Things we should all be aware of;
[i]In 2010, the UK Government Science and Technology Committee analysed the research into homeopathy and concluded that “homeopathic products perform no better than placebos.” This conclusion was backed up this week in a review by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. With many homeopaths claiming their pills can treat serious illnesses, homeopathy is a dangerous placebo.
When Penelope Dingle chose to take the advice of her homeopath husband and treat her rectal cancer with homeopathic remedies, the results were tragic – her death was, according to the coroner, the result of being “influenced by misinformation and bad science”. There are real dangers in using homeopathy in place of real medicine.
Homeopathy is big business. The homeopathic industry is highly-profitable for companies like Boiron, Weleda and Nelson’s. The UK homeopathic market is estimated at £213m per year – comparable to the US ($300m), France and Germany (£400m each). All this for treatments which have not been proven to be any more effective than placebo.
In 2010, the NHS spent around £4 million on homeopathy – this money could instead be spent providing effective treatments, vital surgery and additional nursing staff. With NHS budgets under increasing pressure, wasting money by giving sugar pills to the sick is unjustifiable. According to the 2010 UK Government Science and Technology Committee: “The Government should stop allowing the funding of homeopathy on the NHS.”
In 2012, Boiron settled a class action law suit over their popular ‘Oscillococcinum’ homeopathic remedy for colds and flu. Boiron claim the remedy is made from the heart and liver of a single duck - given that the ‘ultra-dilute’ remedy contains nothing at all of the original duck and generates over $20 million of revenue, it has to be the ultimate ‘quack’ remedy.
Even now, groups such as Homeopaths Without Borders are currently offering ineffective homeopathic treatments in the developing world. Other homeopathy charities are known to dispense sugar pills to treat AIDS and the Ebola virus. Some of these groups are even promoted on the website of the World Homeopathy Awareness Organisation.
In 2011, 1,700 people in thirty countries around the world took part in an international protest, each taking an ‘overdose’ of dozens of homeopathic pills to demonstrate that these worthless pills have no effect, and should not be sold as medicine.
If only homeopathy is used, even relatively commonplace ailments can lead to severe consequences. Gloria Thomas was nine months old when her parents chose to treat her eczema exclusively with homeopathy. When she was finally admitted to hospital, she had developed sepsis, and died shortly after admission. Her parents’ confidence and faith in homeopathy ultimately led to this tragedy, and they were subsequently jailed for manslaughter.
In 2006, a Newsnight investigation revealed that homeopaths told undercover reporters that homeopathic preparations could be used to prevent malaria – this advice was roundly condemned as dangerous and potentially life-threatening. Nevertheless, homeopaths still claim to treat malaria - the list of people harmed by choosing homeopathy instead of seeking out real medicine is continually growing.
The Advertising Standards Authority has received over 150 complaints of false advertising and misleading claims made by homeopaths – homeopathic bodies seem unwilling or unable to stop their members making unsubstantiated claims.
Many homeopaths regularly discourage conventional vaccination, instead promoting ‘nosodes’. These ineffective homeopathic ‘vaccines’ put children at risk of diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella and whooping cough.
Patients have been warned against using homeopathy by the House of Commons, the British Medical Association, the NHS and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Northern Ireland. Mark Walport, Chief Scientific Advisor to the government, surmised homeopathic treatments were “nonsense” with “absolutely no medical benefit” – echoing the sentiments of the UK’s Chief Medical Officer. It’s clear that leading medical experts agree: homeopathy simply does not work, and should not be used.[/i]
from [url= http://www.homeopathyawarenessweek.org/ ]http://www.homeopathyawarenessweek.org/[/url]
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/homeopathy-product-recalled-over-fears-it-may-contain-actual-medicine-9217206.html ]Homeopathy product recalled over fears it may contain actual medicine [/url]
Please don't make fun of Homeopathy folks. I am the South Manchester Emergency Homeopathy responder.
Whenever someone calls, I'm within 90seconds response time. Our service is crucial.
Homeopathy Practioners rule.
Surely it should be "Homeopathy Awareness Nanosecond" so it's nicely diluted through the year. Or should that be century/millennium/lifetime of the universe?
[i] I am the South Manchester Emergency call out Homeopathy Doctor. [/i]
Surely you'd be more effective if you were given the whole of England and Wales as your area to cover?
Include Reflexology, Acupuncture & Reiki in the same list
Homeopaths Without Borders - that's just brilliant.
What's next parachuting in Astrologers into warzones?
Last week I had to push through a crowd to attend to a woman who had fainted. I applied a compress of Jasmine and Rosehip then performed Reiki.
She soon came round and had a cup of Fennel tea.
[i]I applied a compress of Jasmine and Rosehip [/i]
Quack!
A homeopath would have applied a compress [i]without[/i] Jasmine and Rosehip.
Homeopaths Without Borders - that's just brilliant.
They went to Haiti after the earthquake. Homeopathic remedies now work for crushed people it appears
A homeopath would have stood about 14mtrs away and waived thier hands in the air "like they just don't care" resembling a Windmill with a faint breeze in it's sails flapping randomly at the "patient"
FIFY
Quack!A homeopath would have applied a compress without Jasmine and Rosehip.
How dare you? I trained under the very best at Lewisham Community social centre.
Include Reflexology, Acupuncture & Reiki in the same list
Acupuncture does have [i]some[/i] backing from medical review.
"CONCLUSION:Several Cochrane reviews of acupuncture for a wide range of pain conditions have recently been published. All of these reviews were of high quality. Their results suggest that acupuncture is effective for some but not all types of pain."
.
^ I've diluted my response to this thread to increase its effectiveness.
teef - Member
Include Reflexology, Acupuncture & Reiki in the same list
What? Why? An article like wwaswas's to back this up please, or you'll come across as an idiot. I don't know about reflexology and the other one, but acupuncture is not a placebo.
Interesting post wwaswas, cheers.
Dont you be bringing actual science into this debate ....burn the cheating heretic
Surly tap water is homoeopathic?
[i]Surly tap water[/i]
water going through those difficult teenage years?
😆
but acupuncture is not a placebo.
Well all the evidence that I've read suggests that that is exactly what it is. I haven't read that full cochrane report, just the abstract so I've no idea what the actual studies measured. Also all those reports are for pain relief for which can't be quantified independatly. Then there is also the "small" matter of explaining the actual mechanism!
On that basis I'm happy to put acupuncture in with the rest of the pseudo scientific nonsense.
What? Why? An article like wwaswas's to back this up please, or you'll come across as an idiot. I don't know about reflexology and the other one, but acupuncture is not a placebo.
Acupuncture:
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/acu.html
Happy now?
Here we go again...homeopathy bashing.
The reality is that it does work for a lot of people.
I know many people that have benefited from it where conventional medicine offered nothing.
Mark Walport, Chief Scientific Advisor to the government, surmised homeopathic treatments were “nonsense” with “absolutely no medical benefit” –
What an interesting cherry picking exercise went on there! Because the actual quote from Mark Walport is:
"there is absolutely no medical benefit of homoeopathy [u]other than a possible placebo effect.[/u]"
Which would be a scientifically correct answer!
Now viewers, we you think we should accept the proven medical effectiveness of placebo and its place in the 'arsenal' of medical treatments? Or do you think that we should overlook it in the interest of 'sending the right message'? or is dismissing it just another bandwagon jumped upon by people who want to laugh at the stupid people despite not actually understanding the science themselves??
Well all the evidence that I've read suggests that that is exactly what it is.
There have been a few studies which have suggested that there is an effect greater than placebo but almost universally they've dismissed the difference as clinically negligible.
Don't mock this stuff, it's a matter of life and Death. Here's Hora at work:
[i]I know many people that have benefited from it where conventional medicine offered nothing[/i]
What they've benefited from is someone showing an interest in them and spending time talking to them about their problems.
Any actual substance they ingested as a result of talking to a homeopath had no effect on their recovery.
Talking to people and showing an interest is a good thing, but it's not medicine.
Now viewers, we you think we should accept the proven medical effectiveness of placebo and its place in the 'arsenal' of medical treatments? Or do you think that we should overlook it in the interest of 'sending the right message'?
No. I want my medicine to actually do something!
No. I want my medicine to actually do something!
Congratulations, you've proved that you don't understand the Placebo effect 😆
Talking to people and showing an interest is a good thing, but it's not medicine.
You don't think talking to people and showing an interest is a vital and integral part of medical treatment?
I heard on the radio last month an interview with some Chinese doctors (Proper Medical Doctors) and they were asked why there was still state run Acupuncture clinics in China - they explained that many people had imaginary ailments that they couldn't treat so they sent them to the Acupuncture clinics for treatment.
[i]You don't think talking to people and showing an interest is a vital and integral part of medical treatment? [/i]
I do but he'd said;
[i]where conventional medicine offered nothing[/i]
which I assumed meant what it said?
[edit] clearly 'proper medicine' includes all the 'soft' stuff that goes on but in terms of homepoathy people seem to assume that the benefits they get from the soft stuff is actually being given by the sugar pills.
You don't think talking to people and showing an interest is a vital and integral part of medical treatment?I do but he'd said;
where conventional medicine offered nothing
which I assumed meant what it said?
Perhaps what the patient needed was someone to talk to and show an interest in them?
Why is doing that beyond the realms of 'conventional medicine' if it results in a positive health outcome for the patient?
Congratulations, you've proved that you don't understand the Placebo effect
No, I understand it perfectly well. It's a way of making people feel better and is only "effective" in self reporting, self limiting conditions. Tell me the last time a placebo treatment was shown to be effective in treating an actual disease?
I'm just going to leave this here:
Tell me the last time a placebo treatment was shown to be effective in treating an actual disease?
Define 'actual disease'
Viral infection, Bacterial infection, Cancer.
There's three to be going on with. Basically anything that where an effect can be measured independantly of the patient.
...you think we should accept the proven medical effectiveness of placebo and its place in the 'arsenal' of medical treatments?
One obvious problem is how do doctors decide which placebo to prescribe without giving the game away?
[i]"Yes Mr Fan, a very interesting condition. To be honest with you I don't think conventional medicine can help here.
Tell me, do you think homeopathy might help? No? Hmm... how about crystals? No? Aromatherapy? Prayer? Magnets? Reflexology? Ionic cleansing? Happy thoughts? Fairies?
No? None of those?
Oh I know... These are brand new on the market and have had amazing success. I'm prescribing one full tube every day for a week..."[/i]
[img] 
[/img]
Looks like TamiFlu has turned out to be a case of the government spending £500 million on something no more effective than paracetamol.
I know it's not actual homeopathy but it does seem to illustrate that transparency on efficacy is critical when assessing any treatment.
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/apr/10/tamiflu-saga-drug-trials-big-pharma ]http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/apr/10/tamiflu-saga-drug-trials-big-pharma[/url]
[i]
That is a scandal because the UK government spent £0.5bn stockpiling this drug in the hope that it would help prevent serious side-effects from flu infection. But the bigger scandal is that Roche broke no law by withholding vital information on how well its drug works. In fact, the methods and results of clinical trials on the drugs we use today are still routinely and legally being withheld from doctors, researchers and patients. It is simple bad luck for Roche that Tamiflu became, arbitrarily, the poster child for the missing-data story.
And it is a great poster child. The battle over Tamiflu perfectly illustrates the need for full transparency around clinical trials, the importance of access to obscure documentation, and the failure of the regulatory system. Crucially, it is also an illustration of how science, at its best, is built on transparency and openness to criticism, because the saga of the Cochrane Tamiflu review began with a simple online comment.[/i]
Here we go again...homeopathy bashing.
The reality is that it does work for a lot of people.
Not sure if serious, or just trolling...
Basically anything that where an effect can be measured independantly of the patient.
But thats a straw man argument - the NHS spends billions of pounds in time and resources treating, for example, back pain.
are you saying that back pain is not an 'actual disease' that conventional medicine has an important daily role in treating?
Let alone the amount of time and money the NHS spends treating anxiety, depression, mood disorders etc.
If the only 'actual diseases' the NHS had to treat on a day to day basis were ones which could be measured independently of the patient, then wouldn't life be awesome!
Is Homeopathy still available on the NHS...I know a few years back there were a few NHS "homeopathic hospitals".
^ nope, only on mitchell & webb
But thats a straw man argument
No it's not, it's some examples of a disease. I take it that you don't then have any examples of where a placebo has effetively treated anything other than self limiting, self reporting conditions?
[i]^ nope, only on mitchell & webb [/i]
I'm not so sure;
[i]The NHS Centre for Integrative Care at Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital, on the Gartnavel Hospitals site, offers people with long term conditions a wide range of opportunities to enhance their health and quality of life. Most patients referred to the Centre are experiencing chronic pain, chronic low energy, and/or chronic low mood or anxiety. However, any patient with a long term condition may benefit from the care provided here. [/i]
[url= http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/CONTENT/default.asp?loc_id=2533&page=s762 ]http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/CONTENT/default.asp?loc_id=2533&page=s762[/url]
ninfan -
But thats a straw man argument - the NHS spends billions of pounds in time and resources treating, for example, back pain.
Is that...Use of the straw man argument... As a straw man itself...?