Homeopathic tablets

[Barbrae]

The only real value homeopaths have is that they may help folks who are afraid of the stigma attached to consulting anyone with the word "psych" in their title.

What they need to do is stay away from medical conditions which have shown to be readily treatable with real medicine, human and veternary... like diabetes, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and even hyperthyroidism in cats.

Look, if something is readably treatable then people don't look elsewhere for treatment. It is the conditions that do not respond to conventional treatment that we mostly see.

 

[BillHoyt]

Huh, surprised the law hasn't intervened with homeopathy then cause it has been around waaay longer than those investment scams, confidence ganmes, pyramid schemes and perpetual motion machines, hasn't it? Ah well, it's probably just a matter of time. Seriously.

Not surprising at all. There was a homeopath in congress at the time FDA legislation was being drafted. He ensured it was grandfathered in. It was done in such a way as to prevent the law from examining the lack of science to it.

But, in fact you are right. It is just a matter of time -- and effort on the part of rational activists -- to shut it down.

 

[BillHoyt]

Look, if something is readably treatable then people don't look elsewhere for treatment. It is the conditions that do not respond to conventional treatment that we mostly see.

Nonsense, but you're backing yourself into a corner by opening up an argument from desperation.

 

[Sarah-I]

Bill,

How has Barb done this? I can't see how myself and I would totally agree wiith her.

Here in the UK, we don't seem to have the same kind of problems with OTC remedies.

In the UK a lot of our patients come to us after conventional treatment has failed and they are totally fed up. Mostly, if conventional treatment is working, people do not think about the alternatives and this seems to be the case in the UK too.

 

[BillHoyt]

Bill,

How has Barb done this? I can't see how myself and I would totally agree wiith her.

Here in the UK, we don't seem to have the same kind of problems with OTC remedies.

In the UK a lot of our patients come to us after conventional treatment has failed and they are totally fed up. Mostly, if conventional treatment is working, people do not think about the alternatives and this seems to be the case in the UK too.

You don't see the apologetics here? First, it is an admission that homeopathy is not the patient's first choice. Interesting. Second, it says that, in desperation, they come to homeopaths. The same way they turn to the laetrile folks, the psychic healers, faith healers and other witch doctors. You don't see the apologetics here?

Now, let us couple that with homeopathy's total disregard, nay, even fear, of doing well-designed basic research. Clearly, you claim to have a group of people you think you can help and that you think real medicine cannot help. Clearly, you have here the opportunity to get the world to stand up and take notice of what you've got. And what do you do? Stand there, scratch your heads and drool.

You also, particularly in the U.K, and particularly following Randi's recent appearance on Horizons, utterly fail to seize the opportunity to demonstrate to us all how wrong we are and walk away with a cool million for your efforts or for that research that - oh, you can't do because you haven't got the funds for it, despite the fact that you gleefully report the growing amount of the medical care dollar being diverted your way. But, of course, showing Randi up would be "stooping" for cash, wouldn't it.

No, my dear, this is apologetics. You claim medicine can't treat and that you can. But you never get the rubber to meet the road. You can't or won't do the science. You can't or won't do the simple JREF test. You just keep moving the "desperate" marks through your offices and collecting the money.

The "desperation" apologetics is a two-edged sword and homeopaths who argue along these lines find themselves bleeding in the dark corner with the other witch doctors.

Now, come into the light for once.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

. Wanna talk about misleading labels - what about the new "migraine" pills? Advil for Migraine - Excedrin for migraine - it is the same dang thing as regular advil or regular excedrin just different packaging, what's up with that? Just a little tangent, not really questioning it.

Not misleading at all, really. You see, Advil and Excedrin, they did studies. With people who suffer from migraines. Gave some of them Advil, gave some of them a placebo. Looked at who felt better. The FDA gave them approval to market their drug as a migraine drug, even though it's the same stuff as in the regular package. But they proved that their drug works for the condition stated.

And as a migraine sufferer, I can tell you ibuprofen does work. But I get so many migraines, I buy my ibuprofen in bulk from Costco.

If I went and bought a homeopathic migraine remedy would it have had any studies for efficacy done on it?

 

[Z]

But there'd be tons of anecdotes to prove its worth - maybe even as many as snake oil had in the 1800s.

After all - 50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong...

 

[Chris Haynes]

HC - oh, come on, I have not been "cagey" at all. In fact I have tried very hard to answer any question thrown my way and was honest enough to admit when I didn't know the answer or to say when it comes to homeopathy there are several things we don't know. I told you very plainly how homeopathy could possibly help based on homeopathic theory which is all I have to go on. Please don't paint me like the homeopaths you may have had experience with, it ain't fair.

I actually have elaborated in detail on my experience in past threads - you must have missed it.

For which I apologize. I may have missed your experience... and I do remember feeling that even that you tried to answer how homeopathy works for a variety of conditions was just not satisfactory.

I still think that the best way to answer how homeopathy works compared to conventional medicine is to be clear what does and does NOT work. Be honest in saying that a child with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy may not be helped with homeopathy. Be sure to tell a cat owner that homeopathy will not cure hyperthyroidism and that conventional treatment should commence as quickly as possible.

That is not directed at you... but I think it should be shared with other homeopaths. They really need to know the limits.

 

[Chris Haynes]

HC,

'Homeopathic vaccines' are not homeopathic either.

....

And yet there are hundreds of websites and places where they are sold. Sometimes as equivalents to real vaccines.

Including by Bill Gray... one of the FOUNDERS of the Hahnemann College of Homeopathy (which I believe at least one of the folks in H'pathy attended).

Can you understand why it is so confusing to keep track of what is or is not homeopathic.

 

[Chris Haynes]

...taken when homeopathic to the case then it would indeed work. Wanna talk about misleading labels - what about the new "migraine" pills? Advil for Migraine - Excedrin for migraine - it is the same dang thing as regular advil or regular excedrin just different packaging, what's up with that? Just a little tangent, not really questioning it.

Label on my bottle of ibuprofen from Costco:
Active Ingredient (in each tablet): Ibuprofen USP, 200 mg

From the bottle of Aleve (which was recommended by the doctor for my son's migraines):

naproxen sodium tablets, 220 mg

Other information - each caplet contains sodium 20 mg

Inactive ingredients FD&C blue #2 lake, hypromellose, magnesium stearate, microcrystalline cellulose, plyethylnen glycol, povidone, talc, titanium oxide

........... Okay .......... Now what is wrong with putting the actual amount of ingredient on what is sold as a homeopathic remedy (whether it is a real one or not)?

Like this:

Active ingredients: capsium : 0.000 mg

Inactive ingredients: lactase (or water or alcohol)

 

[anonimouse]

In the UK a lot of our patients come to us after conventional treatment has failed and they are totally fed up. Mostly, if conventional treatment is working, people do not think about the alternatives and this seems to be the case in the UK too.

This is a very interesting statement. It makes a lot of sense that people that tend to gravitate towards homeopathy tend (on balance) to have conditions that are:

-chronic in nature, with natural ebbs and flows (like multiple sclerosis)
-stress-related, or even psychosomatic (like tension headches)
-untreatable or incurable by modern medical practice, like end-stage cancers

Obviously, chronic conditions like arthritis or multiple sclerosis tend to come and go - so it's very, very possible that the patient's current condition would have improved on its own, without homeopathic intervention. Yet I've never heard of a study that effectively separates spontaneous MS improvement from homeopathic MS improvement.

The improvement (perceived or otherwise) in some stress-related conditions can easily be explained by both the consultative process, as well as the fact that the homeopath tells the patient that he or she can "fix" them. (This in contrast to doctors who tell the patient otherwise - mostly because there is nothing structurally or chemically they *can* fix in the first place.) That's part of the reason I think some "chronic pain sufferers" find relief with wacky things like magnets - sometimes, just believing that something will work makes the patient feel better.

"Untreatable" conditions are a whole other ballgame. I've heard homeopaths talk about how their remedies can help autistic or developmentally disabled children, but never seen any conclusive evidence that said treatment works any better than occupational therapy or pharmaceutical options. And for incurable, terminal conditions? The best I can say is that homeopathy can probably claim a similar cure rate as modern medicine.

The point is that there is no proof that I've seen that homeopathy does anything to "fix" anyone's medical problems. It may make people feel better and give them a sense of hope. But so can my priest, and with all due respect I'm not going to him for medical advice anytime soon.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

From the bottle of Aleve (which was recommended by the doctor for my son's migraines):
[/B]

Not to derail the thread, but how well does Aleve work for your son's migraines? My son gets them, too, and he used to take naproxyn for his JRA, so I know he tolerates it well.

 

[epepke]

This is a very interesting statement. It makes a lot of sense that people that tend to gravitate towards homeopathy tend (on balance) to have conditions that are:

-chronic in nature, with natural ebbs and flows (like multiple sclerosis)
-stress-related, or even psychosomatic (like tension headches)
-untreatable or incurable by modern medical practice, like end-stage cancers.

There was an article in Skeptical Inquirer many years ago about how to design a health practice to take advantage of this. I can't remember who wrote it or in what issue it appeared.

Basically, all it required is that the treatment be completely harmless. Just follow this simple algorithm:

1) If the patient gets worse, up the dosage.
2) If the patient gets better, lower the dosage.

This will naturally follow the cycles of most illnesses but give the impression that the treatment causes the cycles.

Ultimately, three things can happen:

1) The patient continues
2) The patient gets better
3) The patient dies

If 1, you can play this game forever. If 2, you can claim credit, as it will always happen after an upswing during which the patient is under treatment. If 3, you can always claim that you just didn't get to the patient in time.

Bonus question: how many non-woowoo medical practices are supported by a similar kind of algorithm? Probably lots.

 

[Chris Haynes]

Aleve seems to work a bit better than the ibuprofen. But you do have to get it early... like just when the visual symptoms start.

I have to remember to have the doctor fill out the paperwork for the bottle to be kept in the school nurse's office next week. He has been known to have a migraine start in 2nd period... go to the nurse, get the Aleve... and then be back for 4th period. Last year I only had to pick him up once to come home.

Also, his migraines have lessoned since he was put on beta blockers (Atenolol) for his heart. He has not had a migraine all summer (of course, he has also not had a first period foreign language teacher trying to pry some work out of him either).

Oh, and another derailment: I do not get migraines (that is reserved for hubby's family, including hubby). But I used to get nasty cramps... I love ibuprofen. It was such a relief to FINALLY have something that actually worked for those &^%$#! cramps. (though now I have have turned into a crone... I am past the hot flash stage, and cramps are distant memory. hurray!!!)

 

[Sarah-I]

HC,

Yes, I can understand how you would be confused about the homeopathic vaccines. Some homeopaths do use these methods and there are specific schedules that have been developed. Although some homeopaths do use this, I still do not believe it to be homeopathic and would not use this method myself.

I would say that a constitutional remedy is always the best option.

 

[BillHoyt]

I would say that a constitutional remedy is always the best option.

Which translates to: let the patient fall ill, let them pass the contagion to many others during the infectious period, then pump them with voodoo water until the thing passes of its own accord? Brilliant.

 

[Chris Haynes]

oh, good grief.

Okay, so WHO does practice real homeopathy?

And how would you tell if they did?

Let's see... you have a person like Wim in H'pathy who prescribes multiple remedies at multiple times a day. Is he a real homeopath? Prester John has been known to correct Wim's understanding of homeopathy... and has now declared himself a homeopath. Is Prester John a real or even better homeopath than Wim?

THEN... there is Bill Gray who help found a homeopathic college, but who sells homeopathic vaccines. Is he a real homeopath?

Snoopy went to the homeopathic college he founded... and since HE does not practice real homeopathy --- Does this mean that SHE is not a real homeopath?

There are over 18000 hits with a search on homeopathic vaccines:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=homeopathic+vaccine+&btnG=Google+Search ... starting off with this lovely missive:
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Health/Health-BirdmanVaccineLtr.html with this pronouncement, "because homeopathy may well be the solution to the vaccine shortage for smallpox and the other diseases, with the additional property of being nontoxic"

Oh, and this bit from http://www.alexharris.co.uk/article/PARENTS_WARNED_ON_NATURAL_JABS_194.asp (an ambulance chasing law firm reprinting copyrighted material from The Times): "Christina Head, a homeopath in south London, says she has given the homeopathic measles vaccine to 2,000 children. Head, who is not otherwise medically qualified, admitted that some had developed the disease but she insisted that homeopathic remedies used with the vaccine prevent the infection being serious."

Is Christina Head a real homeopath?

If she isn't, well.. she is in your neck of the woods and you should have a talk with her about real homeopathy. Remind her that there is no such thing as a homeopathic vaccine, especially since some of her patients actually came down with the disease.


Perhaps the REAL homeopaths need to do some serious quality control enforcement of those who claim to be homeopaths, but really aren't.

 

[Rolfe]

Look, if something is readably treatable then people don't look elsewhere for treatment. It is the conditions that do not respond to conventional treatment that we mostly see.

Barb, I really do wish you would promote this point of view on the H'pathy site. Particularly to the other Barbara (Alphonse), and that other poster (I forget her name) who is determinedly denying her hyperthyroid cat proven effective treatment, with Wim's encouragement.

If homoeopaths confine themselves to patients who either have nothing wrong with them in the first place (hypochondria, the one ailment for which I could be persuaded homoeopathy might be effective), or are going to get better on their own in their own good time, or have a condition which real medicine can't offer much help for, then frankly, real medics have more to do than argue with them most of the time. The problem is that this is by no means always the case.

Snoopy is a good example of the worst practices. Have you read her appalling article on Why Choose Homeopathy First?

People always come to us last. By the time they get here, they've already been poisoned, mutilated, and relieved of their life savings. Nonetheless, they believe they've taken the right steps in seeing the "real" doctors first. If only they knew that the modern medical paradigm is built on a faulty premise!

I've tried to find out what she means by "faulty premise", but failed to get a coherent answer. (The article itself merely demonstrates a total failure to understand what real medicine is actually about, by concentrating solely on the trivial shallows where mainly OTC symptom-relieving preparations can be misrepresented as "suppression".)

This is the sort of attitude that most homoeopaths exhibit when you really get down to it, though some of them prudently hide it in mixed company. Real medicine is wrong, and ineffective, and positively harmful, while homoeopathy is correct, successful and safe. (Funny it's such a fringe pursuit then, isn't it?) Patients are encouraged to regard real medicine with fear and suspicion, and to see a homoeopath first. Even where real medicine is reluctantly admitted, it is often presented as a "last resort" rather than the obvious thing you try first (for example Shirley, again in the hyperthyroid cat thread). Now is seeing a homoeopath first really a good idea?

This of course was the point of the Addison's disease question, which Snoopy failed so spectacularly. (HC's point about hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was essentially the same one.) Can a homoeopath recognise when a patient is presenting with vague but possibly serious symptoms of a life-threatening condition? Answer, no they can't. In a situation like this the patient is in serious danger of death while the homoeopath tells her to come off the pill or prescribes some magic sugar pills. And while it may sound unlikely in practice, consider the possibility of a convinced homoeopathy believer who developed the symptoms listed.

Far more common is the denial of lifesaving treatment to animals by the convinced believer. If Alphonse herself was suffering the way Sarah was suffering, I'll bet the ideological purity would have gone by the board a lot sooner. But we see it again and again, both on the homoeopathy web sites and in real life. Animals suffer for the false beliefs of their owners. Lunatics like Wim demonise the medicine that could really help, and seem more concerned that the true faith should not be broken than for the cat's suffering.

So OK, Barb, real medicine is struggling with Crohn's disease and IBS (though the fact that you didn't seem to know which you had does raise a bit of a question about how far this was pursued). Real medics will admit this. They will also decline to take the credit for coincidental improvements or spontaneous recoveries. Now you were lucky enough to experience what we would regard as a spontaneous recovery while dabbling with homoeopathy. Real medicine doesn't really mind if you want to believe that was cause and effect - you're better, and that's the main thing. But when the members of what is in effect the Lottery Winners Club (those who happened to get better while taking magic sugar pills and became conveinced believers as a result, which I think you'll find accounts for a substantial proportion of homoeopaths) start to preach that all anyone has to do to be certain of winning the jackpot is to buy a ticket (and so you shouldn't bother taking a job), it's not so harmless.

I know you're convinced, but do you really think real doctors are that stupid? If these "miracle cures" were repeatable, could be produced reasonably reliably, and appeared more frequently in homoeopathy patients than in patients not playing with magic water, they'd go for it, molecules or no molecules. Medicine is nothing if not pragmatic.

Your own beliefs are your own affair. But when you start promoting magic sugar pills as effective, and associate with people like Snoopy "faulty premise" Lewis and Wim "better to let the cat die than try real medicine" Pardaan, and Divina "we all know that allopathic medicine has never, ever helped anyone at all" ChaChaHeels, do you think you're really in good company?

Rolfe.

 

[Chris Haynes]

...So OK, Barb, real medicine is struggling with Crohn's disease and IBS (though the fact that you didn't seem to know which you had does raise a bit of a question about how far this was pursued). ....

Okay, so I am not going nuts. She really did not tell exactly which one she had. They are two completely different things, except that many symptoms overlap.

I do not know much about Crohn's, other than a member of Pearl Jam, Mike McCready, is going to participate in the "You Gotta Have Guts" 5K Walk/Run in local park this Saturday (http://www.ccfa.org/chapters/northwest/ )...

But I am familiar with IBS... and how it is closely tied to psychological stress (my hubby whipped it by a clear liquid diet for a few days AND by stepping down from management and going back to being a plain engineer, where the work is more fun). So I can easily see how the talking part of homeopathic therapy could be useful.

 

[Rolfe]

Okay, so I am not going nuts. She really did not tell exactly which one she had. They are two completely different things, except that many symptoms overlap.

I do not know much about Crohn's, other than a member of Pearl Jam, Mike McCready, is going to participate in the "You Gotta Have Guts" 5K Walk/Run in local park this Saturday (http://www.ccfa.org/chapters/northwest/ )...

But I am familiar with IBS... and how it is closely tied to psychological stress (my hubby whipped it by a clear liquid diet for a few days AND by stepping down from management and going back to being a plain engineer, where the work is more fun). So I can easily see how the talking part of homeopathic therapy could be useful.

I'm sorry, my memory was somewhat at fault. (In my defence, Xanta - currently posting as QII - has a very similar sort of tale and IBS features in that one.)

I searched for the post where Barb told us her story (she was posting as Phil63 at the time, but that identity was apparently lost by the software), and her actual words were

I was diagnosed with Crohns disease and Ulcerative COlitis, after several misdiagnosis - the MD's never did decide which of the two it was - different gastros gave different diagnosis fromt he same colonoscopy results.....

.... and so to the inevitable miracle cure.

I have a small collection of reported "miracle cures" where (animal) patients staged allegedly spectacular recoveries from serious or chronic conditions after a few judiciously-selected magic sugar pills. Put these together in one room and you'd easily be convinced there was something amazingly effective there. However, vets know that the cases written up were the extreme exception, and that all the other dogs with the same conditions still have to be managed the usual way, more's the pity.

On-line homoeopathy forums like H'pathy are just such a room. The Amazing Coincidences Club, whose similar experiences validate each other's, and reinforce the belief that the probability of recovery following homoeopathy is far higher than it really is. Add to that the admitted concentration on self-limiting and chronic-fluctuating conditions in their own practices, and it is possible to see how such beliefs become unassailable.

Rolfe.