Homeopathy and alternative medicine discussion

[Wallenstein]

[Apologies to Carla... I was actually planning to request my posts be split off into a separate discussion as it's not meant to be a dig at her work!]

Sensible practioners like Carla are to be welcomed, and it'd be great to have a report on her seminar following the Moot.

__________________________________

In response to Graham:

“Malaria is a serious and life-threatening disease and there is no published evidence to support the use of homeopathy in the prevention of malaria,” comments Dr Peter Fisher, a member of the Faculty of Homeopathy and Clinical Director of the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital. “The Faculty of Homeopathy recommends following the HPA guidelines.”

And yet a 2006 survey of 10 alternative health clinics found that 100% recommended homeopathic malaria treatments, directly putting lives at risk.

 

[gregorach]

[...]They have a good safety profile.

(Well, as long as you're not using them for anything actually life-threatening...)

Did you hear the one about the homoeopath who forgot to take his medicine and died of a fatal overdose? <rimshot>

 

[sandsnakes]

And thats a comprehensive survey...not! I would not reccomend homoepathics for malaria either, but 10 clinics. Its like asking 10 bushcrafters whats their fav knife and using it as a national statistic.

And yet a 2006 survey of 10 alternative health clinics found that 100% recommended homeopathic malaria treatments, directly putting lives at risk.


Sandsnakes

see you at the moot

 

[Wallenstein]

And thats a comprehensive survey...not! I would not reccomend homoepathics for malaria either, but 10 clinics. Its like asking 10 bushcrafters whats their fav knife and using it as a national statistic.

Of course not, anecdote != data (as they say!).

But these were some high-profile clinics - including Helios in Covent Garden, Nelsons off Oxford St, and Neal's Yard Remedies - which pride themselves on regulation and balance.

And Melanie Oxley - spokesperson for the Society of Homeopaths - went on national TV to support the use of homeopathic remedies for malaria prevention.

Certainly indicative of a wider malaise, I would say.

It's also significant that British Homeopathic Association and Faculty of Homeopathy felt the need to publically clarify the position - they wouldn't need to do so if this were really an isolated problem.

Like I said, if taking a homeopathic remedy makes you feel your backache has gone, or helps you sleep better, or stops hay fever then that's groovy... anyone can spend their money how they wish, especially if you've had no luck with standard treatments.

But when homeopaths sell these remedies as cures for malaria or HIV/AIDS or cancer it becomes a real problem - people die through that kind of deception, and it's simply not enough to say "each to their own". If doctors acted like that they'd be locked up and homeopaths should be held to a similar standard IMO.

 

[myotis]

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:

Thanks for this, very interesting, I admit that I thought that arnica was one the remedies well accepted outside homeopathy and that it was the basis for the sprays used in football matches to control injury pain.

I am obviously familiar with the argument about individual treatment problems so the paper you linked to is a useful read. Well at least the abstract is, as I can't access the full paper.

None the less, all good stuff.

Graham

 

[myotis]

[
In response to Graham:

“Malaria is a serious and life-threatening disease and there is no published evidence to support the use of homeopathy in the prevention of malaria,” comments Dr Peter Fisher, a member of the Faculty of Homeopathy and Clinical Director of the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital. “The Faculty of Homeopathy recommends following the HPA guidelines.”

And yet a 2006 survey of 10 alternative health clinics found that 100% recommended homeopathic malaria treatments, directly putting lives at risk.

But were these being recommended by homeopaths, from your quote, the homeopathic advice is to follow HPA guidelines because the homeopathic malaria treatment doesn't work, but the survey seems to be of "alternative" health clinics, and not specifically by qualified homeopaths.

Graham

 

[myotis]

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:

Carla and Tony,

I guess this was my fault, in responding to the comment on homeopathy, I suppose I should have anticipated where it might go and held back.

So I am glad you have split it off , and I apologise to Carla and anyone else who find a thread on homeopathy rather than naturopathy.

Graham

 

[JohnC]

Many of the patients I meet are interested in alt medicine. The issues for my work is that I am involved in early trials of anti cancer meds and people are asked to not take any other anti cancer treatments during a trial. We check out the drugs or alt meds they are on, and in doing so I have found in general people are taking things with very little understanding of what they are taking, best is a discussion with a qualified comp therapist, who is aware the person is on chemo or a trial, worst is someone who buys off the internet or is given the mixture by a friend with some quite staggering claims (and prices) being made.
I've seen very good symptom control or reduction with some comp or alt meds, and I'm aware of the effect of any substance that applies to anything ie drug or placebo, that is:
the actual effect of the drug, the patients expectation of the drug, and the natural course of the symptom or disease.
As with everthing in this area, you need to have controlled trials, and they can be a real fiddle to organise so you get a decent question and reliable answer..

 

[Wallenstein]

But were these being recommended by homeopaths, from your quote, the homeopathic advice is to follow HPA guidelines because the homeopathic malaria treatment doesn't work, but the survey seems to be of "alternative" health clinics, and not specifically by qualified homeopaths.

Graham

For the view of "qualified" practitioners, we could perhaps see what the Society of Homeopaths - "the UK's largest body of professional homeopaths" - has to say?

"...there is substantial anecdotal evidence from around the world to suggest that homeopathy may offer a gentle, yet effective, [...] alternative approach [for treatment of malaria]".

Fairly clear - they support using water as malaria prophalaxis, despite acknowledging there is no evidence to support its efficacy.

 

[Wallenstein]

I've seen very good symptom control or reduction with some comp or alt meds, and I'm aware of the effect of any substance that applies to anything ie drug or placebo, that is:
the actual effect of the drug, the patients expectation of the drug, and the natural course of the symptom or disease.

The NHS etc has a lot to learn from Alt Med in terms of the way patients are treated.

SWMBO is a medical student at the moment, and my brother is registrar in a London teaching hospital, and they both report a move away from "doctor knows best" to a more patient-centric treatment regime.

"A medical consultation is a meeting between two experts" is how SWMBO had it explained. Not suprisingly a lot of doctors are opposed to this approach as it takes away some of their authority.

It's not a suprise that a 1hr consultation with an Alt Med practicioner in nice surroundings and no sense of being rushed will put a patient in a much more positive frame-of-mind regarding their treatment. Compare that to a rushed 6 min appointment at a GPs surgery in often less-than-pristine NHS premises.

It's back to the placebo effect in a way, but that's not a bad thing - humans are complex beings, and a proper understanding of the psycho-social impact of different medical approaches, including the impact of ritual on our behaviour (something that traditional healers have long understood), should be as much a part of medicine as the biochemical compounds used.

 

[JohnC]

"A medical consultation is a meeting between two experts"
.

Thats a good point, however, I have been in the position where a person will insist "they know best" or "I am the expert about my body" both of which were only partly true.. They could be seen as bringing to the consultation a unique insight into their condition, but it didnt *automatically* make them an expert (though I know some people who have found out a vast amount about their particular illness). Regretably some people dont "know best" and its heartbreaking seeing someone insist on going down a route that will cause them further pain or illness, I'm completely behind personal choice and would never force a decision, but if I'm involved in the care, I want to see informed choice and consent. This is why this sort of thread is good, as the time to learn about issue like this is before you need to make decisions..

I'd agree theres a lot to learn yet

 

[myotis]

For the view of "qualified" practitioners, we could perhaps see what the Society of Homeopaths - "the UK's largest body of professional homeopaths" - has to say?

"...there is substantial anecdotal evidence from around the world to suggest that homeopathy may offer a gentle, yet effective, [...] alternative approach [for treatment of malaria]".

Fairly clear - they support using water as malaria prophalaxis, despite acknowledging there is no evidence to support its efficacy.

So we seem to have the not unusual disagreement amongst experts, as you original quote demonstrates.

"Malaria is a serious and life-threatening disease and there is no published evidence to support the use of homeopathy in the prevention of malaria,” comments Dr Peter Fisher, a member of the Faculty of Homeopathy and Clinical Director of the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital. “The Faculty of Homeopathy recommends following the HPA guidelines.”

However the Society of homeopaths quote is very weasly with their use of "anecdotal" and "may have" not really very convincing.

Graham

 

[myotis]

It's not a suprise that a 1hr consultation with an Alt Med practicioner in nice surroundings and no sense of being rushed will put a patient in a much more positive frame-of-mind regarding their treatment. Compare that to a rushed 6 min appointment at a GPs surgery in often less-than-pristine NHS premises.

I suspect this is one of the major factors of why complimentary medicine, even the most obscure, seems to work so well with long term chronic illnesses where the state of mind of a person can be seriously affecting how "well" they feel at any moment in time.

A very strong argument for the broader promotion of good health with the aim of giving GPs more time to provide pastoral care, as well as medical care, to those who need it.

All the homeopaths that I have some knowledge of were GPs who went on to do further training in homeopathy, so its not that GPs don't have the skills, its just that they don't have the time.

Graham

 

[myotis]

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!

That throws up some interesting questions,maybe its the homepaths themselves that have the magical properties and not the remedies

Graham

 

[Doc]

That throws up some interesting questions,maybe its the homepaths themselves that have the magical properties and not the remedies

Graham

I'd agree with that. A consultation with a sympathetic genuinely interested person is probably therapeutic in itself. It might explain why homeopaths get very good results in their clinics, when homeopathy does not generally do well in clinical trials.

 

[myotis]

I'd agree with that. A consultation with a sympathetic genuinely interested person is probably therapeutic in itself. It might explain why homeopaths get very good results in their clinics, when homeopathy does not generally do well in clinical trials.

Yes, and in spite of the flippant way I expressed it, I do think the relationship between doctor and patient is an important aspect of the healing process and that the mind set of the patient can have a significant impact on the speed of healing.

Graham

 

[-Switch-]

Couldn't help but post a comment here.

I've been given homeopathic treatments on 2 seperate occasions for clinical depression and insomnia and I can say, with absolute confidence, that they don't work at all.
In fact, when I was prescribed homeopathic treatment for depression it actually made things worse.
I reported the failure of the prescribed medication to the homeopath and her reply was quite astonishing.
She asked if I believed in homeopathy, to which I replied that I didn't believe in it's effectiveness as a medicine because I was aware of the principles behind it, which as far as I'm concerned don't make sense.
She went on to tell me that I should have mentioned my cynicism (I'd call it skepticism, personally) because homeopathic remedies only work if you really believe in them. She told me I would have to be positive and develop a better outlook on life, then the medicine would pick up on the change in my mood and start to take effect.

Effectively she was telling me to 'cheer up'.

Needless to say, I haven't been back.

 

[myotis]

Couldn't help but post a comment here.

I reported the failure of the prescribed medication to the homeopath and her reply was quite astonishing.

She went on to tell me that I should have mentioned my cynicism (I'd call it skepticism, personally) because homeopathic remedies only work if you really believe in them.

Needless to say, I haven't been back.

I find this astonishing as well. The common theme of all the people I know who have been successfully treated by homeopathy is that they had no faith in it working. They only ended up going to a homeopath because the lack of success with conventional treatment meant they felt they had nothing to lose.

In contrast to your experience, expressing my doubts about homeopathy to my homeopath, was met with a comment that he had shared the same doubts until he had started using it. But then he was a GP who had then undertaken homeopathic training, and only used homeopathy when he felt it gave an advantage over conventional treatment.

I don't blame you for not going back, I wouldn't have either.

Graham

 

[-Switch-]

I find this astonishing as well. The common theme of all the people I know who have been successfully treated by homeopathy is that they had no faith in it working. They only ended up going to a homeopath because the lack of success with conventional treatment meant they felt they had nothing to lose.

In contrast to your experience, expressing my doubts about homeopathy to my homeopath, was met with a comment that he had shared the same doubts until he had started using it. But then he was a GP who had then undertaken homeopathic training, and only used homeopathy when he felt it gave an advantage over conventional treatment.

I don't blame you for not going back, I wouldn't have either.

Graham

Perhaps my experience was an example of shoddy practising rather than evidence against the medicinal value of homeopathy?

I'm still healthily sceptical though. I won't go into my reasons etc at any great length as it'll take ages to reference everything. Suffice to say I'm open to the idea of homeopathy but need to see a hell of a lot more thorough scientific evidence to convince me.

 

[myotis]

Perhaps my experience was an example of shoddy practising rather than evidence against the medicinal value of homeopathy?

I'm still healthily sceptical though. I won't go into my reasons etc at any great length as it'll take ages to reference everything. Suffice to say I'm open to the idea of homeopathy but need to see a hell of a lot more thorough scientific evidence to convince me.

As with any profession, there will be a range of expertise and capabilities amongst homeopaths. I fully understand the skepticism, especially as the underlying explanations of why it works are so difficult to rationalise.

My difficulty in rejecting homeopathy is largely based on the number of people I know who have apparently been successfully treated, after other treatment had failed them. But as to what exactly is behind this success, is another question.


Graham