"The U.S. EPA has set the arsenic standard for drinking water at 0.010 parts per million (10 parts per billion) to protect consumers served by public water systems from the effects of long-term, chronic exposure to arsenic." Mathmatically this is equivalent an 8X homeopathic potency to (0.00000001 parts of arsenic to water). EPA seems to think arsenic at this dilution is not just water.
Hm. Very convincing, reasonable sounding arguments. Patient satisfaction rates are fantastic.
There's just one thing...
IT IS WATER. A little thing called atomic theory came about after homeopathy was born. Molecules exist. And there very simply aren't any of active ingredients in homeopathic 'medicines'. There isn't anything else to it: it's water. And we are not paying 'professionals' millions of pounds to give people water.
@darkfunkychimp So "IT IS WATER" only is it? If you can prove that statement you would have to be able to tell me with absolute certainty that you know what the smallest divisible unit of the universe is. You have as much chance of doing that as explaining to me how the universe continues to infinity. What is true of the macrocosm is true of the microcosm and much of life remains mystererious - even since The Enlightenment, atomic theory, and the BBC bias and against homeopathy.
While Homeopathy detractors cling to 8 FLAWED studies to discredit Homeopathy, there are over 200 well conducted clinical trials and studies done to prove that Homeopathy is NOT placebo effect by eminent scientists, among them:
Hans Von Euler - Nobel Laureate in Chemistry 1930
Brian David Josephson - Nobel Laureate in Physics 1973
Luc Montagnier - Nobel Laureate in Physiology & Medicine 2009
Insulting and gross ad hominem comments like the one below show just how desperate corporate science is to suppress homeopathic practice but keep all many of their totally unproven products on the market.
@ProvocativeDoctor i'm looking at recent comments around the time of this one and can't find any ad hom attacks in any of them, would you be so knd as to direct me to the comment in question?
@fomoran Unfortunately the internet is full of boneheaded 'activists' who love smearing other people's ideas with obscene, ugly and nasty comments that have no relevance whatsoever to the subject being discussed.
@fomoran No, I only delete comments with obscenities. I even publish comments that are ungrammatical but I don't publish offensive, nasty and obscene comments. The internet is infested with boneheaded activistis and they can comment here - but not with obscene remarks.
If Homeopathy worked beyond placebo than our understanding of chemistry and biology would be completely wrong, and we simply know this is nonsense. It physically doesn't work, it cannot work.
And on placebo effect. If you are giving a patient homeopathy and they feel better, than you are deceiving your patient because you KNOW it doesn't work. This is unethical.
And people may use Homeopathic medicine to treat serious conditions instead of using real medicine.
I really dont understand why people use homepathy. A meta anaylses of all the meta anaylses in the lancet shows it just doesnt work! Homeopathy doesnt work!!!!
@ExposeHomeopathy The tax payer saves the NHS money by paying for their remedies from a pharmacy or Boots, or a good health food store; the remedies are actually cheaper than the cost of a prescription! It's also cost-effective for medical doctors to use homeopathy first, instead of wasting money on the more expensive conventional drugs. Although, I leave this decision to my qualified medical doctor, since he was the one who introduced me to homeopathy, as I'm severely allergic to penicillin
@Amygdala100 Your argument about the taxpayer would be correct if homeopathy worked, but we simply know it does not.
Scientifically it is impossible for it to work, as well as studies showing it doesn't work anyway even if the theory was sound.
I actually think its deeply irresponsible if your doctor is suggesting homeopathic remedies and I question his/her abilities as a physician if this is true. I would advocate disciplining a doctor for doing this.
@ ExposeHomeopathy: Yes, by all means stop cowering and you are welcome to use my clips of my video in yours. By the way I don't feel margnialised at all. This Government supported NHS homeopathy and so did the last one. As far as I am concerned that makes my political views on this MAINSTREAM. And of course it's about politics when a Parliamentary Committee recommends cutting funding for NHS homepathy. Fortunately their recommendations were treated with the contempt they fully deserved.
@ExposeHomeopathy 'confuddle' is not a word. I'll argue this on a political basis as I always have. The scientism of people like yourself was trumped by liberty in our democratic system. I know you would like more authoritarian and scientistic poiticis but many people here, saw what that did to the USSR and don't want it here. Sorry but it's Liberty 1 Scientistic authoritarianism 0 at this time. Maybe that will change but for now I'm enjoying our lead.
@ProvocativeDoctor Confuddle is a portmanteau of confuse and befuddle I cheekily slipped in for amusement :)
The debate doesn't really have much to do with politics. Perhaps that's where you're getting confused, or perhaps you know very well that homeopathy cannot defend itself on its own merits so you want to cause the confusion.
I hardly think homeopathy is in the lead. Homeopathy has been marginalised. Cont...
@ProvocativeDoctor (...cont). In fact, homeopathy has had big chunks taken off it in the last decade; from Dawkins, from the latest challenge by the BMA regarding NHS funding, from the Internet which spreads lies but has a stronger force where the truth CANNOT be supressed (e.g. Homeopathy's entry on Wikipedia), from all the comedians including homeopathy in their stand-up routines.
It is a good thing that ANY THEORY is questioned, and if found to be ridiculous then parodied and mocked.
@ProvocativeDoctor You only have to do a search on YouTube. You have to get past a lot of anti-homeopathy videos before you get to the advocates. This will grow and grow. I might even stop cowering behing my "dull handle" and put up a few videos myself. If I do this, may I include extracts of your videos in mine?
@ProvocativeDoctor By the way, you have my respect for allowing ratings and comments to your videos, and by replying respectfully even though it is obvious that you are being challenged on something which is a massive part of your life.
Because it is your life, perhaps it becomes difficult to be more impartial about it?
I am blessed by not having the emotional attachment and years of investment I suppose.
@ExposeHomeopathy I posted the video as a defence against double-standard, denigrating, jeering, hypocritical, illiberal and anti-democratic attacks on homeopathy. I started studying homeopathic medicine in 1982 and there was criticsim then but gentled by good natured tolerance so I never felt I had to defend anything. But against this hypocritical scientistic assault on liberty - I simply could not remain silent.
double-standard and hypocritical? How? Isn't spouting pseudoscience but happily taking the fruits of proper science double-standard and hypocritical?
anti-democratic? In what way are the attacks on homeopathy anti-democratic? As the great Dawkins says in the TV programme of the same name - you are ENEMIES OF REASON and need to be continually told how you are wrong in the eyes of science, the scientific method and reason.
And do you expect us to remain silent? Impossible!
@ExposeHomeopathy Maybe you think what you consider to be 'reason' should be FORCED on the people against their will. This happened in the USSR and those who would force their will on the people should will always be with us. I know I am seen as 'wrong' in the eyes of the scientismists such as the less-than-great Dawkins. Let people believe wihat they want but Government needs to be of the peeople, for the people and by the people and those who oppose that are 'enemeis of liberty'.
@ProvocativeDoctor From 26th July 2010 the British government continues to support the people's choice to seek homeopathy within the National Health Service.
Yesterday, my husband made an appointment with his NHS medical doctor, who is is also qualified to prescribe homeopathy. More people should be aware that it's a treatment available within the NHS and not just for the elite people of this world.
@ProvocativeDoctor Reason is not about forcing on the people against their will. If you use that logic then one could say funding of homeopathy on the NHS is being forced on people against their will.
Please don't conflate infringement of liberties with criticism of homeopathy. You're just trying to confuddle the argument; a tactic I referred to earlier.
The government needs to be for the people, yes. The government also needs to spend its money wisely. Continued...
@ProvocativeDoctor (...cont). The £4million/year is good money from cash-strapped UK taxpayers that is being diverted away from good causes to homeopathy which is unproven beyond placebo.
It's nothing to do with 'emeneis [sic] (eyesore alert LOL!) of liberty'. People can still buy this stuff from their own funds, can't they?
@ProvocativeDoctor If a theory is being attacked, then in the normal world, that is a GOOD THING. Any theory worth its salt will stand up to criticism and will get stronger because of the "attacks". It should be able to respond with dignity and accuracy. The theory should stand on its own merits and not need to use diversionary tactics (e.g. changing the subject, questioning credentials, resorting to screaming "I'm a victim", etc.).
Homeopaths can't do this, so they simply attack in return.
@ProvocativeDoctor Science is about evidence. If there is no evidence that it works, and it contravenes known scientific laws than you should expect an assault on it.
Liberalism is for politics, and not medicine. There is only one form of medicine we should use, and thats the one that works - you cannot have multiple opinions on what works. We need science to show us what does and what doesn't.
Liberal ideas of all opinions are equal applies to politics, and not Science.
We should use any form of treatment so long as there is reasonable evidence to show that it works.
Whilst on the subject, many conventional mainstream drugs don't actually work, often have terrible side effects and are very expensive to buy - yet are available as forms of treatment and are sold as 'safe.'
The traditional pharmacological fraternity have a lot to answer to, yet continue with both BMA and government support.
@ExposeHomeopathy I can see that you've been busy up-rating your own here, within a matter of 16 hours you have a rating of 107!!...lol. Yes, someone is using my amgdala 100 name, to discredit my earlier comments.
@heatherashio101 Are you Amygdala100 or heatherashio101? Make your stupid bloody mind up!! Or is heatherashio101 the fake account you have for voting up Amygdala100's comments?
Looks like people have cottoned onto your game and they're 50 times more efficient than you at playing it :)
ExposeHomeopathy Actually, heatherashio is a family and friend's account. Amygdala, is my personal account, does this satisfy you? Oh, i see that you are the one who goes around marking your own comments up, whilst marking down support from other pro-homeopathy supporters, so stop spreading your lies and propaganda. Swearing never works to gain your support and it's never intimidated me. Evidence of your actions: ExposeHomeopathy
@ExposeHomeopathy I can see that you've been busy up-rating your own here, within a matter of 16 hours you have a rating of 107!!...lol. Yes, someone is using my amgdala 100 name, to discredit my earlier comments.
These opponents of homeopathy have recently set up an account with an identical name to my youtube name: amygdala100. They're contradicting my earlier comments in this name. Check out these oscillo videos and watch out for this tactic with your own youtube name.
@ExposeHomeopathy How about YOU show integrity and courage and say what your real name is instead of hiding behind a rather dull mask of a 'handle'? I don't accept what you say about quality studies all showing homeopathy to be placebo. You may also want to 'invest' some time in (and not 'into' ) improving your English: 'when this knowledge is abound', 'fradulently' are eyesore on the page.
@ProvocativeDoctor OK, you got me on the misspelling of fraudulently. I do care about my spelling and grammar, so thank you. What is wrong with "when this knowledge is abound"? I've just found a comment from you on this page with the words "macocosm" and "philosoophy", so you can churn out eyesore messages like the best of us LOL.
As for the handle, what does that have to do with the argument? At least there's some fragment of my message once your cronies have marked it as spam! :)
@ProvocativeDoctor ...cont. You have highlighted your problem in that you don't accept what I say about the quality studies. Because of your emotional connection with homeopathy and because of the time you've invested in it, you have grown a filter which keeps out the truth.
Listen, if the studies supported homeopathy, IT WOULD BE ACCEPTED in mainstream medicine. Why would medicine deliberately reject efficacious remedies?
So, once again: Please regain some integrity and stop fooling people.
@ExposeHomeopathy They reject it because of it's 'implausibility' not for lack of evidence - which huge swathes of orthodox medicine lack and are not rejected for - eg SSRI anti-depressants.
@ ExposeHomeopathy You talk to me about 'regaining integrity' and 'fooling people'. Who exactly are YOU? Are you medically qualified or simply qualified to judge the clinical decisions of fully medically qualified doctors? And their morality and integrity of course while you hide behind a cowardly handle.
@ProvocativeDoctor Yes, I do talk to you about regaining integrity and to think about what you're doing. The reason the focus is on you and your ideas is because you're the one who has posted the video.
Who I am is irrelevant to the discussion. And as you can tell the handle is very much necessary because (as I stated before), after Amygdala100 has marked the messages from opponents as spam, at least the underlying message (or exposing homeopathy) remains.
@ProvocativeDoctor In answer to your question about whether I am qualified to judge the decisions of medically qualified doctors. When it comes to homeopathy, yes I am.
I would say better than you because I understand about rigorous trials, the scientific method.
It seems ironic, sad (and dare I say selfish?!) that you benefit from all manner of inventions and findings from science and medicine but you'll dish out these magic potions without grazing your conscience.
@ExposeHomeopathy Actually I know about epistemology and Kant, phenomenology and Husserl and teleology - which is important too. My teacher was a student of these philosophers and made me read them. (Eric Ledermann author of Philosophy and Medicine - Gower 1970)
I think Carl Jung spoke truly when he said: 'I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as fraud.'
Do a search on YouTube for "James Randi explains homeopathy". It's always better to hear it from someone who doesn't have a financial interest in selling the stuff!
No government could make a better investment than to support h'pathy through its public health insurance programs. It's both efficacious and safe--proven by 100's of studies and 200 years of clinical use around the world. H'pathy is famous for its cures of chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes.
It's used by 1/2 billion people around the world, 100 million of them are Europeans. It's supported by countries like France, Germany, Switzerland and India for those very reasons.
I've used h'pathy for a dozen years. I can only say that I wish I had known about this magnificent system of medicine many, many years ago. It would have saved me immense suffering and disability. I've used h. with great success in treating chronic diseases like neuropathy and muscular disorders, acute illnesses like bronchitis, injuries involving nerve damage and to reduce the pain and swelling of dental work/problems.
H'pathy has been so successful that I use it exclusively.
My friends, neighbors and family saw what it did for me and tried it. They were so pleased that they told their friends and family. And so h'pathy grows in use every year.
With a little knowledge lay people can treat themselves quickly, successfully and inexpensively for acute illnesses at home and for just a few pennies.
It's wonderful for treating animals too, as so many vets know so well. A pet can be treated easily for acute problems without expensive trips to the vet.
Homeopathy defended? How do you defend the indefensible? By saying it gives people choice? People have a choice to jump off a cliff, but it doesn't mean it's a good, informed, rational thing to do.
@ExposeHomeopathy So the people shouldn't have choice in your opinion? The people should be forced to do what 'intelligent people' such as yourself think they should do. Why don't we dump democracy and let a few well-informed people such as Stalin rule because such individuals know better than us what is good for us. 'The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter' (Winston Churchill - a supporter of democracy)
@ProvocativeDoctor People can choose to do whatever they want. Some people choose to commit suicide. Doesn't mean every choice is good for their health.
Some people think the National Health Service should pay £4million/year on magic potions. Doesn't mean every choice is good.
When it comes to what the taxpayer funds, it matters a great deal and bad choices (homeopathy being a bad choice) should not be on the table.
There will be a time when the NHS doesn't fund this rubbish...
@LAnonHubbard: I don't agree with a word you say but will defend until death your right to protest as much as you want. As long as you respect the democratic rights of those who disagree with your views, that's fine with me.
@ProvocativeDoctor I'm surprised you don't agree with anything I said. Don't you agree about the patient feeling more cared for because the homeopath talks to the patient more than a proper doctor?
I would like to see more resources directed on mainstream doctors having a better "bedside manner" with their patients. THAT and the placebo effect is where homeopathy scores in my opinion.
@LAnonHubbard Homeopaths in India typically see 100 patients a day so they spend even less time with patients than NHS GPs. But yes we can agree that bedside manner is important in medicine. So why don't we end our conversation there?
@ProvocativeDoctor Also, veterinary homeopaths and farmers, who treat animals, with homeopathic remedies for mastitis, wouldn't have the time to pander their cows with a bedside manner, when the conventional antibiotics fail to work for them and they have to seek alternatives such as homeopathy, or they may have to cull their cows.
@ProvocativeDoctor NHS medical doctor has certainly never dissuaded me not to use vaccination; although he did introduce me to the safer alternatives of homeopathy, after I was rendered with a severe allergy to penicillin and a semi-coma resulted.
I am livid that my tax money the government collects from me goes to fund homeopathy within the NHS. The more I read about homeopathy, the more I want to protest. This is as big an abuse of my money as the government funding faith schools. Since when should my money be funding woo woo and superstition?
Want to practice homeopathy and religion? Do it on YOUR OWN money!!
Homeopathy is pure quackery. A vestige from Victorian ignorance. The people who practice this are frauds and charlatans who are simply fooling their patients.
@LAnonHubbard You are simply wrong in what you say about people who practise homeopathy. They are not charlatans and frauds because we do believe our medicines work. You can call homeopaths dated, outmoded, deluded or whatever you want but it is simply wrong to call them frauds because they are not.
@ProvocativeDoctor I am not "simply wrong" in calling practitioners frauds. I think my statement would cover a lot of practitioners who know full well that their "medicines" are not effective, but also know there is money to be made in this unregulated industry.
This leaves at least 2 groups: 1) The deluded who believe that they actually do work; using woo woo, water memory, or whatever explanation is fashionable this decade. 2) Those who know they're just placebos. Continued...
@ProvocativeDoctor (Continued) Those practitioners that know they're just placebos but realise their patients are getting better ARE fooling their patients, and this is undesirable, even if the placebo effect is shown to be real. Those other deluded ones are dangerous and are the ones who might suggest patients don't use vaccinations, or use homeopathic "medicine" to protect against malaria, etc.
Homeopathy is bad, bad, bad whichever way you look at it.
@LAnonHubbard Well that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. The fact is that millions of people benefit from consulting homeopaths all over the world and I've never met a homeopath who was knowingly prescribing placebo. You may be surprised to know that homeopathy is a huge subject requiring thousands of hours of study. People don't put in that amount of study to be registered and 'entitled' to prescribe placebos. Far from being exploitative, homeopaths tend to be very fine people indeed.
@ProvocativeDoctor Any benefits gained from visiting a homeopath cannot be attributed to the remedy though, can it? Can't we agree on that? Do you see that there are better reasons people improve?:
1) homeopaths typically spend more time talking to patients and this can make a patient feel more cared for.
2) The remedy acts as a placebo and the placebo effect is a strange phenomenon that IS observed and does exist.
ProvocativeDoctor I agree, I have a splendid NHS medical doctor who first introduced me to homeopathy, he is also a trainer of doctors and nurses. It's great news to hear that the British government will continue to back homeopathy within the NHS. It’s great news to all the best doctors, who serve the people, for their well being.
Dr Erick Turner published a study in the "New England Journal of Medicine" saying that psychiatric journals cherry pick clinical trials to promote their drugs. The study involved over 12,500 patients and he found out that the trials submitted to the FDA were very different to the trials appearing in medical journals.
So the reader of the journal would be given a FALSE impression of the benefits because the negative trials had been suppressed.
The reason for the increased attacks on homeopathy have been mainly pushed through by Dr Ben Goldacre. He's on a crusade to get homeopathy banned, infact he was on the select committee and I wouldn't be supprised if he was responsible for starting the whole thing.
@caketheory Ben Goldacre is a psychiatrist and psychiatry is more of a fraud than homeopathy. I don't think its fair that he critisizes the homeopathic medical model when his own is a fraud. I mean they still use ECT treatment. If complimentary medicine was still using ECT he would probably be using a megaphone to tell the general public about this bogus treatment but because psychiatry does it he stays quiet. He's calling everyone a quack but his own profession is based on quackery.
Whether or not you mean to mislead a patient, if you are giving them a placebo and a listening ear (even without knowing) and calling it by another name, you are leading a patient to a false belief.
It doesn't mean you're intentionally misleading them, but unintentional misleading is still misleading.
@icilianfenner I don't think that a homeopathic veterinary surgeon or a farmer can give their animals a listening ear to deceive them; however, they do give them homeopathic treatment when the antibiotics fail for mastitis AND OTHER CONDITIONS.
July26th the British government fully backs homeopathy the people's choice within the NHS. Thank goodness, because penicillin rendered me in a semi-coma as a child
@Amygdala100 while it is probably true about listening ears, that is *not* the only factor that can create the impression of positive reaction. Regression from the mean and subconciously biased interpretation can. That's why you need large-scale studies to establish effecacy on a scale of numbers, and why they need to be double-blinded.
@icilianfenner I’ve seen enough evidence of double-blind studies to impress me, since my NHS graduated GP first intoduced me to homeopathy. For minor complaints, I’m my own laboratory, as are the millions of the general public, who seek and use homeopathy; including the Royal family, heads of state and other world elite, who all have their own personal homeopathic physicians. Agro homeopathic experimentation in plants is an on going fascination for me now.
If you cherry-pick your studies, it is possible to present only the anomalous as evidence. However, as presented to the science and technology select committee, the systematic reviews (ie, the results of all of the good studies, not just the ones that support a particular view-point) do not find that homeopathy works better than placebo. This is the highest standard of evidence we can get for medicine.
As for you being your own lab - we already know how unreliable that is. A) you susceptible to the placebo effect, B) humans are terrible at distinguishing random patterns from meaningful ones, and are predisposed to 'spot' a pattern where co-incidence is the correct answer, and C) you are a statistically insignificant sample, so there's no way to separate actual effectiveness from confounding factors.
Hence why real studies, not popular belief or the elite, are a golden standard
@icilianfenner Statistically insignificant sample; would this also include the 70% success rate at the NHS Bristol Homeopathic Hospital, where the referrals were made by NHS medical doctors, for whom the conventional drugs and treatments have failed to work? This type of referral is usually a last resort, for the acute and chronically ill. Obviously the" placbo effect" isn't in evidence here, although homeopathic science is.
@Amygdala100 A) I answered to this earlier - you haven't defined success, you haven't accounted for regression to the mean (people getting better over time), you haven't accounted for placebo (which is not obviously discounted - if you can explain why you think it is, that'd be interesting).
If you really want to know if the substance works, you do placebo-controlled double-blinded trials. Not a loose collection of case studies. The former eliminates these confounding factors.
@Amygdala100 As to your adverse reaction to penicillin - it's true that conventional medicine can produce adverse reactions in some. It's also true that conventional medicine is more likely to do good than harm - it's why it gets accepted as a therapy.
NONE of that has any impact on the efficacy of homeopathy at all. if you replace something on balance good with someone useless, more people will suffer.
@icilianfenner Actually, homeopathy is often reserved as a last resort, when a lot of money has been wasted on ineffective "conventional" treatments. Although, it's good for the business of the money makers.. Homeopathy steps in with great success-over 70% success rate, when the chronically and the acutely ill are referred to the NHS hospitals, so I suspect the profit makers come before the general public and that’s how it goes.
@Amygdala100 If homeopathic treatments are effective, it will show up in the systematic reviews of the well-conducted, double-blinded placebo controlled studies. It has yet to. An undefined 'success rate', that is not differentiated from OR placebo tested and blinded, is of little use. It's too open to error
IF the evidence came in strongly in favour of homeopathy, I would be happy, as a strong believer in evidence based medicine, to soundly endorse it. Unfortunately, it hasn't.
@icilianfenner Obviously you need to take your blinkers off, because the UK Government dismissed the House report, ( July 26th 2010 ) and empatically backs the people's choice of homeopathy within the NHS!
@Amygdala100 No blinkers on - I actually watched the Science and Technology Select committee hearing on it, read a summary of their recommendations, and read the government response.
The government did not decide to continue funding homeopathy because the evidence suggests it is more effective than placebo (the committee recommendation was that it does NOT suggest that), it did it in support of patient choice.
Patient choice =/= evidence for effective therapy.
1:20 - not none of them - even the 'skeptical' panelists of the committee interviews said that there have been studies showing a positive inclination, but these results disappear when well-designed, large scale studies are concerned.
And yes, there's a great case for therapy, and talking to people thoroughly. Same with placebo - that doesn't replace the need for actually effective therapy in many cases.
My Cambridge graduated GP/Obsetrics doctor, precribed me with Arnica, since I had opted for a home birth, under his care. He also treated my mastitis with Belladonna as I'm severely allergic to antibiotics. I've also saved an abscessed tooth and treated my son successfully for his diagnosed asthma condition. I will continue to opt for homeopathy, as my first choice of medicine. Thanks to the open mindedness of confident and competent doctors.
"Nobody disagree? Surely a clear case of Qui tacet consentire videtur? ["he who is silent is taken to agree"]" Well, no. Just because none of the people to view this video (viewed only 168 times at time of writing) have disagreed with you, it is not safe to conclude that everyone agrees with what you say in it.
"[homeopaths] could just give blank pills if they thought it was placebo!" - Well yes, homeopaths *do* just give blank pills.
@RobHinkley Homeopathic doctors certainly believe there is active ingredient in Arnica 30c and have seen it work time and time again in the clinic. The fact that we are not able to measure that ingredient at present does not mean that it does not exist. We do not know what the smallest division of nature is any more than we know what the boundaries of the universe are. The microcosm remains as mysterious to man as the macocosm. But this necessitates a discussion of philosoophy of science...
Ah, homeopathic doctors *believe* it contains an active ingredient despite it being both absent in theory and indetectable in practice. This puts them in the same league as people who *believe* there is a unicorn in the garden, despite the lack of actual evidence.
@ProvocativeDoctor You don't understand how your potions work? Well perhaps, as an ethical doctor, you shouldn't use medicine based on properties you don't know anything about?
@munsism We know that homeopathic medicines act as an holistic stimulus to the whole organism. HOW exactly this happens we don't know. But we can live with the not knowing - unlike those with a scientismic orientation who cannot do this and would prevent others from benefitting from homeopathy because it is an AFFRONT to their scientismic philosophy of naive realism.
@ProvocativeDoctor You say "We know that homeopathic medicines act as an holistic stimulus to the whole organism." I am afraid that we don't know that at all. Not only is there no biological plausibility to homeopathy, beyond anecdotes, there is also no evidence that it works. I don't think it is ethical for a medical doctor to suggest that anything else is the case.
@munsism And I suppose you think it's better to pretend to know, as allopathic doctors do when they prescribe SSRIs, SNRIs, and antipsychotics? Or aren't you aware that the concepts of a brain disease and chemical imbalance are just Big Pharma marketing tools without one shred of evidence?
He basically paints a picture of evil, nay-saying opponents versus friendly caring proponents. There is no information in this piece. The 70% is just thrown out there. You can't do that. You need to compare, put it in context etc. But you can't in 10 minutes, that'll take a few hours.
I had a homeopathic GP for over 20 years, believed it was actual medicine and at some point figured it didn't work. I had no idea about a controversy, just went back in my mind about what worked and what didn't.
@waytoeden: Thanks. Of course saying 'either conventional OR CAM is ridiculous'. An holistic stimulus should often be used initially - unless there is a risk of mortality or morbidity when orthodox scientific medicine is mandatory. In non-risk situations it makes sense for a doctor trained in both approaches to try an holistic stimulus such as homeopathy first - knowing of course that if the patient does not improve, the conventional approach is in reserve. This is the 'Complementary' in CAM.
Well said - but the anti movement i basically trying to make the alternative community go into an either-or conflict- as if work like homeopathy was an opposite as opposed to a complement to conventional medicine.
Patients get better! Thanks Dr Kaplan, well said.
clairlym 5 days ago
"The U.S. EPA has set the arsenic standard for drinking water at 0.010 parts per million (10 parts per billion) to protect consumers served by public water systems from the effects of long-term, chronic exposure to arsenic." Mathmatically this is equivalent an 8X homeopathic potency to (0.00000001 parts of arsenic to water). EPA seems to think arsenic at this dilution is not just water.
dgiddens8 6 months ago
Hm. Very convincing, reasonable sounding arguments. Patient satisfaction rates are fantastic.
There's just one thing...
IT IS WATER. A little thing called atomic theory came about after homeopathy was born. Molecules exist. And there very simply aren't any of active ingredients in homeopathic 'medicines'. There isn't anything else to it: it's water. And we are not paying 'professionals' millions of pounds to give people water.
darkfunkychimp 1 year ago
@darkfunkychimp So "IT IS WATER" only is it? If you can prove that statement you would have to be able to tell me with absolute certainty that you know what the smallest divisible unit of the universe is. You have as much chance of doing that as explaining to me how the universe continues to infinity. What is true of the macrocosm is true of the microcosm and much of life remains mystererious - even since The Enlightenment, atomic theory, and the BBC bias and against homeopathy.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@darkfunkychimp
Stop thinking in three dimensions and start thinking in four.
Then all will be revealed...
pianoplayeruk 6 months ago
so if homeopathy = placebo....
iamundergrace 1 year ago
You are dissembling, 'Doc'. You know it, and it is a disgrace.
Homeopathy is quackery of the highest degree without a scintilla of real evidence-based science behind it.
It is much worse than placebo, it is a scam and you are a scammer.
freeflo2007 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
freeflo2007 1 year ago
@ mohanturo: Thanks for that useful bit of information
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
While Homeopathy detractors cling to 8 FLAWED studies to discredit Homeopathy, there are over 200 well conducted clinical trials and studies done to prove that Homeopathy is NOT placebo effect by eminent scientists, among them:
Hans Von Euler - Nobel Laureate in Chemistry 1930
Brian David Josephson - Nobel Laureate in Physics 1973
Luc Montagnier - Nobel Laureate in Physiology & Medicine 2009
mohanaturo 1 year ago
Insulting and gross ad hominem comments like the one below show just how desperate corporate science is to suppress homeopathic practice but keep all many of their totally unproven products on the market.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor i'm looking at recent comments around the time of this one and can't find any ad hom attacks in any of them, would you be so knd as to direct me to the comment in question?
fomoran 1 year ago
@fomoran I decided to delete comments with obscenities.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor maybe deleting the replies to posts no longer here would be the way to go, it is rather confusing.
fomoran 1 year ago
@fomoran Unfortunately the internet is full of boneheaded 'activists' who love smearing other people's ideas with obscene, ugly and nasty comments that have no relevance whatsoever to the subject being discussed.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor, That comment is hilarious given that you got rid of a comment of someone using Ad hom attacks.
fomoran 1 year ago
@fomoran No, I only delete comments with obscenities. I even publish comments that are ungrammatical but I don't publish offensive, nasty and obscene comments. The internet is infested with boneheaded activistis and they can comment here - but not with obscene remarks.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
If Homeopathy worked beyond placebo than our understanding of chemistry and biology would be completely wrong, and we simply know this is nonsense. It physically doesn't work, it cannot work.
And on placebo effect. If you are giving a patient homeopathy and they feel better, than you are deceiving your patient because you KNOW it doesn't work. This is unethical.
And people may use Homeopathic medicine to treat serious conditions instead of using real medicine.
Homeopathy should be banned.
markgg1 1 year ago 4
I really dont understand why people use homepathy. A meta anaylses of all the meta anaylses in the lancet shows it just doesnt work! Homeopathy doesnt work!!!!
QuantumOverlord 1 year ago
@ExposeHomeopathy The tax payer saves the NHS money by paying for their remedies from a pharmacy or Boots, or a good health food store; the remedies are actually cheaper than the cost of a prescription! It's also cost-effective for medical doctors to use homeopathy first, instead of wasting money on the more expensive conventional drugs. Although, I leave this decision to my qualified medical doctor, since he was the one who introduced me to homeopathy, as I'm severely allergic to penicillin
Amygdala100 1 year ago 9
@Amygdala100 Your argument about the taxpayer would be correct if homeopathy worked, but we simply know it does not.
Scientifically it is impossible for it to work, as well as studies showing it doesn't work anyway even if the theory was sound.
I actually think its deeply irresponsible if your doctor is suggesting homeopathic remedies and I question his/her abilities as a physician if this is true. I would advocate disciplining a doctor for doing this.
markgg1 1 year ago 3
@ ExposeHomeopathy: Yes, by all means stop cowering and you are welcome to use my clips of my video in yours. By the way I don't feel margnialised at all. This Government supported NHS homeopathy and so did the last one. As far as I am concerned that makes my political views on this MAINSTREAM. And of course it's about politics when a Parliamentary Committee recommends cutting funding for NHS homepathy. Fortunately their recommendations were treated with the contempt they fully deserved.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 38
@ExposeHomeopathy 'confuddle' is not a word. I'll argue this on a political basis as I always have. The scientism of people like yourself was trumped by liberty in our democratic system. I know you would like more authoritarian and scientistic poiticis but many people here, saw what that did to the USSR and don't want it here. Sorry but it's Liberty 1 Scientistic authoritarianism 0 at this time. Maybe that will change but for now I'm enjoying our lead.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 26
@ProvocativeDoctor Confuddle is a portmanteau of confuse and befuddle I cheekily slipped in for amusement :)
The debate doesn't really have much to do with politics. Perhaps that's where you're getting confused, or perhaps you know very well that homeopathy cannot defend itself on its own merits so you want to cause the confusion.
I hardly think homeopathy is in the lead. Homeopathy has been marginalised. Cont...
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor (...cont). In fact, homeopathy has had big chunks taken off it in the last decade; from Dawkins, from the latest challenge by the BMA regarding NHS funding, from the Internet which spreads lies but has a stronger force where the truth CANNOT be supressed (e.g. Homeopathy's entry on Wikipedia), from all the comedians including homeopathy in their stand-up routines.
It is a good thing that ANY THEORY is questioned, and if found to be ridiculous then parodied and mocked.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor You only have to do a search on YouTube. You have to get past a lot of anti-homeopathy videos before you get to the advocates. This will grow and grow. I might even stop cowering behing my "dull handle" and put up a few videos myself. If I do this, may I include extracts of your videos in mine?
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor By the way, you have my respect for allowing ratings and comments to your videos, and by replying respectfully even though it is obvious that you are being challenged on something which is a massive part of your life.
Because it is your life, perhaps it becomes difficult to be more impartial about it?
I am blessed by not having the emotional attachment and years of investment I suppose.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ExposeHomeopathy I posted the video as a defence against double-standard, denigrating, jeering, hypocritical, illiberal and anti-democratic attacks on homeopathy. I started studying homeopathic medicine in 1982 and there was criticsim then but gentled by good natured tolerance so I never felt I had to defend anything. But against this hypocritical scientistic assault on liberty - I simply could not remain silent.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 6
@ProvocativeDoctor
double-standard and hypocritical? How? Isn't spouting pseudoscience but happily taking the fruits of proper science double-standard and hypocritical?
anti-democratic? In what way are the attacks on homeopathy anti-democratic? As the great Dawkins says in the TV programme of the same name - you are ENEMIES OF REASON and need to be continually told how you are wrong in the eyes of science, the scientific method and reason.
And do you expect us to remain silent? Impossible!
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 17
@ExposeHomeopathy Maybe you think what you consider to be 'reason' should be FORCED on the people against their will. This happened in the USSR and those who would force their will on the people should will always be with us. I know I am seen as 'wrong' in the eyes of the scientismists such as the less-than-great Dawkins. Let people believe wihat they want but Government needs to be of the peeople, for the people and by the people and those who oppose that are 'enemeis of liberty'.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor From 26th July 2010 the British government continues to support the people's choice to seek homeopathy within the National Health Service.
Yesterday, my husband made an appointment with his NHS medical doctor, who is is also qualified to prescribe homeopathy. More people should be aware that it's a treatment available within the NHS and not just for the elite people of this world.
Amygdala100 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor Reason is not about forcing on the people against their will. If you use that logic then one could say funding of homeopathy on the NHS is being forced on people against their will.
Please don't conflate infringement of liberties with criticism of homeopathy. You're just trying to confuddle the argument; a tactic I referred to earlier.
The government needs to be for the people, yes. The government also needs to spend its money wisely. Continued...
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor (...cont). The £4million/year is good money from cash-strapped UK taxpayers that is being diverted away from good causes to homeopathy which is unproven beyond placebo.
It's nothing to do with 'emeneis [sic] (eyesore alert LOL!) of liberty'. People can still buy this stuff from their own funds, can't they?
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
Comment removed
Amygdala100 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor If a theory is being attacked, then in the normal world, that is a GOOD THING. Any theory worth its salt will stand up to criticism and will get stronger because of the "attacks". It should be able to respond with dignity and accuracy. The theory should stand on its own merits and not need to use diversionary tactics (e.g. changing the subject, questioning credentials, resorting to screaming "I'm a victim", etc.).
Homeopaths can't do this, so they simply attack in return.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 15
@ProvocativeDoctor Science is about evidence. If there is no evidence that it works, and it contravenes known scientific laws than you should expect an assault on it.
Liberalism is for politics, and not medicine. There is only one form of medicine we should use, and thats the one that works - you cannot have multiple opinions on what works. We need science to show us what does and what doesn't.
Liberal ideas of all opinions are equal applies to politics, and not Science.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1
We should use any form of treatment so long as there is reasonable evidence to show that it works.
Whilst on the subject, many conventional mainstream drugs don't actually work, often have terrible side effects and are very expensive to buy - yet are available as forms of treatment and are sold as 'safe.'
The traditional pharmacological fraternity have a lot to answer to, yet continue with both BMA and government support.
Homeopathy is about healing.
Pharmacology is about money
pianoplayeruk 6 months ago
LOL at someone imitating Amygdala100 and posting anti-homeopathy messages!! Did you accidentally up-rate their comments too? LOL!!
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 19
@ExposeHomeopathy I can see that you've been busy up-rating your own here, within a matter of 16 hours you have a rating of 107!!...lol. Yes, someone is using my amgdala 100 name, to discredit my earlier comments.
heatherashio101 1 year ago
@heatherashio101 Are you Amygdala100 or heatherashio101? Make your stupid bloody mind up!! Or is heatherashio101 the fake account you have for voting up Amygdala100's comments?
Looks like people have cottoned onto your game and they're 50 times more efficient than you at playing it :)
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 16
ExposeHomeopathy Actually, heatherashio is a family and friend's account. Amygdala, is my personal account, does this satisfy you? Oh, i see that you are the one who goes around marking your own comments up, whilst marking down support from other pro-homeopathy supporters, so stop spreading your lies and propaganda. Swearing never works to gain your support and it's never intimidated me. Evidence of your actions: ExposeHomeopathy
25 minutes ago 20 thumbs up
Amygdala100 1 year ago
@ExposeHomeopathy heatherashio101
2 hours ago be displayed hide
@ExposeHomeopathy I can see that you've been busy up-rating your own here, within a matter of 16 hours you have a rating of 107!!...lol. Yes, someone is using my amgdala 100 name, to discredit my earlier comments.
Amygdala100 1 year ago
These opponents of homeopathy have recently set up an account with an identical name to my youtube name: amygdala100. They're contradicting my earlier comments in this name. Check out these oscillo videos and watch out for this tactic with your own youtube name.
Amygdala100 1 year ago
in what way were any of my comments spam?
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@ExposeHomeopathy How about YOU show integrity and courage and say what your real name is instead of hiding behind a rather dull mask of a 'handle'? I don't accept what you say about quality studies all showing homeopathy to be placebo. You may also want to 'invest' some time in (and not 'into' ) improving your English: 'when this knowledge is abound', 'fradulently' are eyesore on the page.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 13
@ProvocativeDoctor OK, you got me on the misspelling of fraudulently. I do care about my spelling and grammar, so thank you. What is wrong with "when this knowledge is abound"? I've just found a comment from you on this page with the words "macocosm" and "philosoophy", so you can churn out eyesore messages like the best of us LOL.
As for the handle, what does that have to do with the argument? At least there's some fragment of my message once your cronies have marked it as spam! :)
Cont...
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 32
@ExposeHomeopathy On this you are right and I apologise.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor ...cont. You have highlighted your problem in that you don't accept what I say about the quality studies. Because of your emotional connection with homeopathy and because of the time you've invested in it, you have grown a filter which keeps out the truth.
Listen, if the studies supported homeopathy, IT WOULD BE ACCEPTED in mainstream medicine. Why would medicine deliberately reject efficacious remedies?
So, once again: Please regain some integrity and stop fooling people.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 32
@ExposeHomeopathy They reject it because of it's 'implausibility' not for lack of evidence - which huge swathes of orthodox medicine lack and are not rejected for - eg SSRI anti-depressants.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ ExposeHomeopathy You talk to me about 'regaining integrity' and 'fooling people'. Who exactly are YOU? Are you medically qualified or simply qualified to judge the clinical decisions of fully medically qualified doctors? And their morality and integrity of course while you hide behind a cowardly handle.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 8
@ProvocativeDoctor Yes, I do talk to you about regaining integrity and to think about what you're doing. The reason the focus is on you and your ideas is because you're the one who has posted the video.
Who I am is irrelevant to the discussion. And as you can tell the handle is very much necessary because (as I stated before), after Amygdala100 has marked the messages from opponents as spam, at least the underlying message (or exposing homeopathy) remains.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor In answer to your question about whether I am qualified to judge the decisions of medically qualified doctors. When it comes to homeopathy, yes I am.
I would say better than you because I understand about rigorous trials, the scientific method.
It seems ironic, sad (and dare I say selfish?!) that you benefit from all manner of inventions and findings from science and medicine but you'll dish out these magic potions without grazing your conscience.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago 95
@ExposeHomeopathy Actually I know about epistemology and Kant, phenomenology and Husserl and teleology - which is important too. My teacher was a student of these philosophers and made me read them. (Eric Ledermann author of Philosophy and Medicine - Gower 1970)
I think Carl Jung spoke truly when he said: 'I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as fraud.'
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 7
@ProvocativeDoctor Mr Jung's statement makes the assumption there is something to explain.
The "efficacy" of homeopathy has already been explained by placebo effect and all QUALITY studies show them as equal.
So, to be a practitioner when this knowledge is abound IS fraud. I'm sorry if you don't like that word, but you are acting fradulently.
I understand you've invested a lot of time into this, but why not step outside the box, have a think and regain your integrity?
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
Do a search on YouTube for "James Randi explains homeopathy". It's always better to hear it from someone who doesn't have a financial interest in selling the stuff!
BanderShit 1 year ago
Homeopaths have a homeopathic notion of truth. The more they're disproven, the more certain they become.
FraudOfHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ExposeHomeopathy: The difference in our opinions on this matter are a good illustration between authoritarian and libertarian politics.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 9
@ProvocativeDoctor "The difference in our opinions on this matter are a good illustration between authoritarian and libertarian politics."
I disagree - you're trying to make the difference appear sophisticated.
The difference is very basic - you believe in witch doctor "remedies" that have not been verified in studies of any quality.
I believe in things that can be proven, tested and repeated.
It's a question of how you acquire knowledge - epistemology if you must get sophisticated.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
No government could make a better investment than to support h'pathy through its public health insurance programs. It's both efficacious and safe--proven by 100's of studies and 200 years of clinical use around the world. H'pathy is famous for its cures of chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes.
It's used by 1/2 billion people around the world, 100 million of them are Europeans. It's supported by countries like France, Germany, Switzerland and India for those very reasons.
den151redbank 1 year ago 3
I've used h'pathy for a dozen years. I can only say that I wish I had known about this magnificent system of medicine many, many years ago. It would have saved me immense suffering and disability. I've used h. with great success in treating chronic diseases like neuropathy and muscular disorders, acute illnesses like bronchitis, injuries involving nerve damage and to reduce the pain and swelling of dental work/problems.
H'pathy has been so successful that I use it exclusively.
den151redbank 1 year ago 3
@den151redbank
My friends, neighbors and family saw what it did for me and tried it. They were so pleased that they told their friends and family. And so h'pathy grows in use every year.
With a little knowledge lay people can treat themselves quickly, successfully and inexpensively for acute illnesses at home and for just a few pennies.
It's wonderful for treating animals too, as so many vets know so well. A pet can be treated easily for acute problems without expensive trips to the vet.
den151redbank 1 year ago 3
Homeopathy defended? How do you defend the indefensible? By saying it gives people choice? People have a choice to jump off a cliff, but it doesn't mean it's a good, informed, rational thing to do.
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@ExposeHomeopathy So the people shouldn't have choice in your opinion? The people should be forced to do what 'intelligent people' such as yourself think they should do. Why don't we dump democracy and let a few well-informed people such as Stalin rule because such individuals know better than us what is good for us. 'The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter' (Winston Churchill - a supporter of democracy)
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor People can choose to do whatever they want. Some people choose to commit suicide. Doesn't mean every choice is good for their health.
Some people think the National Health Service should pay £4million/year on magic potions. Doesn't mean every choice is good.
When it comes to what the taxpayer funds, it matters a great deal and bad choices (homeopathy being a bad choice) should not be on the table.
There will be a time when the NHS doesn't fund this rubbish...
ExposeHomeopathy 1 year ago
@LAnonHubbard: I don't agree with a word you say but will defend until death your right to protest as much as you want. As long as you respect the democratic rights of those who disagree with your views, that's fine with me.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago 32
@ProvocativeDoctor I'm surprised you don't agree with anything I said. Don't you agree about the patient feeling more cared for because the homeopath talks to the patient more than a proper doctor?
I would like to see more resources directed on mainstream doctors having a better "bedside manner" with their patients. THAT and the placebo effect is where homeopathy scores in my opinion.
The "remedies" are useless.
LAnonHubbard 1 year ago
@LAnonHubbard Homeopaths in India typically see 100 patients a day so they spend even less time with patients than NHS GPs. But yes we can agree that bedside manner is important in medicine. So why don't we end our conversation there?
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor Also, veterinary homeopaths and farmers, who treat animals, with homeopathic remedies for mastitis, wouldn't have the time to pander their cows with a bedside manner, when the conventional antibiotics fail to work for them and they have to seek alternatives such as homeopathy, or they may have to cull their cows.
Amygdala100 1 year ago 5
@ProvocativeDoctor NHS medical doctor has certainly never dissuaded me not to use vaccination; although he did introduce me to the safer alternatives of homeopathy, after I was rendered with a severe allergy to penicillin and a semi-coma resulted.
Amygdala100 1 year ago 5
I am livid that my tax money the government collects from me goes to fund homeopathy within the NHS. The more I read about homeopathy, the more I want to protest. This is as big an abuse of my money as the government funding faith schools. Since when should my money be funding woo woo and superstition?
Want to practice homeopathy and religion? Do it on YOUR OWN money!!
LAnonHubbard 1 year ago
Homeopathy is pure quackery. A vestige from Victorian ignorance. The people who practice this are frauds and charlatans who are simply fooling their patients.
LAnonHubbard 1 year ago
@LAnonHubbard You are simply wrong in what you say about people who practise homeopathy. They are not charlatans and frauds because we do believe our medicines work. You can call homeopaths dated, outmoded, deluded or whatever you want but it is simply wrong to call them frauds because they are not.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor I am not "simply wrong" in calling practitioners frauds. I think my statement would cover a lot of practitioners who know full well that their "medicines" are not effective, but also know there is money to be made in this unregulated industry.
This leaves at least 2 groups: 1) The deluded who believe that they actually do work; using woo woo, water memory, or whatever explanation is fashionable this decade. 2) Those who know they're just placebos. Continued...
LAnonHubbard 1 year ago 2
@ProvocativeDoctor (Continued) Those practitioners that know they're just placebos but realise their patients are getting better ARE fooling their patients, and this is undesirable, even if the placebo effect is shown to be real. Those other deluded ones are dangerous and are the ones who might suggest patients don't use vaccinations, or use homeopathic "medicine" to protect against malaria, etc.
Homeopathy is bad, bad, bad whichever way you look at it.
LAnonHubbard 1 year ago
@LAnonHubbard Well that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. The fact is that millions of people benefit from consulting homeopaths all over the world and I've never met a homeopath who was knowingly prescribing placebo. You may be surprised to know that homeopathy is a huge subject requiring thousands of hours of study. People don't put in that amount of study to be registered and 'entitled' to prescribe placebos. Far from being exploitative, homeopaths tend to be very fine people indeed.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor Any benefits gained from visiting a homeopath cannot be attributed to the remedy though, can it? Can't we agree on that? Do you see that there are better reasons people improve?:
1) homeopaths typically spend more time talking to patients and this can make a patient feel more cared for.
2) The remedy acts as a placebo and the placebo effect is a strange phenomenon that IS observed and does exist.
3) Patient gets better naturally.
4) Etc (many other reasons).
LAnonHubbard 1 year ago
ProvocativeDoctor I agree, I have a splendid NHS medical doctor who first introduced me to homeopathy, he is also a trainer of doctors and nurses. It's great news to hear that the British government will continue to back homeopathy within the NHS. It’s great news to all the best doctors, who serve the people, for their well being.
Amygdala100 1 year ago
Psychiatry is more of a fraud than homeopathy.
Dr Erick Turner published a study in the "New England Journal of Medicine" saying that psychiatric journals cherry pick clinical trials to promote their drugs. The study involved over 12,500 patients and he found out that the trials submitted to the FDA were very different to the trials appearing in medical journals.
So the reader of the journal would be given a FALSE impression of the benefits because the negative trials had been suppressed.
caketheory 1 year ago
The reason for the increased attacks on homeopathy have been mainly pushed through by Dr Ben Goldacre. He's on a crusade to get homeopathy banned, infact he was on the select committee and I wouldn't be supprised if he was responsible for starting the whole thing.
caketheory 1 year ago
@caketheory Ben Goldacre is a psychiatrist and psychiatry is more of a fraud than homeopathy. I don't think its fair that he critisizes the homeopathic medical model when his own is a fraud. I mean they still use ECT treatment. If complimentary medicine was still using ECT he would probably be using a megaphone to tell the general public about this bogus treatment but because psychiatry does it he stays quiet. He's calling everyone a quack but his own profession is based on quackery.
caketheory 1 year ago
Whether or not you mean to mislead a patient, if you are giving them a placebo and a listening ear (even without knowing) and calling it by another name, you are leading a patient to a false belief.
It doesn't mean you're intentionally misleading them, but unintentional misleading is still misleading.
icilianfenner 1 year ago 2
@icilianfenner I don't think that a homeopathic veterinary surgeon or a farmer can give their animals a listening ear to deceive them; however, they do give them homeopathic treatment when the antibiotics fail for mastitis AND OTHER CONDITIONS.
July26th the British government fully backs homeopathy the people's choice within the NHS. Thank goodness, because penicillin rendered me in a semi-coma as a child
Amygdala100 1 year ago 9
@Amygdala100 while it is probably true about listening ears, that is *not* the only factor that can create the impression of positive reaction. Regression from the mean and subconciously biased interpretation can. That's why you need large-scale studies to establish effecacy on a scale of numbers, and why they need to be double-blinded.
icilianfenner 1 year ago
Comment removed
Amygdala100 1 year ago
@icilianfenner I’ve seen enough evidence of double-blind studies to impress me, since my NHS graduated GP first intoduced me to homeopathy. For minor complaints, I’m my own laboratory, as are the millions of the general public, who seek and use homeopathy; including the Royal family, heads of state and other world elite, who all have their own personal homeopathic physicians. Agro homeopathic experimentation in plants is an on going fascination for me now.
Amygdala100 1 year ago 4
@Amygdala100
If you cherry-pick your studies, it is possible to present only the anomalous as evidence. However, as presented to the science and technology select committee, the systematic reviews (ie, the results of all of the good studies, not just the ones that support a particular view-point) do not find that homeopathy works better than placebo. This is the highest standard of evidence we can get for medicine.
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@Amygdala100
As for you being your own lab - we already know how unreliable that is. A) you susceptible to the placebo effect, B) humans are terrible at distinguishing random patterns from meaningful ones, and are predisposed to 'spot' a pattern where co-incidence is the correct answer, and C) you are a statistically insignificant sample, so there's no way to separate actual effectiveness from confounding factors.
Hence why real studies, not popular belief or the elite, are a golden standard
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@icilianfenner Statistically insignificant sample; would this also include the 70% success rate at the NHS Bristol Homeopathic Hospital, where the referrals were made by NHS medical doctors, for whom the conventional drugs and treatments have failed to work? This type of referral is usually a last resort, for the acute and chronically ill. Obviously the" placbo effect" isn't in evidence here, although homeopathic science is.
Amygdala100 1 year ago 12
@Amygdala100 A) I answered to this earlier - you haven't defined success, you haven't accounted for regression to the mean (people getting better over time), you haven't accounted for placebo (which is not obviously discounted - if you can explain why you think it is, that'd be interesting).
If you really want to know if the substance works, you do placebo-controlled double-blinded trials. Not a loose collection of case studies. The former eliminates these confounding factors.
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@Amygdala100 As to your adverse reaction to penicillin - it's true that conventional medicine can produce adverse reactions in some. It's also true that conventional medicine is more likely to do good than harm - it's why it gets accepted as a therapy.
NONE of that has any impact on the efficacy of homeopathy at all. if you replace something on balance good with someone useless, more people will suffer.
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@icilianfenner Actually, homeopathy is often reserved as a last resort, when a lot of money has been wasted on ineffective "conventional" treatments. Although, it's good for the business of the money makers.. Homeopathy steps in with great success-over 70% success rate, when the chronically and the acutely ill are referred to the NHS hospitals, so I suspect the profit makers come before the general public and that’s how it goes.
Amygdala100 1 year ago 16
* NHS Homeopathic hospitals.
Amygdala100 1 year ago
@Amygdala100 If homeopathic treatments are effective, it will show up in the systematic reviews of the well-conducted, double-blinded placebo controlled studies. It has yet to. An undefined 'success rate', that is not differentiated from OR placebo tested and blinded, is of little use. It's too open to error
IF the evidence came in strongly in favour of homeopathy, I would be happy, as a strong believer in evidence based medicine, to soundly endorse it. Unfortunately, it hasn't.
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@icilianfenner Obviously you need to take your blinkers off, because the UK Government dismissed the House report, ( July 26th 2010 ) and empatically backs the people's choice of homeopathy within the NHS!
Amygdala100 1 year ago 12
@Amygdala100 No blinkers on - I actually watched the Science and Technology Select committee hearing on it, read a summary of their recommendations, and read the government response.
The government did not decide to continue funding homeopathy because the evidence suggests it is more effective than placebo (the committee recommendation was that it does NOT suggest that), it did it in support of patient choice.
Patient choice =/= evidence for effective therapy.
icilianfenner 1 year ago
@icilianfenner Continued: The The Complementary Medicine Research Group from the:
Department of Health Sciences at the University of York presented a well argued
summary with 68 references [Ev. 143]. In this appears the statement
"To date there are eight systematic reviews that provide evidence that the
effects of homeopathy are beyond placebo when used as a treatment for [five
childhood conditions]".
Amygdala100 1 year ago
@Amygdala100
Can you give me the name of the paper, and preferably the year of publishing?
icilianfenner 1 year ago
1:20 - not none of them - even the 'skeptical' panelists of the committee interviews said that there have been studies showing a positive inclination, but these results disappear when well-designed, large scale studies are concerned.
And yes, there's a great case for therapy, and talking to people thoroughly. Same with placebo - that doesn't replace the need for actually effective therapy in many cases.
icilianfenner 1 year ago 2
Its only because the MP's wont be rich any more
ysiblini 1 year ago
Thank you very much for this excellent explanation of Homeopathy!
mohanaturo 1 year ago
Placebos shouldn't cost 70% more than real medicine.
fncypntz 1 year ago
@fncypntz
I don't know what placebos cost but do know that Homeopathy is much cheaper than orthodox medicine.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
Thanks Bandershot,
"The time is out of joint: O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!"
;-)
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
Thank you very much Dr. Kaplan for this video. You've made some very cogent points here, and you are absolutely right.
Bandershot 1 year ago
My Cambridge graduated GP/Obsetrics doctor, precribed me with Arnica, since I had opted for a home birth, under his care. He also treated my mastitis with Belladonna as I'm severely allergic to antibiotics. I've also saved an abscessed tooth and treated my son successfully for his diagnosed asthma condition. I will continue to opt for homeopathy, as my first choice of medicine. Thanks to the open mindedness of confident and competent doctors.
Amygdala100 1 year ago
"Nobody disagree? Surely a clear case of Qui tacet consentire videtur? ["he who is silent is taken to agree"]" Well, no. Just because none of the people to view this video (viewed only 168 times at time of writing) have disagreed with you, it is not safe to conclude that everyone agrees with what you say in it.
"[homeopaths] could just give blank pills if they thought it was placebo!" - Well yes, homeopaths *do* just give blank pills.
RobHinkley 1 year ago
@RobHinkley Rob, the comment was aimed at a few ardent critics of homeopathy whom I know to be following my blog. It is also an attempt at a joke ;-)
YOU may think that homeopaths give blank pills but they do not - that's why they study encyclopaedias of homeopathic remedies.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor
"YOU may think that homeopaths give blank pills but they do not".
So please tell, how much active ingredient is there in a pill of 30C arnica?
RobHinkley 1 year ago
@RobHinkley Homeopathic doctors certainly believe there is active ingredient in Arnica 30c and have seen it work time and time again in the clinic. The fact that we are not able to measure that ingredient at present does not mean that it does not exist. We do not know what the smallest division of nature is any more than we know what the boundaries of the universe are. The microcosm remains as mysterious to man as the macocosm. But this necessitates a discussion of philosoophy of science...
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor
Ah, homeopathic doctors *believe* it contains an active ingredient despite it being both absent in theory and indetectable in practice. This puts them in the same league as people who *believe* there is a unicorn in the garden, despite the lack of actual evidence.
RobHinkley 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor You don't understand how your potions work? Well perhaps, as an ethical doctor, you shouldn't use medicine based on properties you don't know anything about?
munsism 1 year ago 2
@munsism We know that homeopathic medicines act as an holistic stimulus to the whole organism. HOW exactly this happens we don't know. But we can live with the not knowing - unlike those with a scientismic orientation who cannot do this and would prevent others from benefitting from homeopathy because it is an AFFRONT to their scientismic philosophy of naive realism.
ProvocativeDoctor 1 year ago
@ProvocativeDoctor You say "We know that homeopathic medicines act as an holistic stimulus to the whole organism." I am afraid that we don't know that at all. Not only is there no biological plausibility to homeopathy, beyond anecdotes, there is also no evidence that it works. I don't think it is ethical for a medical doctor to suggest that anything else is the case.
munsism 1 year ago 2
@munsism Making the no evidence claim over and over doesn't make it so. There most assuredly is evidence - but you choose to ignore it.
YouMustBeKidding666 1 year ago
@munsism And I suppose you think it's better to pretend to know, as allopathic doctors do when they prescribe SSRIs, SNRIs, and antipsychotics? Or aren't you aware that the concepts of a brain disease and chemical imbalance are just Big Pharma marketing tools without one shred of evidence?
YouMustBeKidding666 1 year ago
He basically paints a picture of evil, nay-saying opponents versus friendly caring proponents. There is no information in this piece. The 70% is just thrown out there. You can't do that. You need to compare, put it in context etc. But you can't in 10 minutes, that'll take a few hours.
I had a homeopathic GP for over 20 years, believed it was actual medicine and at some point figured it didn't work. I had no idea about a controversy, just went back in my mind about what worked and what didn't.
erwinblonk 1 year ago
@waytoeden: Thanks. Of course saying 'either conventional OR CAM is ridiculous'. An holistic stimulus should often be used initially - unless there is a risk of mortality or morbidity when orthodox scientific medicine is mandatory. In non-risk situations it makes sense for a doctor trained in both approaches to try an holistic stimulus such as homeopathy first - knowing of course that if the patient does not improve, the conventional approach is in reserve. This is the 'Complementary' in CAM.
ProvocativeDoctor 2 years ago
Well said - but the anti movement i basically trying to make the alternative community go into an either-or conflict- as if work like homeopathy was an opposite as opposed to a complement to conventional medicine.
waytoeden 2 years ago
Nobody disagree? Surely a clear case of Qui tacet consentire videtur ?
ProvocativeDoctor 2 years ago