Homeopathy is a joke, says this Canadian educator

Ii the U.S the National Vaccine Compensation Program has paid out over 2 Billion dollars to parents of children killed or injured by vaccines. I would think any safer alternative would be welcomed, or at least stimulate curiosity. The author of this article speaks with the dubious authority of someone who has never taken a homeopathic remedy, nor studied it seriously, nor treated a single patient. He would probably argue that homeopathy is placebo.

The 100,00 board certified homeopathic physicians who practice in India curing everything from Dengue fever to Leprosy would be surprised to know that they’ve been using placebos all these years. 42% of British medical doctors refer their patients to a homeopath. 39% of French physicians have prescribed the remedies and six French medical schools offer 4 year degrees in homeopathy. In Germany 20% of physicians dispense homeopathic remedies and in Holland 40% of doctors do the same. Homeopathy is used to successfully treat pneumonia, malaria, Japanese encephalitis, dengue fever, tuberculosis, epidemic fever and more. Recently Cuba administered a homeopathic remedy to 2 million people to successfully prevent an epidemic of Leptospirosis.
What you generally hear are cliches from the uninformed, or propaganda from surrogates of the pharmaceutical industry. If you are really scientific, you will have an open mind and do some serious research of homeopathic literature ( not just criticism of
it). You will also learn that there are homeopathic pediatricians who treat infants, and homeopathic veterinarians who treat domestic animals and livestock.

Not only does homeopathy work but it works beautifully and safely. It often cures after conventional treatments have failed. To see hundreds of documented cured case records of conditions from type 2 diabetes to Grave’s disease to cancer google “homeopathy cured cases”.

Cuba’s use of a homeopathic nosode to prevent leptospirosis has all but eradicated the disease in that country. When it used its conventional vaccine there were about 2,000 infects and 100+ deaths during the hurricane season. With the nosode there were 10 or fewer infects per month and no deaths. In addition the vaccine costs so much (about $3,000,000) that it can only be given to people at high risk — the elderly, children and pregnant women. Cuba was able to treat 2,500,000 people with the nosode at a cost of $200,00.

Cuba has had similar success with nosodes in epidemics of dengue fever, swine flu, hepatitis A and conjunctivitis. Other countries also use nosodes to control the same infectious diseases.

Anyone who tries to claim homeopathy and nosodes don’t work is doing a great disservice to the people who may be influenced by such statements.

What’s most notable about the study you linked to is that it makes no mention of a negative control. The authors claim that the homeopathic preparation is as effective as the extract from which it is prepared, but are absolutely silent on whether it works any better than any other homeopathic treatment, or just plain water. To me this is gaping hole.

Were the nosodes compared to conventional vaccines and to just plain “doing nothing” in the same season and in the same population? If not, no conclusions can be drawn.

Well, talking about propaganda you might get some facts straight and stop misrepresenting others.

Vaccine compensation courts over the whole world are set up to award benefit on very little evidence. Their awards cannot be used to draw conclusions about the safety of vaccines which are generally very safe.

The many homeopaths around again do not testify to the effectiveness of homeopathy and there is no reliable evidence that homeopathy cures anything beyond a placebo result. The Cuban trial is a typical homeopathy clinical trial, insufficient controls and claims not supported by the results.

There are a few properly run clinical trials on homeopathy. When collated they show that homeopathy is ineffective beyond placebo.

Professor Ernst started his career in medicine in a hospital that used homeopathy. It is hardly surprising that he was convinced it did something. He was still convinced when he took his professorship but on examining the data he has had to conclude that it is all a sham. That is how we find out things. Not by accepting the claims of others but by examining the evidence. We also assess just the evidence, it is unimportant what Professor Ernst gave his wife, or even that he is a respected professor, it is only the evidence he provides that is useful.
The reliable evidence shows that homeopathy does not work.

I’m afraid the joke about homeopathy being a “joke” is on Professor Joe Schwarz. The spread of the use of alternative medicine, and more importantly homeopathy either alone or as integrative medicine, is on an unrelenting accelerated trajectory throughout the world. The battle of conventional medicine versus homeopathy is over. Homeopathy has won.

Information about alternative medicine is everywhere: newspaper and magazine articles, as well as social media. Conventional medicine has failed in many ways, allowing alternative forms of health care to surface. Class action law suits with drug companies paying billions of dollars to injured patients is all over the print media. That, combined to hearing the adverts (with mention of potentially serious adverse reactions) to prescription drugs on television is enough to scare anyone away from conventional medicine. The result is that health care consumers are eager for information about their health care options.

News of the use of homeopathy in every day medical practices is now more commonplace. A recently published news article in the United States (7/27/15), highlighted the opening of a new office of an acclaimed plastic surgeon who uses homeopathy both pre and post-operatively for his patients. He would not use homeopath, or risk a malpractice lawsuit if his patients did not improve. The article can be read in full by doing a Google search using the words “acclaimed surgeon jeffrey b wise md opens new office in manhattan”

On a grander scale, the Prasanta Banerji Homeopathic Research Foundation (Kolkata, India) and their protocol for the treatment of advanced cancers is spreading from India to satellite treatment centers in the United States (New Jersey), the UK (London) and a second location in Bagnan, India. It is not uncommon for the clinic in Kolkata to treat 1,000 patients (from around the world) a day. A newspaper article (11/14/2014) in the money and business section of a New Jersey paper announced the first India based homeopathic drug manufacturing facility in New Brunswick, New Jersey. This article can also be read by doing a Google search. Point of fact: the homeopathic drugs would not have worldwide market if they were not effective or the subject of class action law suits.

I look forward to the day when the skeptics provide definitive factual evidence that homeopathy is NOT effective. Since opinions are no substitute for facts, I fear the wait will be a long one.

The link I posted is to the abstract of the study. Based on your comment, can I assume you had access to the full article? If so, you should post it here.

Professor Ernst’s conclusions on homeopathy are so unconvincing that homeopaths are continually trying to discredit him and four European homeopathy producers formed a cartel to pay a journalist to smear him. In fact he is so unconvincing that more health providers in the UK have publicly stated that they will spend no more money on homeopathy.

Seems like you had better pray he doesn’t become convincing when his arguments can cause such effects, there would be nothing left of homeopathy in the UK. Oh,there doesn’t seem to be much anyway.

Why are you encouraging Joe Q. to infringe copyright?

A major argument of homeopaths is their perceived faults of medicine. This is specious. The effectiveness or other of say MMR vaccine bears no relationship to the effectiveness of something else such as homeopathy. Nevertheless they make the argument and we know it is taught in their ‘schools’. This extends to making false claims about vaccines and has led to outbreaks of preventable contagious disease. This has woken up regulatory departments around the world. Now, in general, these regulatory departments are asking for homeopathy to be regulated as medicines, after all, that is what is claimed for them. So why don’t homeopaths want their preparations regulated? You might think they would look forward to having materials tested to modern standards.

If the full article is free to read, please post the URL for me.

used by the tofu suppository advocate types.

It is a fairly impressive joke having survived more than two centuries and being now the second most used medical modality after Allopathy and the fastest growing.

It is very clear that those universities and medical schools which teach it; the MD’s who spend years training to practise it and the hospitals which utilise it, as well as the Governments which officially embrace it as part of their medical systems remain completely unaware of the joke and clearly have no fear of being sued or mocked through their acceptance of Homeopathy.

If Homeopathy is a joke, healing and curing effectively for centuries, with little cost and no harm done then modern, Allopathic medicine is a very, very sick joke with its kill rate up with the top three – iatrogenic, doctor or medical induced – most of it from its medications.

Those utilising Homeopathy can just smile quietly at the desperate attempts of the profit-driven pharmaceutical/science/medical industries which consistently attack Homeopathy out of fear and ignorance.

The last laugh has been and remains, with Homeopathy.

I remain in awe of the ignorance, arrogance and prejudice of those who seek to discredit Homeopathy.

There is plenty of evidence that Homeopathy is more than placebo but you would have to do research to know that. Novel, I know, but researching something before passing an opinion on it is wise.

Homeopathy demonstrates effect on cells, body tissue, plants, unconscious animals and humans and months after being taken – all impossible for pure placebo.

Back to the books for you! Except you probably did not read any.

The major argument of homeopathic doctors is that the modality cures and does no harm.

You do realise that their ‘schools’ as you put it, are, as often as not part of universities and medical schools?

The rest of your statement just displays the consistent ignorance and prejudice of those who attack Homeopathy and does not warrant a reply.

One way of trying not to come across as ignorant might be to make sure (a) you know what Latin terms like “ad hominem” mean *before* you use them and (b) ensuring that it does not apply to your posts more than anyone else’s in these comments.

Just saying…

Might as well respond about homeopathic ‘education’ here as elsewhere. Yes, I’m fully aware some fraudulence has taken place in the university system. In the UK, law, science and medicine departments complained that these so called courses where besmirching the good names of everyone else. When requests were made to these public universities to show the lecture course notes a surprising thing happened. The request was refused. Finally under threat of court sanction the notes were published. Yeah, whole lectures on the power of crystals, dowsing for disease, it was all there. But not one note on reading a scientific paper. It was then found that one particular course was being self certificated through the SoH. Yeah the course leader was certificating her own courses and charging at both ends. So, glad you mentioned ‘education’.

I see you come complete with the fallacious argument from antiquity and exactly the attack on medicine that I mentioned earlier. What you haven’t arrived with and which is the most important part is any evidence that homeopathy has any effect at all.

Medicine has, despite your attempts at scaremongering, made great advances. It has eliminated major infective diseases, cured insulin dependent diabetes, has cured many cancers. These are incontrovertible, the evidence is overwhelming. What does homeopathy have? Claims, yes that’s all, a series of claims with no evidence they are correct and plenty of evidence that they are not.

And here we see the homeopath confusing reading books of other homeopaths with researching a topic.

Joe Q is quite correct there is a plethora of poorly performed studies by homeopaths. Simple maths shows that these pathetic examples of clinical studies will have high variability and that some may erroneously be positive for homeopathy. Well designed, high quality and large studies are not.

It is now completely obvious why homeopaths indulge in lots of poor studies rather than fewer high quality ones. They know that sugar and water has no curative effect.

Thank you so much for again displaying egregious prejudice along with ignorance. You guys just make it so easy because you insult and abuse and never make a case. Well, you cannot because you never do any research but how can you let facts get in the way of propaganda?

No, I see someone passing an opinion on a topic of which he or she has absolutely no knowledge. Generally one does some research before forming an opinion but clearly not you.

Ah, the pharmaceutical companies are paying to limit the growth of homeopathy are they? Any evidence for this allegation or is it just to filed under homeopathic claims as usual?

Yeah, yeah, so much evidence for homeopathy that none is presented. It has grown because of unbased claims. When you have some evidence for any of your claims then get back to us.

Materialist reductionist mechanical science. Very funny but I doubt you understand the joke.

Ah, the vaccine lie, dead on schedule. No doubt the cattle in Africa which now do not suffer from rinderpest arrived at that happy state through better nutrition and the toilets provided throughout the veldt. Hygiene and nutrition standards did not change much before and after the initiation of vaccination and when vaccination rates fall through efforts of such as yourself, infection rates rise.

If I was insulin dependent I would take insulin and call it a cure. Homeopathy, of course neither treats or cures. Your comments about cancer is a direct lie, getting desperate are you?

And still no evidence to back up any of your claims.

I have yet to find a homeopath who knows more about homeopathy than the average skeptics. You certainly don’t otherwise you would be able to debate the points made rather than issue febrile insults.

Someone is behind the campaign. Logic suggests it is unlikely to be scientists or doctors who are also involved and that leaves the pharmaceutical industry who needs the carnage inflicted by Allopathic medicine in order to make bigger profits.

Actually, I don’t believe in conspiracies. I find human beings stupid, ignorant, arrogant, incompetent, inefficient and deluded enough to create all sorts of tragedies without any kind of plan being involved.

Homeopathy has endured and thrived because it works.

Bingo, rinderpest – always after dingle.

Insulin has been invaluable but it is not a cure. Medication for life is not a cure. Having parts of your body regularly removed is not a cure. Cure is being and remaining free of disease. That is what medicine should do and that is what Homeopathy can and does do.

No, my comments about cancer are not a lie. Sadly.

It is not about knowing it works, it is a clear demonstration over centuries that it works.

The only thing science can say is that it does not understand how it can work or how it might work, but work it does. Science will of course develop and in time it will know how it works and in the meantime Homeopathy will continue to cure regardless.

And yes, Homeopathy when it is understood will cause theories and careers to come crashing down, but hey, that’s progress. And you are talking classical chemistry and physics of course.

Materialist reductionist mechanistic science will not understand Homeopathy. Quantum Mechanics has potential as does Biophysics so science will get there but for the moment is at a stage akin to the era before bacteria was understood and seen. Doctors killed a lot of people before that understanding came as well because of their arrogant ignorance.

When Homeopathic remedies have effect on cells that is not anecdotal. When Homeopathic medicine has an effect on plants, that is not anecdotal.

However, nothing wrong with anecdotal because that is how a lot of Allopathic medicine works given the increasing knowledge that the ‘famed gold-standard’ and peer review are deeply flawed and that much scientific research is not worth the paper on which it might be printed.

In The Lancet’s April 11th edition, editor-in-chief Dr. Richard Horton published his own perspectives on the symposium. In what amounts to an editorial, entitled “What is medicine’s 5 sigma,” he wrote:

“A lot of what is published is incorrect.” I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides. Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution? Because this symposium — on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research — touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations.

The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”.

http://acsh.org/2015/05/science-publication-is-hopelessly-compromised-say-journal-editors/

It must be somebody!!!! You do make me laugh, classic conspiracy theory.

No, your lies, obfuscations and misrepresentations are being challenged. Like all who have got away with nonsense for many a year you are feeling anxiety that someone is challenging you.

Again, homeopathy has survived through a slick advertising campaign of lies, obfuscation and misrepresentation.

And you immediately make my point with you baseless claim that homeopathy works.

If it works then prove it. You should have masses of evidence, according to you. But surprise, surprise this evidence appears rather shy, why is that?

‘ as often as not people feed HIV drugs to chickens and pigs to ‘make them grow bigger.’

Even if this ludicrous claim was true then that is no excuse for trying to stop others from taking life saving medication, except of course, if you want to make money from them.

Yes, she had lethal advice, from a homeopath who had no other treatment that could work.

The Cuban study was dross. It was eye candy for homeopaths who didn’t realise they were just demonstrating their lack of education concerning controlled clinical trials.

And homeopathic preparations are only sugar and water in the vast majority of sales, are you trying to tell me that you didn’t even know that?

Many qualified Homeopaths are also MD’s and it takes years to train as a Homeopath.

In my experience they work with Allopathic doctors and patients undergoing Allopathic treatment and often very successfully.

But many people who turn to Homeopathy do so after years or decades of failed Allopathic treatment. When they are cured, not surprisingly they opt for Homeopathy as their first choice and Allopathy as their last.

It was a statement of fact. You may call it an insult. I would call it a statement of fact.

Lol, the efficacy of homeopathy. And the evidence for this amazing claim is where?

As you have been neither reasoned nor coherent and not particularly knowledgeable about homeopathy, perhaps you should reconsider your ‘research’.

The concept of somebody trained in nothing is quite a concept. Yes, it may take years, I’ve seen three year graduate courses in homeopathy. Sounds impressive until you read that this a 4 day a week course for ten weeks of the year. This is laughable to medical and science graduates.

Some doctors in some countries may also be homeopaths. A list of them would be useful as people should not go near anyone who doesn’t use evidence and science based medicine. Interestingly, homeopaths in India are clamouring to use prescription medicines but they don’t want to train in their use, just sell them.

Materialist reductionist means reducing to the purely material.

The probability factor in Quantum Mechanics means it is never absolutely reduced to the purely material.

But I love the way you admit you cannot mount a case in response by resorting to ad hominem. Keep it up. Let me see, Dingle, rinderpest, quack…. few more to go. Do they hand out a manual to you? Reads like it.

What this study adds

Patients with allergic rhinitis who received homoeopathy had significantly better nasal air flow than those in the placebo group

More patients in the homoeopathic group had initial symptom aggravations

Overall, no difference was seen in subjective measurements on a visual analogue scale, with both groups showing improvement

When the results are combined with those of three similar studies, homeopathy is different from placebo on both subjective and objective measures.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC27460/

A qualified MD only requires two years training. And without it, the course is four years and not the short course you cite. Never let facts get in the way of propaganda.

Perhaps you can explain why an MD would spend two years studying and training to practise Homeopathy?

The simple reality is that, given the terror academics, medical professionals and politicians have of looking stupid or being sued, if there were the slightest chance you were correct there would not be one respectable university or medical school in the world teaching Homeopathy and there are many; there would not be one MD or respectable hospital in the world practising Homeopathy, and there are many and there would not be one respectable Government in the world prepared to officially embrace Homeopathy as a part of their medical system, and there are many.

Quite simply, the above realities demolish the case of the naysayers, put paid to the delusional claim Homeopathy does not work or is pure placebo or fraud, and make it very, very clear that Homeopathy is recognised and respected by many of those who should, or would utterly reject it if you were correct.

Ergo, you are wrong.

Homeopathy works. It is the only form of medicine for me and my family and we have not had to visit a gp for years. My 17 year old has only been to a gp four times and those were for investigations.

Presumably all the way to the bank.

Displaying your crass ignorance again. Scientists live to disprove current theory. That way lies fame and fortune. But to disprove current thinking rightly involves a lot of solid data. Nothing is disproved by the pathetic studies that homeopaths regularly churn out.

Scientists and academics are also mostly scrupulously honest. To be found cheating on data is death to a career. It is hardly surprising that dishonest quacks make entry into such a system. However, they are being rooted out. But homeopaths found defrauding the public are never censured by their ‘professional’ bodies, why is that?

For somebody who cannot even see their own logical errors, ergo what?

So you are propagandising with lurid claims that you cannot justify, I leave it to the onlookers to decide who is talking sense.

I have no financial incentive in Homeopathy beyond the fact that it is far more effective and cheaper than Allopathic medicine.

I consult Homeopaths when required and as a curious person, I also study it because it is fascinating. I have a deep and abiding interest in the human body and mind and in all approaches to health. For what it is worth in past years I produced a magazine for a major hospital. The difference is I know far more about conventional medicine than you know about Homeopathy.

And most of the Homeopaths I know are far from wealthy, unlike the Allopathic doctors I know who are very wealthy.

Is that what you did to get the full article? If so, why not quote the methodology used. If you make a claim, you should be able to provide proof.

There are many MD’s who train as Homeopaths. In France for instance, a country where Homeopathy is used frequently, it is required by law to first train as an MD before training as a Homeopath.

Still haven’t grasped the concept of an ad hominem, have you. My first paragraph is a direct observation which I can prove from your comments, so it isn’t even an insult.

Neither hygiene, nutrition nor sanitation changed before and after the rinderpest was eliminated, your proposition is a bust. What destroys your scaremongering even more is that we can see outbreaks of previously prevented disease in areas where that specific vaccine is underused. Or are you now going to claim that every time the drop in vaccination rate coincides with a reduction in hygiene, sanitation and nutrition? Really?

And then we get the weak minded nonsense that boils down to science doesn’t know everything. Yes, we know that, it is why we do research, not to perform your cognitive bias but to learn new things. But there are things we do know with high probability. We know all matter we directly experience is baryonic and can be described in terms of QED and we know homeopathy doesn’t work, even more we know why it doesn’t work and we even have a pretty good idea why you might think it does work.

Aww, wondered when the special pleading would make its dreary appearance. There is nothing special about homeopathy, it makes claims that have been disproved. That you don’t understand that is of little interest except to psychologists. That, from your great ignorance, you are prepared to endanger patients with your nonsense is certainly of concern .

I think you have consistently demonstrated ad hominem and those of sound mind will have no issue seeing the validity of my claim.

You do mix things up. I never said Rinderpest was about hygiene, sanitation or nutrition. I said, Rinderpest always comes up because it is the only case which can be made. I don’t know enough about it and don’t actually care since my interest is humans.

Given the fact that vaccine claims for humans are in error, Rinderpest may well be also. I also never said vaccines could not work. They might in some ways although the methodology and practice are flawed.

Largely they are not required where there is good sanitation, hygiene and nutrition because the situation in which one lives is healthy and a healthy body deals with any pathogens.

The outbreaks are in the vaccinated. Ponder that!

Again you misread. This was not about science not knowing everything, but about the fact that science can only know about that which can be reduced to the material and mechanistic since that is the paradigm in which science operates. And that means it can know little about the natural world.

We know Homeopathy works – we don’t yet know how it works. But we will, one day.

I think you had a delusional moment – there was no special pleading for Homeopathy.

That must put your knowledge of medicine into nano sized chunks as I know more about homeopathy than you do. I know your sugar and water is all that is present in your preparations, you appear to be unaware of that simple fact.

You either do not read or do not process. I said, I have no financial gain from Homeopathy except as a patient.

Homeopathy works. All you can say is science cannot explain how it works.

Repeating a lie does not make it true.

“Lurid” claims?

You still have not explained to me if Homeopathy is fraud why it is practised by MD’s and respectable hospitals; taught in respectable universities and medical schools and embraced by Governments around the world.

Those facts alone shred any case you might make.

You are quite correct. In my experience attempting to COMMUNICATE, let alone have a discussion with “Acleron”, he (or she) will creatively “reinterpret” what I said and then attack the “reinterpretation” !

Ad hominems and other innuendo from this anonymous individual are typical, I’m afraid.

No real discussion is possible with the closed mind.

Oh dear Sandra, the evidence is all over this thread.

Talk about anecdotal! One case? How many killed by iatrogenic disease? Utter garbage.

“It doesn’t mean insult?” Please, read your comments before posting. Extremely insulting is more like it. Ridicule and criticism are your tools, and not very good ones, at that.

That is an extremely well documented and investigated case. It happened just the way it was reported. Stop misrepresenting the casual note of an untrained observer such as a homeopath with what we know about Dingle.

Eh? You lost the plot or something?

I don’t need to go a car mechanic for health advice, why on earth would I want to go to someone who is equally clueless?

Actually no. You are making the extraordinary claims that sugar and water cure disease, it is up to you to supply the extraordinary evidence for that claim. So far nothing, which neatly matche’s the amount of active material in one of your preparations.

I chose not to make a comment on your claim of no financial gain, I’ve seen it too often.

If homeopathy works you can show us all, the data leading to that conclusion. Go on, start composing your Nobel prize speech because that is the least you will get for disproving several major theories.

Strange how that data keep appearing and disappearing isn’t it?

It isn’t I that has misrepresented data,made schoolboy logical errors and failed to understand simple Latin phrases, that was you, but projection is quite common in the deluded.

Still haven’t quite understood the concept of the ad hominem have you?

Lol, now you are claiming that rinderpest still exists? Really? Any straw to a drowning man I suppose.

Rinderpest is not the only case, and I have given you one more already, you are a liar.

Name one fact about the natural world that we have established without science.

Ignorance about special pleading as well, figures.

Ridicule? Lol, I hold my hat out to the homeopaths they ridicule themselves far better than I could do it.

Criticism? Yes, without a doubt and until you either stop making dangerous claims or produce convincing evidence I will continue to do so.

I quite realise you will not be able to understand the following but it has to be said.

In the last 20 years there has been three major metastudies on homeopathy where all the relevant trials are collated according to strict, well described rules. That is not every trial they have to be of sufficient quality before being included. All three, Linde et al, Shang et al and the recent Australian report from the NHMRC have concluded that homeopathy is no better than placebo.

To overcome this edifice of evidence then more than that, all being positive to homeopathy, is required. Lists of piddling little trials with glaring inadequacies will not do.

Tetenterre’s taunts are in tatters.

Objectivity matters.

Just responding ….

“Professor” Ernst ? The guy with NO HOMEOPATHY DEGREES OR CREDENTIALS ?

As before, so true.

It is not clear if they are unwilling, OR unable to do their own reading and research to decide.

Perhaps both.

It IS indeed !! IN YOUR IMAGINATION !!

Read many cartoons ?

Over a century ago, technicians would do blood counts by peering down a microscope and counting the different types of cells. A problem was seen in this method, the results were too good. No deliberate chicanery was taking place, it was just a natural desire to get the ‘right’ result that caused technicians to allocate cells to the wrong type if they felt they had accumulated enough of that type. Scientists recognised the problem of confirmation bias. People are more likely to accept a result if it confirms what they are expecting. Scientists go to great lengths to avoid this problem. A distinct but related bias is cognitive bias where someone is unable to ascribe any mechanism but one to an observation. This is why the anecdotes of homeopaths are disregarded. Until homeopaths understand and appreciate their own bias they will stay at the level of Hahnemann and continue to sell a discredited modality.

Prove my claim? OK, here is a page of reports of people who died tragic, needless deaths because they or their parents believed homeopathy would cure them. These come from the coroners’ courts: http://discoverhomeopathy.co.uk/victims-2/

Now you prove your claim.

I notice smart Alecron does not comment often on the Allopathic kill rate.

Understandable.

That is correct.

In addition, I suspect the person you are addressing is incapable of doing that research.

Are you serious? You think MDs never practise fake medicine?

Since you mentioned “Professor” Ernst, who is also anti acupuncture, did you see his paper that was positive for acupuncture? Enjoy.

“It is concluded that acupuncture can alleviate dental pain and that future investigations should define the optimal acupuncture technique and its relative efficacy compared with conventional methods of analgesia.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=ernst+e%2C+dental+pain

Well, Ernst is full of surprises !

I’m starting to wonder if there was a connection between Ernst’s “conclusions” and whichever way the funding winds were blowing!!

As you had obviously forgotten, the topic is homeopathy, not nuclear engineering, the CRISPR gene insertion method, rate kinetics of noble gases or of modern medicine but quackery.

Have you found the controls, if so present your evidence. Cackling away means nothing.

Rubbish! The whole history of medicine involves doctors giving worthless treatments but plenty of doctors have been struck off for prescribing homeopathy.

And no respectable university in the UK teaches it any more.

As for governments around the world – they make decisions on the basis of economics not on good science.

Actually I use my brain. You should try it Jimbo, I’m sure you will enjoy the novelty.

Evidence remains unseen by Evidunces.

Once again Acleron = model of condescending behavior; e.g. having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority, patronizing, supercilious, superior, snobbish, snobby, disdaintul, lofty, haughty, etc.

If Acleron is superior then that’s hardly his fault, is it?

What should he do…pretend to be stupid, and agree homeopathy works?

The comments here are hilarious. I never get tired of watching fools try to argue that their magical water “cures” things other than dehydration.

Wait, so you admit you attempted to cite an article which you haven’t actually read?

… and you expect to be taken seriously?

“I would think any safer alternative would be welcomed, or at least stimulate curiosity”

Of course; which is why we studied homeopathy. Then we found out that it’s complete bunk. Since it doesn’t work, it can’t be a safer alternative, any more than a magic carpet could be a safer alternative to an airplane. For something to be an alternative, it has to actually work.

Ah! I see “Acleron” got himself in some hot water after being called out on that “Fraud” statement,
so low and behold (yes “low”) “Jem” and “Alex” appear to “help” him.

Speaking of that army of unknowing dupe zombies…..

“… but compared to other CAM treatments, patient satisfaction with homeopathy appears to be very high.”

That’s a pretty sad indictment of CAM as a whole. When the most popular form of “treatment” is magic water, that right there tells you how useful the whole field is.

Yes, objectivity is good, why don’t you use it.

Alliterative nonsense is still just nonsense.

Put that random gobbledygook generator away. It’s past your bed time.

If true, it’s an anecdote and nothing more. That’s a big if.

The hypocrisy of the homeohypocrites is mind boggling.

As Jean-Pierre in a comment below alludes, it is a faith based system. It requires an evermore complex network of delusions to sustain it. Any vaguely supportive statement is grabbed and trotted out.

The lack of any self awareness becomes apparent when a statement is disproven. There is no embarrassment over being wrong. The argument ad Populum will be trotted out by these particular homeopaths in the future when they think there is a fresh audience.

The NHMRC report was deeply flawed and rejected as such.

It amounted to a study into the efficacy of oncology for example, where no oncologist is on the study panel, no oncologists are consulted and data was selectively admitted which made a comprehensive and representative information source impossible.

Neither water, nor magic. And of course your dismissive comment does not make a case against Homeopathy.

Acleron, people who resort to misinformation find it necessary to regard others as liars and difficult to recognise the truth.

Why on earth would I not admit to being a qualified and practising Homeopath if that was indeed my profession?

If I keep appearing and disappearing, and just applying a little common sense and logic here, radical I know, it might just be because you and I are in different time zones!!!!!!

Homeopathy works and has done for more than two centuries. The only proof patients require is efficacy. They have that.

Homeopaths and others are curious about how it works but until that knowledge is gained, they will just make use of it.

I have never claimed sugar and water cure disease and I never would.

In truth, as every Homeopath would attest, the body cures disease and all medicine is merely an aid to that process.

Homeopathy is a highly effective aid to that process and it has nothing to do with sugar and water anymore than an Allopathic drug is about its ‘carrier,’ the soluble capsule in which the medicine is contained.

No doctor has been struck off for practising Homeopathy. And respectable universities do teach it, even if the Brits have been compromised by vested agendas and ignorance. Although UK universities still validate Homeopathic degrees.

And many universities around the world continue to teach it. The UK is hardly the centre of the universe and with Scotland, Ireland and Europe so close it matters not a whit if every UK university stops their Homeopathic courses.

I absolutely care about something working. Why would we utilise something which does not work?

Homeopathy works and I know that without a shadow of a doubt.

I don’t know how it works but there are some interesting theories and I am curious and will be very interested when science advances enough to understand how it works, but until then, all I care about is that it does work and it does no harm.

You do become increasingly incoherent. I know it is difficult having people who can make intelligent, informed, substantiated posts regarding Homeopathy when all you can do is insult, abuse and rail, but try to remain calm.

Thank you so much for yet again demonstrating absolute ignorance of Homeopathic methodology. You guys just do so much good work for Homeopathic medicine because you demonstrate, time and time again, you have never done any research and you know absolutely nothing about Homeopathy. Please keep up the good work.

Medical Mafia, oncologists get a cut from the cost of the drugs they use and the source of this delirious delusion? Aah, natural news LMAO. You are seriously citing a delusionary web site to back up your own delusion, just wow!

Of course, you have as much evidence for all this nonsense as you have for the claim that homeopathy does anything at all, ie zero.

Keep up the good work. No facts, no data, just name-calling.

DETROIT — In a crowded courtroom in downtown Detroit, the onetime prominent cancer doctor stood before the judge.

With his hands cuffed and his head lowered, the man in the bright red jail suit made a surprise move.

Dr. Farid Fata, who was charged with intentionally misdiagnosing healthy people with cancer and pumping dying patients with chemo to make money, pleaded guilty.

“It is my choice,” Fata said on Tuesday of his surprise guilty plea, which included rattling off the names of numerous drugs he prescribed for his patients over the years. In each admission, he uttered these words:

“I knew that it was medically unnecessary.”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/16/cancer-doc-admits-scam-giving-patients-unneeded-chemo/15754535/

And there we see the full blooded belief system of a closed mind.

‘We know you are wrong’

Classic.

Well, let’s just say if the same thing was done to oncologists it would not be surprising if oncologists were seeking to set the record straight.

This is from the Complementary Medicine body in Australia.

Media Release
For Media Interviews or Further Information Contact:
CMA, Chief Executive: Carl Gibson +61 457 028 974
15 December 2014

The Five Fundamental Flaws of the NHMRC Homeopathy Review
Complementary Medicines Australia (CMA) today pre-empted the publication of a formal position
statement by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) on homeopathy, calling
into question the NHMRC’s methods used to review the evidence of effectiveness on homeopathy.
Mr Carl Gibson, Chief Executive of CMA said “A number of independent experts in the sector have
expressed strong concerns with the methodology of the review, according to information obtained
from NHMRC under Freedom of Information laws.”
“We are today calling out the NHMRC Review as fatally flawed by outlining Five Fundamental Flaws:
1. Shoddy Methodology: NHMRC provides no adequate explanation of why randomised
controlled trials (RTC) were excluded from the Review.

The NHMRC decision not to
adhere to a search of all Level 1 evidence, as per International standards, should
certainly be justified.

2. Selective Research: The choice of databases searched was not broad enough to capture
the balance of complementary medicine specific content, and excluded non-English
studies.

3. Lack of Expertise: NHMRC did not appoint a homeopathic expert to the Review Panel.

4. Flawed evidence: NHMRC did not provide an adequate explanation of why only
systematic reviews were used where systematic reviews have inherent weakness as a
reliable source of evidence.

5. Ignoring Opinion of Experts: Two out of three Experts who NHMRC consulted prior to
publication expressed numerous concerns over the methodology and selective use of the
data and recommended the NHMRC could not come to the very definitive conclusion that
it came to.

The NHMRC then chose to ignore these Expert Opinions.
Mr Gibson added; “The papers released under Freedom of Information show that the NHMRC failed
to appoint a homeopathic expert to the Review Panel, left out randomised controlled trials, excluded
all studies not published in English, and limited the choice of databases searched, which basically
meant that the balance of complementary medicines specific content was omitted.”

“No valid conclusions can be drawn from this Review, except that the NHMRC has failed to uphold
its own standards of ethics and quality research in this instance,” said Mr Gibson.

Mr Gibson went on to say “As the first in a series of investigations into the evidence on
complementary medicines, CMA questions how future reviews will be underpinned by best practice principles and conducted in a transparent manner.”

http://www.cmaustralia.org.au/Resources/Documents/16%2012%2014_Fundamental_Flaws_of_the_NHMRC_Homeopathy_Review.pdf

p.s. I offer this not to your closed mind but to others who are more rational and less prejudiced and who may require balanced information.

Keep on thinking the events in the UK do not matter. While you are doing that the doctors in India are fighting back against the homeopaths, the FDA is considering regulation, as are the appropriate authorities in Canada and Australia.

Yeah, that must be why when it is tested under high quality conditions by professionals it somehow fails to work.

Your own words coupled with your inability to produce robust, reliable evidence clearly shows that it is a faith based system.

Are you seriously suggesting that people who have used Homeopathy for many years and remained well and not in need of other medical treatment, are deluding themselves and their experience is anecdotal?

I suppose you are. Now that is delusion.

By pointing out that you have no evidence and just have a belief, I am supporting homeopathy? May I just point out you have no logic either.

Yeah, as I said, claims by quacks. Just a few of the lies and misrepresentations you have listed.

One of the authors was a homeopath.
Full descriptions of the selection process were given.
No FOI was necessary, the bloody thing was fully published.

It is obvious that the quacks have no substantiated criticism, as always, they just don’t like the result and are prepared to lie to denigrate it.

Amazing ineptitude. I have remained fit and healthy for the whole of my life without homeopathy. According to your silly logic that disproves homeopathy.

Of course, both are anecdotes, they prove nothing. That’s why we do clinical trials and then we know homeopathy fails.

I don’t need to make a case against your magic water; all I have t do is explain to people how it supposedly “works”. As soon as I do that, anyone who isn’t a complete idiot immediately stops believing in it.

No, it’s incredibly stupid. They embraced Trepanning too, Einstein. Are you even reading what I’m writing, or are you just randomly flailing about?

Quelle Horreur! Fancy that. A Homeopath responding to inaccuracies regarding Homeopathy. Who would have thought of that?

It must be why pharmacists respond to inaccuracies regarding psychiatry and lawyers respond to inaccuracies regarding oncology.??

You have ignored evidence. That is the salient point. But then you must.

Nice response, water-boy!

Every time you use terms like water and sugar you just push the case for Homeopathy because you make those who attack Homeopathy look like the ill-informed, unable to mount a coherent intelligent case, individuals that you all appear to be.

What astonishes me is that at least a few of you don’t do some research so you can sound like you have some idea of what you are talking about.

lol. No, numbnuts, the fact of the matter is that homeopathy is just water. If you don’t know that, you’re misinformed. If you do know it and are pretending otherwise, you’re a liar. Either way you’re wrong, and aren’t helping your case one bit.

No. Full comprehension requires complete reading of the exchange.

Perhaps a tall order at the best of times.

Oh yeah, I hit a nerve there 🙂 Go ahead, water-boy, explain to me why it’s ok for homeo-quacks to sell their own magic potions, but wrong for real doctors to do it!

Thankyou for demonstrating what was evident – total ignorance.

You have no idea what the proving process is. You have given your interpretation of a Homeopathic consultation.

That is not what Homeopathic proving is.

“Nuhuh,that’s not how my magic works!”

You’re adorable 🙂

It’s a stupid question to ask why you support a double standard? Really?

Were you born this dishonest, or did it happen after you became a homeopath?

Oh look, another pair of parents who didn’t need real medicine!

http://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/public-safety/2015/06/11/bradford-county-pair-charged-childs-death/71053600/

She? What she? Here is what you typed.

‘Are you seriously suggesting that people who have used Homeopathy for many years and remained well and not in need of other medical treatment, are deluding themselves and their experience is anecdotal?’

So the answer is yes, their experience is anecdotal and they are deluding themselves if they think the drops of water or sugar pills are doing anything but enriching a quack.

If you have to lie and misrepresent facts then your complaints can be disregarded. Homeopaths have a long history of this mendacious behaviour.

Pretty fair summary. I’d only change #1.

Invent a problem people are having.

Well, you actually managed to get something right for a change! Yes, most of us are quite peeved that millions of people are being tricked by frauds such as yourself. That’s rather the point. The good news is we’ve had great success in tightening up regulations and closing loopholes, greatly reducing the amount of harm that can be done by quacks and charlatans. We’ll never completely eliminate all forms or fraud – nor the human condition which allows it to flourish – but that’s ok as long as we continue to make progress.

You keep making this claim, and keep failing to produce the slightest amount of evidence for it. I wonder why that is?

As for Milgrom, he tried to show that homeopathic dilutions of some irrelevant material contained something by uv spectroscopy. He published the spectra in your homeopathy magazine. It was shown that he was actually looking at impurities in an alcohol diluent. Having been made to look a complete fool in a discipline he should be an expert in he moved onto making an even bigger fool of himself by mumbling about quantum entanglement, much as you do.

Neither “Alex” nor “Jem” can save ACLERON on that one. He was completely wrong in his assertion that cancer doctors do not profit from the chemotherapy drugs.

No it is not homeopathy but the fraud carried out by the homeopaths by pretending to be doctors and scientists.

The harm that homeopaths do reflects on us doctors and scientists because it is us that you frauds are impersonating.

But mostly it is the deliberate and uncaring harm you cause in pursuit of the victims money. They lose twice, first their money and if they have a serious condition they are prevented from getting adequate treatment.

Gosh, you must be right because you have had to shout. Just one small question, where?

Oh dear! This is what you could have found out if you’d done two minute’s research:

(1). Dr Marisa Viegas was struck off for advising Lady Victoria Waymouth to stop taking her usual heart medication and to only take homeopathic treatment. (She died of course!)

(2). Since abandoning the provision of homeopathy degree courses, UK universities are no longer compromised by vested agendas and ignorance. Actually it was by exposing the vested interests and nonsensical pseudo science being taught on such courses that campaigning scientists won the battle to get such courses closed, though the fact that increasing public awareness of the nonsense that is homeopathy had led to falling applications no doubt helped a lot. This is particularly true of Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen, which is in (3) Scotland which, by the way, is part of the UK!

(4) No Irish university runs courses in homeopathy and if you think most people can afford to just hop over to live in France and study it there instead, you’re even more ignorant than you sound.

The last time I checked, some UK unis were still completing degree courses started before the exposure. I wonder how those students felt with one or two years left of a course that was deemed quackery by their own university.

But there are still plenty of homeopathic colleges around offering ‘graduate’ courses. I asked one if that was a degree course and was told that it was of degree level. Not much honesty there then.

You’re opening yourself and cantechletter to a lawsuit.

You’d have to prove it’s a scam !

I’m not in pursuit of any “victims” money. I’m retired.

You gotta be more reasonable or you’re going to get yourself, and possibly the company where you work, if you’re posting this from work, in a WORLD of trouble.

How does the homeopathy scam work? It is a multilayered fraud but the quintessential part is the interaction between the homeopath and the victim.

A ‘case history’ is taken, people have recorded and reported these, the most ludicrous questions are asked with a pretension to deep complex knowledge. If the victim has presented with vague, non specific symptoms, the homeopath just invents a disease state and continues.There are various on line homeopathy sites that will do this. If you need a good laugh then try one. The irrelevant symptoms are compared against a list of equal irrelevance and a label is selected. The label is the most important part the vial and its contents will always be the same. The homeopath then extracts an exorbitant amount of money for this tomfoolery and then charges for the label. Stage one is thus completed.

If the victim fails to return at this or any further point then the homeopath will mark that down as a success, after all, they didn’t need any further treatment.

If the victim returns with a different complaint the previous visit is again marked down as a success and stage one is repeated.

If the symptoms have persisted then the homeopath will select a different label and charge for the visit and label as before. Stage two is completed. Stage two may be treated several times. Usually the trivial complaints seen by homeopaths are self resolving so sooner or later the symptoms will recede. Homeopaths love chronic conditions such as an allergy which is likely to resolve itself.

Sometimes the symptoms will get worse. ‘Aha’ cries the homeopath ‘Aggravation, that shows the treatment is working’. So it is heads I win, tails you lose, a great scam. And every single one is marked down as a success, this is why the homeopaths case histories are worthless junk.

Occasionally, a victim will realise that the treatment(s) are not improving matters. At this stage, the victim is blamed, they didn’t take the remedy properly, they had a coffee, visit to the dentist, the excuses are endless but the homeopath will blame the victim at every turn.

A well worked scam that has the benefit of convincing the victim that they got better because of the sugar and water.

Don’t threaten me mate!

If the uni felt any responsibility they would be switched to another course. I never found out if they were given that option.

P1: Governments are afraid of looking foolish/being sued.
P2: Governments “embrace” homeopathy
C: Therefore homeopathy works and has integrity.

If you can’t see the flaws in your reasoning, I suggest you sign up for a logic class. Where on earth do you get the idea that governments “are renowned for fearing looking foolish or being sued” from? And what exactly do you mean by “embrace” homeopathy?

By the way, I’m still waiting for you to prove your claim that “The biggest killer is iatrogenic – doctor or medical induced – Allopathic and that takes out millions around the world every year.” Let’s see the evidence – that’s if you know what the word even means.

Since pro homeopathy comments in forums like this are always posted by people who have themselves (or family members) been helped by homeopathic treatment, I would like to pose the following question:

Have any of the anti homeopathy people posting here ever consulted a conventionally trained medical doctor who has included homeopathy in his/her practice?

YES, I’m familiar with it.

it’s not enough to read just the Organon. One must read the entire corpus of Hahnemann, including the incorrect and obsoleted misasm theories of chronic disease. Unfortunately, skeptics probably have neither the time nor the inclination to do this, and therefore form some imagined conception of what it’s all about, as Ack’s hilarious posting indicates. It takes years, not days or weeks, to assimilate this stuff.

“And….HOW could there possibly be ANY ‘aggravation’, an immediate, almost immune system like response to the introduction of the Homeopathic remedy if there’s nothing but water and sugar in them ??”

Lmao. It’s amazing how you manage to so completely miss the point again and again, yet remain smug and arrogant. Dunning-Kruger effect in action!

The point, genius, is that there IS no “aggravation” just like there is no “healing”. It’s all nonsense. The homeoquack just uses “aggravation” as a handy excuse for why his magic potion didn’t work, and then charges the patient for another bottle of water with a different label.

Lol. A quack spent years trying to address a “problem” which he made up, therefore the problem is real. That is incredibly funny 🙂 it’s no wonder you believe that magical water cures people; you clearly don’t have even a basic understanding of how logic actually works.

Oh God I love this ! So you think Hahnemann made up a phony system of medicine, practiced it for decades then made up an “imaginary” problem with the “phony” system, worked for more decades to solve the “problem”, then did the 6 th edition of the Organon describing the fix to the problem and Hahnemann’s wife held on to that as a deep secret for decades known only to a few insiders ?

HOW INCREDIBLE, CLEVER AND SINISTER THIS HAHNEMANN DUDE WAS ? Maybe he was in with the “illuminati” or freemasons or something ?

HA HA HAHA HA HA !!

SO …. you think 200 years worth of case studies, clinical reports, doctor reports, patient reports describing in detail this aggravation effect were all…. imagined ? fantasy ? part of of a world wide conspiracy to “fool” people ???

And you think this can all be explained away by knowing how (ha ha ha ha pardon me, couldn’t hold it back ….) how “logic” works?

Bwaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha !!

I’m really curious now, you think Hahnemann thought this up “on purpose as a trick” or something to convince people, and then the other homeopaths picked up on it as a “scam” or were they just convinced because of H’s stature? And the patients reporting the “aggravation” effect, were they responding to auto suggestion, coming back and telling their Homeopath that things just got noticeably worse ? How do you write all this off and disregard all these documented experiences ??

So you’re absolutely sure that this could not in any way be an actual effect with the body reacting to the homeopath remedy ?

I’m intrigued !

Lol. We know exactly what 200 years of research show: that homeopathy is complete nonsense, has no plausible method of action, relies on a complete misunderstanding of how both the human body and the universe as a whole work, and does absolutely nothing to cure or harm anyone. It is utterly indefensible. To even try and claim it actually does something you pretty much have to be stuck in the 1800s.

The really ironic part, though? You’re on here pretending that 200 years of anecdotes is proof of efficacy, despite the fact that Hahnemann himself first made up homeopathy because the doctors of his time had been using ineffective and dangerous “treatments” for hundreds of years. When people of his time proposed that maybe blood-letting didn’t actually work, they were met with the same idiotic response which you are relying on now: “hurr, we have hundreds of years of research which shows it works!”. If we were to listen to morons like you we would never have abandoned bloodletting, trepanning, urine therapy, or mercury tinctures. If we ignored evidence the way you do we’d still be ignorant of germs and the true causes of disease, and would imagine that magical water can cure anything.

Why the ‘moron’ name calling?

How else do you refer to a person who is arguing that magical water can cure illness?

Thus neatly proving that Sandra neither understands nor appreciates either cognitive or confirmation bias.

Richard Feynman, possibly the greatest scientist of the 20th century expressed it thus:-

‘The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.’

In the past, Sandra has been shown exactly how she can fool herself. Yet she insists that the only way to appreciate the truth about homeopathy is to put oneself in exactly the conditions where one would be easiest to fool.

The UK Guardian newspaper claimed that to call such people as Sandra, idiots, was counter productive. I think it is obvious that some people are just that, all that is left to do is to hope they do not suffer an easily treatable serious disease and rely on witchcraft to recover. A sentiment, incidentally that Sandra does not reciprocate.

In the meantime, a record must be left countering their idiocies so that others do not fall into the clutches of this plausible scam.

I notice the homeopaths are constructing a delusion about the origins of homeopathy.

Hahnemann noticed that he exhibited some symptoms of malaria when he took high doses of quinine. It was an idiosyncratic response not seen in everyone. History does not record if he failed to notice that others did not respond or was the first to use the only research tool available to homeopaths, the cherry picker.

So from that rather shaky foundation he invented the similars theory. Or rather he just repackaged beliefs seen throughout history. For something to cure a disease it must reproduce the symptoms of that disease. The only problem was that the doses of some of these weird materials were toxic. He managed to convince himself that diluting the materials would reduce the toxicity and somehow increase the therapeutic response. Unfortunately he was ignorant of the atomicity of matter or of Avogadro’s number.

Since then homeopaths have tried to justify this ridiculous system with evermore bizarre fabrications including the amazing get out clause of aggravation. James had better tell his co-quacks they have got it all wrong because contrary to his view, aggravation is to be welcomed as it shows the treatment is working.

Here is Dr Charles Forsythe saying they are a good sign.

http://www.dr-forsyth.com/Dr_Charles_Forsyth/Homeopathy_-_FAQ.html

And here is Homeopathy Plus a site that many quacks hold up as giving real information saying that aggravation heralds a healing response.

http://homeopathyplus.com.au/tutorial-15-what-to-expect-part-a/

Personal testimonials from a homeopathic patient trumps unqualified opinions. You have never been treated by a homeopath. Therefore, your comments can be easily dismissed.

Honey, when you’re going around telling people that magic water can cure them off all their ills, you have absolutely no business calling anyone else childish. Magic isn’t real. Grow the hell up.

Magic potions are no substitute for medicine.

Ah ! But the discussion was about “aggravation”, the supposed effect that sometimes happens on taking a homeopathic remedy !!

Little distraction there, eh ? Understandable.

“Let’s try again – so all that talk about ‘aggravation’ was what…imagination ? conspiracy?, doctors AND patients ‘fooled’ themselves?, mass hypnosis ?

Yes.

“How can you possibly deny the stated experience of thousands of people ?”

Easily.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_windshield_pitting_epidemic

“You see that that doesn’t jive with what your claiming – that we disregard these recorded experiences ? ”

Not at all; you don’t disregard stories, you LOVE stories. You disregard evidence.

I’m sorry that the above is out of context. I was responding to a Sandra comment that included a reference to the Banerji’s, favourite homeopaths of hers. The comment then disappeared and mine has been orphaned. 🙁

That’s a wonderful argument from authority you’ve got going on there. Just like when creationists trot out their list of 200 biologists who believe that evolution isn’t real. Unfortunately you fail for the same reason they do; because testimony is never as good as evidence, and because every field of human endeavor has some percentage of cranks within it.

The evidence unambiguously shows that homeopathy does not – and can not – work. If the best argument you can make in response to that is “well, like, some doctors think it does” then you clearly do not understand how we go about determining what’s true and what’s not.

Get a flashlight …..CHECK THE PREMISES !!!!

The end.

Pull your head out of your ass and look at the evidence. The end.

Of ‘their’ day? Did you mean this Joslin?

http://blog.joslin.org/2011/07/diabetes-and-complementary-medicine-is-there-more-than-what-western-medicine-has-to-offer/

This charlatan freely admits that there is no convincing evidence that herbs can control diabetes then goes on to advise how best to choose them.

Or perhaps you meant this one.

http://www.homeoint.org/history/bio/j/joslinbfj.htm

This one practised before the discovery of insulin but had the heretical, to James and Ros, belief that smallpox could be eliminated by vaccination.

The elder Joslin is an interesting examples. In those days, doctors had few tools and even less knowledge of the kind we have at our disposal today. They just used what they had. Homeopathy? Try it. Oh well let’s try some bleeding. They didn’t appear to be the rabid believers we see today. But any of them that mentioned homeopathy, no matter how fleetingly, is instantly enrolled as a supporter of homeopathy by present day faith holders. The same technique is applied to present day doctors. Ridiculous statistics have been produced by so called professional bodies of homeopaths as to the number of UK doctors who believe in homeopathy. After much investigation it was found that not only were they including any doctor who had prescribed homeopathy but often including them two or three times. The same dishonest techniques were applied to the members of the public who had bought some worthless sugar or water.

GOOD ! Now you’re showing some evidence of historical research, though your conclusions are premature.

Keep doing this. Excellent !

Sandra, I have a new “system of medicine” where I treat illness by acting out Monty Python sketches while wearing a parrot suit. All of my patients swear by it, and you’ve never tried it. So by your own standard it’s at least as good as homeopathy and I can easily dismiss you or anyone who tells me otherwise.

Today I learned something fascinating and quite beautiful. Sharks and rays detect prey and predators through sensing electrical fields. The electrical fields were thought to be generated by the myoelectric activity of fish muscles while they breathed. But researchers have found that the electric field change occurs by the transfer of ions from the sea water to mucopolysaccharides when the fish opens its mouth to breathe.

Not an earth shaking discovery but a good example of how scientists work. They don’t make up stories and then only select those results that fit the story. Neither do they avoid reporting their results because it goes against received wisdom. This is how we slowly and painstakingly advance our knowledge of reality, by accumulating data, comparing it against previous hypotheses and producing new ones.

Homeopathy has not moved one iota in 200 years despite good evidence that it fails to do anything. Evermore complex stories are created to justify the original story. We get conspiracy stories that medics and doctors are in competition with homeopaths, stories that pharmaceutical companies pay skeptics to smear homeopathy, exotic stories about mechanisms etc.

What is never produced is any decent evidence.

You mean the word homeopaths use when the victim presented too early and hadn’t yet experienced the worst of their condition.

Interestingly, medicines can have such an effect attributable to the medicine, not the disease. Antibiotics can cause an inflammation response when treating severe infection because of the release of endotoxins from dead bacteria. But these are real measurable effects not made up stories to explain why the treatment failed.

Sure ! You bet ! I’ll just condense 8 years of research involving thousands of pages and hundreds of cases into a few short sentences and fit it all in these little comment boxes !

Dream on Horatio.

After reading the weak anti homeopathy skeptics’ arguments posted here, including the childish name-calling, I would like to suggest that there be a post scripted addendum to this article. Perfect title would be: “Homeopathy Skeptics Are a Joke”

What a pathetic excuse for a man you are. He asks you which “Joselin” you’re referring to, and your answer is that you can’t answer him because you spent 8 years reading nonsense? Are you kidding me?

You’ve just completely given up on even pretending to be a thinking human being, haven’t you?

It was his last paragraph that got me.

I’m sorry you’re disappointed !

Wait for the book ?

Ignorance and prejudice are best ignored. Just keep posting facts to counter propaganda and ignore the game-playing I am beginning to think is the way to go.

I wonder if they recruit 13 year olds to attack Homeopathy. Hang on, most 13 year olds I know are more intelligent than the naysayers appear to be. Perhaps it is just an indication of how prejudice lowers intellectual capacity. 🙂

Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by any respectable university in the world.

I am not surprised it is your source.

Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by any respectable university in the world.

If it is your source then your comment has no credibility. But that is not hard to see anyway.

You did not deal with aggravation! You cannot explain ‘proving.’

It’s all a conspiracy you say!!! That my friend does not make a case and never will.

Good heavens, if you are a doctor or a scientist you gave up rigorous, objective reasoning long ago.

You either do not read or have trouble processing.

These oncologists are not fraudulent – what they are doing is completely legal!!!! Immoral, yes, but legal!

Lol, and you still haven’t worked out the concept of the ad hominem while calling others ignorant.

I did not call others ignorant. I point out they are ignorant of Homeopathic methodology. Different thing and not ad hominem, just fact.

Ah, the ‘proving’. Of course, it doesn’t prove anything, even the word is a mistranslation of the German.

Very quickly, the homeopath searches for something that hasn’t been used before. Weird and wonderful nonsenses have been used, plutonium, polonium, dolphin song, light of Venus, vacuum, water. Yes, even water!

The material is mixed with sugar and ground up and then thrown away. Vials of water or perhaps sugar pills are given to a susceptible group of people and told what symptoms to expect. They keep a diary which is then ‘interpreted’ by the resident wizard, sorry homeopath. As expected, the diary entries are similar to the comments required. These become the symptoms which the witch doctor looks for to sell the vial with this label.

Ah, the label, a fake Latin name is made, originally to prevent the victim knowing what was used but now to put a marketing gloss on the water or sugar.

No material has ever failed in this process, none whatsoever. And when used by the homeopath, no label has ever been withdrawn. A perfect scam.

Oh please learn something about the scam you support. Start by reading the post you are referring to, you then have a chance of not looking quite so silly.

Hahnemann coined the word allopathy to try to indicate he had the only cure and that real medicine was useless. He was selling g a bill of goods from the start and knew it.

Like most snake oil, homeopathy had nearly died out, medicine had advanced and water and sugar just don’t work.

Then came an unfortunate combination of circumstances. The bill in the US to approve the formation of the FDA passed through the hands of a believer and he gave a free pass to homeopathy in return for passing on the bill. Well, just what is your dishonest huckster going to do when he can claim, wrongly, he has the approval of the FDA? Well he dives in with both hands to scoop up all that cash from the unsuspecting public.

Yes, a few MDs have been sucked into the scam but the vast majority in the US, UK, India and Australia are not.Well now the regulatory authorities are waking up to the dangers of this scam and are tightening the regulations, the squeals from homeopaths is a wonder to behold.

In the UK, the Advertising Standards Agency has made a simple request to those advertising snake oil, back up any claims with evidence. Don’t you find that is a reasonable request?

A consistent belief among members of the public is that there is something in those homeopathic preparations. When told they contain nothing but water or sugar they react with incredulity. They point to the fake Latin and the ‘dose’, ‘there’ they say ‘that is what is in it’. Alternatively, one hears the comment that the pharmacist would not be selling it if it was useless, unfortunately, they do. However, I have found that showing them the production process is convincing.

Homeopaths are well aware that if the public become fully aware of the absence of any activity their trade will suffer.

This is why Sandra will bang on about freedom of choice but is nowhere near as keen for freedom of information.

It also led to an amusing event in the early days of the Wikipedia article on homeopathy, Ullman, a well known seller of this scam tried to prevent details of the absence of any material. His efforts were herculean and evermore frenetic as he failed, leading to his banning for just being disruptive.

Trust me, I read carefully all that others say, it is generally so insubstantial that it does not take much time.

Your comment is so ridiculous I shall leave it to others to do a quick bit of research and know it is delusion.

You do demonstrate an inability to dissociate your claims from reality.

It is often the claim that many people turn from medicine to your scam. Despite repeatedly asking for evidence none has appeared, perhaps you have some?

As for those I meet being stupid, perhaps you might like to tell me why homeopaths spend inordinate amounts of time and energy preventing the general public knowing some rather simple facts.

1) There is nothing but sugar or water in a vial of a homeopathic preparation.

2) There is no robust, repeatable evidence that homeopathy does anything beyond placebo.

Any ideas why you suppress this information?

The claim that few people are as obsessional as to only use homeopathy may be correct, who knows? But it is often the case that quack supporters claim they and their family are healthy only because they use homeopathy. Strangely, over a period of time, they let slip they use medicine. Sandra can tell you all about that, I’m sure.

And then we have the claim that it works but yet again with no evidence to back up this amazing claim.

I repeat, your level of delusion is impressive for you to be able to believe in a conspiracy more than two centuries old in which millions of people have been involved and in which today, universities, medical schools, hospitals, MD’s, Governments now knowingly participate as fraudsters. You do realise that you make more of a case for Homeopathy because of the ridiculous nature of your claims, than anyone else could.

You use words like scam – that means a conscious decision to defraud and cheat. Ergo, that means a conspiracy over more than two centuries.

That means hospitals, MD’s, universities, medical schools, Governments etc., who utilise Homeopathy are frauds. How do you think that can happen?

Ah, ‘think’ the operative word.

Given your track record of ignoring evidence why would I bother? I merely counter the stupidity of your claims. Not that that is difficult.

A conspiracy is the collusion of two or more peoplepeople, Sheesh, this is basic English. No collusion is necessary, as explained. Defrauding many people is just a wide spread scam. The faintly amusing but sad aspect is that many who have been scanned are the homeopaths. Just because someone has been deluded enough to believe in this nonsense makes it no less a scam when they attempt to promote it to others. One of the facets of a successful scam is to convince the unthinking dupes such as yourself to go out and try to convince others.

And still no evidence, funny that.

But, your suggestion that people over two centuries have devised a highly complex system called Homeopathy and managed to defraud millions amounts to conspiracy. How else could it have been done?

You talk nonsense. And yes, that would count as a Homeopathic symptom.

Hahnemann’s First Success—Typhus
The year 1812 also saw the bloodshed and destruction of the Napoleonic war come to Leipzig. As Napoleon was driven from Germany , the conflict entered Leipzig and its surrounds bringing with it refugees, starvation, and no less than 80,000 dead and another 80,000 wounded. Hahnemann and other physicians were pressed into service trying to help the many who suffered not only from the battle but also from an outbreak of typhus. Armed with the twenty-six homeopathic medicines he had proven in Torgau, Hahnemann achieved remarkable results in treating typhus. He would later report in an article published in 1814, that of the 180 typhus patients he treated only 2 had died.

http://www.drmasiello.com/homeopathy/history-of-homeopathy/

Quote: The story of how homeopathy first came to America, became the second most practiced healing art by public demand, and then was virtually destroyed by Big Pharma and its allies, the AMA and the practitioners of modern (allopathic) medicine, is why we have called our article “The Worst Crime of the 20th Century.” This history bears witness to how the self-interest of just a handful of people, by creating an allopathic medical monopoly, continues to cause the needless deaths of millions of people and the ongoing suffering of millions more.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Dean/carolyn29.htm

I don’t suppose you understand the term ironic but your reference is epic considering the title of the article.

‘ the idea that each person has a vital force, a resonating frequency, if you will. This vital force, called Qi or Chi in Asian healing arts, is basically the energy or essence of the person that can be observed and measured.’

This is the pure woo. So Qi can be measured. This is huge news to the whole of science. Wow, all those physicists at CERN must feel pretty stupid that all their efforts to measure energy of many different forms missed something that an MD who fervently believes in homeopathy has found and measured.

Quick now, what is the value for an average human being, 5, 10, a million, the square root of minus one?

Even after several years of dealing with homeopaths it is difficult to appreciate how mind numbingly stupid they can be.

So what? Did he have this evidence that you have failed to find?

No, homeopathy requires good quality evidence that it does anything at all.

So far such evidence is conspicuously absent.

Quote: Homeopathic treatment is an effective method of healing
– in both acute and chronic conditions, as claimed by
millions of patients and thousands of homeopathic doctors.
It may even offer long lasting to permanent cure, treating
the disease from its roots, for most of the ailments. The body
of clinical evidence for the effectiveness of homeopathy
continues to accumulate. Several research studies have
shown overall that three quarters of the chronically ill patients
reported that they felt ‘moderately better’ or ‘much better’.
A number of rigorous clinical trials have shown homeopathy
superior to placebo; others have shown it to have effects similar to conventional treatments3
.

Homeopathy is an effective alternative to antibiotics in infectious diseases, producing no toxic
side effects and bringing about rapid recovery. Viral infections are also very well treated with
homeopathy.

In addition, homeopathy is extremely effective for a variety of complaints occurring
in children, including behavioural problems. Other medical conditions successfully treated are: skin
diseases such as acne, boils, eczema, psoriasis, warts; musculoskeletal pain, arthritis, osteoarthritis,
sciatica, bursitis and fibromyalgia; allergies, frequent infections; tension headache and migraine;
heartburn, gastritis, constipation, intestinal conditions, irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel
disease; frequent colds, sinusitis, tonsillitis, cough, asthma and respiratory infections; emotional
conditions such as depression, anxiety, insomnia; menstrual disorders, premenstrual syndrome,
infertility, hot flushes; morning sickness, labour induction, labour pain, lactation problems, breast
inflammation (mastitis); coronary dysfunctions, liver disorders, Ménière’s disease. There are many
other conditions besides those listed where homeopathy is found to be effective.

http://www.homeopathyeurope.org/publications/promotion-booklets/homeopathiccare.pdf

Thank you ! Excellent point.

The history of Homeopathy in American has the underlying theme that it was overthrown from becoming the dominant modality by politics, not science.

The utter stupidity of the skeptics is reinforced by denial.

Denial that there is any curative effect whatever.

And, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands have experienced it, DENIAL of the homeopathic induced aggravation effect, a clear indication that “something” just happened directly related to taking the Homeopathic pill.

Denying that homeopathy accomplished anything requires an alternative explanation when patients report cures, improvements, increased well being – that’s where the skeptic reaches into their bag of pseudo-scientific logical positivist bag of tricks, or more correctly reaches into the bag provided for them by an army of junk journalists, quick buck skeptic book writers and “evidence” based medicine propaganda sources which have infested our regulatory agencies, research centers, University medical colleges and pharmaceutical organizations and companies.

These skeptics put on a big show of being “scientific” but something curious happens when one attempts a “discussion” with them.

They don’t seem to be able to hold the concept of actual witness based evidence, from Doctors or patients, in their heads at all ! It’s like a sort of short term memory problem,a mental paralysis, a thinking self sabotage in which any attempt to provide actual evidence outside the narrow scientism confines with which the skeptic has blinded themselves is immediately rejected as inapplicable or unacceptable, even if from medical experts and scientists and doctors of unimpeachable source.

It is not stupidity per se, though it may seem so, but a self imposed stupidity a kind of mental contortion which renders them infuriated that any disagree with anything so obvious as their own personal self delusion.

Such is the state of education these days to produce individuals at this low level of cognitive functioning.

You have just again demonstrated your only ‘case’ against homeopathy rests on a belief in some weird form of conspiracy over centuries, involving millions of people. Delusional.