On CBC's Marketplace, a dozen people overdosed on this stuff (there is a "maximum amount to take") on purpus, what happened? nothing. It is either water or sugerpills, depending on weather it's solid or liquid.
OMG really, so what most of you are saying is that you never try something new to help you feel better. you would rather take stuff that has to warn you of all sorts of possible nasty side effects, and it still may not help. if you dont try you will never know. modern medicine just trys to expand on what is already known through homeopothy, it is not a replacement it is an alternative or complimentary method. my opinion the guy was rude and didnt really know what he was talking about.
OMG really, so what most of you are saying is that you never try something new to help you feel better. you would rather take stuff that has to warn you of all sorts of possible nasty side effects, and it still may not help. if you dont try you will never know. modern medicine just trys to expand on what is already known through homeopothy, it is not a replacement it is an alternative or complimentary method. my opinion the guy was rude and didnt really know what he was talking about.
I come to make the observation that there is a lot of hate and anger in these comments. Most likely the cause for a lot of the world's suffering. I recommend that if a person is sick to support him/her in whichever healing path the person chooses. If whatever path the person chooses does not work for them, eventually they will see it and try something else until relief is achieved. We have to be supportive of each other to get us through hard times. Harsh criticism hurts the soul.
That girls smoking hot! u can totally tell shes raw in bed. coming home after a bad day of work. pissed off about 'whatever'. grabbing a glass of wine. bitching to me about her day. bragging about how she just needs to get FUCKED.. can anyone else see that? or is it just me
An aquaintance of mine was given homeopathic anti-malarials when visiting south america. she didn't get malaria. There! Proof that it works!...
NOT!
she used many other preventatives, including permethrin impregnated mosquito nets and repellents, she was in a low risk area. I told she was taking a huge risk putting her eggs in the homeopathy basket. She said would sooner take those than nasty chemicals made by corporations?! She also beleives that she can suck spirits out of people with a straw.
so the pills are radioactive? lol..are they electric? Avogadros theory states that in a mixed SOLUTION after 6*10^23 there is a chance that only one molecule of the original substance in the mixture.. so once the substance is diluted to 10^24 ... there is one chance in 10 that a molecule of the original substance exists in the mixture
some homeopathic tablets contain substances way more diluted than that
anyway.. WHY DIDNT THE LADY CONTRADICT HIM with logical arguments? lol
@oldirtybastard213 So by the same reasoning gravity and electromagnetism are also hoaxes, since there is not a single ATOM transferred. Electric current is a giant hoax because it is only a flow of electrons without a single atom moving.
Why don't you start campaigning against mobile phones as a hoax? There is not a single atom transferred through the phone, so by your reasoning it is impossible. A little consistency here please.
@oldirtybastard213 Hahnemann was a contemporary of Avagadro and understood perfectly well what his discoveries implied.
As I have stated above, you are assuming that molecules are the largest particles in physics and this is a silly assumption based on high school chemistry. You are also ignoring the transfer of structural information through epitaxy and clathrates which are beyond the comprehension of doctors and the medical profession but which are a daily occurrence for any pipeline engineer.
Just because science cant explain it doesnt mean it is a sham. Type this in Youtube search and watch the movie: "Gregg Braden -The Science of Miracles, the Divine Matrix and Quantum Physics-Part 1" Try and explain what happens within current scientific thinking. You cant!
Homeopathy DOES NOT WORK, it's been proved being any doubt for those who actually understand what the scientific method is and how it works and how it can conclusively show wether something has any actual effect or not.
Only people like you my dear, who does not really understand what a clinical trial is, what testing under controlled conditions really mean can actually say that there are proves that homeopathy works...
panda, I am glad your Grandpa's cancer is gone, but I am sure it was not the homeopathic remedies. Sometimes cancer goes into remission, and rarely it even goes away.
The medical community has a way to tell when medicines work that factor out false positives and negatives. These are called randomized double blind studies with statistical analysis of the outcomes. These show homeopathy does not work.
"...double blind studies with statistical analysis of the outcomes. These show homeopathy does not work."
It is unfortunate to hear this line aped by countless people trying to sound authoritative (not knowing your background, I cannot say in your case) who do not have the background or knowledge to make such statements. As a clinician who has read many of these studies, I understand that the majority of these DBPC, randomized trials failed to use individualized treatment.
@panda181881 But you do not know it was homeopathy that cured him.
Cancer can go into remission for a number of reasons, and just because he happened to be using a homeopathic treatment does not mean it HAD to be that treatment that was the cure. Some people give up with medicine and just try to live it out, then find out 6 months later their cancer has gone. If they happened to have taken up smoking to enjoy themselves would that prove smoking was the cure?
Her best case is word of mouth. Have years of psychologic research and studying the results of clinical trials taught us nothing about the inability of patients to distinguish a placebo?
@calmguy1 he is reffering to the fact that 10 out of 10 homeopaths would rather perscibe something homeopathic for more life threatening diseases and put peoples life at risk KNOWING that is not scientificlly proven to work. resulting In a neglegable death. pay attention to 5:19 . Homeopathy doesn t cure diseases. she says it herself. how do you figure hes an idiot?
Speaking of studies evidencing FOR homeopathy, there are over 150+ methodologically reliable, controlled studies evidencing for h. in at least 24 int'l and nat'l, conv journals including Cancer, Int'l J of Oncology, Rheumatology, Allergologie, Pediatrics, Pediatrie, J of Head Trauma Rehab, British J of Clinical Pharm, Lancet and BMJ.
Does anyone believe these journals would publish anything but high-quality, reliable studies? I don't!
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (one of the US's most prestigious cancer ctrs) did two studies on h. trtmt of cancer. They both evidenced for h. The most recent was published in Int'l J of Oncology, 2/10/2010. (titled: "Cytotoxic effects of ultra-diluted remedies in breast cancer cells"). This study showed that 4 h. remedies were demonstrated to induce programmed cell death in breast cancer cells. H. cancer trtmt does not damage surrounding cells and does not destroy the immune system.
Banerji Clinic treats 1,200 cancer patients A DAY with 70% benefit. They have cases which have not relapsed after five years. They have a case in which a brain tumor was regressed 100% with h. alone--no surgery or any other trtmt. AND at minimal cost.
A lot more work on cancer has been done. See Dr. A. V. Ramakrishnan's book "A Homeopathic Approach to Cancer" for 10 yrs' work experience and cured cases.
This paper showed NO STATS (the language of science) and didn't even show the chromatograms they rely upon so heavily in their results. They just describe it in a confused manner then move on. The experiment was done on a cell culture, meaning that it could have been repeated many times, yet they only did it TWICE. Most other in vitro studies would have repeated the studies at LEAST nine times.
Considering that conventional cancer treatments are only effective in 25% of patients (per records of GSK accumulated from all over the world), big pharma must be scared. Especially when h. cancer trtmt does not damage surrounding cells or destroy the immune system. NOT TO MENTION that the cost of treatment is minimal.
25% is much better than the nill effectiveness of homeopathy. All well constructed clinical trials have shown that homeophathic "treatments" have no more effectiveness than a placebo.
@den151redbank What the fuck are you talking about? The survival rate for certain cancers is over 70% with modern medical interventions... how many of those patients do you think would survive on homeopathy alone? Oh... wait, I forgot that you're a crank.
Next,they say As shown in Fig.1A, the solvent reduced the viability of all three cell types; the overall reduction in cells at different doses of solvent was about 30% for MCF-7,20-30% for MDA-MB-231 and 20% for HMLE cells.
Hang on a second - this is their CONTROL treatment! If they have found that it too is causing cell death,we need to see the stats to see if it is significant difference b/w the "active" treatment and the solvent. But there are no stats! How on earth did this get published?!
Finally, this experiment was in vitro. It is by no means "ground breaking". Never extrapolate results found in a culture dish to a human being, Why? The treatment must survive the low pH of the stomach, cross the gut, escape metabolism in the liver and get to the site of the cancer then do its job. Yelling Homeopathy as good as chemotherapy for breast cancer is not a conclusion you can draw from this study.
Yep,conv treatment for cancer at this stage of scientific progress isn't great.Many die from cancer, even with the best medical interventions.
But homeopathy isn't the answer. It doesn't destroy surrounding cells/immune system, because homeopathy doesn't destroy anything!
It's all a big conspiracy to you people.You have no sense of scientific credibility. You believe in anything that will support your sham therapies and condemn anything to the contrary, regardless of methodological validity!
So are you going to reply to any of the charges against the article or just call me and all other skeptics of homeopathy "shills", "pill pushers", "big-pharma", etc?
postal-gal, One would rather laugh in the face of the plethora of deadly medical concoctions (250,000 Americans died last year from the effects of medications) than the efficable and safe effects of homeopathy.
postal worker, While we're spreading the truth on the wonders of homeopathy, novice folks such as yourself can benefit from our hard work. Thank you for your interest in effective holistic health care. Don't forget...medicine killed 800,000 Americans last year...I wonder how many world -wide?
@chiropractic47 why do you keep replying to my message, and with inconsistent statistics? By the way, in case you do not understand logic, even if the stats you wrote are true about medicine killing people, it has nothing to with the fact that homeopathy has ZERO proven effect other than placebo effect. Keep selling your snake oil...
postal worker, you keep replying to me! What evidence can you present refutes homeopathy's claims. Even the homeopath in this vid backs up her claims of homeopathy's virtues with research. There are DC, MD, NPD, and PhD research backing up homeopathy. Simon Singh even bull shits his way throught the interview and disrespectfully interupts the homeopath with lies.
Shang et al (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placeo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy."a Lancet, 366, pp726-732.
But homeopathy isn't all bogus. It can treat one particular condition very well - DEHYDRATION
lald6103, what!? You present me with bull shit confounding psudo-medi-pharma journals wrought with profit ensuring motives? Don't you ever dare drop off this piece of a shit selfish pseud-journal and expect us to respect you. Your nothing but a pill pusher lald6103. You know nothing of how the body is made, how it works, nor what it needs to survive. back to school with ya...medi-pharma light wieght.
Wow, harsh words. Sounds like someone's been backed into a corner.
"Confounding"? A confounding variable is one which correlates with the dependent variable and independent variable. Explain to me how this article has any confounding variables in it.
I don't expect you to respect me, but it would be good if you could present me with some logical arguments, backed with evidence, to support your claims, instead of hurling abuse at everyone who doesn't believe you.
lald6103, I'm sorry for my harsh words. It's just that I feel a lack of respect for many aspects, but not all, of your field (allopathy) of so-called health care, which is more accurately described as crisis care. You see, medicine is the third largest cause of death in the U.S. It killed 800,000 Americans last year (either directly or indirectly via drug toxicity and/or secondary reactions. Holistic health care providers understand our detractors are those who feel threatened. Chiropractic!
Ernst, E (2002). "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;54(6):577-82, reviews 17 systematic reviews of homeopathy.
Shang et al (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placeo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy."a Lancet, 366,p726-32,is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 9 high-quality homeopathy trials.
Both papers convincingly show homeopathy to be no more than a placebo effect.
They may "show" h. to be no more than placebo but they certainly don't show it convincingly.
Re Ernst, he's a devout antagonist of h. so any conclusion he comes to is bound to be biased.
Re Shang:
1. the leader of this review (M. Eggers) is a vocal, noted skeptic of h. so his work could not help but be biased
2. the Lancet's sr edtr stated "Prof. Eggers stated at the onset that he expected to find that h. had no more effect than placebo. Strong evidence of bias against h.
3. Shang threw out several hi quality trials claiming they weren't of hi quality. These trials evidence for h. and were reported by Lancet and BMJ as such. Shang never commented on the discrepancy.
4. Shang through out a trial on polyarthritis which evidenced for h. even though it fit the criteria for inclusion in the meta-a. None of the studies in the final paper matched each other in any way so throwing this one out is more proof of strong bias and that they intended to claim h.
5. Shang purposefully did not evaluate safety issues. At least 3 of the conv meds were later found to be so dangerous that they were withdrawn from medical use.
The Shang analysis was debunked a while ago and yet "skeptics" continue to cling to it.
Funny how they continually claim that nothing from the h. world can be accepted because it's "biased" and yet........
I may be wrong,but I think most of what youre referring to comes from Rutten & Stolper.The 2005 meta-analysis of homeopathy: the importance of post-publication data. Homeopathy2008;97:169-177 this is a seriously flawed piece of work.
1. Ill get to your comments about Ernst et al and bias at the end.
2.this is called a hypothesis-it's what scientists state they expect to find before a study begins.
Sorry, to most people it's bias. It's like "placebo". If you go into a study expecting a certain result the chances are pretty good that that is the result you will "come to", or confirmation bias.
It's called bias. No good scientist goes into a study with a closed mind expecting to find what he expects to find. That leads to confirmation bias! It immediately disqualifies the study.
3&4. Shang did not implicitly remove series of trials afterwards: they used all the trials in their initial analysis to define which ones are the highest quality trials. The surviving 8 homeopathic trials were simply the ones that made the cut.
Sorry, I disagree. Shang used 8 studies out of 110 qualified studies. Not really kosher! He wouldn't even identify which 8 studies he used. Definitely not kosher.
Kosher by homeopathic quack standards. Not by scientific standards. He used even less conventional trials than homeopathy trials - so by the same reasoning I could make the case that his results were not supportive of conventional medicine!
Thanks for identifying yourself as a big pharma shill. How do I know? You've posted one of the words---"quack"---that identifies them right off the bat.
@0mniaV1nc1t Unfortunately for you and your campaign against CAM homeopathy has been proven to produce significant and sometimes substantial health benefits in 100's of high quality studies published in 86 respected, peer-reviewed national and international journals. Some of them can be seen at the web site for the National Center for homeopathy; others at the web site for Avilian co uk and more at the web site for extraordinarymedicine org.
@den151redbank Odd that you direct me to check your sources at pro-homeopathy organisations. As a scientist I'm understand how to read scientific papers and identify good methodology, and it tend to be smaller trials that show positive results for homeopathy. All the high-quality meta-analyses reveal no statistically significant benefit. Sometime homeopathy does marginally better than placebo, sometimes marginally worse - just what you'd expect when comparing two placebos.
That is an absolute lie. All of the 110 trials evidencing for homeopathy were of high quality and matched the criteria. They were just too much overwhelming evidence that homeopathy works beyond placebo for Shang to include them.
5.I cant find anything to support this statement. Please direct me to somewhere that describes these withdrawals.Nonetheless,Shangs article isnt concerned with safety its concerned with efficacy and the placebo effect (read the title). I dont doubt homeopathy is safer than conv. med. But its benefits are no better than placebo, as Shangs and Ernsts papers show.
Any study should be concerned with safety. Does putting drugs on the market that harm and kill help anyone? NO!
Sorry, again. Homeopathy has been proven to be extremely safe. Conventional drugs have been proven to be quite dangerous, especially to children and when used in combination, hence "post-approval" when the drugs are taken off the market because they've killed and maimed.
I'll take safe, efficacious homeopathy any day. Thank you.
This wasn't a study aimed at putting drugs onto the market. It was a study to compare homeopathy with conventional medicine and to ascertain whether homeopathy more efficacious than conventional med and/or the placebo effect. Studies into safety are separate.
I never said homeopathy wasn't safe. I agree, it's 100% safe. I doubt that anyone has ever experienced an adverse effect from homeopathy, ever. But it's not efficacious. Conv. med CAN be dangerous,but the benefits outweigh the risks.
As a reminder, lald6103, there are 150+ methodologically reliable, controlled studies published in int'l and nat'l conventional peer-review journals evidencing for homeopathy. Does anyone really believe these journals publish poor studies? I don't.
There are now two studies evidencing for homeopathic efficacy in treating cancer done at prestigious M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The most recent was a ground-breaking study on breast cancer and was published in Int'l J of Oncology.
You're clinging to a meta-a debunked a while ago. More and more work proving h. efficacy is done every year. Including:
1. studies in animals on diarrhea, hematomas, mastitis and fertilization
2. the Cuban homeoprophylaxis program among 2 1/2 million people that averted an epidemic of leptospirosis. With conv vaccine, there were 1,000's of infect and 100+ deaths. With h. there were 10 or fewer infects per month and ZERO deaths.
1. The results of meta-analyses can be debated, but scientists like Ernst and Shang should not be accused of research misconduct on the basis of no evidence, or on the basis of having failed to read their work properly.
One of the best testimonies of the efficacy of Homeopathy is the book:
"HOMEOPATHY CURES WHERE ALLOPATHY FAILS" written by an Allopathy medical doctor & surgeon.
In it he details many patients of chronic diseases who were getting worse with Allopathy drugs but were CURED once they switched to Homeopathy remedies.
Many of these patients were Allopathy doctors themselves.
In order for homeopathy to work in would have to break the laws of physics. so forget spending billions looking for the higgs-boson particle we should look into how homeopathy work, lol
men-feaster..., homeopathy works in a similar fashion as vaccines...like (homo) virus to invoke immune response to same disease (pathy). So why do you enjoy vaccinations...a killer of millions world wide?, while homeopathy killed "0".
That's too bad. I've never heard of anyone for whom h. doesn't work. It's used successfully by tens of millions of people around the world. If you really did use it and it really didn't work, these are the reasons: you chose the remedy instead of being treated by a homeopath, you used the wrong remedy or wrong dosage, you antidoted the med with coffee, etc. You may have been using some other med such as naturopathy which some people mistake for homeopathy.
It's common knowledge that dilutions over 12c do not contain one molecule of substance. If you desperately need meds which work through the material body with "active ingredients", use those meds. Tens of millions of people around the world plus a large body of high quality studies show that homeopathy is an energy medicine working through energy.
My suggestion: if you don't like homeopathy, don't use it. Beyond that, there's nothing to discuss here.
"It is below avagadro's number" hahaha She admitted there are no molecules of any useful substance in homeopathic remedies. How the flux was she able to become a chemist if she is realizes that and still believes in such nonsense as "succussing" and "memory of water"? Human stupidity knows no bounds.
Who cares about the trials and meta-analyses. If you believe homeopathy, you are an idiot and do not know about science. Why can't they just get a physicist on tv and teach some freakin science.
Just like drugs, it supresses the feelings, but not for long, you gotta go on to something stronger.First u start with some weed, and then go to stronger ones..
Oh, and another thing- ever wondered why the allopathic medications are constantly changing? Because the active ingredient in them, must be gradually increased, so that it can supress your symptoms effectively.That's something you should look an answer for.The WHO every 20yrs is changing the medications, since the quantity of the active ingredient that supresses your symptoms, no longer works, the body needs a bigger dose.
Allopathic care and meds are proven to kill upwards of 784,000 Americans per year. And that is a LOW number since only 5% to 20% of "negative events" are ever reported. The numbers come from the CDC and the offices of medical examiners. I'll pm links to you.
I believe the 250,000 figure is several years old. Allopathic care WAS the number 3 killer in the US in 2000. See JAMA, 7/26/00, Dr. B. Starfield's report in that issue.
den..., I agree with you regarding the numbers of iatrogenic deaths. The numbers are published by govt. and private sources. Thanks for the links. A good portion of my patient care goes to
education in prevention via a healthful lifestyle. For a man of high IQ, Simon Singh comes off as very narrow-minded and self-oblivious to medical iatrogenic deaths and injuries. An MD in my community recently "came out" in a major news paper article and announced medicines lack of self control and horrors.
Good for him.......I think the general public is growingly aware of and frightened by what's been forced on them. More and more traditional doctors in our area are recognizing that they have to recommend other healing modalities to their patients. We have a few integrative practices offering or recommending a variety of natural modalities before allopathic drugs. They include homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, acupressure, vitamin supplements, etc.
In their way, people like Singh do the world a favor. Their activities tend to bring problems out into the open where they can be understood and addressed in full view of the public (although it's not a pleasant process).
When you have a really hard disease, and start taking those drugs that allopaths use, u'll just see that the more u take, the worse it gets.Until you try homeopathy, you can never say what's better.
While Homeopathy detractors cling to 8 FLAWED studies to discredit Homeopathy, there are over 200 well conducted clinical trials and studies done by eminent scientists and physicians around the world to prove that Homeopathy is NOT placebo effect.
I wonder how homeopaths treat hemhorragic strokes, thoracic trauma from a steering wheel impact, aortic dissections, metastasized cancer, diabetic ketoacidosis, cystic fibrosis, impaled objects, gunshots, etc. etc. etc.
Funny how everyone ends up going to real doctors when they have real problems.
Saying homeopathy is "probably more like preventive [sic] medicine" doesn't answer my direct question NOR is it something that any homeopathy practitioner would allege.
IF, it did not answer either vaguely or specifically the question that you alluded to you probably are not asking a question,but rather demanding anyone, everyone and yourself, Logic for something that you cannot understand, which in turn does nothing to discredit any substantial provable benefit
Okay, once again your sentences aren't coherent and I can't for the life of me figure out what you are attempting to say. Why is the word logic capitalized again? Let's try and make some grammatical sentences here instead of blowing verbal diarrhea all over the internet.
And by the way, the point is...it isn't medicine. It's snake-oil, which is why pharmaceutical companies aren't trying to make millions off of it. It's too obvious that it's pseudoscience.
You are probably an atheist, and not a very bright one, taking into account that your lack of comprehension ability. Then again you only prove you are Correct in what you are saying- from your perspective, from your perspective of course, one that is encapsulated and restrained by the mere limits of your intelligence.
You have again proven my point as I have brought you through this passage of insight by other means rather than obligation. But I will refrain from too much "clutter" as this is the way you may perceive it. In essence, you are judging poetry by the tools of grammar, like judging Piccasso by the brush in his hand, nevertheless my point is not myself, but the way that you look at homeopathy is the same.
By the way, there is a slight lack of stability in your words, something that makes you scowl.
Any native speaker of English is laughing at you at this point. What a stream of logorrhea.
No offense intended as I only speak one language and am learning yours but....really? This isn't worth pursuing. You're just blathering all over the place.
Have a good one! (colloquial expression of good will)
By the way, homeopathy is STILL unscientific, superstitious, pathetic bullshit no matter what language we speak.
Funny how at no point did I acknowledge that I am an atheist (the correct spelling of the word in English). You merely went to my channel page and decided that THAT therefore dismisses all of my arguments. The essence of any dogma: you can't respond to my arguments so you attack my character. Predictable.
Not only is homeopathy a scam, but it is one of the most outrageous scams ever. The principle of homeopathy is so stupid, I can't imagine how ANYONE would ever believe in it.
The con lady admitted "below Avogadro's number," which is a sleazy way of saying, "Yes, I realize that we cannot guarantee that there is a single molecule or atom of "working ingredient" in any given treatment."
In fact, the majority of the most diluted, (and supposedly most effective), doses are nothing but WATER!
The German Medical Association mandates homeopathic training for all its conventional doctors, and the French Medical Association recommends mandatory training of same.
But that never seems to stop some ignoramus popping every so often and mouthing tired, misinformed cliches about water and the Avogard Limit.
Fireiciclespark, homeopathy is fraud, plain and simple. I don;t believe anyone who has ever adminisered it actually believed it ever had any more than a placebo effect and every one of those "practitioners" is a deliberate fraud or pig ignorant.
Anyone who believes in homeopathy doesn't know the first thing about chemistry. Like "Avogadro" instead of "Avogard."
I would be interested in seeing your source on your claims about the German and French Medical Associations.
and why is it that it is like buying a blind man a big screen tv, well because you will only hear it while avoiding the primary purpose of it's purchase. Think hard Daniel San!!! haaaard.
Yeeah, not sure I understand your metaphor or (apparent) "Karate Kid" reference, though, of course I am American. So...what's next? Why else do I suck (without addressing my actual claims and arguments against you)? Am I gay? Or a communist? Or some other name?
Discussing the ability of harly30 to write a coherent sentence is irrelevant. You have all of the evidence on your side. Thanks for making good points about homeopathy being a snake oil treatment. It's a shame so many people fall for this pseudoscientific treatment.
People who point a finger at legitimate treatments and holler about how many people are hurt by them are making a huge misrepresentation. In all standard treatments, risks are weighed against the benefits and patients are given the relevant clinical information. One patient in 100,000 may suffer worse consequences or die because of a treatment, while the other 99,999 are helped or cured.
Homeopathy never directly killed anyone because it doesn't DO anything. Nor has it ever helped anyone.
I guarantee you there is no clinically valid test which shows ANY effect of homeopathy at all. The very premise is absolutely absurd. Of course, this was invented before anyone knew much about atoms and molecules. Now the knowledge to completely debunk homeopathy is in the grasp of any high school chemistry student.
Do you REALLY think one atom of copper is going to cure something? Especially when you have billions of them in your body already? Etc.
There are over 200 high-quality studies evidencing FOR homeopathy. They can be seen at PubMed. A few are available on the side bars of Bandershot's videos.
My guess is that you are totally unable to look at them objectively because you are totally unable to acknowledge anything that does not support your own personal views/agenda. You could not acknowledge
evidence FOR h. from ANY source no matter how credible, and that includes org's and docs from the system of med you use.
Let's not forget that every single day brings more evidence of the fact that your med not only does a great deal of harm (it's the No. ONE KILLER in the US today) but does very little good. GlaxoKleinSmith ADMITS most meds don't work for most people. See The Independent, 12/08/03.
And lets not forget about the huge number of drugs marketed illegally by big pharma. That's why Pfizer was fined $2.3 BILLION. Drug co's consider fines/settlements "the cost of doing business".
My first choice in medicine is also homeopathy. Conventional medicine has its place in surgery and where the organs are beyond healing and so organ function must be sustained artificially.
I've used homeopathy for a dozen years for treatment of serious, chronic diseases, acute illnesses, injury and dental work with 100% satisfaction and success.
Everyone has the right to choose the type of medicine they find works best. I'll use the good medicine!
Homeopathy is bunk. Always has been. Always will be. It's as useless as snake rattles and voodoo spells. Its promoters are lying scum or gullible fools and the claims of "200 high-quality studies evidencing FOR homeopathy" are as bogus as the therapy itself.
ANY study supporting homeopathy is automatically and profoundly flawed -- or outright fraudulent. Not only is homeopathy bunk, but it is based on one of the most ridiculous premises of any pseudo-medicine practice.
Uh, no. There are exceptionally crappy studies showing effect beyond placebo but they are never able to be reproduced. LOADS of studies show it does not demonstrate efficacy beyond that of placebo.
We need to consider the quality of evidence, the number of studies, the journals these studies appear in, etc.
If homeopathy worked and it could be proven, and was in fact a real, effective medical modality, somebody would've earned a Nobel Prize already.
Lancet 199... 7 I think.. Showed homeopathy is 2.45 times more likely to have clinically beneficial effect than placebo.
Thousands in Cuba successdully vaccinated against swamp fever wirh homeopathy in 2007.
Have seen through cures (complete remission of symptoms) in my own life and the life of someone close to me in the year I've been using it. Placebo/coincidence implausible explanations.
There are well documented records proving that h. has been successful (far more so than conv med) in saving lives during epidemics of yellow/scarlet fever, flu, cholera and typhoid. Those records are available to everyone.
There is a large body of high quality scientific lab and clinical work evidencing FOR h. (also available to everyone).
H. history is replete with cured cases of chronic diseases for which it is famous. Some of those records are here on the internet.
"How can you know that all 102 trials were "small and poor quality" (or that the remaining 8 were valid) when the identities of the 8 in question were not even specified?"
Simon Singh is logical, not clever. Clever is where you avoid being ignorant.
If he was clever he would recognise that many clinical studies are flawed in there mythological study of Homeopathy.
He would also know that most allopathic medicines are snake oil and kill THOUSANDS of people EVERY YEAR, So what is he on about, worried about homeopaths being irresponsible.
He would also know homeopathics do work by trying them himself.
Some real medicines carry some risk. Those risks are clinically determined and given to the patient with EVERY medicinal treatment. One patient may have an adverse reaction while the next 1000 are cured.
Homeopathy doesn't cure or alleviate ANY condition. Right: there are no risks because it doesn't DO ANYTHING.
HEART DISEASE is the #1 cause of death, and much of that caused by obesity and smoking. I'm alive today because of CONVENTIONAL heart medications and treatments. Homeopathy is fraud.
Homeopathy is not scientific. Even Oxford Biologist Richard Dawkins proved it. Hemeopathy is basicaly belief like placebo effect. The people advocating homeopathy are just marketing their products and are not even rational minded.
I tried homeopathy a dozen years ago. It was so wonderfully effective I have used it for every illness and injury I've had over the course of those years.
I told my friends and family about it. They tried it and have loved it. One friend got p. rosacea. The allopath told her she would have itching for 6 weeks and nothing could be done, just live with it. She took h. med and was completely cleared in 3 DAYS.
Homeopathy has been a blessing to us and also to our animals.
Homeopathy have not been the actuall blessing - your brain is the blessing. Placebo is one extremely strong and potent force the brain uses to disguise horrible symptom...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The placebo argument was disproved some years ago. It is an old, tired, worn out argument. If you want good scientific work on how h. works, read the work done at Stanford, Cambridge, Penn U, Princeton U, and Arizona U by scientists like Roy, Bell, Tiller, Conte and Berliohi.
The placebo argument most certainly was NOT "disproved". On the contrary, if you can prove that homeopathy has any effect beyond placebo, you should stake your claim in the pantheon of great scientific discoverers. Until then, please acknowledge the overwhelming power of self delusion.
On CBC's Marketplace, a dozen people overdosed on this stuff (there is a "maximum amount to take") on purpus, what happened? nothing. It is either water or sugerpills, depending on weather it's solid or liquid.
dave19941000 11 months ago
OMG really, so what most of you are saying is that you never try something new to help you feel better. you would rather take stuff that has to warn you of all sorts of possible nasty side effects, and it still may not help. if you dont try you will never know. modern medicine just trys to expand on what is already known through homeopothy, it is not a replacement it is an alternative or complimentary method. my opinion the guy was rude and didnt really know what he was talking about.
OMGreally103 11 months ago
@OMGreally103 You're an idiot.
CymroGoch 11 months ago
OMG really, so what most of you are saying is that you never try something new to help you feel better. you would rather take stuff that has to warn you of all sorts of possible nasty side effects, and it still may not help. if you dont try you will never know. modern medicine just trys to expand on what is already known through homeopothy, it is not a replacement it is an alternative or complimentary method. my opinion the guy was rude and didnt really know what he was talking about.
OMGreally103 11 months ago
Basically, what the woman said is that homeopathy is nothing more than a psychological treatment.
Montse120 11 months ago
Q: How does homeopathy work ?
A: It doesn't!
synsei1 11 months ago
I come to make the observation that there is a lot of hate and anger in these comments. Most likely the cause for a lot of the world's suffering. I recommend that if a person is sick to support him/her in whichever healing path the person chooses. If whatever path the person chooses does not work for them, eventually they will see it and try something else until relief is achieved. We have to be supportive of each other to get us through hard times. Harsh criticism hurts the soul.
vlad180 1 year ago
That girls smoking hot! u can totally tell shes raw in bed. coming home after a bad day of work. pissed off about 'whatever'. grabbing a glass of wine. bitching to me about her day. bragging about how she just needs to get FUCKED.. can anyone else see that? or is it just me
kedmonton 1 year ago
You can tell she is talking shit. Her lips move.
LiamXaoh 1 year ago
An aquaintance of mine was given homeopathic anti-malarials when visiting south america. she didn't get malaria. There! Proof that it works!...
NOT!
she used many other preventatives, including permethrin impregnated mosquito nets and repellents, she was in a low risk area. I told she was taking a huge risk putting her eggs in the homeopathy basket. She said would sooner take those than nasty chemicals made by corporations?! She also beleives that she can suck spirits out of people with a straw.
kickofighto 1 year ago 2
I forgot electric current. Of course current flow is only the flow of electrons which is way below Avagadro's 6x10^23
Electromagnetism must be the BIGGEST HOAX OF ALL TIME.
farmerjohn010 1 year ago
A couple of false paradigms here Mr Singh
1. That symptoms can be separated from the whole and tested and treated individually. FALSE
2. That no effect can be produced beyond Avagadros number. FALSE
Clearly Radiation, Gravity and Magnetism work below Avagadros number with no molecular exchange.
How many molecules pass through a patient receiving an MRI scan? NONE
So Magnetic Resonance Imaging is a SCAM.
So Gravity and Magnetism are giant hoaxes, according to Mr. Sings Reasoning
farmerjohn010 1 year ago
Comment removed
oldirtybastard213 1 year ago
@farmerjohn010
so the pills are radioactive? lol..are they electric? Avogadros theory states that in a mixed SOLUTION after 6*10^23 there is a chance that only one molecule of the original substance in the mixture.. so once the substance is diluted to 10^24 ... there is one chance in 10 that a molecule of the original substance exists in the mixture
some homeopathic tablets contain substances way more diluted than that
anyway.. WHY DIDNT THE LADY CONTRADICT HIM with logical arguments? lol
oldirtybastard213 1 year ago
@oldirtybastard213 So by the same reasoning gravity and electromagnetism are also hoaxes, since there is not a single ATOM transferred. Electric current is a giant hoax because it is only a flow of electrons without a single atom moving.
Why don't you start campaigning against mobile phones as a hoax? There is not a single atom transferred through the phone, so by your reasoning it is impossible. A little consistency here please.
farmerjohn010 1 year ago
@oldirtybastard213 Hahnemann was a contemporary of Avagadro and understood perfectly well what his discoveries implied.
As I have stated above, you are assuming that molecules are the largest particles in physics and this is a silly assumption based on high school chemistry. You are also ignoring the transfer of structural information through epitaxy and clathrates which are beyond the comprehension of doctors and the medical profession but which are a daily occurrence for any pipeline engineer.
farmerjohn010 1 year ago
MR.SIMON CONTACT ME WE HAVE MILLIONS OF RECORDS WHERE HOMOEOPATHY CURES.DO ACCEPT CHALLANGE?
chayanmitraful 1 year ago
Don't say homeopathy works or it doesn't work just because other people say so....think and experiment for yourself..don't be a sheep.
fkoff99 1 year ago
Just because science cant explain it doesnt mean it is a sham. Type this in Youtube search and watch the movie: "Gregg Braden -The Science of Miracles, the Divine Matrix and Quantum Physics-Part 1" Try and explain what happens within current scientific thinking. You cant!
alldown2me 1 year ago
@alldown2me You are right, I didn't believe in homepathy and after I tried, Im very HAPPY AND SATISFIED!.
fkoff99 1 year ago
No lady, you are wrong.
Homeopathy DOES NOT WORK, it's been proved being any doubt for those who actually understand what the scientific method is and how it works and how it can conclusively show wether something has any actual effect or not.
Only people like you my dear, who does not really understand what a clinical trial is, what testing under controlled conditions really mean can actually say that there are proves that homeopathy works...
But i guess she won't accept that, will she?
tommytalks77 1 year ago
panda, I am glad your Grandpa's cancer is gone, but I am sure it was not the homeopathic remedies. Sometimes cancer goes into remission, and rarely it even goes away.
The medical community has a way to tell when medicines work that factor out false positives and negatives. These are called randomized double blind studies with statistical analysis of the outcomes. These show homeopathy does not work.
technoway 1 year ago 11
@technoway
"...double blind studies with statistical analysis of the outcomes. These show homeopathy does not work."
It is unfortunate to hear this line aped by countless people trying to sound authoritative (not knowing your background, I cannot say in your case) who do not have the background or knowledge to make such statements. As a clinician who has read many of these studies, I understand that the majority of these DBPC, randomized trials failed to use individualized treatment.
mnmm1 10 months ago
my grampa for real was cured of cancer after doing homeopathic meds.
panda181881 1 year ago
@panda181881
Clearly your anecdote means we certainly don't need scientific studies or any real facts to conclude how real homeopathy is!
Yay placebos!
ZakkoryWylde 1 year ago
@panda181881 But you do not know it was homeopathy that cured him.
Cancer can go into remission for a number of reasons, and just because he happened to be using a homeopathic treatment does not mean it HAD to be that treatment that was the cure. Some people give up with medicine and just try to live it out, then find out 6 months later their cancer has gone. If they happened to have taken up smoking to enjoy themselves would that prove smoking was the cure?
Of course not, you need more data!
digitised 1 year ago 15
Her best case is word of mouth. Have years of psychologic research and studying the results of clinical trials taught us nothing about the inability of patients to distinguish a placebo?
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@icilianfenner
Your comment assumes that all groups have the ability to distinguish placebo from medication.
There are five groups on which placebo effect can not possibly work.
1. Someone unconscious.
2. Someone who's not compos mentis.
3. Human babies
4. Animals
5. Plants
The above groups either have low self awareness or no self awareness.
In order for placebo effect to be valid, the recipient must have the ability to consider possible and potential outcome of a consumed substance.
acorntechnique 1 year ago
I was going to take homeopathy medicine but then I remembered I dont belive in magic.
youcutmelegoff 1 year ago 3
It will work anyway.
den151redbank 1 year ago
@den151redbank no it won't
snowfan 1 year ago
at 4.25 ..what a nonsence said by the gentlemen..'10 OUT OF 10 HOMEOPATHICS WILLING TO GIVE HOMEOPATHIC'
what were you expecting idiot...
calmguy1 1 year ago
@calmguy1 he is reffering to the fact that 10 out of 10 homeopaths would rather perscibe something homeopathic for more life threatening diseases and put peoples life at risk KNOWING that is not scientificlly proven to work. resulting In a neglegable death. pay attention to 5:19 . Homeopathy doesn t cure diseases. she says it herself. how do you figure hes an idiot?
He's making perfect sense.
thegliphic 1 year ago
Speaking of studies evidencing FOR homeopathy, there are over 150+ methodologically reliable, controlled studies evidencing for h. in at least 24 int'l and nat'l, conv journals including Cancer, Int'l J of Oncology, Rheumatology, Allergologie, Pediatrics, Pediatrie, J of Head Trauma Rehab, British J of Clinical Pharm, Lancet and BMJ.
Does anyone believe these journals would publish anything but high-quality, reliable studies? I don't!
den151redbank 1 year ago
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center (one of the US's most prestigious cancer ctrs) did two studies on h. trtmt of cancer. They both evidenced for h. The most recent was published in Int'l J of Oncology, 2/10/2010. (titled: "Cytotoxic effects of ultra-diluted remedies in breast cancer cells"). This study showed that 4 h. remedies were demonstrated to induce programmed cell death in breast cancer cells. H. cancer trtmt does not damage surrounding cells and does not destroy the immune system.
den151redbank 1 year ago
Banerji Clinic treats 1,200 cancer patients A DAY with 70% benefit. They have cases which have not relapsed after five years. They have a case in which a brain tumor was regressed 100% with h. alone--no surgery or any other trtmt. AND at minimal cost.
A lot more work on cancer has been done. See Dr. A. V. Ramakrishnan's book "A Homeopathic Approach to Cancer" for 10 yrs' work experience and cured cases.
den151redbank 1 year ago
This paper showed NO STATS (the language of science) and didn't even show the chromatograms they rely upon so heavily in their results. They just describe it in a confused manner then move on. The experiment was done on a cell culture, meaning that it could have been repeated many times, yet they only did it TWICE. Most other in vitro studies would have repeated the studies at LEAST nine times.
lald6103 1 year ago
And more canned drivel written by big pharma.....
Considering that conventional cancer treatments are only effective in 25% of patients (per records of GSK accumulated from all over the world), big pharma must be scared. Especially when h. cancer trtmt does not damage surrounding cells or destroy the immune system. NOT TO MENTION that the cost of treatment is minimal.
den151redbank 1 year ago
@den151redbank
25% is much better than the nill effectiveness of homeopathy. All well constructed clinical trials have shown that homeophathic "treatments" have no more effectiveness than a placebo.
biomanwin 1 year ago
@den151redbank What the fuck are you talking about? The survival rate for certain cancers is over 70% with modern medical interventions... how many of those patients do you think would survive on homeopathy alone? Oh... wait, I forgot that you're a crank.
0mniaV1nc1t 3 months ago
Next,they say As shown in Fig.1A, the solvent reduced the viability of all three cell types; the overall reduction in cells at different doses of solvent was about 30% for MCF-7,20-30% for MDA-MB-231 and 20% for HMLE cells.
Hang on a second - this is their CONTROL treatment! If they have found that it too is causing cell death,we need to see the stats to see if it is significant difference b/w the "active" treatment and the solvent. But there are no stats! How on earth did this get published?!
lald6103 1 year ago
As I said, canned drivel written by big pharma......
den151redbank 1 year ago
Finally, this experiment was in vitro. It is by no means "ground breaking". Never extrapolate results found in a culture dish to a human being, Why? The treatment must survive the low pH of the stomach, cross the gut, escape metabolism in the liver and get to the site of the cancer then do its job. Yelling Homeopathy as good as chemotherapy for breast cancer is not a conclusion you can draw from this study.
lald6103 1 year ago
Canned drivel written by big pharma and posted on the sites of their "skeptic" blogs to be reposted by their, ah hem, shills.
den151redbank 1 year ago
Yep,conv treatment for cancer at this stage of scientific progress isn't great.Many die from cancer, even with the best medical interventions.
But homeopathy isn't the answer. It doesn't destroy surrounding cells/immune system, because homeopathy doesn't destroy anything!
It's all a big conspiracy to you people.You have no sense of scientific credibility. You believe in anything that will support your sham therapies and condemn anything to the contrary, regardless of methodological validity!
lald6103 1 year ago 2
So are you going to reply to any of the charges against the article or just call me and all other skeptics of homeopathy "shills", "pill pushers", "big-pharma", etc?
lald6103 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"......To the best of my knowledge......there are no refutations of Homeopathy that remain valid......"
Brian Josephson
Nobel Laureate Scientist - (Physics 1973)
mohanaturo 1 year ago
LOL @ all the homeopathy apologists here
postalgbv 1 year ago
postal-gal, One would rather laugh in the face of the plethora of deadly medical concoctions (250,000 Americans died last year from the effects of medications) than the efficable and safe effects of homeopathy.
chiropractic47 1 year ago
postal worker, While we're spreading the truth on the wonders of homeopathy, novice folks such as yourself can benefit from our hard work. Thank you for your interest in effective holistic health care. Don't forget...medicine killed 800,000 Americans last year...I wonder how many world -wide?
chiropractic47 1 year ago
@chiropractic47 why do you keep replying to my message, and with inconsistent statistics? By the way, in case you do not understand logic, even if the stats you wrote are true about medicine killing people, it has nothing to with the fact that homeopathy has ZERO proven effect other than placebo effect. Keep selling your snake oil...
postalgbv 1 year ago
postal worker, you keep replying to me! What evidence can you present refutes homeopathy's claims. Even the homeopath in this vid backs up her claims of homeopathy's virtues with research. There are DC, MD, NPD, and PhD research backing up homeopathy. Simon Singh even bull shits his way throught the interview and disrespectfully interupts the homeopath with lies.
chiropractic47 1 year ago
Here's a start:
Shang et al (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placeo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy."a Lancet, 366, pp726-732.
But homeopathy isn't all bogus. It can treat one particular condition very well - DEHYDRATION
lald6103 1 year ago
lald6103, what!? You present me with bull shit confounding psudo-medi-pharma journals wrought with profit ensuring motives? Don't you ever dare drop off this piece of a shit selfish pseud-journal and expect us to respect you. Your nothing but a pill pusher lald6103. You know nothing of how the body is made, how it works, nor what it needs to survive. back to school with ya...medi-pharma light wieght.
chiropractic47 1 year ago
Wow, harsh words. Sounds like someone's been backed into a corner.
"Confounding"? A confounding variable is one which correlates with the dependent variable and independent variable. Explain to me how this article has any confounding variables in it.
I don't expect you to respect me, but it would be good if you could present me with some logical arguments, backed with evidence, to support your claims, instead of hurling abuse at everyone who doesn't believe you.
lald6103 1 year ago
lald6103, I'm sorry for my harsh words. It's just that I feel a lack of respect for many aspects, but not all, of your field (allopathy) of so-called health care, which is more accurately described as crisis care. You see, medicine is the third largest cause of death in the U.S. It killed 800,000 Americans last year (either directly or indirectly via drug toxicity and/or secondary reactions. Holistic health care providers understand our detractors are those who feel threatened. Chiropractic!
chiropractic47 1 year ago
For the fourth time, I challenge you to provide evidence "killed" 800,000 Americans last year.
lald6103 1 year ago
lald6103, you got it! I'll have the data tomorrow. Chow!
chiropractic47 1 year ago
I'll be waiting. If, however, you fail to provide it for the fourth time, I can only assume that it doesn't exist.
lald6103 1 year ago
lald6103, let's make it clear it will be only "you" who will "...only assume that it doesn't exist". Patience mate...patience.
chiropractic47 1 year ago
lald6103,
To date, there is not an iota of evidence to show that homeopathy is indeed placebo effect.
mohanaturo 1 year ago
Ernst, E (2002). "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;54(6):577-82, reviews 17 systematic reviews of homeopathy.
Shang et al (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placeo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy."a Lancet, 366,p726-32,is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 9 high-quality homeopathy trials.
Both papers convincingly show homeopathy to be no more than a placebo effect.
lald6103 1 year ago
They may "show" h. to be no more than placebo but they certainly don't show it convincingly.
Re Ernst, he's a devout antagonist of h. so any conclusion he comes to is bound to be biased.
Re Shang:
1. the leader of this review (M. Eggers) is a vocal, noted skeptic of h. so his work could not help but be biased
2. the Lancet's sr edtr stated "Prof. Eggers stated at the onset that he expected to find that h. had no more effect than placebo. Strong evidence of bias against h.
den151redbank 1 year ago
3. Shang threw out several hi quality trials claiming they weren't of hi quality. These trials evidence for h. and were reported by Lancet and BMJ as such. Shang never commented on the discrepancy.
4. Shang through out a trial on polyarthritis which evidenced for h. even though it fit the criteria for inclusion in the meta-a. None of the studies in the final paper matched each other in any way so throwing this one out is more proof of strong bias and that they intended to claim h.
den151redbank 1 year ago
was placebo by hook or by crook.
5. Shang purposefully did not evaluate safety issues. At least 3 of the conv meds were later found to be so dangerous that they were withdrawn from medical use.
The Shang analysis was debunked a while ago and yet "skeptics" continue to cling to it.
Funny how they continually claim that nothing from the h. world can be accepted because it's "biased" and yet........
den151redbank 1 year ago
Bias and a closed mind.......not really good qualities in science are they?
den151redbank 1 year ago
I may be wrong,but I think most of what youre referring to comes from Rutten & Stolper.The 2005 meta-analysis of homeopathy: the importance of post-publication data. Homeopathy2008;97:169-177 this is a seriously flawed piece of work.
1. Ill get to your comments about Ernst et al and bias at the end.
2.this is called a hypothesis-it's what scientists state they expect to find before a study begins.
lald6103 1 year ago
Sorry, to most people it's bias. It's like "placebo". If you go into a study expecting a certain result the chances are pretty good that that is the result you will "come to", or confirmation bias.
den151redbank 1 year ago
It's called bias. No good scientist goes into a study with a closed mind expecting to find what he expects to find. That leads to confirmation bias! It immediately disqualifies the study.
den151redbank 1 year ago
3&4. Shang did not implicitly remove series of trials afterwards: they used all the trials in their initial analysis to define which ones are the highest quality trials. The surviving 8 homeopathic trials were simply the ones that made the cut.
lald6103 1 year ago
Sorry, I disagree. Shang used 8 studies out of 110 qualified studies. Not really kosher! He wouldn't even identify which 8 studies he used. Definitely not kosher.
den151redbank 1 year ago
Kosher by homeopathic quack standards. Not by scientific standards. He used even less conventional trials than homeopathy trials - so by the same reasoning I could make the case that his results were not supportive of conventional medicine!
lald6103 1 year ago
Thanks for identifying yourself as a big pharma shill. How do I know? You've posted one of the words---"quack"---that identifies them right off the bat.
den151redbank 1 year ago
@den151redbank The lack of good evidence for the efficacy of homeopathic remedies isn't evidence of a conspiracy. You sound like a creationist.
0mniaV1nc1t 3 months ago
@0mniaV1nc1t Unfortunately for you and your campaign against CAM homeopathy has been proven to produce significant and sometimes substantial health benefits in 100's of high quality studies published in 86 respected, peer-reviewed national and international journals. Some of them can be seen at the web site for the National Center for homeopathy; others at the web site for Avilian co uk and more at the web site for extraordinarymedicine org.
den151redbank 3 months ago
@den151redbank Odd that you direct me to check your sources at pro-homeopathy organisations. As a scientist I'm understand how to read scientific papers and identify good methodology, and it tend to be smaller trials that show positive results for homeopathy. All the high-quality meta-analyses reveal no statistically significant benefit. Sometime homeopathy does marginally better than placebo, sometimes marginally worse - just what you'd expect when comparing two placebos.
0mniaV1nc1t 3 months ago
That is an absolute lie. All of the 110 trials evidencing for homeopathy were of high quality and matched the criteria. They were just too much overwhelming evidence that homeopathy works beyond placebo for Shang to include them.
den151redbank 1 year ago
5.I cant find anything to support this statement. Please direct me to somewhere that describes these withdrawals.Nonetheless,Shangs article isnt concerned with safety its concerned with efficacy and the placebo effect (read the title). I dont doubt homeopathy is safer than conv. med. But its benefits are no better than placebo, as Shangs and Ernsts papers show.
lald6103 1 year ago
Any study should be concerned with safety. Does putting drugs on the market that harm and kill help anyone? NO!
Sorry, again. Homeopathy has been proven to be extremely safe. Conventional drugs have been proven to be quite dangerous, especially to children and when used in combination, hence "post-approval" when the drugs are taken off the market because they've killed and maimed.
I'll take safe, efficacious homeopathy any day. Thank you.
den151redbank 1 year ago
This wasn't a study aimed at putting drugs onto the market. It was a study to compare homeopathy with conventional medicine and to ascertain whether homeopathy more efficacious than conventional med and/or the placebo effect. Studies into safety are separate.
I never said homeopathy wasn't safe. I agree, it's 100% safe. I doubt that anyone has ever experienced an adverse effect from homeopathy, ever. But it's not efficacious. Conv. med CAN be dangerous,but the benefits outweigh the risks.
lald6103 1 year ago
As a reminder, lald6103, there are 150+ methodologically reliable, controlled studies published in int'l and nat'l conventional peer-review journals evidencing for homeopathy. Does anyone really believe these journals publish poor studies? I don't.
There are now two studies evidencing for homeopathic efficacy in treating cancer done at prestigious M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The most recent was a ground-breaking study on breast cancer and was published in Int'l J of Oncology.
den151redbank 1 year ago
You're clinging to a meta-a debunked a while ago. More and more work proving h. efficacy is done every year. Including:
1. studies in animals on diarrhea, hematomas, mastitis and fertilization
2. the Cuban homeoprophylaxis program among 2 1/2 million people that averted an epidemic of leptospirosis. With conv vaccine, there were 1,000's of infect and 100+ deaths. With h. there were 10 or fewer infects per month and ZERO deaths.
den151redbank 1 year ago
I disagree. So do qualified researchers and upwards of 1/2 billion satisfied users of homeopathy around the world.
den151redbank 1 year ago
1. The results of meta-analyses can be debated, but scientists like Ernst and Shang should not be accused of research misconduct on the basis of no evidence, or on the basis of having failed to read their work properly.
lald6103 1 year ago
Their own records accuse them.
den151redbank 1 year ago
Take it up with the senior editor of Lancet! Their own work and statements accuse them of poor and shoddy work.
den151redbank 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3 Nobel Laureate scientists have done studies on high dilutions( similar to Homeopathic) and have proven their effects.
1. Hans Von Euler -
Nobel Laureate Chemistry 1929
2. Brian David Josephson -
Nobel Laureate Physics 1973
3. Luc Montagnier -
Nobel Laureate Physiology & Medicine 2009
mohanaturo 1 year ago
One of the best testimonies of the efficacy of Homeopathy is the book:
"HOMEOPATHY CURES WHERE ALLOPATHY FAILS" written by an Allopathy medical doctor & surgeon.
In it he details many patients of chronic diseases who were getting worse with Allopathy drugs but were CURED once they switched to Homeopathy remedies.
Many of these patients were Allopathy doctors themselves.
IMO, the book should be titled:
"HOMEOPATHY CURES ALLOPATHY DOCTORS"!! LOL!!!
mohanaturo 1 year ago
mohan..., great job chap!
chiropractic47 1 year ago
Comment removed
mohanaturo 1 year ago
In order for homeopathy to work in would have to break the laws of physics. so forget spending billions looking for the higgs-boson particle we should look into how homeopathy work, lol
menfearthought 1 year ago
men-feaster..., homeopathy works in a similar fashion as vaccines...like (homo) virus to invoke immune response to same disease (pathy). So why do you enjoy vaccinations...a killer of millions world wide?, while homeopathy killed "0".
chiropractic47 1 year ago
Simon Singh behaves as a pompous ass in this vid, rudely and repetively interrupting the homeopath. Fuck Simon Singh!
chiropractic47 1 year ago
And chiropractics are no better that homeopaths.
Embarassing witch-doctors who should be outlawed!
genco21 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Homeopathy remedy Ruta 6 selectively induces cell death in brain cancer cells but proliferation in normal peripheral blood lymphocytes:
A novel treatment for human brain cancer:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY 23: 975-982, 2003
mohanaturo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why is it that Homeopathy remedies almost ALWAYS induce the placebo effect in susceptible patients and Allopathy drugs almost NEVER induce it...????
This Homeopathy "placebo effect" cure holds for months or years.
Many Homeopaths in busy clinics with 10 minute consultations are able to CURE their patients with this so called "placebo effect".
mohanaturo 2 years ago
There is NO. SUCH. THING. as water memory!
Gemmabeta 2 years ago 3
she respects a man that cheated on his wife while in office clinton wow
MrSports29 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Skeptic ignorance never tires of displaying itself at every possible opportunity.
Homeopathy does not just work, it works beautifully.
den151redbank 2 years ago
I grew up on Homeopathy and was sick all the time. It really doesn't work, at least not for me.
Marq72 2 years ago 3
That's too bad. I've never heard of anyone for whom h. doesn't work. It's used successfully by tens of millions of people around the world. If you really did use it and it really didn't work, these are the reasons: you chose the remedy instead of being treated by a homeopath, you used the wrong remedy or wrong dosage, you antidoted the med with coffee, etc. You may have been using some other med such as naturopathy which some people mistake for homeopathy.
den151redbank 2 years ago
There's nothing in it!
Minttzz 2 years ago
That you're willing to acknowledge!
den151redbank 2 years ago
Are you acknowleding it?
Minttzz 2 years ago
Are you making a joke?????????
It's common knowledge that dilutions over 12c do not contain one molecule of substance. If you desperately need meds which work through the material body with "active ingredients", use those meds. Tens of millions of people around the world plus a large body of high quality studies show that homeopathy is an energy medicine working through energy.
My suggestion: if you don't like homeopathy, don't use it. Beyond that, there's nothing to discuss here.
den151redbank 2 years ago
"energy medicine working through energy"
Surey it's poo medicine as it contains more molecules of poo than it does of whatever it says on the label.
Minttzz 2 years ago
Simon Singh will go the way of the dinosaurs...an outdated skeptic just trying to put his mark on the world. He's just a poor schmuk.
chiropractic47 1 year ago
I agree! The fools always bring themselves down in the end.
den151redbank 1 year ago
den..., good!
chiropractic47 1 year ago
"It is below avagadro's number" hahaha She admitted there are no molecules of any useful substance in homeopathic remedies. How the flux was she able to become a chemist if she is realizes that and still believes in such nonsense as "succussing" and "memory of water"? Human stupidity knows no bounds.
johndoe43210 2 years ago 3
Who cares about the trials and meta-analyses. If you believe homeopathy, you are an idiot and do not know about science. Why can't they just get a physicist on tv and teach some freakin science.
johndoe43210 2 years ago 3
Just like drugs, it supresses the feelings, but not for long, you gotta go on to something stronger.First u start with some weed, and then go to stronger ones..
ljupcopetkovski1 2 years ago
Oh, and another thing- ever wondered why the allopathic medications are constantly changing? Because the active ingredient in them, must be gradually increased, so that it can supress your symptoms effectively.That's something you should look an answer for.The WHO every 20yrs is changing the medications, since the quantity of the active ingredient that supresses your symptoms, no longer works, the body needs a bigger dose.
ljupcopetkovski1 2 years ago
At least allopathic medications have active ingredients in them. That's more than can be said for homeopathy.
AtheistFromHell4 2 years ago
Did you mena allopathics medicines that killed 250,000 Americans last year?
chiropractic47 1 year ago
chiropractic47,
Allopathic care and meds are proven to kill upwards of 784,000 Americans per year. And that is a LOW number since only 5% to 20% of "negative events" are ever reported. The numbers come from the CDC and the offices of medical examiners. I'll pm links to you.
I believe the 250,000 figure is several years old. Allopathic care WAS the number 3 killer in the US in 2000. See JAMA, 7/26/00, Dr. B. Starfield's report in that issue.
den151redbank 1 year ago
den..., I agree with you regarding the numbers of iatrogenic deaths. The numbers are published by govt. and private sources. Thanks for the links. A good portion of my patient care goes to
education in prevention via a healthful lifestyle. For a man of high IQ, Simon Singh comes off as very narrow-minded and self-oblivious to medical iatrogenic deaths and injuries. An MD in my community recently "came out" in a major news paper article and announced medicines lack of self control and horrors.
chiropractic47 1 year ago
Good for him.......I think the general public is growingly aware of and frightened by what's been forced on them. More and more traditional doctors in our area are recognizing that they have to recommend other healing modalities to their patients. We have a few integrative practices offering or recommending a variety of natural modalities before allopathic drugs. They include homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, acupressure, vitamin supplements, etc.
den151redbank 1 year ago
In their way, people like Singh do the world a favor. Their activities tend to bring problems out into the open where they can be understood and addressed in full view of the public (although it's not a pleasant process).
den151redbank 1 year ago
When you have a really hard disease, and start taking those drugs that allopaths use, u'll just see that the more u take, the worse it gets.Until you try homeopathy, you can never say what's better.
ljupcopetkovski1 2 years ago
Why is it that Homeopathy remedies almost ALWAYS induce the placebo effect in susceptible patients and Allopathy drugs almost NEVER induce it...????
This Homeopathy "placebo effect" cure holds for months or years.
Many Homeopaths in busy clinics with 10 minute consultations are able to cure their patients with this so called "placebo effect".
mohanaturo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
While Homeopathy detractors cling to 8 FLAWED studies to discredit Homeopathy, there are over 200 well conducted clinical trials and studies done by eminent scientists and physicians around the world to prove that Homeopathy is NOT placebo effect.
mohanaturo 2 years ago
I wonder how homeopaths treat hemhorragic strokes, thoracic trauma from a steering wheel impact, aortic dissections, metastasized cancer, diabetic ketoacidosis, cystic fibrosis, impaled objects, gunshots, etc. etc. etc.
Funny how everyone ends up going to real doctors when they have real problems.
sleepcity 2 years ago
well it is probably more like preventive medicine.
harly30 2 years ago
Saying homeopathy is "probably more like preventive [sic] medicine" doesn't answer my direct question NOR is it something that any homeopathy practitioner would allege.
sleepcity 2 years ago
IF, it did not answer either vaguely or specifically the question that you alluded to you probably are not asking a question,but rather demanding anyone, everyone and yourself, Logic for something that you cannot understand, which in turn does nothing to discredit any substantial provable benefit
of many who have tried this form of medicine.
harly30 2 years ago
Okay, once again your sentences aren't coherent and I can't for the life of me figure out what you are attempting to say. Why is the word logic capitalized again? Let's try and make some grammatical sentences here instead of blowing verbal diarrhea all over the internet.
And by the way, the point is...it isn't medicine. It's snake-oil, which is why pharmaceutical companies aren't trying to make millions off of it. It's too obvious that it's pseudoscience.
sleepcity 2 years ago
You are probably an atheist, and not a very bright one, taking into account that your lack of comprehension ability. Then again you only prove you are Correct in what you are saying- from your perspective, from your perspective of course, one that is encapsulated and restrained by the mere limits of your intelligence.
harly30 2 years ago
"...taking into account that your lack of comprehension ability."
Grammar fail. Who's the stupid one again?
"Then again you only prove you are Correct in what you are saying- from your perspective, from your perspective of course..."
Coherent rational expression fail. What is this sentence meant to assert? Want to give it another try, oh intellectual giant?
And why is the word "correct" capitalized this time? What is with all these arbitrary capitalizations?
sleepcity 2 years ago
You have again proven my point as I have brought you through this passage of insight by other means rather than obligation. But I will refrain from too much "clutter" as this is the way you may perceive it. In essence, you are judging poetry by the tools of grammar, like judging Piccasso by the brush in his hand, nevertheless my point is not myself, but the way that you look at homeopathy is the same.
By the way, there is a slight lack of stability in your words, something that makes you scowl.
harly30 2 years ago
Any native speaker of English is laughing at you at this point. What a stream of logorrhea.
No offense intended as I only speak one language and am learning yours but....really? This isn't worth pursuing. You're just blathering all over the place.
Have a good one! (colloquial expression of good will)
By the way, homeopathy is STILL unscientific, superstitious, pathetic bullshit no matter what language we speak.
sleepcity 2 years ago
Wow I am right, you are an athesiest, there is no point in talking to you. It is like buying a big scree tv to a blind man. Good Luck!!
harly30 2 years ago
Your spelling, grammar, and metaphors suck. Good luck to you, but by the way, homeopathy is still unscientific, magical bullshit.
sleepcity 2 years ago
Funny how at no point did I acknowledge that I am an atheist (the correct spelling of the word in English). You merely went to my channel page and decided that THAT therefore dismisses all of my arguments. The essence of any dogma: you can't respond to my arguments so you attack my character. Predictable.
sleepcity 2 years ago
Not only is homeopathy a scam, but it is one of the most outrageous scams ever. The principle of homeopathy is so stupid, I can't imagine how ANYONE would ever believe in it.
The con lady admitted "below Avogadro's number," which is a sleazy way of saying, "Yes, I realize that we cannot guarantee that there is a single molecule or atom of "working ingredient" in any given treatment."
In fact, the majority of the most diluted, (and supposedly most effective), doses are nothing but WATER!
Astrobrant2 2 years ago
The German Medical Association mandates homeopathic training for all its conventional doctors, and the French Medical Association recommends mandatory training of same.
But that never seems to stop some ignoramus popping every so often and mouthing tired, misinformed cliches about water and the Avogard Limit.
fireiciclespark 2 years ago
Fireiciclespark, homeopathy is fraud, plain and simple. I don;t believe anyone who has ever adminisered it actually believed it ever had any more than a placebo effect and every one of those "practitioners" is a deliberate fraud or pig ignorant.
Anyone who believes in homeopathy doesn't know the first thing about chemistry. Like "Avogadro" instead of "Avogard."
I would be interested in seeing your source on your claims about the German and French Medical Associations.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago 2
and why is it that it is like buying a blind man a big screen tv, well because you will only hear it while avoiding the primary purpose of it's purchase. Think hard Daniel San!!! haaaard.
harly30 2 years ago
Yeeah, not sure I understand your metaphor or (apparent) "Karate Kid" reference, though, of course I am American. So...what's next? Why else do I suck (without addressing my actual claims and arguments against you)? Am I gay? Or a communist? Or some other name?
sleepcity 2 years ago
Discussing the ability of harly30 to write a coherent sentence is irrelevant. You have all of the evidence on your side. Thanks for making good points about homeopathy being a snake oil treatment. It's a shame so many people fall for this pseudoscientific treatment.
darr25 2 years ago
People who point a finger at legitimate treatments and holler about how many people are hurt by them are making a huge misrepresentation. In all standard treatments, risks are weighed against the benefits and patients are given the relevant clinical information. One patient in 100,000 may suffer worse consequences or die because of a treatment, while the other 99,999 are helped or cured.
Homeopathy never directly killed anyone because it doesn't DO anything. Nor has it ever helped anyone.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago
"...they have tested homeopathy...it is all suggestion....."
???????
How can that be when the results of lab work and studies overwhelmingly evidence FOR h.? How about all the work on PubMed supporting h.?
den151redbank 2 years ago
I guarantee you there is no clinically valid test which shows ANY effect of homeopathy at all. The very premise is absolutely absurd. Of course, this was invented before anyone knew much about atoms and molecules. Now the knowledge to completely debunk homeopathy is in the grasp of any high school chemistry student.
Do you REALLY think one atom of copper is going to cure something? Especially when you have billions of them in your body already? Etc.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago
Astro,
There are over 200 high-quality studies evidencing FOR homeopathy. They can be seen at PubMed. A few are available on the side bars of Bandershot's videos.
My guess is that you are totally unable to look at them objectively because you are totally unable to acknowledge anything that does not support your own personal views/agenda. You could not acknowledge
evidence FOR h. from ANY source no matter how credible, and that includes org's and docs from the system of med you use.
den151redbank 2 years ago
Let's not forget that every single day brings more evidence of the fact that your med not only does a great deal of harm (it's the No. ONE KILLER in the US today) but does very little good. GlaxoKleinSmith ADMITS most meds don't work for most people. See The Independent, 12/08/03.
And lets not forget about the huge number of drugs marketed illegally by big pharma. That's why Pfizer was fined $2.3 BILLION. Drug co's consider fines/settlements "the cost of doing business".
den151redbank 2 years ago
I'll take the good medicines. Homeopathy is one of them. It works beautifully, no side effects, no iatrogenic disease and cost effective.
You're welcome to take what you want! End of discussion.
den151redbank 2 years ago
i complitely agree.
homeopathy works amaisingly if prescribed properly.
my experience is very positive.
let anybody take what they want to take.
my choice is homeopathy!
angomako 2 years ago
My first choice in medicine is also homeopathy. Conventional medicine has its place in surgery and where the organs are beyond healing and so organ function must be sustained artificially.
I've used homeopathy for a dozen years for treatment of serious, chronic diseases, acute illnesses, injury and dental work with 100% satisfaction and success.
Everyone has the right to choose the type of medicine they find works best. I'll use the good medicine!
den151redbank 2 years ago
Homeopathy is bunk. Always has been. Always will be. It's as useless as snake rattles and voodoo spells. Its promoters are lying scum or gullible fools and the claims of "200 high-quality studies evidencing FOR homeopathy" are as bogus as the therapy itself.
ANY study supporting homeopathy is automatically and profoundly flawed -- or outright fraudulent. Not only is homeopathy bunk, but it is based on one of the most ridiculous premises of any pseudo-medicine practice.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago 4
"There are over 200 high-quality studies evidencing FOR homeopathy."
No, there aren't. There are some articles on PubMed supporting homeopathy, but none that I've read have been "high quality"
Parmenus 2 years ago 4
Uh, no. There are exceptionally crappy studies showing effect beyond placebo but they are never able to be reproduced. LOADS of studies show it does not demonstrate efficacy beyond that of placebo.
We need to consider the quality of evidence, the number of studies, the journals these studies appear in, etc.
If homeopathy worked and it could be proven, and was in fact a real, effective medical modality, somebody would've earned a Nobel Prize already.
Why won't they claim their Nobel already?
sleepcity 2 years ago
Lancet 199... 7 I think.. Showed homeopathy is 2.45 times more likely to have clinically beneficial effect than placebo.
Thousands in Cuba successdully vaccinated against swamp fever wirh homeopathy in 2007.
Have seen through cures (complete remission of symptoms) in my own life and the life of someone close to me in the year I've been using it. Placebo/coincidence implausible explanations.
fireiciclespark 2 years ago
it's not thousands of cubans...it is 2,5 millions of cubans.
the results were far better then previous years when people were treated with conventional vaccines against leptospirosis.
angomako 2 years ago
There are well documented records proving that h. has been successful (far more so than conv med) in saving lives during epidemics of yellow/scarlet fever, flu, cholera and typhoid. Those records are available to everyone.
There is a large body of high quality scientific lab and clinical work evidencing FOR h. (also available to everyone).
H. history is replete with cured cases of chronic diseases for which it is famous. Some of those records are here on the internet.
H. works beautifully!
den151redbank 2 years ago
As of this time, NO EVIDENCE of homeopathy working, exists in the scientific community beyond "chance" statistics. Sept. 23 2009
VimisiDigitalMedia 2 years ago
they have tested homeopathy time and time and time again, it is all suggestion, no evidence what so ever.
ccheng21 2 years ago
You didn't answer the question, btw -
"How can you know that all 102 trials were "small and poor quality" (or that the remaining 8 were valid) when the identities of the 8 in question were not even specified?"
fireiciclespark 2 years ago 2
My two posts were in response statickk14, by the way, whom I'd like to give thumbsup to but can't.
skepticat1 2 years ago
Homeopathy is Bullshit....people are paying for placebo. Do some research people!!
statickk14 2 years ago
Well said, mate.
skepticat1 2 years ago 2
Simon Singh is a really cever guy. Fair play to him for keeping his cool in the face of vacuous bulls**t!
FeynmanAdmirer 2 years ago
Simon Singh is logical, not clever. Clever is where you avoid being ignorant.
If he was clever he would recognise that many clinical studies are flawed in there mythological study of Homeopathy.
He would also know that most allopathic medicines are snake oil and kill THOUSANDS of people EVERY YEAR, So what is he on about, worried about homeopaths being irresponsible.
He would also know homeopathics do work by trying them himself.
Kingfillins 2 years ago
And even that Conventional Medicine is the number one cause of death in America.
fireiciclespark 2 years ago 2
Some real medicines carry some risk. Those risks are clinically determined and given to the patient with EVERY medicinal treatment. One patient may have an adverse reaction while the next 1000 are cured.
Homeopathy doesn't cure or alleviate ANY condition. Right: there are no risks because it doesn't DO ANYTHING.
HEART DISEASE is the #1 cause of death, and much of that caused by obesity and smoking. I'm alive today because of CONVENTIONAL heart medications and treatments. Homeopathy is fraud.
Astrobrant2 2 years ago
Homeopathy is not scientific. Even Oxford Biologist Richard Dawkins proved it. Hemeopathy is basicaly belief like placebo effect. The people advocating homeopathy are just marketing their products and are not even rational minded.
scarletflip 2 years ago
Simon Singh is very polite.
aversion2k 2 years ago
I tried homeopathy a dozen years ago. It was so wonderfully effective I have used it for every illness and injury I've had over the course of those years.
I told my friends and family about it. They tried it and have loved it. One friend got p. rosacea. The allopath told her she would have itching for 6 weeks and nothing could be done, just live with it. She took h. med and was completely cleared in 3 DAYS.
Homeopathy has been a blessing to us and also to our animals.
den151redbank 2 years ago
To correct: it is p. rosea not p. rosacea
den151redbank 2 years ago
Homeopathy have not been the actuall blessing - your brain is the blessing. Placebo is one extremely strong and potent force the brain uses to disguise horrible symptom...
sanningos 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The placebo argument was disproved some years ago. It is an old, tired, worn out argument. If you want good scientific work on how h. works, read the work done at Stanford, Cambridge, Penn U, Princeton U, and Arizona U by scientists like Roy, Bell, Tiller, Conte and Berliohi.
den151redbank 2 years ago
The placebo argument most certainly was NOT "disproved". On the contrary, if you can prove that homeopathy has any effect beyond placebo, you should stake your claim in the pantheon of great scientific discoverers. Until then, please acknowledge the overwhelming power of self delusion.
CaptainFruitfly 2 years ago 3