Alternative Medicine

Myksyk · 08-12-2003 4:32pm #1

I'm interested in hearing what people have to say about alternative medicine. Either their experience or their opinion. This was the topic of the last Irish Skeptics public lecture by Dr. Brian Hughes of NUIG (well, in a roundabout way ... it was actually looking at the psychology of health behaviour and what this tells us about alternative practices). So guys and gals ... are ye skeptical? are ye convinced of it? when it says it works or when people says it works...what EXACTLY is at work? Can we group them altogether ... after all, they're fairly divergent, sometimes mutually contradictory, in theories and practices. Why should we care either way??

Myksyk · 08-12-2003 9:19pm

Here are my thoughts on one of the most popular of alternative 'medicines', Homeopathy. This is my "Ten Things You REALLY Need to Know about Homeopathy" rant!

1. Homeopathy is a multi-billion dollar international industry whose monies are earned selling people sugar water.

2. Homeopathic preparations are produced by diluting substances in water to a level where none of the substance is left (that's right...NONE...just plain old water remains). The over the counter homeopathic remedies sold in your local health food store or chemist are generally in the form of pills. These pills are lactose (sugar) tablets on which a single drop of this plain water has been placed. Homeopathic preparations contain no active ingredients. There is no medicine in this 'medicine'. You are buying sugar and water only. On the side of each bottle a particular herbal extract or mineral is listed, along with the dilution; but not one molecule of these herbs or minerals is actually in the tablets.

3. Homeopaths know this but say that the water in the preparations "remembers" that it was once in contact with such ingredients and can transmit this memory by unknown forces to your body. These claims constitute some of the most extraordinary and bizarre in the alternative healthcare field and yet people tend to see homeopathy as mainstream and plausible (many may mix it up with herbalism, and think the preparations contain active ingredients).

4. Strange that the water remembers the homeopathic product it was in contact with, but manages to ignore the many other pollutants with which it must also have had contact. Very bright water, or very wacky notion. You decide!

5. The claims made by homeopaths about how homeopathy works fundamentally contravene basic laws of chemistry and physics as well as common sense.

6. The effects seen on administration of homeopathic water are far more reasonably explained by well known psychological and physical factors which together constitute the placebo effect.

7. It has been said that Homeopathy is the greatest demonstration of the effectiveness of placebo.

8. Horizon recently took the James Randi $1,000,000 psychic challenge to show that homeopathy works. In the single best controlled scientific study of its kind involving a host of top British scientists the results were crystal clear. Homeopathy does not work. James kept his million.

9. A typical bottle of these sugar tablets costs between €6 and €8. Taken at this rate a 1Kg bag of sugar would cost you approximately €1,400. That's mighty fancy sugar.

10. Still interested in trying out homeopathy? Remember the old adage, 'buyer beware'.

davros · 09-12-2003 1:00am

Originally posted by Myksyk
Can we group them altogether ... ?

In my head, they divide into two categories.

In Category I, the practitioner physically interacts, hands on, with the patient (osteopathy, for example) or gives the patient meaningful quantities of some substance to ingest (herbal medicine). There is no need to subscribe to the rationale behind the treatment to accept that the treatment can have a real effect on the human body. We know that plant extracts can have a huge effect on health - poisonous as well as curative. And physical contact is a component of many non-controversial therapies - physiotherapy and massage are well-recognised treatments for physical injuries.

In Category II, the practitioner does not touch the patient or supply any active substance that might be construed as medicinal, in the normal sense. In reiki, the "masseur" does not need physical contact with the patient. In homeopathy, the only substances prescribed are often nothing more than distilled water and sugar. These treatments can not be justified by anything we know about biology or chemistry. Explanations therefore rely on the almost-magical (energy fields projected from the therapist) or on pseudo-scientific theories that have not been confirmed scientifically ("the memory of water", in the case of homeopathy).

For Category I, the task of the health community is to identify the parts that work, drawing on traditional knowledge and folklore as a guide to developing new, more effective treatments. For example, a recent New Scientist article mentioned that in South-East Asia, a traditional treatment for burns is potato skins. It turns out that the skins contain an agent that prevent bacteria from adhering to the wound, reducing the chance of infection.

For Category II, the burden of proof is much more on the proponents of the therapies since their ideas violently contradict our accumulated knowledge to date. The task of the health community in this case should be to explain to the public that these theories are far out on the fringe and lack even the slightest evidence that they are correct (and indeed have often been scientifically tested and found lacking).

There are, of course, many overlaps between these categories. For example, reflexology does involve physical contact but claims beneficial effects far from the point of contact (a reflexologist on Newstalk 104 recently claimed to be able to reduce the size of cancerous tumours). So it more properly belongs in the second category.

Calibos · 09-12-2003 1:54am

I made most of those points on the 'Hopeopathy' thread on PI which is where davros noticed me and knew I was a like skeptic-minded soul.

The usual comparisons were trotted out about how treating a headache with something that causes headaches was the same as vaccinations ie. inactivated viral vaccine immunises you against real virus. There is no comparison!

This whole lark about the greater dilution of the active ingredient the more potent the effect :rolleyes: Yeah, the less of the active ingredient that probably exascerbates the headache instead of curing it, the quicker the headaches go. What a surprise!!

:D

Myksyk · 11-12-2003 8:35pm

Interesting debate on Marian Finucane this morning. Some alternative practitioners (herbalist, homeopath, accupuncturist, etc...six in all I think) were given a chance to tackle Dr. Brian Hughes on what he said last week on the programme. I though he dealt very well with the discussion.

The alternative practitioners, I thought, generally entered the debate fairly and reasonably (though I thought their arguments were flawed)...except for one guy who lost the run of himself and told Marian that he had been at one of the Skeptics meetings and said 'you should see them Marian' suggesting that if one attended one of these meetings one would be greeted with a bunch of wide-eyed crazed cultists with hands joined in the air chanting mantras like 'Darwin, Newton, Schrodinger et al'. He then went on to describe ALL skeptics as 'cynical, closed-minded fundamentalist born-again scientists'. Hmmm ... good defence of his position that!!

However, I was disappointed that a fundamental question remains unanswered. Do the practitioners acknowledge placebo effects and other psycho-biological factors and if so how do they know that the effects they are seeing and the testimonials they so strongly rely on are not solely due to these processes? It seems all other medical and health-related practitioners accept that these processes are a big factor in outcome but AM practitioners hardly ever mention the phenomenon. Yes ... for the millionth time ... most therapy interventions will show an effect ...BUT can you please demonstrate that these effects are above and beyond placebo. AM has consistently failed to demonstate this.

Marian also made an interesting point worthy of comment. She said, more or less, 'so what?' What does it matter why it works, as long as it works. I think there are a number of reasons it matters. Firstly, AM is selling us ideas and theories as well as practices. If the practices seem to work (but are really placebo) then the erroneous ideas undepinning the practices gain credibility they do not deserve. This could result in false and misleading ideas about the world, health or the human condition ... hardly unimportant consequences. Secondly, practitioners (whatever about clients) have an ethical duty to demonstrate that what they are selling is effective beyond placebo. Thirdly, smug reliance on the relatively powerful but ultimately quite limited placebo effect will result in stagnation for any practice. Since practitioners will not be looking to go beyond the effect for really powerful interventions, they will never find more powerful interventions. This is the case with a lot of AM. They will never demonstrate effects beyond what can reasonably be explained by reference to the placebo and other factors related to the psychology of health behaviour.

Final point. Not all AM practices are equal. Herbalism is a million miles from homeopathy and to place the two in the same category does little for the credibility of herbalism, which clearly has or can have some merits. Homeopathy is plain, simple 'undiluted' placebo.

Syth · 11-12-2003 10:09pm

One man set up a fake crystal site and then criticised it on another forum under a different name. Many people supported the crystal site, until the original author admitted it was all a test of gullibility. See this New Scientist article.

I think all medicines (alternate & 'modern') should have to withstand a scientific study on their effictivness. If they 'fail' then they should be ignored until they work.

sextusempiricus · 11-12-2003 11:56pm

I live near a bone-setter. You might call him my opposition. I'm offering mainstream medicine and he is 'putting bones back in'. His patients almost invariably have more than one disc out and by various manoevres often, according to clients with a very audible click, he actually seems to help some people. I wonder at his ability to see a bone out. Perhaps he has x-ray eyes. Also popular used to be 'the charge' applied to backs and joints (a mixture of turpentine and lead lotion) which caused the most violent allergic dermatitis. The huge blisters were supposedly fluid coming from the swollen joint. Of course most dislocations are associated with an obvious deformity, torn joint capsules and ligaments. Even with normal looking joints with no deformity he still 'puts the bone back in'and when I see them subsequently (because the Dept of Social Welfare will not accept his medical certs) many seem to be happy with the treatment given. Perhaps this isn't surprising if you believe part of your skeletal structure has been slipping out and it is now safely back in place. Of course if you call all backaches disc problems and claim to put the disc back in (a procedure about as easy as putting toothpaste back in the tube) you'll have a pretty high success rate. Sometimes, but not too often, I can act the bone-setter. One of the most satisfying procedures is the quick manipulation of a toddler's 'pulled elbow' due to a minor subluxation . They come in refusing to use their arm and after a few seconds procedure, also often associated with a click, are back to normal and raiding my loillipop jar. At least I'm on the alert for the unexpected. Rough handling of patients whose backache is due to myeloma, bony secondaries or TB can have tragic consequences.
What characterizes these 'alternative practitioners is wacko theories to explain what they are doing, a high spontaineous cure rate and, as Brian Hughes explained, a clever use of the placebo response. My local bone-setter also seriously believes he has a god-given gift. If things go wrong its a case of 'let the buyer beware'. If I make a mistake I have to contact the medical Protection Society!

Myksyk · 13-12-2003 11:18am

Syth ... checked out that site on crystal homeopathy. Very interesting. I read through most of the VERY long thread that he had had with converts to his made up therapy. Says a lot about the processes involved (and not involved) in this sort of thing.

Myksyk · 13-12-2003 9:29pm

BTW, was in a pharmacy today ... It really annoys me to see them hawking all sorts of nonsense from magnet therapy to homeopathy ... these guys have science degrees don't they? They are part of professional organisations with some sort of code of ethics aren't they? The usual argument is 'well, people want to buy that stuff' ... sure, lets give Joe Public what he wants. Never mind that our implicit professional imprimatur is giving credibility to all manner of hokum. I reckon this amounts to selling your professional integrity. I wonder, of the average pharmacist, what percentage is scientist and what percentage is business person? Are they making so much extra from these nostrums that they just have to sell them to keep afloat???

sextusempiricus · 22-12-2003 8:29pm

Perhaps the clearest difference of 'Alternative Medicine' to mainstream medicine is its unwillingness to subject its claims to rigorous testing. 2 million papers on medicine are published each year. Medical practitioners cannot read them all but summaries from 50 journals selected by searchers trained to spot papers of importance for practice are published about twice a year by the British Medical Journal in hefty volumes of over a 1000 thin pages ('Evidence-Based Medicine'). When AM practitioners subject their 'treatments' to similar scrutiny then I'll take note of their work and perhaps even agree with Prince Charles when he told a meeting of the British Medical association in 1982 that today's unorthodoxy (i.e. alternative medicine) "is probably tomorrow's convention." In the meantime I would advise patients, if they are inclined to go the AM route, to first check perhaps that excellent website.

UCC Philosoph · 22-10-2010 6:30pm

If you still want to hear different peole's views on the topic there is a debate in UCC on Monday November 1st.

Paul O'Donoghue of Irish Skeptics, Thomas Cotter of UCC Biochemistry Department, Orla Broderick of Irish Homeopaths and British MP David Tredinnick will be speaking. The motion is That This House Believes Alternative Medicine Does More Harm than Good. It is at 19.30 in Kane G19 on UCC Main Campus. The Medical Society and Philosophical Society are hosting it. Everyone is welcome.

condra · 06-04-2011 1:45pm

Long before I became a skeptic, I was treated with homeopathy and acupuncture. Neither had any effect on me.

noxqs · 19-04-2011 6:25pm

People are inclined to believe in witchcraft, voodoo, homeopathy, faith healing, crystals and so on. Since it is a simple set of beliefs, that anyone can understand.

Science is hard, people don't understand biochemistry and the massive body of work required to get drugs and medical procedures to market.

Which makes people distrustful. Just like some people will oppose nuclear energy even if it was possible to make a hypothetical system that is 100% infallible and even cleans the air and oceans while producing unlimited free energy and restores extinct species in the process and brings on world peace.

meryem · 16-05-2011 2:27pm

In my knowledge some of the homeopathic dilutions are made by diluting it with alcohol and it is mentioned on the bottle label. And such a dilution is served after mixing with milk glucose/sugar balls called globules than normal sugar. And what I consider this alternative medicine treatment is normal medical therapy while Allopathy is a emergency medical system with a lot of side effects.

Regarding use of nuclear energy I don't find it any good to use considering it's risks and harms in abnormal environment(take recent Japan incident as example here). It is better to put air, solar and sea energy more to use for producing energy than nuclear fuel for the risks attached with it.

looksee · 21-05-2011 7:49pm

I don't believe in most alternative medicine except perhaps herbalism. However years ago I had a cat that had a severe skin problem - the hair was falling out and there were large bald patches that looked unhealthy. The vet tried all sorts with no effect, and in the end said he would try homeopathy. Which he did, and the effect was miraculous. The cat's skin cleared and the fur began to regrow. I don't think you can do placebos on cats. Maybe it was coincidence and it was going to get better anyway. I still would not use homeopathy myself, but I have no idea why or how it worked.

WesternNight · 24-05-2011 8:36pm

looksee wrote: »

I don't believe in most alternative medicine except perhaps herbalism. However years ago I had a cat that had a severe skin problem - the hair was falling out and there were large bald patches that looked unhealthy. The vet tried all sorts with no effect, and in the end said he would try homeopathy. Which he did, and the effect was miraculous. The cat's skin cleared and the fur began to regrow. I don't think you can do placebos on cats. Maybe it was coincidence and it was going to get better anyway. I still would not use homeopathy myself, but I have no idea why or how it worked.

Just a small point, homeopathy and herbalism aren't the same.

And there are some herbal solutions that have been shown to have beneficial effects. The same cannot be said for homeopathy.

Galvasean · 13-06-2011 12:38am

I used to go out with a girl who practiced alternative medicines/treatments including homeopathy (something which I have contempt for). It was one of those things I simply tried to avoid talking to her about.... ever!

Belfast · 30-01-2012 3:21pm

I had no Idea that the were so many branches of alternative medicine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_branches_of_alternative_medicine

I believe in Germany the herbal medicine.is not consider alternative medicine and doctors are trained in medical school in its use.

I am Skeptical about all branches of alternative medicine or other wise.

My own experience of alternative medicine is

I have asthma

I had just got out of hospital in Belfast city after and asthma attack.

I was in 2 inhalers and 2 different pills for my asthma and my asthma was getting less stable.

I met a chiropractor by chance.

He said is had Scoliosis. He said one hip was one inch higher than the other and I was pitting 10 more weight on one foot than the other.

I think the spine problem might be the result of a fall on ice when I was a child. I had suffered from back pain that came and went over the years.

I noticed that in the year after the accident my breathing got worse.

He treated me for 6 months I no longer needed the 2 different pills and my asthma was stable.

Years later I noticed that using dairy products made me cough more and made my asthma worse.

I stopped using dairy products apart for cream and butter and found I no longer need inhaler except when I have a chest infection.

I noticed that if I used dairy products made for non homogenised milk it did not cause a problem with my breathing.

Of course this does not prove anything thing.

Alternative Medicine

Comments