Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Homeopathy; the new wallet inspector.

Options
12467

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    That would be the same Kate O'Connell who runs a pharmacy I take it? Big Pharma globally hates homeopathy because more and more people find that it works and it's threatening their monopoly.

    Ah so like most people with no evidence for a claim, you choose to make up a narrative about the people who do not believe the claim. Conspiracy Theory 101 stuff that is. Who needs evidence in a world where you can merely character assassinate people who disagree.

    But your narrative is not just unfounded but shows a remarkable ignorance of economics. If "Big Pharma" had any inclination that homeopathic water showed any efficacy at all they would likely not be threatened by that, so much as they would start to sell it. Or if they thought of it as a revenue stream, regardless of whether it worked or not, they could start to sell it. And as a user mentioned above, in some ways they already are.

    There is either evidence that a treatment works, or there is not. Conspiracy theory narratives are not going to change the fact that there simply is no evidence whatsoever that treating conditions with water.... other than a few conditions like, you know, thirst...... does anything at all.
    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    That's why you see these angry hateful articles in the papers about homeopathy appearing more and more

    No the reason you get angry articles is that people are pushing a product that appears to do nothing, on people who are vulnerable and desperate, at mark up prices that exploit people who have likely already lost a lot of money attempting to mediate their condition(s). Sometimes doing so while requesting the patient stop taking other medications and treatment plans.

    Charlatans, frauds, and the abuse of the vulnerable deserves every ounce of anger and hatred that is written their way. Preferably in the form of new laws that penalize them in proportion for their crimes.
    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    from people who've never taken it nor had any reason to seek medical assistance.

    Neither of which is relevant AT ALL. Whether someone giving the advice has taken it or not should not be relevant. Anecdote is not data, and the plural of anecdote is not evidence.

    The only advice worth taking on the subject is PRECISELY the advice that has failed to find even a modicum of efficacy in the product. That is the advice of double blind controlled studies implementing all the methodologies of epidemiology.
    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    I wonder if the boul Kate is going to be as forthright in the upcoming referendum about the dangers of the abortion pill. I assume not.

    What you mean like here where she was very clear people taking such a pill can potentially bleed to death? Yes, she seems more than informed, and willing to discuss, the potential risks of the drug. And the effects of any law that makes women feel compelled to take such a drug without medical advice, support, or consultation.


  • Options
    #93
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,856 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Harika wrote: »
    because it was not shaken 100! times

    You'd be long dead before you finish that. ;)


  • Options
    #94
    jmayo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,152 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Harika wrote: »
    It says water has memory, so if you give it something that resembles what you have and dilute it the water will keep this ingredient in memory. Basically the more you dilute it, the stronger it gets. You can try it yourself. Take your fav. booze and put it into a glass. Then spill it out, but leave a drop in it. Now fill the glass with water and swivel it 100 times. Then pour it away, but beware that there is still a drop in the glass. Add again water and swivel it 100 times. Pour it out and do this more 100 times. Finally fill the glass again with water. Now you have a super potent booze and a sip of it will kill you.
    That is homeopathy in a nutshell.

    Ahh finally we have explained the mystery of Jesus and the water and the wine.

    Now lets crack the walking on water bit.
    strandroad wrote: »
    Arnica is a plant, with recognised healing benefits. If you're using a formula with actual arnica in it, it's a legit herbal treatment (nothing to do with homeopathy). If you're using a homeopathic formula with no actual arnica in it, it's water.

    I would have seen people use Arnica gel a bit like I would have seen people use aloa vera.
    Never saw arnica solution i.e. water.
    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    But it conveniently forgets all the p**s and s**t that's been in it.

    Anyone that has been to India can disprove that theory that water definitely forgets the p**s and sh** that has been in it.
    Harika wrote: »
    because it was not shaken 100! times

    So must be shaken not stirred ?


  • Options
    #95
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Yup, apparently water only remembers stuff if you shake it. And not just any old shaking. It is called "cessation" and it has to be done in three directions. Something like 10 (or was it 100) times in each direction? So 10 times in the X axis, 10 in the Y, and 10 in the Z. Then suddenly it remembers everything.

    I would trot out the old cliche of "You could not make this crap up!" except, clearly, they have!


  • Options
    #96
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    That would be the same Kate O'Connell who runs a pharmacy I take it? Big Pharma globally hates homeopathy because more and more people find that it works and it's threatening their monopoly. That's why you see these angry hateful articles in the papers about homeopathy appearing more and more, from people who've never taken it nor had any reason to seek medical assistance.

    I wonder if the boul Kate is going to be as forthright in the upcoming referendum about the dangers of the abortion pill. I assume not.

    Big Pharma? You do know that Big Pharma has plays a big role in supplying people with their expensive placebos, right? Go into any pharmacy in this country and you'll see plenty of homeopathic voodoo on sale. Without prescription too, I might add.

    If you think Big Pharma isn't raking it in by selling homeopathy to the uninformed, I have some expensive water for you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Harika wrote: »
    Have you ever wondered who produces "homeopathy"? I give you a tip, its the same companies that produce the pills of Big Pharma. homeopathy has become Big Homeopathy already and is a rapidly growing business.
    E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiron
    Revenue €607,8 million (2015)
    Profit €73,9 million (2015)

    Q1+Q2 2016 already show an increase to 2015.

    That is not a nice apothecary that produces that in he back of a pharmacy for a penny and a dime.

    Well put. I didn't see your response before I made mine.

    It's crazy that people out there think that their snake oil was produced by some crusty called Tristan who lives by a spring and practices yoga.


  • Options
    #98
    Mrs Shuttleworth
    Registered Users Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭Mrs Shuttleworth


    Homeopathy isn't "pushed" on anyone. Most people who use it find their way naturally to it in their search for a cure, usually when front line treatments have failed.

    Royal family have been using it for decades.


  • Options
    #99
    Walter Bishop
    Registered Users Posts: 557 ✭✭✭Walter Bishop


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    Homeopathy isn't "pushed" on anyone. Most people who use it find their way naturally to it in their search for a cure, usually when front line treatments have failed.

    Royal family have been using it for decades.

    Oh well that really sets the seal on it so, it must work.


  • Options
    #100
    mikhail
    Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭mikhail


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    Royal family have been using it for decades.
    They've been inbreeding for centuries. I bet that's a good idea too.


  • Options
    #101
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    Homeopathy isn't "pushed" on anyone. Most people who use it find their way naturally to it in their search for a cure, usually when front line treatments have failed.

    Royal family have been using it for decades.

    The royals aren't known for being intellectual heavyweights.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    That would be the same Kate O'Connell who runs a pharmacy I take it? Big Pharma globally hates homeopathy because more and more people find that it works and it's threatening their monopoly.

    Without "big pharma", I would have been dead within six months of receiving my cancer diagnosis. I'm still going to die from it because because it was metastatic from the get-go but have been given a long reprieve, coming up on three years shortly.

    Meanwhile, anyone who recommends homeopathy over "big pharma" medicine to an early stage cancer patient who had a chance to be cured has blood on their hands.


  • Options
    #103
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,379 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    Most people who use it find their way naturally to it in their search for a cure, usually when front line treatments have failed.

    "Find their way naturally to it. .."
    What does that even mean?


  • Options
    #104
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    "Find their way naturally to it. .."
    What does that even mean?

    Turn to it in desperation because their illness is too far advanced to have any hope of survival.


  • Options
    #105
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Natural is also a magic word that is thrown around, if something is natural then it has an advantage.
    Of course there are a lot of natural things that aren't good for you; uranium, mercury, dog sh1t etc

    Has the detox craze taken of in Ireland yet?


  • Options
    #106
    Corruptedmorals
    Registered Users Posts: 4,194 ✭✭✭Corruptedmorals


    Homeopathy may not be actively pushed but it is dangled as an attractive, natural miracle cure to people who are at their most fragile and vulnerable and who will grasp at anything.

    I generally think that when it comes down to it, even the most vociferous supporters of homeopathy will want the best painkillers and sedatives produced by Big Pharma in their last days and not IV's of memory-water.

    I hate hearing stories of people abandoning medicine for it or other alternative therapies, hoping this or any other legislation will go through to control the industry and what they can claim.


  • Options
    #107
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,379 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    Homeopathy is also very attractive to people with feck all wrong with them who crave a bit of attention and validation as a "sick" person.


  • Options
    #108
    currants
    Registered Users Posts: 207 ✭✭currants


    Its popular with people with chronic illness to as the pharma company drugs often have side effects- got arthritis, take a dmard, your kidneys and liver may suffer but you'll be able to walk again...for a while anyway. There are lots of diseases pharma cant cure, people cant live their lives as they once did, get depressed, get desperate and the quacks and charlatans wait on the sidelines patiently. Of course many of these chronic illnesses follow paths of flare ups and remission throughout your life, dopes and the gullible will say it was the homeopath that cured them, then they stopped taking it and their illness got worse again. Chronic pain and associated lack of restful sleep impairs your judgement too.
    Herbalism is totally different and has been proven to work. Acupuncture works for pain management for some too, that's totally mad!


  • Options
    #109
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    currants wrote: »
    Its popular with people with chronic illness to as the pharma company drugs often have side effects- got arthritis, take a dmard, your kidneys and liver may suffer but you'll be able to walk again...for a while anyway. There are lots of diseases pharma cant cure, people cant live their lives as they once did, get depressed, get desperate and the quacks and charlatans wait on the sidelines patiently. Of course many of these chronic illnesses follow paths of flare ups and remission throughout your life, dopes and the gullible will say it was the homeopath that cured them, then they stopped taking it and their illness got worse again. Chronic pain and associated lack of restful sleep impairs your judgement too.
    Herbalism is totally different and has been proven to work. Acupuncture works for pain management for some too, that's totally mad!

    Herbalism is a load of nonsense too . About a handfull of the tens of thousands of herbal remedies for sale have any proven efficacy.

    Acupuncture is just palcebo effect.


  • Options
    #110
    Walter Bishop
    Registered Users Posts: 557 ✭✭✭Walter Bishop


    currants wrote: »
    Herbalism is totally different and has been proven to work. Acupuncture works for pain management for some too, that's totally mad!

    Citation needed.


  • Options
    #111
    currants
    Registered Users Posts: 207 ✭✭currants


    jh79 wrote: »
    Herbalism is a load of nonsense too . About a handfull of the tens of thousands of herbal remedies for sale have any proven efficacy.

    Acupuncture is just palcebo effect too

    Its not a load of nonsense if even a handful of them work- St John's Wort, milk thistle, chestnut extract, willow bark for salicylic acid-these things work for mild illnesses. the pharma versions are just standardised dosage wise. They dont actually know how acupuncture works-some guess its placebo, others guess it works on the mind's perception of pain. but it definitely works for some conditions:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/jul/26/acupuncture-sceptics-proof-effective-nhs


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Zascar
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 12,778 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zascar


    So my sister is mad into this and constantly tries to convince me. What is the best way to provide her of evidence that proves its rubbish once and for all?


  • Options
    #113
    mikhail
    Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭mikhail


    jh79 wrote: »
    Herbalism is a load of nonsense too . About a handfull of the tens of thousands of herbal remedies for sale have any proven efficacy.

    Acupuncture is just palcebo effect.
    Goldacre has written a bit about acupuncture. Apparently, it's a hoor to do double-blind trials on (you can control against a group the practicioner just sticks needles in randomly, but he/she has to know they're not doing it right), so it's hard to measure the placebo effect. The short version appears to be that it's no better than placebo all right.
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2007/sep/29/acupuncture


  • Options
    #114
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    currants wrote: »
    Its not a load of nonsense if even a handful of them work- St John's Wort, milk thistle, chestnut extract, willow bark for salicylic acid-these things work for mild illnesses. the pharma versions are just standardised dosage wise. They dont actually know how acupuncture works-some guess its placebo, others guess it works on the mind's perception of pain. but it definitely works for some conditions:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/jul/26/acupuncture-sceptics-proof-effective-nhs

    The pharma versions have a dose that works the herbs don't have near enough to have a clinical effect. There are exceptions but as i said already a handfull out of 10's of thousands.


  • Options
    #115
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    currants wrote: »
    Its not a load of nonsense if even a handful of them work

    It depends how you define "work" though. The simple fact is that when testing the efficacy of a drug on serious conditions one of the things we have to account for is there is a %, it varies but usually around 5%, who are simply going to get better anyway even if you do nothing.

    So if you randomly give 1000 people herbal remedies about 50 people will come back (there is your handful) claiming it worked. But it did not work. They just got better like they were always going to without the treatment.

    The less serious the condition the more % of people who will just get better anyway. Down to the common cold or general headaches where pretty much 100% of people will get better anyway.

    So to claim a handful of these things "work" one has to first show what condition it works on, how many people it "worked" on, and how many people can be expected to get better anyway for that particular condition and in what time frame. A lot of work and figures alas, but thankfully people out there ARE doing that work and finding out which treatment actually do something, and which do not appear to do anything.
    Zascar wrote: »
    So my sister is mad into this and constantly tries to convince me. What is the best way to provide her of evidence that proves its rubbish once and for all?

    As someone else on the thread said, you can not reason people out of a position the did not reason themselves into. You could get all the most powerful (that is to say the most dilute) remedies homeopathy offers and simply massively over dose on them all. The fact nothing at all will happen to you will not give any pause to the people who hold to homeopathy on faith.

    All the evidence is there. Paper, after paper, showing that the efficacy of homeopathy does not differ at all from Placebo. But all the evidence in the world will not convince someone who holds a position that was never based on evidence in the first place.

    One thing you could possibly try, though you can debate the ethics of it yourself, is spend 6 months of a year replacing all her treatments with tap water. Then after a year of her claiming the treatments have been helping her, reveal she has been having nothing but tap water for a year. That MIGHT shake the foundations of a persons faith, but even then I would be interested to see what narrative they come up with to cling to that faith anyway.
    mikhail wrote: »
    Goldacre has written a bit about acupuncture. Apparently, it's a hoor to do double-blind trials on (you can control against a group the practicioner just sticks needles in randomly, but he/she has to know they're not doing it right), so it's hard to measure the placebo effect. The short version appears to be that it's no better than placebo all right.
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2007/sep/29/acupuncture

    Yes it has been shown that placebo is more effective if the practitioner administering it believes in it themselves. With a drug you can mediate for this by not letting the person administering a tested drug know if they are administering the placebo or the real drug (double blinding).

    I have heard it is claimed this is not so easy with acupuncture as the practitioner would KNOW they are administering the real thing or a fake version and so this would affect the result.

    But I wonder if with a certain amount of imagination could this not be overcome. For example having practitioners trained in many sequences of acupuncture, one of which is entirely fake but THEY do not know which one could do it.

    Another one is to keep the practitioner blind to the condition they are treating. Give them for example 100 patients with back pain. But tell HALF the practitioners they are treating something totally different to back pain so they implement a different sequence. But they will still do it with all the confidence the other group would. And if there is any significant difference in the alleviation of back pain between the "correct" treatment and the "wrong" one..... then you would know there is something to acupuncture.

    And so on. Often in epidemiology and treatment testing, one simply needs to sit down and use ones imagination. I do not think testing acupuncture need be as hard as some people think.


  • Options
    #116
    Mrs Shuttleworth
    Registered Users Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭Mrs Shuttleworth


    Homeopathy is prescribed by overall symptom picture and patient history emotional not just the physical so you can't prove the efficacy or otherwise in a controlled clinical trial. Two patients with the exact same symptom could be prescribed different homeopathic remedies whereas the conventional medicine prescription is likely to be the same.

    The better homeopaths are those who use kinesiology to prescribe the remedy, it nails the right one to use straight off.


  • Options
    #117
    SATSUMA
    Registered Users Posts: 706 ✭✭✭SATSUMA


    I discovered homeopathy about 5 years ago. I took a remedy not knowing what it was and could not believe the results. When i read into it I became so curious. How could this work? I now take it when necessary, I visit my homeopath when necessary, i know a large proportion of people who use it. I recommend it whole heartedly. I do not think it will cure terminal cancer or reverse any deep pathology but I do believe it has its benefits. For Me, the proof is in the pudding. It works for me and my ailments. Let people make their own choices. Don't hate on them because it's not your choice or your belief. I'm not defending homeopathy, i dont care enough and I can absolutely see why people think it can not work.

    But it does.


  • Options
    #118
    Greentopia
    Registered Users Posts: 3,221 ✭✭✭Greentopia


    currants wrote: »
    Its not a load of nonsense if even a handful of them work- St John's Wort, milk thistle, chestnut extract, willow bark for salicylic acid-these things work for mild illnesses. the pharma versions are just standardised dosage wise. They dont actually know how acupuncture works-some guess its placebo, others guess it works on the mind's perception of pain. but it definitely works for some conditions:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/jul/26/acupuncture-sceptics-proof-effective-nhs

    Add agnus castus to that list for PMS and regulation of female hormones.
    I took it for the latter not wanting to take synthetic hormones indefinitely so I tried it and it worked.

    I was pretty sceptical but it started working to change the duration and frequency of my cycle pretty much straight away and I wasn't taking anything else or doing anything outside my normal routine that the change could be attributed to.

    It does have some clinical trial evidence for it's efficacy: http://ebmh.bmj.com/content/4/3/88

    But that's herbal. Homeopathy is a different story...complete horse manure at worst, harmless placebo at best. Unfortunately I know some otherwise sensible people who take it and refuse to believe it's just water, especially here in Germany-the home of homeopathy.

    I can get a prescription for homeopathic pills from my GP here if I want and it's covered by my private insurance. It annoys me that in a medically and scientifically advanced country with a generally very logical and educated populace that homeopathic BS is taken seriously by many and part of my money is used to fund its use.


  • Options
    #119
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    Homeopathy is prescribed by overall symptom picture and patient history emotional not just the physical so you can't prove the efficacy or otherwise in a controlled clinical trial. Two patients with the exact same symptom could be prescribed different homeopathic remedies whereas the conventional medicine prescription is likely to be the same.

    The better homeopaths are those who use kinesiology to prescribe the remedy, it nails the right one to use straight off.

    Do they then dilute the right one down to nothingness?


  • Options
    #120
    Kurtosis
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 2,881 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kurtosis


    Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »
    The better homeopaths are those who use kinesiology to prescribe the remedy, it nails the right one to use straight off.

    Charlatans. Everyone knows astrology is the only genuine complement to homeopathy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Mrs Shuttleworth
    Registered Users Posts: 1,346 ✭✭✭Mrs Shuttleworth


    Bizarre the amount of people engaging in verbally abusive posts about a topic they have no direct experience or knowledge of.

    In particular I would understand the terminal cancer patient's diatribes on here if he tried homeopathy and was promised the earth and it failed but where the established treatment has not been successful may I logically suggest he give homeopathy a go via a good homeopath rather than bashing those of us who politely recant that we have found it useful.


Advertisement