Am interested in the healing properties of plants but usually get put off by the anecdotal evidence tosh that homeopathic types spout.
Good clear evidence of something working I like.
Good clear evidence of something working I like.
Homeopathy and alternative medicine discussion
- Thread starter demographic
- Start date
-
Come along to the amazing Summer Moot (21st July - 2nd August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
ditto. my attitude is; try it. if it works for you, well and good. if not, find something else. my knowledge about which plant does what is pretty cat, although my mom knows shed loads on the subject. usually if there is something wrong with me (apart from the usual) she will create something horrible that makes me better. i am not sure if my system heals up pronto for fear of getting more, or what. lol
I'm sure given its part of the Bushmoot this will be all above board - particularly since the word "medicine" has been used - with all that implies and the incredibly tight regulation on claims for remedies to have the status of "medicine"
Red
Homeopathy uses animal and minerals as well, and some respects the least anecdotal of the complementary treatments as all the treatments have been derived experimentally by matching treatment to symptoms, and this is all documented.
For a summary of some of the research into the effectiveness of homeopathy (from journals such as the Lancet) you could have a look at
http://www.trusthomeopathy.org/case/res_toc.html
While I continue to have some problems with the science of "how" homoeopathy works there is certainly more than just anecdotal evidence that it works. Indeed even the authors of the damming, review recently published in the BMJ admitted that patients being treated by homeopaths got better, they just couldn't see why. One suggested that it was the improved pastoral care that homoeopaths gave their patients, compared to the normal GP. Which is interesting as all the homoeopaths that I know, are also GPs.
And that continues to be the problem, the approach to homoeopathic treatment is complex and makes simple double blind testing difficult, and whatever is going on, doesn't neatly fit with how we think the world works.
Some of the critical scientific trials (done by non-homoeopaths) have mismatched the remedy to the symptom and not followed standard homoeopathic treatment protocols. I can understand why they have done the latter, as they have tried to keep as many of the variables in the trial identical, but it does some what invalidate the trial. Homoeopathic treatment generally relies on regular intervention from the homoeopath to change treatment and dose as the symptoms change through the course of the illness.
Anecdotally, homoeopathy seems to have something to offer, and it seems a shame that we can't get a bit more science behind it. I have my own long list of people that I know (including myself) who have had almost miraculous cures after attending a homoeopath out of desperation because years of conventional treatment had failed to help.
So it would be nice to have more proper trials carried out, and I don't fully understand why so few have been carried out.
A good statistician would love the opportunity to try and design suitable trials for something as complex as this. But I can see some ethical problems as the only design I can come up with would require a very large number of people to be wrongly treated to get a relatively small sample of potentially successful treatments.
Graham
Yes the "potency" increases at greater dilutions.
As even the weakest dilutions are diluted so much that there are no molecules of the original substance left any way, then the idea that further dilutions make it stronger, is even more difficult to rationalise.
Graham
In that case, anyone sensible is wasting money on actually buying the stuff.. Pure water would surely be an infinite dilution of the solution, so the strongest thing possible. Thus, we are all taking in an incredibly powerful dilution of every homeopathic substance with every glass of water.
Therefore, trying anything is a waste, as we are already all taking in an infinitely "potent" solution of every substance, so trying to add a less potent solution to our bodies will have no effect.
The fact is that this "medicine" gives false hope to everyone. The effect must surely be placebo. It disgusts me.
The problem is, that it works, and both the properly done scientific trials and anecdotal evidence support this. As I said in the first post even the recent scathing paper in the Lancet admitted people got better.
As for false hopes I haven't met anyone who hasn't considered the money well spent, but these have all been chronic illnesses where conventional treatment had been failing to help. However, wearing my statisticians hat, my sample size is far from convincing !!
The rather unconvincing explanation about the dilution is that the homeopathic remedy retains a "memory" of the original substance (like footprints in snow) even after it has been diluted. this memory then acts as a trigger to stimulate a specific acceleration of the bodies natural immune system.
The method of preparing the remedy is also critical to this working. Straight forward dilutions have been shown not to work. But, again its a bit difficult to rationalise the method used in preparation, which seems to involve banging the the the container on the bench between each dilution.
Graham
Frankly, I'm a huge sceptic (science gradutate) but I have to admit that yesterday a friend helped me ease off a migraine just by laying on of hands, and a few months ago another friend used Bowen's therapy to ease the horrendous whole body aches I was enduring with a rheumatoid arthritis flare up. Apart from touch nothing else was 'done' to me.
I do know that the pills from the doctors have left me with more problems than the original complaints. One reason I now live dairy and gluten free as well as vegetarian......now when either type of relief totally eradicates the occurance of migraine or R.A. then I'll be a total convert.
I'm kind of betting that it'll be conventional medicine, but until then the other types cause me less grief.
I freely admit that it's a very personal viewpoint, but it works for me.
Looking forward to Carla's talk
cheers,
Toddy
I do know that the pills from the doctors have left me with more problems than the original complaints. One reason I now live dairy and gluten free as well as vegetarian......now when either type of relief totally eradicates the occurance of migraine or R.A. then I'll be a total convert.
I'm kind of betting that it'll be conventional medicine, but until then the other types cause me less grief.
I freely admit that it's a very personal viewpoint, but it works for me.
Looking forward to Carla's talk
cheers,
Toddy
It is called money, no one is getting rich off the homeopathic remedies, so no money for the trials, etc. Drugs make people rich so they have the money for their trials and to buy the people that are running the trials if the results don't come out in their favor
Actually, there have been over 200 randomised controlled trials of homeopathy.
Some have shown benefit over placebo, and some have not.
The largest, most rigorous, best conducted trials show no benefit over placebo.
Having said that, if patients want it, I have prescribed homeopathic remedies (eg 30C ipecac for morning sickness). They have a good safety profile.
Some have shown benefit over placebo, and some have not.
The largest, most rigorous, best conducted trials show no benefit over placebo.
Having said that, if patients want it, I have prescribed homeopathic remedies (eg 30C ipecac for morning sickness). They have a good safety profile.
Placebo Effect, Regression to the Mean, Coincidence, Confirmation Bias, Sele ctive Memory etc... whole bunch of reasons why homeopathy "works", all of which are well understood by scientists.
Interestingly, not many people request homeopathic anaesthetics when they undergo surgery... wonder why that might be
It's fine for treating general aches and pains - they're the sort of thing that statistically tend to get better by themselves - and if a person believes homeopathy helped them that's great.
Likewise it's not suprising that a herbal infusion will make you feel better - it's basically a "nice cup of a tea and a sit down", and who doesn't feel better after that! Water to rehydrate, steam to open blocked sinuses, peace and quiet to calm the heartrate, and warmth to raise core body temp... the particular botanicals you chuck in the mug are a nice extra, but it's the hot liquid and time-out that's doing the work.
But when homeopaths start recommeding what is effectively bottled water as malaria prophalaxis or cancer treatment to gullible and often desperate patients they cross a line and deserve to be strung up IMO.
Herbal medicine is fascinating when it concentrates on the biochemical compounds within plants and their measurable effects on human physiology - willow bark / salicylic acid is a great example - but when "herbologists" recommend certain plants for a runny nose "because they grow near water, and your runny nose is kinda watery" (which I heard on a Herb Walk around Cambridge a couple of summers ago) it tips over into utter nonsense
But hey, each to their own... if it makes you feel better then at the end of the day that's the only thing that matters (just make sure you don't rely on snakeoil till it's too late for a real cure to work).
Interestingly, not many people request homeopathic anaesthetics when they undergo surgery... wonder why that might be
It's fine for treating general aches and pains - they're the sort of thing that statistically tend to get better by themselves - and if a person believes homeopathy helped them that's great.
Likewise it's not suprising that a herbal infusion will make you feel better - it's basically a "nice cup of a tea and a sit down", and who doesn't feel better after that! Water to rehydrate, steam to open blocked sinuses, peace and quiet to calm the heartrate, and warmth to raise core body temp... the particular botanicals you chuck in the mug are a nice extra, but it's the hot liquid and time-out that's doing the work.
But when homeopaths start recommeding what is effectively bottled water as malaria prophalaxis or cancer treatment to gullible and often desperate patients they cross a line and deserve to be strung up IMO.
Herbal medicine is fascinating when it concentrates on the biochemical compounds within plants and their measurable effects on human physiology - willow bark / salicylic acid is a great example - but when "herbologists" recommend certain plants for a runny nose "because they grow near water, and your runny nose is kinda watery" (which I heard on a Herb Walk around Cambridge a couple of summers ago) it tips over into utter nonsense
But hey, each to their own... if it makes you feel better then at the end of the day that's the only thing that matters (just make sure you don't rely on snakeoil till it's too late for a real cure to work).
Do you know how many of these have involved a trained homeopath?
The complaints I have read about the majority of trials is that the homeopathic remedies have been chosen or administered in such way as to almost guarantee they won't work.
Its not suggested this is deliberate, just a lack of understanding on how homeopathic remedies are administered.
Graham
Was this a careful choice of example or just an accident, given it was the treatment of malaria that brought about the accidental discovery of modern homeopathy?
Graham
Many of the trials have been of a single homeopathic remedy for a particular problem, for example arnica for post-operative pain or bleeding.
The most rigorous of the arnica trials clearly show no benefit. This hasn't stopped arnica being the most used homeopathic remedy however.
Homeopathy supporters often claim that this is not a fair test, as remedies need to be individualised for each patient, after a full homeopathic history and examination. There have been trials of this individualised homeopathy by very experienced homeopaths, such as this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...ez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
It showed no benefit for individualised homeopathy in childhood asthma.
Oh, and this trial
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16296913?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
suggests individualised homeopathy doesn't work for ADHD either!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16296913?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
suggests individualised homeopathy doesn't work for ADHD either!
Oh, and this trial
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16296913?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
suggests individualised homeopathy doesn't work for ADHD either!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16296913?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
suggests individualised homeopathy doesn't work for ADHD either!
I have to say guys that I find this thread irritating, it's turned from an offer of a workshop at the Moot into a debate on homoeopathy, often threads divert but this was taken off course and that's a bit disrespectful to the original poster.
I'll split it off but I shouldn't need to as a new thread should have been started for a debate about alternative medicines. :twak:
I'll split it off but I shouldn't need to as a new thread should have been started for a debate about alternative medicines. :twak:
homeopathy debate interesting, cant make a comment ( yikes)
i find many people think homeopathy and NATUROPATHY re the same( both end in opathy!)
Naturopathy is the basis of medicine, tried and tested traditional methods with many strands. Naturopathy is what the doctors used before they had pharmaceuticals.
pharmaceuticals of course have their place and are a god send in so many cases.
unfortunately they often get over used and mis used.
i too believe in using what works. isnt it about keeping healthy through lifestyle and diet so we dont have to use any medicines?
wozers !!!!looking forward to the bush moot
am logging in suggestions, theyre helpful.
thanks
carla
i find many people think homeopathy and NATUROPATHY re the same( both end in opathy!)
Naturopathy is the basis of medicine, tried and tested traditional methods with many strands. Naturopathy is what the doctors used before they had pharmaceuticals.
pharmaceuticals of course have their place and are a god send in so many cases.
unfortunately they often get over used and mis used.
i too believe in using what works. isnt it about keeping healthy through lifestyle and diet so we dont have to use any medicines?
wozers !!!!looking forward to the bush moot
am logging in suggestions, theyre helpful.
thanks
carla
Hey guys this is off track.
Naturopathy, Carla is a naturopath, is well tried natural healing modiality. In effect its 'Old school' treatments which were developed before the advent of antibiotics or sulphonamides. It used what was found locally, much of its methods were honed in the US civil war. Having a lot of people with holes in them shows you what works and does not work very quickly!
Naturopathy does no replace the need for antibiotics or surgery, naturopaths used to do routine surgery. In essence it is the practical medicine that doctors have left behind because it is labour intensive or slower acting. Having said that, when people do not respond to the super pill, thats when naturopaths often step in.
We still use products from the natural world and naturopathy is basically what your grandparents ...ok some of your great grandparents would have been familiar with.
So this is a time where you can observe and learn an ancient and effective skill.
So if you are coming to moot, bring Carla and I a bottle and lets have a long chat by the fire, maybe we will all learn something.
Sandsnakes 
Naturopathy, Carla is a naturopath, is well tried natural healing modiality. In effect its 'Old school' treatments which were developed before the advent of antibiotics or sulphonamides. It used what was found locally, much of its methods were honed in the US civil war. Having a lot of people with holes in them shows you what works and does not work very quickly!
Naturopathy does no replace the need for antibiotics or surgery, naturopaths used to do routine surgery. In essence it is the practical medicine that doctors have left behind because it is labour intensive or slower acting. Having said that, when people do not respond to the super pill, thats when naturopaths often step in.
We still use products from the natural world and naturopathy is basically what your grandparents ...ok some of your great grandparents would have been familiar with.
So this is a time where you can observe and learn an ancient and effective skill.
So if you are coming to moot, bring Carla and I a bottle and lets have a long chat by the fire, maybe we will all learn something.
Sandsnakes
Similar threads
