You want proof of homeopathy's being effective above placebo.

Well, show that you are sincere!

Here are 2 links to studies - just click on them and read.

http://www.virtualtrials.com/ruta/ruta2007.cf

http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/content/full/127/3/936

After you have read them we can perhaps have a discussion that makes some kind
of sense.

They were presented in 2 different very prestigious journals. So - enjoy!

If you do will not spend that little time and effort you will thereby tell us
that you do not wish any objective evidence but want to keep nourishing your
dear prjudice.

Regards

Luise



--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

And to colmcq, same remarks.
Read, and remark. And if you're not willing to do that, then please
find some other hobby.


On Jan 9, 2008, at 5:57 PM, Luise Kunkle wrote:

>
>
>
>
> You want proof of homeopathy's being effective above placebo.
>
> Well, show that you are sincere!
>
> Here are 2 links to studies - just click on them and read.
>
> http://www.virtualtrials.com/ruta/ruta2007.cf
>
> http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/content/full/127/3/936
>
> After you have read them we can perhaps have a discussion that makes
> some kind of sense.
>
> They were presented in 2 different very prestigious journals. So -
> enjoy!
>
> If you do will not spend that little time and effort you will thereby
> tell us that you do not wish any objective evidence but want to keep
> nourishing your dear prjudice.
>
> Regards
>
> Luise
>
>
>
> --
> One thought to all who, free of doubt,
> So definitely know what's true:
> 2 and 2 is 22 -
> and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
> ==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========
>

Its amazing that homeopathy does so well in trials specifically designed for allopathic medicine.

No wonder Big Pharma is worried.

That Chest paper is pretty dubious. For one thing, as pointed out in a response, the title does not match the content. Also, when you look at the data in table 2 the SD error bars are massive and there is always overlap between the placebo and remedy groups. I would seriously question the authors statistical analysis. I think the authors indulged in some statistical chicanery to get the answer they needed. However, assuming the data is meaningful, in order to accept the authors explanations we would need to overturn almost everything we know about physics, chemistry and biology. Of course we may need to do this in time but have you heard the phrase 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'. The authors make extraordinary claims but their evidence is dubious at best. Then there are also issues with homeopaths theories that remedies have to be individualised. These remedies weren't, so using the logic on the Hitler thread, this isn't homeopathy.

As for the ruta6 story. There has been ONE **** paper in a **** journal (IF of 1.6) and it has been thoroughly taken apart here. Certainly not compelling evidence for any scientific basis for homeopathy let alone justification for actually treating patients with it.

I forgot about this rather sterling critique of the Chest paper.

Improved clinical status in fibromyalgia patients treated with
individualized homeopathic remedies versus placebo.

"Improved clinical status in fibromyalgia patients treated with
individualized homeopathic remedies versus placebo."

That's nice. Do you have a reference?

ps - nothing to add to Gimpy's comments.

My mail did not work, there was supposed to be a internet link to a
website.
I try it differently now
goto
http://www.curbside.md/

search for homeopathy.

some nice and less nice material will come out.

Thanks Roger.

homeopathy - Curbside.MD

1329 results.

I haven't time to go through all of these.

Luckily these chaps already have:

Cochrane Database Syst Rev Oct 17, 2007 M Coulter et al
There is currently little evidence for the efficacy of homeopathy for the treatment of ADHD. Development of optimal treatment protocols is recommended prior to further randomised controlled trials being undertaken.

Lancet Aug 28, 2005 A Shang et al
Biases are present in placebo-controlled trials of both homoeopathy and conventional medicine. When account was taken for these biases in the analysis, there was weak evidence for a specific effect of homoeopathic remedies, but strong evidence for specific effects of conventional interventions. This finding is compatible with the notion that the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects.

Gastroenterology May 14, 2006 RL Koretz
The results from these studies confirm that individualized homeopathic treatment decreases the duration of acute childhood diarrhea and suggest that larger sample sizes be used in future homeopathic research to ensure adequate statistical power. Homeopathy should be considered for use as an adjunct to oral rehydration for this illness.

Lancet Oct 22, 1997 K Linde, N Clausius, G Ramirez, D Melchart, F Eitel, LV Hedges, WB Jonas
The results of our meta-analysis are not compatible with the hypothesis that the clinical effects of homeopathy are completely due to placebo. However, we found insufficient evidence from these studies that homeopathy is clearly efficacious for any single clinical condition. Further research on homeopathy is warranted provided it is rigorous and systematic.

Incidentally, Bandolier also looked at the Linde et al paper from '97 -
Homeopathy - dilute information and little knowledge [Nov 1997; 45-2].