Homeopathy is modern medicine - it has a bearing on that.

I wasn't offended - I didn't like your attitude! Can you produce RDBPCT's for the DPT vaccine?

The term 'traditional medicine' applied to pharmacuetical or coventional medicine suggests bloodletting. Homeopathy hasn't changed much because it is a true science - just like Newton's physics hasn't changed - it has been expanded upon.


Pure water that is conducting an electrical charge can kill you.

So we have to update our understanding of the realtionship between energy and matter. How do you explain homeopathy's proven efficacy in the cholera and 1918 'flu epidemics?

__________________
These are my personal views and not necessarily my professional views.The content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice. ALWAYS CONSULT YOUR LOCAL PHYSICIAN.

I'm saying that your claim that homeopathy is more effective than modern medicine is in part based on the comparison of homeopathy to conventional medicine more than 200 years old. This is just stupid, we have progressed incredibly far and that should be taken into account by comparing homeopathy to conventional medicine in current studies.


I can't, but I can provide you for RDBPCT's for many other vaccines that are legally required by public schools if you're interested.


Are you saying true science can't be changed? A vital part of science is the evolution of ideas as new breakthroughs and discoveries are made. For example when the Hubble telescope mapped our universe whole theories had to be rewritten to explain things we learned.

Homeopathy hasn't changed much because it's not compatible with our newer and more realistic grasp of science. Maybe 100 years ago it could pass as acceptable theory, but now much evidence suggests that homeopathy really wont work.


This is stupid and has no bearing on our discussion. Pure water is not medicine.


Are you saying that due to controversial anecdotal evidence that has been refuted by many reliable sources that we should change our understanding of energy and matter?

As for the cholera and 1918 flu epidemics, it's been so many years since those events occurred the sources could be unreliable. Doctors in the homeopathic hospital may have lied about figures in hopes of greater profits, it's hard to say. Why do you have to keep beating this dead horse? An example from 200 years ago is hardly scientific proof. Surely there are some studies or comparisons to modern medicine?


Finally, it's worth thinking about the fact that the more mainstream branches of medicine did not appreciate attempts to force them to adopt RDBPCSs. A RDBPCS is by it's nature unbiased.

This discussion is already taking place on another thread.

Why don't you post your comments there like everybody else?

Then I will be happy to address any points you make THAT HAVEN'T ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED.

Which is more scientific: Allopathy or Homeopathy?

__________________
These are my personal views and not necessarily my professional views.The content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice. ALWAYS CONSULT YOUR LOCAL PHYSICIAN.

Actually, this is a bit of a misunderstanding. It is very common among skeptics to say that homeopaths claim that diluting a substance makes it stronger, but this is not what homeopathic doctrine says. It says that potentization (which consists of serial steps of dilution and vigourous agitation) will purify the effects.

Well, no, because a "scientific reason" implies a dose-dependent pharmacological effect, and such effects vanish at or around the PPM level for all but the most potent substances (way below the Avoadro limit). However, homeopathic doctrine works in another way: It expects the medicine to mimick the disease. While the founder, Hahnemann, does not actually mention this, present day homeopaths tend to assume that there is some kind of resonance phenomenon at play.

Most homeopaths assume that some kind of essence of the original substance is transferred to the carrier. That is why many call it an "energy based" medicine.

Besides placebo effect, there are several other rational explanations for why homeopathy is perceived to work:

- Reporting bias: If you read the extensive base of case accounts, you will soon notice that homeopaths tend to attribute all positive observations to the remedy, and all negative observations to other things.

- Cherrypicking: Even the more extensive collections of case acounts are obviously incomplete. For instance, Hahnemann himself only describes a few hundred cases, that from several decades of practicing. Obviously, even if he treated jsut a single patient per day, he must have hanlded thousands of cases. This begs the question: Did he leave out all those that did not show a positive result?

- Concurrent treatment: Since homeopathy has always been an alternative treatment, we have to assume that many patients were receiving conventional or other treatment concurrently.

- Malpractice by conventional practitioners: Sad as it is, various degrees of malpractice occurs, and not that infrequently. People get the wrong medicine, they get too much, or they get it for too long. Such patients are very likely to get disenchanted with conventional medicine, and look to alternatives. If they have their faulty prescription replaced with effectless homeopathic medicine, they are likely to get better.

- Poor side effect management: Related to the group mentioned above are patients who may get he right conventional medicine, but experience strong side effects. For some patients, the side effects may be perceived worse than the disease. If they change to homeopathy, they will report an improvement.

- Self-limiting conditions: Remember the old joke: "This will cure your cold in 7 days, otherwise it could take a whole week to get well." After all, most diseases are neither fatal nor chronical; even left without any treatment at all, most people will recover from most diseases. Homeopathic treatment often takes quite some time; a remedy is prescribed, and if it doesn't help, the patient gets another, etc. Sooner or later, the patient recovers, and the homeopath writes up another homeopathic cure.

- Fabrication: Unfortunately, some homeopaths will fabricate cures. I have caught some in doing that. I think very few totally fabricate reports, but I have seen homeopaths report cures of e.g. cancer, and when you start to go into the details, it turns out that there was no positive diagnosis of cancer, and in fact the symptoms reported could easily be something else.

Hans

__________________
<i>You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.</i>

Dear Alach
Please see link for:
Cured case database
cure database
1 2 3

__________________
"Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein

Dear Alach
You posted:"I haven't read much .................................................. ."
Books you can read online for free thanks to HOMÉOPATHE INTERNATIONAL AuthorClick on Title to read free
Cyrus Maxwell BOGER, MD
Studies in the Philosophy of Healing
Preface * Thoughts on the philosophy of healing * Vital energy * Homoeopathic science * What is homoeopathy ? * The language of disease * Philosophy and the repertory * Some thoughts on prescribing * Finding the Simillimum * What indicates the remedy ? * How shall I find the remedy ? * Choosing the remedy * What we should know * The undeveloped picture * Random notes * The sick child * Homoeopathic view point in cancer ** Why homoeopathy ? * Climacteric remedies * Panaritium * Clinical cases * Reason and fact * Points in obstetrical therapeutics * The study of Materia Medica : Preface * The study of materia medica * Taking the case * Observations on prescribing * Grading of symptoms * On the use of repertories * The homoeopathic prognosis


John Henry CLARKE, MD
Homeopathy Explained

Stuart CLOSE, MD
The Genius of Homeopathy

__________________
"Great ideas often recieve violent opposition from mediocre minds"...................Einstein