If homeopathy works it should outdo repeated double blind clinical trials... so why doesn't it?
Science works by repeated experimentation until the evidence is overwhelming.
Why can't homeopaths provide the proof that "western medicine" is expected to provide i.e. repeated double-blind experiments showing efficacy?
This is available for aspirin, paracetamol etc. etc. so why not homeopathic remedies?
If homeopathy is somehow too special & fantastic to pass double blind trials, can you explain why?
Thanks.
Answer: It have been a pleasure to read these adjectives and thoughtful opinions. They haven't changed my mind, though.
Homeopathy is merely sympathetic tricks. Water so diluted that it hasn't a single molecule of the original substance, but retains a memory of that substance? In a word: preposterous!
Remarkable what power near is in the placebo effect. What homeopathy proves is that the human body have the power to heal itself. All it take is belief in an agent.
Because it is mental.
Some empire want to believe in it, so it works for some things. Like headache, bad back, indegestion, even some cancers.
But no, it doesn't "actually" work.
I suspect this is because it have a placebo effect in that it works on the mind and not the body. I've never found it any worthy myself, and even things such as copper bracelets, which some people swear by, do diddly squat for me! I don't know if homeopathy works or not, but I do know that the results of test like that would really depend on who have instructed the tests to be done. At the wind up of the day near is big money in pharmaceuticals.
Aspirin doesn't 'work'. Ok so it ease headache or whatever, so could be said to work. But it doesn't cure the mete out, just ease the symptom. Homeopathy is aimed at treating the cause to some extent than alleviating the symptom. If as much money went into homeopathic research as medicinal research, we might see different results.
Homoeopathy works just as a placebo effect, since the double blind trials are designed to weed out this effect, these treatments can never pass. Did it come about to you that with the "Double blind clinical trials' you mention we solitary have the word of the so call "Respected" scientists and big pharma industries that are conducting and promoting them?? It is within their best interests to provide us next to information that "solidly" backs lone their "medicine".
Aspirin will effectively rob us of our B complex of vitamins ~ which we all know are so essential for a glowing digestive, neural and immune system ~ and aspirin will also rob us of Vitamins A (essential for keeping the outer layers of your tissues and organs nutritious and for building resistance to respiratory infections), vitamin C, calcium (essential for bone health, neural functioning, good teeth and keeping your heart beating regularly!! substantial that one) and it will also deplete potassium supplies which assists in the closing down process and in sending oxygen to the brain
You nouns a little stressed hun, walk take a thaw bath next to a few drops of pure essential lavender oil surrounded by it and inhale the rich steamy vapours and sense how much more relaxed you feel after 15 - 20 mintues
The homeopathic remedy for anxiety is Argentum nitricum (silver nitrate). Any pious homeopathic practitioner should be able to assist you buddy
Good condition to you & yours
CHEERS
''scientific''medications kill hundreds of population each year,because of side effects and other problems...
yes it would be pious to see homeopathy proven through trials-maybe it has be in some cases,otherwise some medical docors who prescribe it ,wouldnt.
Also could you trust experimental tests for homeopathy,as drugs companies would be involved and we adjectives know they hate anything i.e. cheap and works-which would go against their profits-so they are bound to rubbish it anyway,beside the help of doctors and scientists getting backhanders.
Have you have a go of Acupuncture ?.
Acupuncture have an extraordinary ability to transform people’s lives by relieving physical ,turbulent and mental suffering and disharmony. In Chinese medicine, form is seen as a state of triad and balance. This is a dynamic state which requires us to respond to the demands of our lives near physical and emotional flexibility. A broad range of factor can cause us to lose this facility to move with the flow of go. Our energy consequently becomes stuck or depleted, and we are more susceptible to ailing health. Acupuncture works directly next to the body’s Qi(pronounced ’Chee’) to unravel these obstructions which explanation ill strength.
By inserting fine needles into the channels of strength, an acupuncturist can stimulate the body’s own healing response and give a hand restore its natural match. The principal aim of acupuncture in treating the unbroken person is to restore your health the equilibrium between the physical ,emotional and spiritual aspects of the individual.
In this path, acupuncture can provide relief for specific symptoms, and several people are aware that it is especially effective for the nouns of pain. However, it can also be impressive for a wide list of other conditions. For example, many family find that treatment increases their energy level and gives them an enhanced sense of well-being and enthusiasm. Also as balance is restored, here is often a sense of ‘coming spinal column to oneself‘, with the reclamation of a sense of purpose.
To find out if YOU would benefit speak to your local acupuncture practioner who will be delighted to outline the treatment and it’s advantages for you. Good luck .
Chris:
Homeopathy is exclusively aimed at treating symptoms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the illusion potions prescribed based solely on symptoms. Modern drug treats the causes of diseases. If you jump into a hospital with a dignified fever and nuchal riditiy, they'll complete an LP and then hand over you medicine that kill the bugs swimming in your meninges. They won't find some horrible chemical that cause these symptoms and then dilute it till it's long gone, claiming that it will restore symmetry to your body. Try that with bacterial meningitis and you'll be unresponsive within two days.
Also, pharmeceutical trials are not fixed by the associates who order the study. For one entity, there are thousands of potential drugs that go wrong every year to get approved by the FDA (they establish the studies by the way). Second, dangerous drugs tend to lead to lawsuits. Third, dangerous drugs injury the reputation of the companies that made them. Fourth, the company's managers don't do the primary research. Scientists do. They follow strict irrefutable principles in determining if a drug even make it to human trials.
Minx:
Yup, we have solitary the word of the scientists. And the hundred thoudand page NDA filed near the FDA that's kept on public record. Maybe you should study the industry you bash. If you did, you wouldn't trademark stupid comments with no justification in authenticity. Everything you've said is just not learned. I imagine this is why you've elected to become a naturopath instead of a concrete doctor. They don't accept idiots at med institution.
To answer your question, homeopathy does not work. It never have. But there are plenty of society who benefit from it. Nervous people next to mild illnesses who don't realize that bed rest will cure the most common illnesses. They desire medication. Prior to the popularity of homeopathy, these people swore by placebos (they didn't know they be placebos) that the doctors gave them because they know they were in recent times hyperchondriacs. The placebo effect can be very powerful. Some those have even shown withrawal symptoms when taken sour of a placebo. These are the vocal supporters of homeopathy. They own no understanding of why drugs work and they enjoy no understanding of placebos. All they know is they took some potion and later got better. They unfairly associated this with the pills and not their working immune systems. Then they yell as loudly as possible give or take a few how great homeopathy is. And gullible idiots can't wait to spend foolishly their money on water.
I know this is a impressively contentious issue right now but the reality is that so called 'western medicine' (whatever that may be) can and does annihilate people, it also make them well. So double blind conducting tests is not the be all and finale all any. Worst case scenario for homoeopathic treatment is that it doesn't work.
Surely individuals should use what treatments they get benefit from? For me it is a mixture, but respectively and every one of us is different.
My husband is a physicist, qualified from Oxford Uni, UCL & Imperial with a research milieu at Cambridge Uni - he is the archetypal scientific sceptic but even he be at a loss to explain why our pets respond well to homoeopathic treatment - they don't do the placebo effect (even our vet use a mix of treatments depending on the animal and condition).
Leeches were once forsaken as archaic, now they enjoy been reintroduced into current medical treatment - as own maggots. Quackery or modern methods - guess it just depends on where on earth you stand in thought and history.
Addition:
But we are adjectives hopelessly biased - you too, we're just biased surrounded by different directions.
You have made an massive assumption about my husband's medical knowledge & your comments are, as a consequence, baseless and poor. He is aware of the possibility of self deception but that be not the point at all.
I did also mention that my vet (not just myself) treat some conditions homoepathically (I didn't mention dogs, bit confused as to why you did), it is perceptible their scientific training is irrelevant also and that they are unfit to emphasize an animal well.
Nobody beside a view different to your own will gratify your question as your mind is already made up. What a shame that a natural debate can flounder so easily.
Further additon:
Not piqued so much as slightly saddened. Feynman is a big hit in this house too, but here is also:
"If the facts don't fit the theory, metamorphosis the facts."
"If we knew what it be we were doing, it would not be call research, would it?"
and a personal favourite:
"It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would variety no sense; it would be without significance, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of surf pressure." (all Albert Einstein)
Not disputing the double blind, ,just saw 'there's more than one way to skin a cat'. Have a moral evening.
Addition:
This is the only vet I hold ever encountered that offer homoeopathic remedies as a compliment to other medicines, indeed, the solitary other veterinary practice in the nouns doesn't offer it so it isn't lately an economic declaration.
Didn't say it be science, said it was homoeopathy - no more, no smaller quantity.
Actually there are plenty of "double-blind" and cross-over studies done on homeopathic remedies - most of them contained by Europe where homeopathy is used much more extensively than contained by the US. They are simply not published in the US. The ones I am aware of are surrounded by veterinary medicine as specifically my area of interest.
Scientific "research" is extremely expensive - difficult to design studies, set up research subjects and do the follow-up called for to "prove" effectiveness. It is simply a business of money when such research is done - mostly supported by the drug companies and our tax dollars supporting the FDA. You solely have to listen to the word and read the daily treatise to know how "effective" these studies are. The reporting of "mistakes" from drug company products which turn out to have deleterious effects on humans are army.
Homeopathic remedies when properly prescribed by qualified practitioners NEVER get adverse results. Homeopathy can't "cure" everything, nor does it purport to do so. Neither can conventional prescription.
From the newspaper concluding week was an article on the denial of effectiveness within treating back niggle in the US. $86 billion (that's beside a B) was spent closing year in US tablets on surgeries, pain relievers, etc. to no avail surrounded by solving that human problem. That's a 65% increase in money spent since 1997 and 171% increase surrounded by drug use in matching time period.
Research, double-blind and cross-over studies are not going to solve the problem of human condition nor does the lack of such research diminish the value of homeopathic remedies.
I'm a physicist / physics lecturer and I own stumbled across this in even so another AnQnA.coms battleground.
The problem that I see near double-blind tests is not the process - it's a nouns approach - but the use of statistics to interpret results. To quote a physicist (Lord Rutherford), “If your result needs a statistician consequently you should design a better experiment”
Any double blind test is going to require a hypothesis to be tested, a statistic calculated and a result standard as "statistically significant" eg 99%, 99.9%.
1) use a big enough preview and the very slightest effect may appear to be significant if it is observed habitually enough. What we imply by 'statistically significant' may not be what the general public give somebody a lift as 'significant'.
2) Drug trials are biased where they are run by big pharma. Simply, the poor results are not offered for publication. A drug treatment which cause an improvement surrounded by condition for a small proportion of test subjects could surpass the test of statistical significance and become licensed, but not make a contribution widespread benefits.
Anyway, as a physicist, it have become normal to believe much weirder stuff than homoeopathy. At most minuscule I can see an nice placebo effect working and go away a at ease man. How do I choose between the copenhagen interpretation and the many worlds interpretation of quantum physics? They're both bark mad. Richard Feynman (genius, knees-up animal, atomic bomb builder, take your pick) started his art developing Wheeler-Feynman radiation theory, which deal with particle moving back contained by time (see also Cramer's transactional interpretation of quantum physics - quantum events don't happen until they bring a message from future announcing that they can begin / have happened). That's what anyone a physicist is about.
Oh, none of this next to a double blind study, just models that verbs to be provisionally accepted (though the travel case is out on the Cramer model) because the evidence against them is not overwhelming. Compared to these mysteries, why worry if citizens choose to take a pill which, within chemical terms, contains nil. Sounds like a model we don't enjoy yet.
double blind trials enjoy repeatedly been proven wrong over time. side effects show up, and the assessment are flawed. homeopathy works wonders for a lot of nation. if it doesn't for you don't use it. no need to be angry around it. have fun while you verbs you stomach in the penny-pinching time. oh and homeopathy it is western, know what your talking around before you bash something Because double blind trials cost deeply of money, and as such not that many hold been funded for homeopathy (except by groups beside a financial interest in discrediting homeopathy).
Most of unadulterated trials on it have proved positive, but since in that haven't been that oodles done in the US, they are mostly without being seen and dismissed.
There have be a lot done outside the US, but they are roughly in like peas in a pod boat.
I think double blind studies enjoy a lot of problems (in vocabulary of proving or creating useful data), but the biggest one is that their cost make them almost inaccessible to anyone except a large drug company. As such, most double blind studies freshly end up supporting whoever have the most money. Homeopaths do not, hence they have not funded 1000s of studies to prove their treatments work.
Im not an expert but my guess would be because complimentary/alternative medicine treat the person as a together not just the symptoms - for this reason maybe it doesnt ratify clinical trials because not one person is one and the same and what works for one person wont work for another.