Is this evidence that homeopathy works? (lol)?

Question

User "flashflood" posted a comment on here a few days ago claiming that homeopathy works and there is evidence to support it. Of course it was only fair that us skeptics called him/her on this evidence. About three hours later...this is the link he/she provided: http://hpathy.com/homeopathy-scientific-research/yer-queen-is-a-witch-and-quack/3/

After you've stopped laughing, I thought we'd all like a chance to explain to the alites why this isn't evidence!

Answer 1

Ouch! There's some major pseudo-science tripe there! Of course, to the average poorly educated quack, all those big words must be true, they sound so complicated after all! I won't go through them all, but some of the insanity includes:



1) They're describing a 'perpetual motion machine' here! Utterly fantastic rubbish! This is so mental, I'm lost for words.



2) More of the same: Putting energy into water gives O2 and H2, burning it reverses the equation and leads you...back where you started. Net result? Nothing!



3) Eccentric Dr claims ionic suspension reduces water surface tension (just like soap). Unlike soapy water, homeopathic mixtures contain nothing but water, so this is totally irrelevant.



4) Cold fusion? Seriously? Do I need to explain this one?



Plus a huge number of fail statements such as "Observe how the rotating dodecahedron, if you spin it fast enough in all gyroscopic directions, becomes a sphere." Err, no, it's still a dodecahedron, duh!



I just love how the references are to YouTube videos! I only clicked on one, but an end-of-the-news wacky item is there for light hearted entertainment, not irrevocable scientific proof! Something you might want to remember next time you're watching the Simpsons etc.



Thanks for the laugh Rhianna, when the alties talk about 'science', we know they're referring to voodoo and alchemy, such a shame that they don't realise too.



Edit: LMAO at flashflood's, peer reviewed, double blind fish fail! Oh jeez, my sides are aching now.......

Answer 2

Homeopathy was first brought by Hahnemann, a german physician, who was disillusioned by conventional medical school and practices. Homeopathy relies on the law of similars. So if one is allergic to bees, the remedy would be to ingest bee parts in a very diluted form (succussion) that is supposed to remedy your allergy. Another example is the homeopathic remedy for babies who suffer from teething by giving them small amounts of caffeine, and belladona in very dilute forms. The problem I have with homeopathy is that it lacks sufficient evidence for efficacy and safety in clinical trials and since it is not regulated by the Food and Drug administration the amounts of the ingredients are also unregulated. Even though most of the medications are so dilute, it PROBABLY wouldn't cause direct harm, however if it homeopathic remedies were to be given in place of medication that has known efficacy and safety profiles, it could prolong the sickness instead of getting legitimate medical therapy and possibly leading to further complications when left untreated. The dose-response has been proven by science over and over. The idea that giving someone a substance that is so dilute, that there is basically no active ingredient left has no evidence to support its use. I find it unethical to promote a product that does not have sufficient clinical evidence of its safety or efficacy. I would not be able to sleep at night knowing I am collecting money from a poor family who desperately would like to cure their child's sickness with a medicine that has no intrinsic value. Hyland who created the teething tablets mentioned above voluntarily recalled their product when the FDA found that there were levels of belladonna in the tablets that were unsafe for children..leading to seizures. I believe in evidence- based medicine.

Answer 3

Hey Mark, I am a US Chiro and I went to school longer than an RN, a paramedic and a physical therapist. I also don't think homeopathy is anything more than bad comedy. Please do not lump Chiros in with homeoquacks

Answer 4

Fine and dandy that the author's humor bounced off your skulls, but STILL no one has commented on his experiments with fish - where the fish in one tank that had a homeopathic remedy added to it survived longer than the fish in the other tank that did not have a remedy added.

Oh, sure, he probably needs to kill thousands of fish before you accept that further testing should be done. So, whatever. The untreated fish died quicker.

Answer 5

Only those who are completely ignorant of basic science, or the gullible, will take this as evidence that homeopathy works, or that the preparations are something more than plain water.



Come on you guys; can't you see baloney when its right under your noses?

Answer 6

QUANTUM!! yeah. I read the first paragraph. I got to something about how jiggiling it causes it to turn into a fish monkey or something. might read it later but about 8 red flags immediatly says to me that I need a good reason to keep reading. I dunno maybe finding it in the RCT section of a pier reviewed publication. Homeopathy weekly for example. pish!!

Answer 7

Why is it that chiropractors call themselves doctors and physical therapists, paramedics, and RNs go to school longer? And they don't sell minerals and supplements anymore, but now they sell formularies and detoxifiers.



By law, from the federal government, those high tech detoxifications go by another name and that is "food."



Wonder why homeopathic don't have double blind studies published in peer reviewed journals?



Let me guess... because there is a conspiracy to keep them out of the true medical field.



Yeah, I believe that like that guy down the street that has a way to convert water into gasoline, but the oil companies paid him to keep his mouth shut.



I've yet to meet one true homeopathic that wasn't a nut. They have more "excuses" than they do medicine. Every time something doesn't work that they recommend, they have a reason why you did it wrong, or used the wrong stuff. I love the Elderberry claims and it's even funnier when you hear all the excuses they have. It's a "medicine" only the homeopathic/naturopathic practitioner loves, as there are so many "outs" and excuses it gives them at every complaint.



I've worked in both worlds... the traditional medical field and the naturopathic world.



I am almost completely convinced that when medications were able to treat schizophrenics, bipolar disorders enough for these people to maintain in society, and we saw the closure of many mental hospitals, the previous patients went into the naturopathic field. I've never met a more naive bunch of people in my life.



The acid test is that you will never find a double blind study published in ANY medical journal (including homeopathic naturopathic) that is peer reviewed. It simply doesn't happen.



And even the few that pushed very hard, such as Linus Pauling, a true scientist, that promoted the claim that Vitamin C did so much, little by little fizzled with one peer review after another. Eventually to his final point that not only did it prevent cancer, it could possibly cure cancer. Of course now we know it doesn't cure, slow, reduce the common cold or it's symptoms and we also know it has no effect on cancer or cancer prevention. All proven near his death and recently.



Ironically one of the few mineral/vitamin that affects health most, Niacin isn't even capable of being produced by naturopaths or holistic practitioners. This was done with Niaspan that is capable of delivering Niacin in time released at dosages around 1 to 2 grams. In this dosage there are significant advantages, almost too numerous to list, but most significant is it raises HDL cholesterol (now known just as important as lowering LDL) and lowers LDL a little and triglycerides a little more. The trials prove this is one of the most effective drugs on the market and Niacin has been known for decades to help, but never to the efficacy of this prescription medication. It will go generic in about 3 years. And NO, Slo-Niacin is not the same and poses significant risks in the same dosage. This screws with your liver and the reason Niaspan is patented and approved by the FDA. Anyone using Slo-Niacin should have their liver profile done frequently, and should never expect anything close to the results of Niaspan. You can read all day long chemists experience at cafepharma.



FWIW, I think conventional medicine is overblown... it's a lot of mind over matter... placebo. And I do believe the mind can contribute significantly to one's health. I will compare any day buying a pet for reducing BP compared to ANY and ALL homeopathic approaches. And even place a pet right up their against many of FDA approved drugs for BP control.



The fact that conventional medicine has been overblown, the body naturally heals itself so well, opens the door to charlatans in the homeopathic field. Many believe it themselves 100%. Prevention blows both forms of medical care away. If you're skinny you will prove both conventional and naturopathic medicine wrong. It's about how much you eat instead of what you eat. You can look at any actuary tables. IOW, the insurance actuaries know more about what is good for you than any doctor of any field... and they've know this for years.



I too wish that there was a pill made by anyone that would have remarkable results. So far the closest is aspirin, vaccines, and antibiotics. All the rest are snails compared to our few rabbits.



If your chemistry expert can't explain in detail the anatomy and physiology of the human body, you can bet they know even less about chemistry. Tell them you have heart burn and what they will suggest. I guarantee you they will have an answer. Ask them what causes Barrett's Esophagus, and they won't have a clue until they look it up. Ask ANY MD and he/she will tell you without hesitating. Naturopaths can't tell you if Barrett's is bad or good until they look it up.



When a person with a business degree tells you the medical solution to your problem, then look it up here: http://www.quackwatch.org/

Answer 8

This is all bullcrap. I would show this to a physicist friend of mine but I'm afraid she might get a stroke from all the **** in the site.



Dear homeoquacks,



Show. Me. Randomized. Peer-reviewed. Clinical. Trials.

Answer 9

Wow, it's got everything!



There's no woo like quantum woo.



Also, ether? What the hell? That was disproven long ago.

Answer 10

You can't prove that Homeopathy works, because you cannot use one remedy for 100 people. Even if 100 people all have the same disease, say Chickenpox for instance. Chickenpox can produce a huge variety of symptoms in each individual. Some may go hot and then cold and shivery, in which case they may need Gelsenium, but some may have a fever and stay hot, in which case they may need Belladonna. Each remedy has VERY specific symptoms associated with it, so you cannot use it on everyone. It would just never work. In orthodox medicine we can use painkillers for any sort of pain, granted ibuprofen is more useful in inflammatory conditions than paracetamol. They are designed to work like this. But Homeopathy is so broad, so wide, so specifically tailored to an individual's needs, that one cannot use one remedy on 100 people and expect to get accurate results. Therefore a clinical trial cannot be successfully performed.

Even Homeopaths don't fully understand how or why it works, but when Hahnemann was experimenting, he found that the smaller the amount of the substance within a remedy, the more potent the action. Nobody can explain why, it just is.

If you do not believe in it, try seeing a recommended Homeopath and see what happens. It can take months to get the right remedy for a constitutional one, but you will feel changes happen.

For accute conditions try using a reference book and see what happens.

I completely understand why people are sceptical, because it seems that it's impossible that it could work. But also know that I got rid of a kidney infection with Bryonia and I prevented myself from swelling up after an operation (surgeon didn't understand why I wasn't particularly swollen) by taking Arnica. I know that if you get the right remedy, it works.

Answer 11

Ahem...





ENERGY!!!

Answer 12

Those are all good and valid studies, however since you have demonstrated such an anti-homeopathy bias, no one should be surprised that you either fail to understand them or just don't want to.

80% of conventional medicine (allopathy) has no scientific evidence to justify it, however anti-holistic bias means that some people seem to think that other healing systems should be held to a higher standard.

It's an established fact that Homeopathy is the second most prevalent system of medicine in use the world today. Why? Because it works.