Dannyboy

i have a problem with homeopathy.

Basically, i don't think it works in any physical way. In fact, i don't think there is any possibility that it ever could work (because, let's face it, all that homeopathic remedies contain is water and wishful thinking). Still, while people believe that it does work, then it can do good things in helping to relieve minor ailments which some positive thinking and a touch of the placebo effect are enough to see off. That wouldn't happen if it were debunked to everyone's agreement as useless.

BUT, while people are left believing in it's efficacy, homeopathy can do a great deal of damage by being put to uses which it is wholly incapable of meeting. Homeopathy emphatically cannot treat cancer, diabetes, emphysema or liver disease (all of which i have seen it advertised to banish) because these are serious organic illnesses which are not going to respond to the 'memory' of a substance contained in a few teaspoons-full of water. And while people are waiting for this wonder-remedy to cure them (as faithfully promised by your local unscrupulous and/or stupid alternative practitioner), they may very well neglect conventional treatments which could radically improve (or, in extreme cases, save) their lives.

There have been several cases of death by this kind of medical self-neglect in the UK (where i work as a nurse, hence my interest in the subject), and i never know quite what to say when people ask my advice on the subject. i almost want to say, 'Anything which doesn't actually require treatment, i wholeheartedly recommend homeopathy, but for goodness sake, don't use it on anything serious', but of course, that would reveal my true opinion that it doesn't really work.

This is a bit of a rant, i know, but i'm interested in your opinions. Is it acceptable to recommend a therapy purely on the basis that it will probably make someone feel better, or should there always be clinical evidence to back it up?

Should homeopathy be completely debunked, removing it's positive effects in many peoples' lives, but also removing its dangers?

What do you say?

Dannyboy

Synaesthesia

I think that people should be encouraged to use alternative medicine as such, as a replacement for medicine of proven causal efficacy.

I won't loose much sleep over it.

Bree

I'm probably going to get flamed for this one...

I do actively practise homeopathy. HOWEVER (before you get all hot and heavy one me) - I do NOT practise it with the intent to cure myself of wonderous diseases, such as diabetes or cancer or anything serious. Nor did my doctor, an actual MD who, when all else failed, pushed me in that direction. His thoughts? If nothing else has worked, it doesn't hurt to try the last resort.

In short: I am allergic to yeasts. All yeasts. If I didn't have my homeopathy, I couldn't eat bread, pasta, or any sugars (since they promote yeast growth). My diet would be severely restricted - you should see the pathetically short list of foods that I was "allowed" to eat before homeopathy. If I were to eat anything with yeast, I would get REALLY sick (physically) and start growing a whitish fungus all over my body. It was NOT cool.

After about a month of taking the remedy (which I was VERY skeptical about, but hey, it couldn't hurt!) the fungus disappeared and I tentatively started eating fruit again. Then a bit of bread. Then <gasp> some spaghetti (a childhood favourite long neglected). I have been on the remedy for 6 years now and can eat pasta with the best of 'em, without pause.

I DID discontinue the remedy last year, when I was short on cash. BIG MISTAKE - the fungus slowly grew back and I couldn't wear shoes because it was so bad on my feet. However, I started back up and the symptoms disappeared.

Do I think homeopathy is quackery? I think SOME of it is - but I can only go on what I read. I know that MY life would be drastically different if I did not have this treatment. I think it has helped me, and judging from the extreme differences in relief, I honestly can say that the relief is NOT all in my mind.

[ May 18, 2002: Message edited by: Bree ]</p>

Coragyps

Bree - Wow! That's pretty wild, given what I know of homeopathy. As a chemist, I have to think that the whole field is pure bullshit, but then there are some reports like yours which suggest otherwise.

I guess there has been some actual scientific research done into the efficacy of homeopathic cures, with mixed results. My guess is that there should be more studies done, but it may be tricky: who funds the work, and how do you ethically run a double-blind study on such a thing? I guess you could do your dilutions on distilled water instead of "medicine" for a control....if that's not what most practitioners are doing already.

Dannyboy: My leaning is to condemn homeopathy utterly, and do the same to faith healing. But just perhaps I'm coming from a naturalistic bias. What both areas perhaps need is, like I said above, careful debunking by, say, some kind of a consortium set up for that purpose, so that the participating researchers don't get flamed out of a job if their results end up being "too unscientific."

And Bree: What's to keep you from home-brewing your own juice?

Bree

I DO brew my own "juice" - but you have to get the nystatin from somewhere .

theyeti

What about beer? Dear God, WHAT ABOUT BEER!!!

tronvillain

Homeopathy is total quackery, and while I'm glad to hear it helps you Bree, that doesn't change the fact that if it's an actual homeopathic remedy then it is nothing but a placebo. I met a mother who was considering giving her child homeopathic vaccinations rather than the real thing, and it just sickened me.

[ May 18, 2002: Message edited by: tronvillain ]</p>

Toto

There are homeopathic remedies that cannot be more than a placebo, and then there are other herbal remedies that homeopaths sometimes prescribe that are not diluted to the point of non-existence, and have a definite effect. What Bree describes doesn't sound like classic homeopathy.

Skeptic/freethinker Wendy Kaminer goes to a homeopath. She says it works, and she doesn't want to know any more than that because she is afraid if she learns there is nothing to it, the placebo effect will stop working.

tronvillain

Yes, I have her book, Sleeping With Extra-Terrestrials.

alek0

You seem to forget that not everybody would choose conventional treatments due to risks/side effects. Therefore, alternative treatments including homeopathy (which I don't think it works or at least I am cetain that proposed explanation how it works is wrong) are a good thing as long as they don't actively do any damage. Some alternative treatments, such as "oxidative therapy" (intravenopus H2O2 and irradiating blood with UV) are physically harmful and should be discouraged. Those which can only harm your wallet (if you paid for it and it didn't work) should be available.

If you disagree with it, you are free not to use it. You have no right to make medical decisions for anyone else. People should never be forced to accept treatment even if it is generally considered to be good for them.

I am using and will continue using nutritional/herbal treatments for my endometriosis. I have been almost completely pain free for more than two years (compared to waking up in ER because I fainted from the pain during period). Restricting diet and taking herbal supplements is definitely less drastic than hysterectomy which my doctor recommended. Personally, I don't care whether what I am experiencing is placebo or real effect. What matters to me is that I feel good, far better than I would feel if I followed any conventional treatment.