tronvillain

Oh, and do you have any evidence that the smallpox virus was ever used in a vaccine?

Bree

Thanks for the clarification, Kally.

I was confused: I thought that people were against homeopathy (whatever it is) because A) it isn't scientifically proven to work and B) because it's basically the placebo effect.

I see my error.

alek0

Tron,
can you accept that in some cases conventional medicine is harmful?

Can you prove to me that I would be better off if I underwent complete hysterectomy at age 27 (as recommended by my doctor, and second opinion, and third opinion) instead of relying on diet/herbals which provide me almost complete pain releif (which I have never experienced with any option offered by conventional medicine)?

tronvillain

Of course conventional medicine can be harmful, but that is completely unrelated to the validity of homeopathy.

As for your case, who knows? What are the effects of that diet? What are the effects of those herbs? What does conventional medicine actually have to offer besides that operation? Would you have achieved this effect by doing nothing? I have no idea, but fortunately this is just a discussion about homeopathy.

alek0

Tron,

I don't think that homeopathy works and would have never tried it. What I do is not homeopathy, but many of you people who have posted on this thread are very hostile to alternative medicine in general, and I disagree with it. Also, I disagree with stereotyping people who would turn to alternative medicine as stupid and ignorant, and comparing alternative medicine with prayer. Many people turn to alternative methods after trying conventional ones which either didn't help or had awful side effects or both. That is why I have a problem with claims that alternative medicine does harm by turning people away from conventional medicine.

As for my case, only things which conventional medicine has to offer which I haven't tried yet (and have no intention to try) is menopause either surgical or medical. Diet changes certainly have done me no harm. Or are you claiming that for example caffeine is absolutely necessary for survival and that I do myself great harm by not consuming it?

tronvillain

alek0:
I am not hostile to alternative medicine in general, though I am hostile to it remaining alternative medicine. It may have much to offer, but I would like the wheat to be seperated from the chaff, and many proponents of alternative medicine seem hostile to that.

My only claim is that homeopathy can potentially cause harm by turning people away from conventional medicine in favour of the placebo effect (which is complex and can be quite powerful). Now, in some cases this may turn out to be the best thing that could have happened, but in many cases it will not be. In the case of other forms of alternative medicine, there may or may not be something substantial to the treatment.

Oh please, I made no claims whatsoever about your case. What part of "I have no idea" don't you understand?

[ May 21, 2002: Message edited by: tronvillain ]</p>

alek0

Does anyone have actual numbers for the people who have been harmed by alternative medicine and by conventional medicine?

Also, I would like to know is there any other scientific discipline where one can find as many contradictory studies as in medicine? Searching Medline is almost like the bible - you can always find something which will support your point of view, as well as something which will support completely opposite claim.

Dannyboy

i'm not sure how helpful that is going to be bearing in mind that conventional medicine treats vastly more people, and is far more likely to contain active ingredients. Your chances of getting sick as a result of conventional treatment will always exceed the odds with homeopathy, because more often than not the homeopath is not actually intervening in any significant way. What would you prefer; no treatment and no side effects or treatment with side effects? If you pick the first one, then the chances are that you don't actually need any treatment, any homeopathy is the therapy for you.

Agreed. The balance of evidence is the important thing. Homeopaths tend to wave isolated studies with ten participants which support their case, whereas i prefer repeatedly confirmed studies in order to recommend a treatment.

MrDarwin

Placebos present both an ethical and a legal dilemma for physicians. Yes, they can be very effective, but to work the physician essentially has to mislead the patient into thinking they will be effective. And if the placebo doesn't work, the patient can sue the doctor for malpractice.

MrDarwin

Does anybody have actual numbers for the people who have been helped by alternative medicine and by conventional medicine?