopathy is to be believed in or not then you are almost by definition agreeing with the lack of evidence - you believe (or not) in superstition, religion or hocum.

The point that I was trying to make was that something positive may well come out of the process of an individual psychologically exploring their concerns. All the more easily done with an individual who is being paid to sit there, listen and ask probing questions. So no, I was not being positive about homeopathy. I was saying that the positive outcome from homeopathy that cannot be attributed to the placebo effect can instead be attributed to a part of the process that has dick-all to do with homeopathy per se.

As for the "what if you go for homeopathy over conventional western medicine" question, the answer is fairly simple. A homeopath will only get rid of homeopath-diagnosed problems, which are in themselves utter nonsense. Offer herbal teas and flower remedies to people with end-stage renal failure as an alternative to dialysis and see how many take you up on the offer. And how many live til the end of the week.

And, my passing shot, since homeopathy is such 1st class arse gravy, a good portion of its totally unquantifiable "success" is that the muppets that sought it had a whole lot of nothing wrong with them in the first place, or something with such a significant (maybe entirely) psychological component that having a chat with someone who listens is enough to banish it from daily life. Modern medicine recognises that latter, and liaison psychiatrists spend a lot of time dealing with somatoform and conversion disorders. But the only people that get to see them are people who are willing to see a psychiatrist, which requires a level of self-awareness and insight that the electromagnetic-pseudoscience brigade are unlikely to ever achieve. People want a diagnosis that absolves them of blame and responsibility, and in the minds of many, somatoform disorder does not provide this. Such is the stigma around mental illness.

For a final time, just to be clear and to make sure I am not misrepresented in the inevitable 2 or 3 days until I return to the thread, HOMEOPATHY IS COMPLETE SHITE FROM START TO FINISH.

[bignumber5]

Jeremy what medicines if any do you use for your asthma

Whilst I'm sure Jeremy can speak for himself, there's a point to be made here because that remark epitomises what is wrong with the alternative therapy club: I've never met Jeremy but I could predict a likely stepwise approach of B2-adrenergic receptor agonists of varying half-lives, perhaps M3-acetyl-choline receptor antagonists, and possibly a synthetic glucocorticoid, inhaled in order to localise the effects but minimise systemic side effects. And how do I know that? Is it because I had a friend who saw a man in a smock in a room full of plants and wall charts who felt better after taking them? Or because that's the evidence based stepwise management of asthma, standardised throughout the country and indeed the world?

How do your "herbs" work, antijen?

[dulwichmum]

Oh bignumber5 darling,

You really are incredibly manly and in charge and I enjoy your logic too (sigh). Did I mention that I wear amazing lingerie darling?

[????]

100