1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
ME/CFS: A disease at war with itself
We can all agree that ME/CFS is a nasty disease, particularly in its severe form, but there are abundant nasty diseases in the world. What is unique and particularly confounding about our disease is that so much controversy surrounds it, and not only surrounds it, but invades it too.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Homeopathy and other things.....

Discussion in 'Alternative Therapies' started by Chris Wick, Jun 28, 2012.

  1. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Likes:
    2,784
    I tend to think that Ben Goldacre's views are fair minded, and usually pretty insightful. He is just interested in the truth of the issues, and interested in exposing shoddy or dishonest science or pseudoscience. I have a lot of respect for people whose fundamental focus is on the truth, and not on some ulterior political or idealogical agenda. Goldacre is certainly not an apologist for the establishment, as his new book called Bad Pharma attests.

    Goldacre says "Bad Pharma is my book about the misuse of evidence by the pharmaceutical industry, especially the way that negative trial data goes missing in action, and how easy it would be to fix this."

    He has even hosted a number of published scientific papers on his website which speculate on possible mechanisms for the memory of water.

    If you have ever looked into the story of Clever Hans, the horse who seemingly could perform mental arithmetic calculations, you will realize just how exquisitely sensitive animals can be to unconscious cues from their owners.
  2. golden

    golden Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes:
    1,069
    Clear Light
    Kina,

    The two links I posted do explain in clear language what a Real Scientist is and equally if not more importantly, what a Real Scientist is not.


    @Thread,

    Here is a further link containing links to Scientific, peer reviewed studies of homeopathy.

    But I can not copy and paste all the relevant bits, or do bold or italics or underline etc... and so it does take reading.

    http://www.homeopathic.com/Articles...niable_Evidence_for_Homeopathic_Medicine.html
  3. maryb

    maryb iherb code TAK122

    Messages:
    2,803
    Likes:
    1,886
    UK
    Hip
    you said 'I tend to think that Ben Goldacre's views are fair minded, and usually pretty insightful'

    thats fine hip - each to their own. Blow I've had to see his name again grrrrrrr.
    golden likes this.
  4. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Likes:
    2,784
    Was there anything in particular that, er, BG has said or done that has got you angry, Maryb? I have in the past thought he was wrong on some points, but then later, as I learnt more, I realized he was actually right, and it was me that was wrong.
  5. Kina

    Kina Moderation Team Lead

    Messages:
    5,524
    Likes:
    4,051
    Ontario, Canada

    Obviously, you don't want to answer me in your own words. That's fine. I have done my own research on Homeopathy in the past and have read reams of material. I am going to say point blank, I have no interest in reading any more at this point in time. With the little energy I have plus it's a real struggle to concentrate these days, I am choosing to focus on other things that are more important to me.

    When it comes down to it. If something works for me -- it works. You can give me tons of evidence why it wouldn't work but it doesn't matter because that doesn't change the fact that it worked for me. Arguments, debates on scientific evidence won't change that. I will agree with people when they present me with scientific studies and say yes it would appear that it would not work but it still doesn't discount my own personal experience. I will happily say maybe it's a placebo effect, maybe it's a combination of things, maybe I have some genetic defect, maybe it's something else causing the effect I am not aware of, maybe the symptoms went away on their own. I really don't care because I am just thankful that I have managed to get control of a symptom or two.

    All I want is for some 'real' scientists to find out what the heck causes ME/CFS and get on to curing it or at least to provide some kind of treatment to make life bearable. It's going to take some cutting edge scientific research to get this done. I have a huge amount of respect for the scientists who are trying to figure out ME/CFS.
    Hip likes this.
  6. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Likes:
    2,784
    What you are doing here is confounding what might be possibly true, with what we actually know to be true from solid evidence.

    You must appreciate Wayne that because you can imagine or conceive in your mind's eye that vibrations might be involved, that does not automatically prove that they are.

    It is true that a scientific theory often does start with imagination, and good scientists tend to have good imaginations; but good scientists also understand that you need to prove your ideas before they become accepted as fact. Just because you can imagine something and you like the idea, that does not mean it is automatically true. I can imagine that the Moon made out of cheese; but that of course does not mean it is.

    There is a massive body of scientific research on herbs, but none of this research indicates that there is anything other than just chemical processes underpinning their medicinal action. And chemistry is based on the structure and constituent elements of molecules, not the vibrations of molecules.

    Having said that, there is an interesting theory on how olfaction (the sense of smell) works, based on the nose identifying molecules by their vibrational signatures. In fact, there are two competing theories of olfaction: one theory posits olfaction works through the nose sensing molecular vibrations, and the other theory posits that olfaction works through the nose sensing molecular shapes. It remains to be seen which theory turns out to be true (or even if the nose uses both mechanisms).
  7. golden

    golden Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes:
    1,069
    Clear Light
    Now with this, you have led me into ugly politics that I wasnt aware existed. Just a point, I am not a fan of labels eg. Skeptic etc apart from in their lightest, practical sense. I think once anyone gets entrenched in a label too strongly, it becomes a serious weight and all sorts of ego defence mechanisms kick in.

    Politics is full of these labels.

    Here is an account of The Randi Saga and there seems to be more in it than simply unclaimed prize money...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/dana-ullman/disinformation-homeopathy_b_969627.html

    I believe there is a similar poster competition going around offering to give $1000 to anyone with scientific proof of the Hiv Virus.

    All bizarre stuff.
  8. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,262
    Likes:
    8,935
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    He's pretty fond of tweeting about any criticism ME/CFS patients get in the news - even taking the time to rephrase such headlines in his own words.

    He also runs badscience.net, which mostly seems to involve a bunch of supposed "skeptics" toeing the party line. Goldacre's own involvement in CFS discussions there has been peripheral at best, but his fanboys can get pretty nasty on the subject on his forum.
  9. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Likes:
    2,784
    I find the people on Goldacre's forum are generally really awful. Some are very clever, but so ill-mannered and churlish — to the point that the whole bunch of them seem to have borderline mental health issues. They obsessively pour out so much venomous diatribe that you get the impression that something must be mentally wrong with them.

    I don't know why Goldacre likes that sort of thing on his forum.
    Valentijn likes this.
  10. Graeme

    Graeme almost there...

    Messages:
    361
    Likes:
    222
    Montreal

    I don’t buy the idea that animals understand the intent of their owners will to heal them, not where a drop of water is concerned. If they did we probably wouldn’t require those protective cones we harness around their heads when we want them to stop ripping open their sutures. Does anybody believe that animals can differentiate a tacit “I care about you” from a “here’s a little drop of water that will make all your problems go away.” Their reasoning would be something like what exactly, “that drop of water was so small you can’t honestly be thinking that would quench my thirst, therefore you’re trying to give me some of that medicine that you highly educated people are concocting in labs that’s going to cure my chronic diarrhoea.” And the standard sugar-pill placebo? The only way I can get my dog to take pills is to wrap them in Kraft Singles. Not only would this risk contaminating the placebo, I’m really disappointed in her lack of sophistication in taste.
    maryb likes this.
  11. Graeme

    Graeme almost there...

    Messages:
    361
    Likes:
    222
    Montreal
    golden said:
    every time the Homeopathic Community attempts to share wisdom and experience to those interested, it gets abruptly interrupted with comments which quite frankly are rude and insulting.


    I don’t recall anyone asking for a homeopath’s opinion on our thread here.
  12. golden

    golden Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes:
    1,069
    Clear Light
    Homeopathic Vet Christopher Day raises some lucid points on this:

    " What about all the animals that appear to improve or become well, coincidentally with the commencement of homeopathic medication (often after many years of other medication)? What is the most likely explanation? Why, with a casual wave, say '"many diseases get better anyway"' or why wheel out the old chestnut '"placebo effect"'? Why did the animals choose to get better coincidentally with homeopathic treatment, in so many cases? Why didn't 'things get better' while on other treatments? How do you convince a herd of cattle or pigs or a flock of sheep to take on and respond to the placebo effect, when they're dosed via their drinking water? These mechanical responses to questions are distractions, smoke screens, and are there simply to prevent the need to think about the results.

    The foregoing begs the question: "Is it ethical to ignore all the reports of recoveries against the odds?" Simple explanations of the mechanisms of homeopathy would be nice but, until such are available (and rest assured, the pharmaceutical industry's billions will not be spent on such research), we have to rely on observations and, as medically-trained and vocational professionals, we have to leave no stone unturned in our mission to help patients, whether human or animal.

    One of the proposed far-fetched and bizarre explanations for the success of homeopathic cases in veterinary practice is that homeopathic vets spend longer with their patients. If it's that simple, why don't other vets spend longer with their patients? "

    His observations and experiences with herds of sheep etc. would to me rule out the sort of close bond a dog or cat has with their 'owner' plus as he states, in the Chronic cases why does an animal suddenly 'decide to get better' exactly after receiving Homeopathic treatment. you know, after having a string of failed drug treatments...
  13. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Likes:
    2,784
    Pro-homeopathy individuals also seem to avoid answering awkward questions. For example, no pro-homeopathy individual on this thread has been able to provide an adequate answer to my simple question above on how dry homeopathic pills can carry the memory of water — which would appear to be a major flaw in homeopathy, and an indication that homeopathic pills are a con trick.

    Can any pro-homeopathy individual answer this simple question? Graeme? Golden?

    Can you kindly point me to the published study in which veterinarian Christopher Day details his evidence? Or is this just another case of waffly anecdotal evidence, anecdotal evidence seemingly being the foundation of much homeopathy.

    The James Randi Educational Foundation is still offering $1million for proof of the efficacy of homeopathy. Here is the application form for that $1million. If you have proof that homeopathy has an effect, go make yourself a million.



    Here is another question for the pro-homeopathy individuals: soon after taking some homeopathic preparations some years ago, I developed chronic fatigue syndrome. Does that mean that homeopathy caused my CFS as a side effect? Or do homeopaths ignore the bad health outcomes that occur after taking homeopathic preparations, and just report the good outcomes. If so, then their data is utterly biased and therfore invalid.

    Graeme? Golden? Did homeopathy cause my CFS?
  14. Hip

    Hip Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,951
    Likes:
    2,784
    Maryb, your interesting experience with a snake venom homeopathic preparation consistently causing blisters to appear on your tongue: if you can repeat this under the scrutiny of the above-mentioned James Randi Educational Foundation, you could earn yourself $1million!

    And if you win that $1million, don't forget all your nice friends here at Phoenix Rising...!
  15. maryb

    maryb iherb code TAK122

    Messages:
    2,803
    Likes:
    1,886
    UK
    ha ha............
  16. Wayne

    Wayne Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,201
    Likes:
    1,301
    Ashland, Oregon
    Well, I'll try another stab at this one. I wrote the following in an earlier post:
    So to answer your simple question, it has to do with the purported effectiveness of vibrations (please note the bold). I seem to remember you fairly insolently dismissing the notion of vibrations as being too vague, apparently because it wasn't a scientific answer. I can understand that, but as far as I know, no scientific attempt has ever been made to devise any research around the various effects of vibrational modalities.

    But what if a person were to approach the topic of vibrations from a more intuitive perspective. And ask various questions pertaining to the possible effects of vibrations. Is this how prayer works? Is it possible this is how voodoo or black magic works? Is it possible that we're effected by vibrations in ways that the scientific community has never even considered? I would ask you a question: If you had a choice of eating food prepared by somebody who loved you and the blessed the food as they prepared it, or eating food prepared by somebody who hated you, and cursed you the whole while they were preparing it, which food would you choose?

    You might say that this analogy and the whole notion of vibrations and/or vibrational medicine has NOTHING to do with science. In which case, I couldn't disagree with you. But that's not the focus of this thread, except to the extent that you've tried to make it so. And I have to wonder why. Is it because you enjoy debating "scientific validity", or is it because it allows you to don your scientific hat, and make various kinds of condescending remarks, such as calling homeopathy a "con trick? If it's the latter, then I think it's a high-jacking of the purpose of this thread.

    I might just mention that I've seen this phenomonen play out again and again. A thread is started on homepathy, or some other alternative therapy, posted on an "Alternative Therapies" forum, and somebody with an anti-alternative therapy / pro-science orientation comes along and starts making condescending and even rude comments, not only about the therapy, but directed at those who may believe in it. I for one don't appreciate it, and would (respectfully) ask that you consider moving on to another forum where strict scientific discourse is the expected norm. That standard is simply not going to be the case on the Alternative Therapies forum.
    Iquitos, Seewell and golden like this.
  17. Dreambirdie

    Dreambirdie work in progress

    Messages:
    5,039
    Likes:
    3,198
    N. California
    That's where I come from too. Some things clearly work better for me than others, and some things have made me significantly worse. (Hydrocortisone and iodine being the absolute WORST things I've tried.)

    I actually kept track of most of the practitioners that I remembered consulting and most of the remedies I've tried in my 35 years with this disease, and gave each of them a grade on their performance, based on effectiveness and helpfulness. As it turns out, these were my conclusions:
    50% (66)--worthless
    19.2% (26) detrimental
    15.7% (21)--minimally helpful
    14.3% (19) supportive
    .75% (1)--very helpful

    On my list is included 5 homeopaths, all of whom I rated as worthless in helping me. I have had absolutely NO significant benefits from any of the 12 homeopathic constitutional remedies I've taken. Nada, zero, zilch.

    The only person who has helped me is a TCM practitioner who has a very unorthodox approach and is not in the least bit groovy as far as "vibrations" go. He would definitely not win the Mr Congeniality award, but he wins my award for being a top notch herbalist. Some people I know have benefited greatly from his herbal prescriptions and some have not.

    It's a mystery as to why something will work for someone and fail completely at helping someone else. And unfortunately it costs a lot of money to experiment.
    Valentijn, Hip and golden like this.
  18. golden

    golden Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes:
    1,069
    Clear Light
    The Science of Homeopathy does not easily fit into Allopathic Scientific trials and testings for blindingly obvious reasons. And yetHomeopathy has achived Scientific Success jumping through Allopathically designed hoops.

    I suppose to understand this fully you have to be able to understand the failings of Allopathic trials and medicne, coupled with a deep understanding of Homeopathy - ...Then you need to look at the Success of Allopathy and why the Homeopathic medicine works in a completely different way...and so needs to be tested in a different way.

    The rest of the post is a quote, part of an article in the Huffington post to potentially further understanding. It contains some Homeopathic Science studies peer reviewed and publishedpat in Allopathic journals.

    (Hip - the information you asked for regarding Homeopathic pills , if you genuinely do not know, can be googled - Ok).

    From the Huffington post by Dana Ullman:

    Sadly, however, the homeopathy deniers tend to spread disinformation about homeopathy, including the following myths:*Myth #1*: "There is no research that shows that homeopathic medicines work."Such statements are a creative use of statistics, or what might be called "lies, damn lies and statistics." Actually, most clinical research studies conducted with homeopathic medicines show a positive outcome. However, if "creative statisticians" evaluate only the smaller number of large studies, a positive result is less likely, not because homeopathy doesn't work, but because these larger studies tend to dispense only one homeopathic medicine for everyone in the study, without any degree of individualized treatment that is typical of the homeopathic method (1). To claim that homeopathic medicines do not work using only these studies is as illogical as to say that antibiotics are ineffective just because they do not cure for every viral, fungal or bacterial infection.*Myth #2*: "The research studies showing that homeopathic medicines work are 'poorly conducted studies.'"Wrong! Studies showing the efficacy of homeopathic medicines have been published in the Lancet, the British Medical Journal, Pediatrics, Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, Cochrane Reports, Chest (the publication of the British Society of Rheumatology), Cancer (the journal of the American Cancer Society), Journal of Clinical Oncology (journal of the Society of Clinical Oncology),Human Toxicology, European Journal of Pediatrics,Archives in Facial Plastic Surgery, Archives of Otolaryngology -- Head and Neck Surgery, Journal of Clinical Psychiatry and many more (2). All of these studies were randomized, double-blind and placebo controlled. Further, because of bias against homeopathy, these studies have been scrutinized rigorously, perhaps even more rigorously than is usual.The weak response from the homeopathy deniers is that the above studies are "cherry-picked." Well, it seems that there are a lot of "cherries" (clinical studies that verify the efficacy of homeopathic medicines). Also, numerous of the above leading medical journals have published meta-analyzes of clinical trials on specific diseases and have shown that homeopathic medicines have significantly more benefits than does a placebo. And further, the deniers erroneously equate the "negative" studies as evidence that the whole system of homeopathy does not work when, in fact, these studies are usually of a preliminary nature that explored the use of one or a small handful of remedies for a specific condition.Ironically, the one review of research that the homeopathic deniers most commonly assert as strong evidence that there's no difference between homeopathic medicines and placebo (Shang et al, 2005) has been shown to be bad or certainly inadequate science (Walach, et al, 2005; Fisher, 2006; Rutten, 2009, Rutten and Stolper, 2008; Lüdtke and Rutten, 2008).*Myth #3*: "12C is like one drop in the entire Atlantic Ocean."Pure fantasy (and fuzzy math)! In fact, the 12C dose requires 12 test tubes, and 1 percent of the solution is drawn from each of the 12 test tubes. It is also very typical for the "deniers" of homeopathy to assert with a straight face that the making of a single homeopathic medicine requires more water than exists on the planet. It seems that the skeptics are so fundamentalist in their point of view that they consciously or unconsciously mis-assume that the dilutions used in homeopathy grow proportionately with each dilution; they assume that each dilution requires 10 or 100 times more water with each dilution -- which they don't, and even the most elementary articles and books on homeopathy affirm this fact. Sadly (and strangely), most of the skeptics of homeopathy seem to read each other's misinformation on homeopathy and have a propensity to spin the reality of what homeopathy is in ways that misconstrue it.*Myth #4*: "There is nothing in a homeopathic medicine. It is just water."Ignorance and direct disinformation. First, a large number of homeopathic medicines that are sold in health food stores and pharmacies are what are called "low potencies," that is, small or very small doses of medicines, most of which are in a similar dose to which certain powerful hormones and immune cells circulate in our body. Second, using samples of six different medicines made from minerals, scientists at the Department of Engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology have consistently confirmed that the starting substance is still present in the form of nanoparticles of the starting minerals even when the medicine has undergone hundreds of serial dilutions -- with vigorous shaking in between each dilution, as per the homeopathic method (Chikramane, Suresh, Bellare, 2010) (3). Further, leading chemistry and physics journals have published other research to confirm that there are differences between water and "homeopathic water" (Elia and Niccoli, 1999; Elia, Napoli, Niccoli, et al, 2008; Rey, 2003)*Myth #5*: "If we do not presently understand how homeopathic medicines work, then, they cannot work. It's witchcraft."Lame on face value. How many more times in history do scientists and others need before they realize that we do not understand a lot of nature's mysteries, but our lack of understanding does not mean that the mysteries are not real. Calling homeopathy "witchcraft" clearly is someone's fear of what they do not know or understand, and a common observation from history is that whenever one goes on a witchhunt, a witch is found (one way or another). The fact that there is a small but significant body of basic sciences research that has shown physical and biological effects from homeopathic medicines tends to be ignored (Endler, Thieves, Reich, et al 2010; Witt, Bluth, Albrecht, et al, 2007). To publish in peer-reviewed scientific journals is not a common practice from witches (or warlocks).Dr. Karol Sikora is a respected oncologist and dean of the University of Buckingham medical school in England. Sikora has expressed serious concern about the "Stalinist repression" that certain skeptics of homeopathic and alternative medicines engage (Sikora, 2009). Sikora has harshly criticized "armchair physicians" and others who seem to have little or no experience in using these treatments with real patients.One other critical piece of evidence to show and even prove the unscientific attitude of the homeopathy deniers is that they now wish to close off all discussion of the efficacy of homeopathic medicines (Baum and Ernst, 2009). These medical fundamentalists actually discourage keeping an open mind about homeopathy. One must question this unscientific attitude that select antagonists to homeopathy embody, and one must even wonder why they maintain such a position.The second part of this article will provide further specific evidence of the unscientific attitude and actions from those individuals and organizations who are leading the campaign against homeopathy. A leading antagonist to homeopathy from the U.S. and another from the UK will be discussed in order to shed light on this important debate in health care. Stay tuned to find out who they are and why they maintain their point of view.FOOTNOTES:(1) Although individualization of treatment is one of the hallmarks of the homeopathic method, there are exceptions to this common rule. For instance, there have been four large randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled studies that have shown that homeopathic Oscillococcinum is effective in treating people with influenza or influenza-like syndrome (Vickers and Smith, 2006).(2) References to these and other studies can be found in the following article: The Case FOR Homeopathic Medicine: Historical and Scientific Evidence -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-ullman/the-case-for-homeopathic_b_451187.html
    (3) Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), electron diffraction by Selected Area Electron Diffraction (SAED), and chemical analysis by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy.*REFERENCES:*Baum M, Ernst E. Should we maintain an open mind about homeopathy? American Journal of Medicine. 122,11: November 2009. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2009/03.038. http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(09)00533-6/fulltext
    Chikramane PS, Suresh AK, Bellare JR, and Govind S. Extreme homeopathic dilutions retain starting materials: A nanoparticulate perspective. Homeopathy. Volume 99, Issue 4, October 2010, 231-242. http://www.homeopathy.org/files/HomeopathyandNanoparticle.pdf
    Elia V, and Niccoli M. Thermodynamics of Extremely Diluted Aqueous Solutions, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 879, 1999:241-248. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10415834/
    Elia V, Napoli E, Niccoli M, Marchettini N, Tiezzi E(2008). New Physico-Chemical Properties of Extremely Dilute Solutions. A Conductivity Study at 25 °C in Relation to Ageing. Journal of Solution Chemistry, 37:85-96. http://www.springerlink.com/content/v27884306836g251/
    Endler PC, Thieves K, Reich C, Matthiessen P, Bonamin L, Scherr C, Baumgartner S. Repetitions of fundamental research models for homeopathically prepared dilutions beyond 10-23: a bibliometric study. Homeopathy, 2010; 99: 25-36. http://www.similima.com/homeopathyresearch/thesis108.pdf
    EU Commission report evaluating implementation of Homeopathy Directives 92/73 EEC and 92/74/EEC, 1997.Fisher P, 2006. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2006 March; 3(1): 145-147.Published online 2006 January 26. doi: 10.1093/ecam/nek007 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1375230/
    Lüdtke R, Rutten ALB. The conclusions on the effectiveness of homeopathy highly depend on the set of analysed trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. October 2008. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.06/015. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18834714
    Prasad R. Homoeopathy booming in India. Lancet, 370:November 17, 2007,1679-80. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18035598
    Rey L. Thermoluminescence of Ultra-High Dilutions of Lithium Chloride and Sodium Chloride. Physica A, 323(2003)67-74. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437103000475
    Rothstein WG. American Physicians in the 19th Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1985.Rutten L, 2009. http://www.dokterrutten.nl/collega/Liga09.pdf
    Rutten ALB, Stolper CF, The 2005 meta-analysis of homeopathy: The importance of post-publication data. Homeopathy. October 2008, doi:10.1016/j.homp.2008.09/008. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19371564
    Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L, Jüni P, Dörig S, Sterne JA, Pewsner D, Egger M. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. The Lancet. 366,9487, 27 August 2005:726-732. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16125589
    Sikora K. Complementary medicine does help patients. Times Online, February 3rd 2009. Online document at:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/court_and_social/article5644142.ece

    Starr P. The Social Transformation of American Medicine. New York: Basic, 1982.Vickers A, Smith C. Homoeopathic Oscillococcinum for preventing and treating influenza and influenza-like syndromes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD001957. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001957.pub3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14973976
    Walach H, Jonas W, Lewith G. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Lancet. 2005 Dec 17;366(9503):2081; author reply 2083-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16360778
    Witt CM, Bluth M, Albrecht H, Weisshuhn TE, Baumgartner S, Willich SN. The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies--a systematic review of the literature. Complement Ther Med. 2007 Jun;15(2):128-38. Epub 2007 Mar 28. From 75 publications, 67 experiments (1/3 of them replications) were evaluated. Nearly 3/4 of them found a high potency effect, and nearly 3/4 of all replications were positive. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&uid=17544864&cmd=showdetailview&indexed=google
  19. golden

    golden Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes:
    1,069
    Clear Light
    Thanks for sharing your Homeopathic Experiences. I am going to book into see a Homeopath shortly. One of the things I wanted to discuss in a serene thread was Choosing your homeopath..

    But as an M.E./ C.F.S. group, a lot of us have the experience of Not much working, until finally, we are more relieved that it didnt do more harm! Even a simple blinkin massage that all my friends would enjoy and gain benefit from - made me really ill.

    It is puzzling.
  20. golden

    golden Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes:
    1,069
    Clear Light
    DB,

    One of my questions I wanted to ask people was of the Constitutional Remedies and which ones people had tried..

    I have been told one person recovered from Gelsemium for example...

    But this is what brought me initially to this thread... the treating of lyme disease directly. I wouldnt want to just try this on my own ...

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page