Brilliant! Water doesn't cause (side) effects!
I'm converted.

Seriously, this argument is so fantastically irrational that I can't believe people still come out with it.

What's 50M of water? Water?

Yeah, seems likely and fits the observations well. Somone takes a homeopathic remedy and are reported cured some time in the future. If they take the remedy just to prove a point, they will get sick some time in the future. If they are sick and doesn't get well it's because they took an aspirin. Homeopathy is the only "treatment" that has never, ever reported a failed case.

Yeah, it's heads-I-win-tails-you-lose. Un(dis)provable demonstrations are inherently useless.

Hi, I sm brand new to this forum and although I do not want to offend anyone, there is absolutely no scientific evidence for homeopathy. There have been many studies and last year there was a meta study of the previous ones and it leaves no doubt. The concept of water having some sort of memory is simply not true. Many people have taken entire bottles of homeopathic sleeping pills just to show that they do nothing. Futhermore all someone has to do to win one million is to be able to tell the differece between water and a homeopathic solution. And the one million from James Randi does exist.

I am certain that there is a placebo effect which does work but no one has shown any effect when the tests are properly double blind.

No offense taken. Because statistically significant results have been demonstrated in a number of DBPC studies, the next step is to debate their respective methodologies, which is what most of the people are doing on this forum. After many years of using remedies, I'm comfortable with what I've seen and experienced, and have no desire or motivation to convince others who think differently.

You can find numerous examples within the links below:

http://www.homeopathic.org/research.htm

http://www.homeopathic.com/articles/research/index.php

http://www.liebertonline.com/toc/acm/11/5

Agreed.
My patient has athlete's foot. I give him Tincture of Leper's Ear to cure it.
Nothing appears to happen. Then he gets tennis elbow. "Oh no!", I think, it must be the effect of the Leprous Water, thereby proving my system of "medicine" is effective. Now I must ask my friends for the antidote.

Let's take the first one, and read the first article I browsed to - the Lancet report - because it's ground we're all familiar with. The big UK homeopathy sites don't usually mention it, because they only mention "evidence" verifying their claims, which is not often considered the make of scientific detachment

http://www.homeopathic.org/pressrelease082505.html

It makes two main points, the first being something mentioned here before, that you can't test homeopathic remedies in the same way you can test anything else.



Well, yes, that would be a fine analogy, except that the penicillin would show effectiveness against those patients with a bacteriological infection countered by penicillin. Meta-analysis would show a statistical benefit compared to the control group. When this is done - with homeopathic or any other remedies - such a statistical benefit would be something to shout about. The analogy breaks down because the studies show that there is nothing to shout about.

Secondly,
*Cough* The structured water argument? Although it's been mentioned on these fora, this just isn't science - and these resources aren't worth anything without being backed up for themselves.

Moopet, you're wanting to debate methodology, theory, etc., which is what I was pointing out in my previous response. There are DBPC studies which have shown significant results, but as with any study, the results can be refuted.

Most likely, I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. I don't need to try and change your mind to feel better about homeopathy, nor will I feel worse because you stick with your opinion. Similarly, it doesn't mean that either of us is the intellectual superior because of our position. I was simply responding to a statement which was made by someone else, and am not interested in a debate.

Finally, you cited one study, a single sentence, and a theory. Out of all the articles in those links, there's much more material to read.

It was the first article I read and it was nonsense. It was, in my experience, typical of homeopathy articles. A single sentence? I took the only two main points in the article. It's not my fault they were stupid

Anyway, yes, agreed re debate. Nobody is going to change anyone's mind without substantial evidence.