Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

does homeopathy work?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by isaone
    Hi, I sm brand new to this forum and although I do not want to offend anyone, there is absolutely no scientific evidence for homeopathy. . .no one has shown any effect when the tests are properly double blind.
    No offense taken. Because statistically significant results have been demonstrated in a number of DBPC studies, the next step is to debate their respective methodologies, which is what most of the people are doing on this forum. After many years of using remedies, I'm comfortable with what I've seen and experienced, and have no desire or motivation to convince others who think differently.

    You can find numerous examples within the links below:

    http://www.homeopathic.org/research.htm

    http://www.homeopathic.com/articles/research/index.php

    http://www.liebertonline.com/toc/acm/11/5

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by sufferer
      This debate is getting nowhere. It's like throwing the ball back and forth, he said- no she said.............
      Agreed.
      Originally posted by sufferer
      has anyone thought Why people such as on the forums have actually been looking for ANTIDOTES because remedies weren't benefiting them, either aggravating/worsening their conditions or giving them new or changed symptoms etc or have been ruined by too harsh and improper, uncareful etc treatment of homeopathy? No Effect shouldn't be the argument, the cures is the harder set of questions.
      My patient has athlete's foot. I give him Tincture of Leper's Ear to cure it.
      Nothing appears to happen. Then he gets tennis elbow. "Oh no!", I think, it must be the effect of the Leprous Water, thereby proving my system of "medicine" is effective. Now I must ask my friends for the antidote.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Michael
        You can find numerous examples within the links below:

        http://www.homeopathic.org/research.htm
        Let's take the first one, and read the first article I browsed to - the Lancet report - because it's ground we're all familiar with. The big UK homeopathy sites don't usually mention it, because they only mention "evidence" verifying their claims, which is not often considered the make of scientific detachment

        http://www.homeopathic.org/pressrelease082505.html

        It makes two main points, the first being something mentioned here before, that you can't test homeopathic remedies in the same way you can test anything else.

        The analogy would be to test the effects of penicillin for all patients with symptoms of an apparent infection.


        Well, yes, that would be a fine analogy, except that the penicillin would show effectiveness against those patients with a bacteriological infection countered by penicillin. Meta-analysis would show a statistical benefit compared to the control group. When this is done - with homeopathic or any other remedies - such a statistical benefit would be something to shout about. The analogy breaks down because the studies show that there is nothing to shout about.

        Secondly,
        the Lancet [...] relies on a quaint old idea from the nineteenth century that the ONLY way that the property of water can be affected or changed is by incorporating foreign molecules. This is the Avogadro-limit high-school level chemistry argument. To a materials scientist this notion is absurd, since the fundamental paradigm of materials-science is that the structure-property relationship is the basic determinant of everything. It is a fact that the structure of water and therefore the informational content of water can be altered in infinite ways
        *Cough* The structured water argument? Although it's been mentioned on these fora, this just isn't science - and these resources aren't worth anything without being backed up for themselves.

        Comment


        • #19
          Moopet, you're wanting to debate methodology, theory, etc., which is what I was pointing out in my previous response. There are DBPC studies which have shown significant results, but as with any study, the results can be refuted.

          Most likely, I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. I don't need to try and change your mind to feel better about homeopathy, nor will I feel worse because you stick with your opinion. Similarly, it doesn't mean that either of us is the intellectual superior because of our position. I was simply responding to a statement which was made by someone else, and am not interested in a debate.

          Finally, you cited one study, a single sentence, and a theory. Out of all the articles in those links, there's much more material to read.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Michael
            Finally, you cited one study, a single sentence, and a theory. Out of all the articles in those links, there's much more material to read.
            It was the first article I read and it was nonsense. It was, in my experience, typical of homeopathy articles. A single sentence? I took the only two main points in the article. It's not my fault they were stupid

            Anyway, yes, agreed re debate. Nobody is going to change anyone's mind without substantial evidence.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Michael
              There are DBPC studies which have shown significant results, but as with any study, the results can be refuted.
              That sentence could be qualified as "but as with any homeopathic study, the results can be refuted". Strangely enough this doesn't happen nearly as often in trials on conventional treatments. It seems to me that the ability to plan and carry out DBPC studies is rather lower in the homeopathic community than within conventional medicine.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Jocce
                That sentence could be qualified as "but as with any homeopathic study, the results can be refuted". Strangely enough this doesn't happen nearly as often in trials on conventional treatments. It seems to me that the ability to plan and carry out DBPC studies is rather lower in the homeopathic community than within conventional medicine.
                May be unrequired, because adversities--side/adverse or toxic effects are least in homeopathic remedies.Practical observations and experiance in mass people since long, may be much more than other studies whose basis can be to understand both real effects and adversities.
                Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
                Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..Shiv Khera

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by kayveeh
                  May be unrequired, because adversities--side/adverse or toxic effects are least in homeopathic remedies.
                  Of course, water and sugar pills are not known to cause any side effects.

                  Originally posted by kayveeh
                  Practical observations and experiance in mass people since long, may be much more than other studies whose basis can be to understand both real effects and adversities.
                  If you again claim that it is not possible to perform scientific studies to find out if homeopathis remedies has any effect because ithe treatment is so special you are at the same time saying that the "practical observations and experiances" can't be relied on.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Jocce
                    Of course, water and sugar pills are not known to cause any side effects.
                    You can't claim and declare "mass existing and well distributed modern people all over the world in millions as fool, illitrate, guliable or frauds who are using homeopathy repeatedly since long and observing and experiancing real effects with least adversities". Although Sugar pills can cause side effects to diabetics.



                    If you again claim that it is not possible to perform scientific studies to find out if homeopathis remedies has any effect because ithe treatment is so special you are at the same time saying that the "practical observations and experiances" can't be relied on.
                    Yes, homeopathic remedies can't be studied equivalent to crude chemical's studies which may show strong effects--may be real, side, adverse or toxic. Moreover there can be a weakness or miss in current scientific understanding in understanding the homeopathic remedies, suitably. So don'r expect or compare at par, till "science is absolute".
                    Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
                    Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..Shiv Khera

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by kayveeh
                      You can't claim and declare "mass existing and well distributed modern people all over the world in millions as fool, illitrate, guliable or frauds who are using homeopathy repeatedly since long and observing and experiancing real effects with least adversities". Although Sugar pills can cause side effects to diabetics.
                      Rubbish, lots of people are extremely gullible and believe in the strangest things. You can't know they are "experiancing real effects". If you can't distinguish the remedy from placebo in a controlled trial you can't possibly do it in clinical practice. You're just guessing and that's not good enough for me thank you.

                      Originally posted by kayveeh
                      Yes, homeopathic remedies can't be studied equivalent to crude chemical's studies which may show strong effects--may be real, side, adverse or toxic.
                      Bull****. I've heard this about homeopathic remedies being completely free from sideeffects so many times by now. If you claim that homeopathic remedies have a physiological effect in the body then they can/will also have adverse effects. Only thing is that the lousy state of your treasured "case notes" can't possibly reveal that. Rumours and gossip, that's what you got, and when each adverse effect is categorized as a normal aggravation that proves that the remedy works...well...bad luck for the patient.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        jocce, since you have no practical observations and experiances, it will be theoritical on your part. Otherwise it is quite practical....as well the other mass......systems. Majority of practical observers and who experianced, practically speak differently than you. Live evidances can be better proof than theoritical stories. Yes, I agree, its constituents, its science couldn't yet be known by science--may either be a "miss" or "weakness" nothing else.
                        So discuss at least here, considering/accepting this at first place as you are reading many positive observations and experiances, here.
                        Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
                        Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..Shiv Khera

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          And I repeat: How can you separate placebo responses and normal recovery from the effects of remedy in your "mass existing experiences"?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Jocce
                            And I repeat: How can you separate placebo responses and normal recovery from the effects of remedy in your "mass existing experiences"?
                            Well qualified homeopaths observe it different. Mass people...using it experiance it different so come again and again. Many countries legally allowed the practices with similar studies eq. to other medical studies--tell it is different.....so alike practicals can be many many.
                            Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
                            Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..Shiv Khera

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by kayveeh
                              Well qualified homeopaths observe it different.
                              And I repeat: How can you separate placebo responses and normal recovery from the effects of remedy in your "mass existing experiences"?

                              Originally posted by kayveeh
                              Mass people...using it experiance it different so come again and again.
                              And this is different from astrology in what way?

                              Originally posted by kayveeh
                              Many countries legally allowed the practices with similar studies eq. to other medical studies--tell it is different.....so alike practicals can be many many.
                              Which? What?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Jocce
                                And I repeat: How can you separate placebo responses and normal recovery from the effects of remedy in your "mass existing experiences"?
                                It is there. Most patients are not previously informed, what they are being treated and what they are getting. Animal, children are aoso treated. The purpose is to cure, so no need to seprate. Anyone can sit in clinics an observe accordingly.


                                And this is different from astrology in what way?



                                Which? What?
                                All mass..re valid in some senses or equivelant to respect, research, means given to them. One should respect his parents and ancestors to carry forward. Otherwise one can go up a hill, come back, and again climb differently... It will be never ending.

                                Whether science is "absolute" and "complete"? On mass/common scale, how old its medicines and theories are?
                                Homeopathic & Biochemic system existed because Drs.Hahnemann & Schuessler thought differently.
                                Successful people don't do different things, they do things differently..Shiv Khera

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X