Homeopathy - I am ready for open challenge

[geni]

Okay, now that my misunderstanding has been cleared up, moving on...

I don't see the point of succussing the placebo. Certainly detecting the difference between succussed and non-succussed water would be a paranormal claim all by itself.

Cleaning glass is dull. So significant risk of contamination with say detergent.

 

[muntadev2in]

So far, so good. I would very much like you to take the MDC, muntadev2in. Keep up the good work.

Thanks, but I dont have desire to take dollars..... my intension is to ask Randi to remove homeopathy from MDC.

There will be a strong reason to include homeopathy in MDC that might be pressure from the side of allopathic pharmacies.

 

[Mojo]

Thanks, but I dont have desire to take dollars..... my intension is to ask Randi to remove homeopathy from MDC.

There will be a strong reason to include homeopathy in MDC that might be pressure from the side of allopathic pharmacies.

Oh well, three and a half pages before we got the "I don't want the money" excuse and conspiracy theories isn't bad, I suppose.

 

[Pixel42]

Thanks, but I dont have desire to take dollars..... my intension is to ask Randi to remove homeopathy from MDC.

The MDC is for proof of the paranormal. If you succeed in telling a homepathically treated solution from one which is not so treated, despite the fact that they are scientifically indistinguishable by any means up to and including examination with an electron microscope, you will have proved the existence of the paranormal.

If your aim is to get homeopathy removed from the MDC you need to come up with a scientific explanation of it. Simply demonstrating that it works would only be the first step, though an essential one.

 

[Jackalgirl]

Thanks, but I dont have desire to take dollars..... my intension is to ask Randi to remove homeopathy from MDC.

There will be a strong reason to include homeopathy in MDC that might be pressure from the side of allopathic pharmacies.

Bear in mind that if you succeed, all you are demonstrating is that you're capable of telling a homeopathic preparation from a similarly-prepared placebo.

This proves nothing about the efficacy of homeopathy itself.

So I am not sure that Randi will remove it from the list of testable things.

Though it would be a very interesting first step towards a demonstration of homeopathic effectiveness. Maybe more legitimate institutions would be interested in trials if it could be demonstrated that there actually is a difference between a homeopathic solution and a solution of solvent prepared in exactly the same way, only without the "mother tincture".

 

[Akhenaten]

Thanks, but I dont have desire to take dollars..... my intension is to ask Randi to remove homeopathy from MDC.

No problem, Dude. Prove yourself, win the million (for charity of course) and the Challenge ceases to exist. Your work here will be done and hopefully your intensions eased.

There will be a strong reason to include homeopathy in MDC that might be pressure from the side of allopathic pharmacies.

When will this occur? Might one ask for evidence of this claim?

 

[Jackalgirl]

There will be a strong reason to include homeopathy in MDC that might be pressure from the side of allopathic pharmacies.

When will this occur? Might one ask for evidence of this claim?

If what Dr. Munta meant to say was "Homeopathy is included as a paranormal effect in the MDC Application due to pressure from allopathic pharmacies", then I have a couple of points:

1) is there evidence that a pharmacy is "allopathic" vice "homeopathic"? Or, in other words, if homeopathic remedies were regularly demonstrated to have an effect beyond placebo, wouldn't they then be regular medical remedies and, thus, be "allopathic"? (I'm probably misunderstanding the meaning of allopathic, but I take this comment to be a take on the standard "Big Medicine is Out to Suppress This Wonderful Cure!" canard.)

2) I don't think that any pharmacy or medical group actually gives much thought to the Million Dollar Challenge. In other words, I highly doubt that any legitimate medical research entity (much less pharmacies) would consider using the MDC as a research venue, or "pressure" the JREF to "include" or "exclude" anything. However, I do think you might be able to argue that something deserves more testing on the basis of having successfully passed the Challenge.

Edited to add: I'm sorry if I missed this, but Dr. Munta, what's the status of your Application? Have you sent it in yet? If so, might you post a copy of it here? Thanks!

 

[Zep]

Quick explanation: "Allopathy" is a term used only by homeopaths to refer to any modern pharmaceutical medicine. It's a broad but nebulous term. For example, some homeopaths will include surgery under that heading, others will not.

In reality, it is a term invented by the founder of homeopathic theory, Hahnemann, to describe the so-called practice of using drugs that create the opposite symptoms to those being treated in an attempt at a cure. Whereas homeopathic drugs supposedly produce symptoms like those being treated, hence their claimed modus for homeopathy of "like cures like". In fact, modern pharmacy (and, in fact, reality) has never operated in an "allopathic" or "homeopathic" way at all. But that has somehow escaped the homeopathic notice for some 200 years now...

 

[Jackalgirl]

Hi Zep --

Thanks for the clarification -- I figured that "allopathic" meant "not homeopathic", but your explanation clears it all up.

 

[Zep]

Over the 200 years since dear old cranky-pants Hahnemann invented the term, "allopathy" has devolved to become a form of insult plus categorisation used by homeopaths to describe just about anything scientific or medical they know nothing about and were never taught in homeopathy college. In their eyes, "allopathy" and "allopaths" are seen pretty much as dangerous drug-dealers of death in the pay of Big Pharma^TM, trying to suppress all that is good and wonderful and light-filled with homeopathy. Consequent collisions with real science, proper testing protocols, and the hard facts of medical realities usually results in a rapid retreat back to the "safer" company of the faith-keepers and their chanting.

So sadly, until Dr Munta and his ilk lose this attitude, they will have a hard time coming to grips with the MDC.

 

[steenkh]

No problem, Dude. Prove yourself, win the million (for charity of course) and the Challenge ceases to exist. Your work here will be done and hopefully your intensions eased.

Or graciously donate the money to the JREf in order to continue the MDC against the real paranormal claims, that will now exclude homoeopathy!

 

[Cuddles]

1) is there evidence that a pharmacy is "allopathic" vice "homeopathic"? Or, in other words, if homeopathic remedies were regularly demonstrated to have an effect beyond placebo, wouldn't they then be regular medical remedies and, thus, be "allopathic"?

More to the point, every single pharmacy I have seen stocks homeopathic remedies as well as real medicine. Why would they pressure Randi to criticise a significant source of their income?

 

[JonathanS]

"""Now I am ready for open challenge to prove that Homeopathic dilutions are different from alcohol or water."""

Meh..

That's unfair to all the patients of homeopathy. Prove your 'medicine' works like conventional medicine.

 

[Rolfe]

"""Now I am ready for open challenge to prove that Homeopathic dilutions are different from alcohol or water."""

Meh..

That's unfair to all the patients of homeopathy. Prove your 'medicine' works like conventional medicine.

Nope. His offer is by far the most interesting one.

We know that even conventional medicine "works", to a certain extent, by taking advantage of coincidental recovery and by gently persuading the patient into a more positive outlook on their situation. It's called "placebo". Don't knock it. Awfully useful for minor but annoying ailments. Also known (copyright to DeeTee) as "Daddy kiss it better" therapy.

Homoeopathic remedies have exactly the same effect. The problem, of course, is that this is all the effect they have.

The really scientifically interesting question, as far as an insight into the workings of the universe is concerned, is whether there is any way at all of distinguishing a potentiised homoeopathic remedy from the stock solvent or carrier material. Of course, one way of doing this would be to take advantage of any therapeutic property the potentised remedy has, over and above the stock solvent, and the failure to claim the prize by this method may be interpreted accordingly.

However, any way at all of showing that the remedy is different from the stock solvent would rock the basis of physics and chemistry to its foundations. Whether or not any therapeutic benefit could be demonstrated.

Rolfe.

 

[JonathanS]

Point taken, Rolfe.

Thing is, I've been on the 'receiving end' of homeopathy before, as well as alternative medicine. I have GERD (gastro esophageal reflux disorder, if I'm not mistaken) which made me miserable for years until I (or better yet my family doctor) finally found a solution - 20mg of Omepradex and a fundamental change in lifestyle. I tried pretty much everything under the sun but the only thing that really helped was conventional medicine.

I guess I was responding to the thread as a disgruntled patient of homeopathy.

I do, however, appreciate the scientific implications of this challenge and will be following this one closely, so best of luck to you, muntadev2in.

 

[JWideman]

However, any way at all of showing that the remedy is different from the stock solvent would rock the basis of physics and chemistry to its foundations. Whether or not any therapeutic benefit could be demonstrated.

Rolfe.

Not only that, but it no doubt will lead to legitimate research and eventually result in a reliable medical treatment. I know what I'd do with a million dollars at the start of that.

 

[Mojo]

Also known (copyright to DeeTee) as "Daddy kiss it better" therapy.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56614

However, any way at all of showing that the remedy is different from the stock solvent would rock the basis of physics and chemistry to its foundations. Whether or not any therapeutic benefit could be demonstrated.

In addition, it avoids infringing the stipulation that "JREF will also NOT test claims that are likely to cause injury of any sort" (as withholding medication from people who are actually ill is likely to do).

 

[Adavidson]

I just figure that if homepathy actually worked, there wouldnt really be any questions about it, the Dr. posting this wouldnt have to justify his rights and his methods. We dont question the effect of western medicin, because it actually does work, the fysiological effects are there, they are documented though years of test and trials and there is no doubt. The results will always vary depending on different age and health, but they are still there, undisputable.

Im sorry, and I honestly mean this with all respect, I could never dedicate almost 9 years of my life to study something that "might" work and "could" be real.

 

[arthwollipot]

fysiological

Oh, you were so close.

 

[MRC_Hans]

While I agree that using stock sugar pills moistened with stock solvent for the placebo sham would almost certainly be perfectly OK, I have to admit a preference for doing it properly.

By properly, I mean to prepare the placebo solution in exactly the same way as the remedy, with the only difference being that the placebo has no mother tincture added at the beginning. It is succussed and diluted and "potentised" in exactly the same way, otherwise.

Note Rustum Roy's experiment. He tested an unpotentised blank (stock solvent) and a potentised blank (solvent that had gone through the entire rigmarole, only excepting the presence of the mother tincture at the beginning). He allegedly found significant differences. I would like to be sure that what is being demonstrated is actually related to the presence of the mother tincture, and not some esoteric property of the shaking and diluting.

Rolfe.

Agreed. The reference must be prepared in the same way, otherwise there could be a difference that has nothing to do with homeopathy.

As for Roy's experiment, I seem to remember that his reference "stock solvent" was not necessarily even from the same source as the remedy.

Hans