Why is homeopathy generally considere...

Why is homeopathy generally considered quackery?

There are 48 comments on the Sarah In Tampa story from Jun 3, 2013, titled Why is homeopathy generally considered quackery?. In it, Sarah In Tampa reports that:

Among intelligent, reasonable people, homeopathy is considered quackery for a variety of reasons.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Sarah In Tampa.

SoonToBe

Hackensack, NJ

#23 Jul 4, 2013
Mark wrote:
Sir, WTF are you on and where can I buy some? I have read some real nonsense in these forums before but your last post has taken nonsense to a new level.
It is little wonder that the average life expectancy in India is 17 years less than it is for the average Australian with people like you claiming to be a "doctor".
How about you spend less time philosophising and more time studying real medicine?
A marvelous example of ignorance and lack of education. They are not an excuse for anything.
Dr Inderjit Singh Guleria

Mumbai, India

#25 Jul 7, 2013
Sir, The disease in question is not a material but
it is a substance and the medicine's power should
also be dynamic and dynamic substance. Science is
erected upon a founded facts, principles and laws.
Science is related, systematized knowledge. There
is no machine invented which can tell what the patient is feeling. The burning sensation in the
body can only be narrated by the patient. These
are called subjective symptoms according to law of
mutual action. Present outdated theory requires to
be reviewed. Before calling this great science as
quackery one should in real sense is well knowing
the conspiracy against homoeopathy. Ridiculous
minds scientifically have weak minds and narrow
thoughts.
Mark

Farrer, Australia

#26 Jul 8, 2013
Dr Inderjit Singh Guleria - homeopaths have had over 200 years to prove homeopathy works, something they have failed to do. Not only does it demonstrably not work, it doesn't even work in theory.

If like cures like then a homeopathic preparation of beer should work as birth control on women - beer causes a fat gut and throwing up - the same symptoms as pregnancy.

Homeopathy is not scientific, it has no laws - only disproven hypothesis made up by Hahnemann.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTo...
Who Knows

Brecksville, OH

#27 Feb 17, 2014
Mark wrote:
Dr Inderjit Singh Guleria - homeopaths have had over 200 years to prove homeopathy works, something they have failed to do. Not only does it demonstrably not work, it doesn't even work in theory.

If like cures like then a homeopathic preparation of beer should work as birth control on women - beer causes a fat gut and throwing up - the same symptoms as pregnancy.

Homeopathy is not scientific, it has no laws - only disproven hypothesis made up by Hahnemann.

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTo ...
Do you realize they cured tuberculosis with aspirin a couple centuries ago? Talk about placebo. And you're trying to put a stop to a cure or at least to something that works? Way to go, big man humanitarian. I don't believe for a second that you are concerned that the people you so crudely criticize here get the best possible treatment for themselves. Do you really care if others are wearing their seatbelts? I don't believe you; you're nowhere near compassionate enough. Just my opinion. I'm sure there is a seatbelt thread/forum you could spout off on if you're really are concerned.

Anyway I am in a unique position to prove whether homeopathy is real or placebo. And if I do prove it then I will not just blindly ask important people to believe me; I will ask them to perform their tests in the correct manner because if there really is something to it then science teams worldwide should become more interested as it would surely shake things up a bit regarding what we think we know about the smallest amount that retains a characteristic of a substance.

I actually believe that homeopathy is placebo so I probably have no reason to fight for recognition of it; but like I said I am in a position to find out and 'find out' I will. And if I do find it is real then I will be writing letters asking for recognition and for tests to be done in this way so that we can promote science.
Who Knows

Brecksville, OH

#28 Feb 17, 2014
Do you realize they cured tuberculosis with aspirin a couple centuries ago? Talk about placebo. And you're trying to put a stop to a cure or at least to something that works? Way to go, big man humanitarian. I don't believe for a second that you are concerned that the people you so crudely criticize here get the best possible treatment for themselves. Do you really care if others are wearing their seatbelts? I don't believe you; you're nowhere near compassionate enough. Just my opinion. I'm sure there is a seatbelt thread/forum you could spout off on if you're really are concerned.

Anyway I am in a unique position to prove whether homeopathy is real or placebo. And if I do prove it then I will not just blindly ask important people to believe me; I will ask them to perform their tests in the correct manner because if there really is something to it then science teams worldwide should become more interested as it would surely shake things up a bit regarding what we think we know about the smallest amount that retains a characteristic of a substance.

I actually believe that homeopathy is placebo so I probably have no reason to fight for recognition of it; but like I said I am in a position to find out and 'find out' I will. And if I do find it is real then I will be writing letters asking for recognition and for tests to be done in this way so that we can promote science.
The way I am going to prove it is this. When something has an effect 3 out of three times one can say it is a coincidence but when it happens 30 out of 30 times it is way way way beyond coincidence. It only takes 12 dilutions to overcome Avogadro's number of molecules, to reach a point where allegedly, and according to science, not a single molecule of the original substance is left behind.

The test needs to be done with chronically ill persons that have been taking a single homeopathic remedy for a very long time claiming that it has an effect every time. So if a person has taken a remedy 30 times and it has had an effect every time then they qualify for such a study.

Get 50 of these people together. Give half of them placebo and the other half their particular remedy but make sure they all know that they could be getting either a placebo or an actual remedy. You can't run a good study by telling them they are all going to get a medicine because that introduces a subconscious bias right from the start. They have to not know what they are going to get; they can't even think they know.

I have never seen a study of this type. And it's sad because of all the money wasted on bogus tests we could have had plenty of these types of tests.

So anyway, since I do not have the time or the resources or the credibility to do such a study, I will do it on myself and if I find homeopathy is real then I will pursue trying to gain interest. If I find out it is placebo then I'll say so but I will not be a killbuzz like Mark and so many others; I will not try to take away a persons freewill choice to pursue a treatment especially if it works for them.

I am uniquely suited for the test because I am a chronically ill person myself, thanks to big pharma and my urologist who gave my Cipro just to "rule out" a bacterial infection that I never had in the first place as confirmed by lab analysis. Yes I am a victim of very serious adverse effects of a drug that is given everyday as a first line reflex when it should be given as a last line defense. My life is ruined because of mainstream medicine. Thank you big pharma. You wanna support that Mark? Really? I know there is a place for mainstream drugs but with greed nothing is sacred, but it's high time someone started giving a friggin sh*t.
Who Knows

Brecksville, OH

#29 Feb 17, 2014
The way I will perform the test on myself is this. The same confidence can be achieved only the trial has to be repeated until I have taken both the placebo and the remedy at least once under the same conditions. Neither I nor the administrator of the test will know which I am taking until I determine if I have reacted to it. The bottle is marked on the bottom so that it can be differentiated at a later time.

So, that said, I have two bottles, one containing my remedy and one containing spring water, both stuffed down into the fingertips of a ski-glove and out of sight. I will have a "technician" reach down into the glove and choose one while I am in a remote location where I cannot see or hear what is going on. That person will place a drop of my remedy in a glass of distilled water and stir, as I have always done in order to take my remedy, as someone else hides the bottle and comes to get me. I take a teaspoon of it like I have always done, all while blindfolded to make sure there is no subconscious connection with something unknown that could possibly kick in the subconscious. Then I wait until I either feel an effect or until a week goes by that I haven't felt an effect, since I've always felt an effect within the week, most usually after a day or two.

Here is the big interpretation, what it all boils down to. We know the remedy has had an effect on me 30 out of 30 times in the past. So what we are looking for in order to conclude that homeopathy is real, is this. We need the placebo to produce no effect and we also need the remedy to produce an effect, and one similar to what it has produced in the past. What we are looking for to conclude homeopathy is a placebo is this. We need the placebo to have an effect similar to the remedy's usual affect, and in this case it really doesn't matter what the remedy produces. In the case of mixed results we conclude homeopathy is a placebo. So, there is only one combination that will be in favor of homeopathy being real; the rest of the results point to placebo. Odds are that it is placebo but we will find out here in the next few months. I'll keep it posted.
Who Knows

Brecksville, OH

#30 Feb 17, 2014
Mark says that homeopathy has failed to be proven in the 200 years since its inception.

Well I would say that since it is still in practice that it has NOT been proven a failure. I don't see people lining up for bloodletting. THAT is proven to be a failure.

There are too many ailments that have no recourse in the mainstream and if they do are not worth the side effects. So in those cases we should outlaw alternatives? Really?

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#31 Feb 17, 2014
There is no question homeopathy works. The question is whether it is placebo. And so what if it is?

What bothers me is that trials are all geared toward whether it works, and not whether it is placebo. The participants are always told they are getting the real thing when they need to know there is an equal chance of getting either placebo or medicine. That's the only way to take the subconscious bias out of the equation. Don't tell me I'm the first to think of this.

It's about time someone gets a clue and does it right.
My self-trial is pretty bullet proof. Again, my premise is that my remedy has had an effect every time for over 30 times. So we already know it works on me. We just have to see if my body can tell when I take the placebo and has no reaction to it.

If it's worked 30 times in a row without ever a fail, then chances are that, if homeopathy truly is a placebo, then I should react the SAME way to both the remedy and the placebo. But I need to correspondingly react in the opposite way for each one.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#32 Feb 17, 2014
Ooops, it might be confusing if you don't realize I am the same person as "Who Knows".

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#34 Feb 19, 2014
Yes why indeed is it considered quackery?

Here's an article written by a skeptic.

http://edzardernst.com/2014/01/homeopathy-doe...

It says 63% of cattle were cured of a pathogen homeopathically compared to 95% with allopathic anitmicrobials.

To me that says homeopathy WORKS. Not as oftem but it does work. And maybe if the trials were actually individualized, as homeopathy needs to be in order to work properly, then the percentage would be much higher. Or even if they tried a few different remedies.

Then you have the skeptopaths claiming that the 63% figure is bullcrap and only indicates what would have happened anyway, had there been no treatment at all; IOW spontaneous remission.

Yea right. 63% spontaneous remission. THAT is bullcrap. I'll buy 5% spontaneous remission but that's about all that is normally found in any study.
Mark

Giralang, Australia

#35 Feb 21, 2014
Pokay wrote:
Yes why indeed is it considered quackery?
Here's an article written by a skeptic.
http://edzardernst.com/2014/01/homeopathy-doe...
It says 63% of cattle were cured of a pathogen homeopathically compared to 95% with allopathic anitmicrobials.
To me that says homeopathy WORKS. Not as oftem but it does work. And maybe if the trials were actually individualized, as homeopathy needs to be in order to work properly, then the percentage would be much higher. Or even if they tried a few different remedies.
Then you have the skeptopaths claiming that the 63% figure is bullcrap and only indicates what would have happened anyway, had there been no treatment at all; IOW spontaneous remission.
Yea right. 63% spontaneous remission. THAT is bullcrap. I'll buy 5% spontaneous remission but that's about all that is normally found in any study.
As Edzard Ernst points out in the comments, there is no placebo group to compare the effect of no medication to what the animals were treated with, It is very possible that 63% of the animals would get well without any treatment.

BTW you do know that Ernst was trained in a German homeopathic hospital and he consistently reviews the research into homeopathy - his conclusion is it doesn't work.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#36 Feb 21, 2014
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>
As Edzard Ernst points out in the comments, there is no placebo group to compare the effect of no medication to what the animals were treated with, It is very possible that 63% of the animals would get well without any treatment.
BTW you do know that Ernst was trained in a German homeopathic hospital and he consistently reviews the research into homeopathy - his conclusion is it doesn't work.
Are you kidding? Very possible? Yea it's very possible that spontaneous remission happened 63% of the time when it is never expected to be above 5%. So I guess that would mean that 63% of the antimicrobial treated group experienced spontaneously remission as well? Who knows, perhaps all of them did, huh?
I don't care who Edzard Ernst is. Anyone, practically, can be bought.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#37 Feb 21, 2014
Look, drop the bias and let's talk about this. I'm not convinced yet that it is real either. But I've never seen a good study put forth. This is such a biased area, it may as well be politics, evolution vs religion, or anthropogenic global warming vs natural causes.

Seems like the 'hpathy is placebo' group will never get it right because they aren't genuinely interested in getting it right. They, like you, only wish to make it placebo even if it's not. The 'hpathy is real' group hasn't either put forth a study that is bulletproof. Perhaps they already know it's placebo and are trying to conceal that?

Well if you would have read my comments before the one you responded to, you would know I am on the verge of finding out whether it is real. You can only handle one post at a time or what? Hopefully you will check them out; I apologize if you are in the process, but I bet you simply are blown away and have nothing to say about it because anything you say could go against your agenda here.

Anyway, later today will be my first double blind trial. As I wrote in previous posts, I will not know whether I am getting placebo or whether I'm getting my remedy that I have been taking for three years without it ever failing to have a dramatic effect on me. So if my body can tell the difference between placebo (no effect) or my remedy (an effect, that I am so familiar with already), then that would be a very confident result. The more times my body can recognize the correct answer the higher the confidence level goes.

Even you would have to be convinced after two or three consecutive "correct answers". Not sure if you are following me but let's illustrate with an arbitrary example. I will "dose" later today. Whatever comes first, either I feel an effect or a week goes by without an effect, I will then ask for the bottle that was used. I am the only one that knows which bottle is which (read prior posts to get experimental procedure) and we will see whether my body was right. If it was consistent with 'hpathy being real' then I will repeat the experiment a few times to make certain of the result, at least until I choose the placebo and the remedy both, at least once.

Of course if I feel the usual effect then the next "dose" will have to wait until the effect wears off, which in my case is usually 6 weeks. So this could conceivably take a few months to finalize but by next week we should at least have some direction. Even the first trial will be very conclusive, just not bulletproof until I repeat it a couple more times.

This kind of study *is* bulletproof and if it works for hpathy, I will be bangin everyone's door down until someone wakes up and starts doing trials the right way.

If it works against hpathy then let the people get their placebo you freekin tyrant.

I'm putting my own "placebo effect", that I have been relying on for so long, on the line. I'm doing it for science and because I have to know myself.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#38 Feb 22, 2014
I "dosed" yesterday around 5 PM. I told a third party how to differentiate the two bottles so that there would be no reason to believe I cheated when it cam time to unveil the bottle that was used. Even though I am truly doing this to satisfy my curiosity; I don't expect anyone to trust me. I still haven' t concluded the first trial. Within an hour of dosing I had a "gut feeling" that I took the remedy. But of course there was nothing much to go on. I woke up this morning still not feeling any real effects. Around 3 PM today I started feeling what felt like unmistakable effects. After a few hours I was indeed feeling the typical effects of the remedy.

Tomorrow or Monday night at the latest, we will unveil what it was that I took. I will be back to post the results. This could be huge, or placebo.

Anyone have Stephen Hawking's phone number just in case this works?

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#40 Feb 23, 2014
What do you think of that Marky?

It's not over yet but it isn't looking good for you skeptopaths.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#41 Feb 23, 2014
If this ends up working out in favor of homeopathy then I would like to challenge the almighty Randi to a million dollar test. Do the test my way, with a bunch of chronically ill people with a known track record of reacting strongly to a certain remedy time after time, double blind, the "patients" need to be told that there is an EQUAL CHANCE they will get EITHER a placebo or an actual medicine.

If it's "just water" then what is there for the big man Randi to be afraid of?

I can swallow a bottle of homeopathic sleeping pills too, and not feel anything. But if I take my remedy in too concentrated a dose, it might just kill me, at least that's the way I feel sometimes.

Whether my experiment works out or not, the only bad thing I would say about homeopathy is that it is not quite as safe as they say; that it is possible to overdose just like on any other medicine. Care must be taken with the chronically ill that they start out by just sniffing the remedy at arm's length; that's how I started.

I know a woman that has the same conditions i have, from the same source (Cipro), and she has had such an adverse reaction to homeopathy that she will likely never take it again; it scared the life out of her. All because some nimrod underqualified homeopath tried treating her like an otherwise healthy person. She took a remedy daily when she should have been instructed to wait until the effects clearly wore off.

Mine lasts me up to 6 weeks. If I took it everyday my face would fall off.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#42 Feb 24, 2014
Over the years I've found I reacted more strongly to 'fewer molecules'. LM2 is the concentration I am currently working with right now. The actual remedy itself very likely has some of the original mother-substance in it. But not much. A liberal estimate is like 5000 molecules per drop. May sound like a lot of them to a non-science person, but 5000 is next to nothing. You can multiply that by 10^15 to equal the molecules in a grain of salt. IOW we need to multiply 5000 by a billion, and then multiply that number by a million, just to equal a "grain".

But I don't take the remedy directly, I dilute it even more, as is typical for LM potencies which are designed for sensitive patients.

My procedure is to take a drop of the LM2 and place it into a half liter of water. 500 ml is about 10,000 drops, so the concentration goes down to the equivalent of 0.5 molecules per drop (and of course when we have a fraction we simply flip it to make more sense of it, in this case it would be the same as saying 2 drops per molecule). Then I succuss that two or three times and transfer a teaspoon of it to another 500ml (10,000 drops) of water. Now the concentration is like 0.005 molecules per drop, or like saying we might find a molecule of the mother substance in every 200 drops (10 ml). I take 1/2 tsp (or 50 drops) of that orally,(50 x 0.005 = 0.25

so, in the end, the chances of finding one molecule of
mother-substance in a dose of my remedy is one in four. Kinda like rolling a four sided "die".

Gee, if I end up being able to recognize placebo when I take it, then no one can argue that it is very likely that homeopathy is a real phenomenon.

I mean, if I reacted to the remedy 30 times without fail and if I am then able to recognize a "fail" when taking the placebo, well what can anyone say? That simply cannot be coincidence. It would then be time to trump up some serious trials.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#43 Feb 24, 2014
Gravity. We see the effect but can't explain the mechanism.
Homeopathy. We see the effect. pretty I we will be able to determine the mechanism once and for all.

I'm sure plenty of people have done this for themselves; I can't be the only one that has thought of it. Or maybe not. Either way, if I recognize placebo in my double blind study then I AM going to make a big deal about it.

If not, I will apologize for getting so riled up about it. I can't help being excited. "I'm a scientist dammit".

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#44 Feb 24, 2014
Pretty SOON I meant to say, not just "pretty".
Dr IJS Guleria

Delhi, India

#45 Feb 25, 2014
Sir, Why there are no comments in favour of Homoeopathy because in
general it has not been understood due to weak perception and also
ithe crude theory in their minds does not allow to understand this great
subject. I have already expressed that in the world whatever happens is
a result and there is a cause in a dynamic way. Any event in nature
means there is sometype of disobeyance about nature. Homoeopathy
does not deal with the results but only subjective symptoms expressed
by the healthy human beings after taking the potentised homoeopathic
medicines. Homoeopathy does not deal with the name of disease but
the circumstances under which the present illness has appeared.. We
take out the subjective symptoms only according to the behaviour of the
individual. Crude drugs primary action have the opposite reaction, if they
prescribe first it will palliate and the secondary action will be opposite.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Health Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Kanawha bar owners to intensify smoking fight (Sep '08) 5 hr Deadzone 9
watching wife get pregnant by another man (Jan '17) Mon Jefe 28
News Dentures linked to higher risk of weak joints a... Mon CAPCAPCAB 1
News Meet the man who's walking 2,500 miles to fight... Mon kate Greenwood 1
News New smoking study supports a stronger ban Mon cant get air 7
News Vaccination and autism Dec 10 UNAVOIDABLY UNSAFE 1
News Autism, mercury, aluminum and vaccine-induced e... Dec 10 UNAVOIDABLY UNSAFE 1
More from around the web