1,800 Studies Later, Scientists Conclude Homeopathy Doesn’t Work

[catsmate]

Link.
Not really a surprise, homeopathy has been disproved numerous times before, but a major Australian meta-study which analysed more the 1,800 papers has shown that homeopathy is completely ineffective.

Washington Post
The Guardian

 

[Aepervius]

I can tell you the effect this news has had on the two persons I know which swear homeopathy is good for them.

Zero.

Which deprime me to not end.

I wish our government would mark homeopathy as "quack" rather than allow it to be so much hyped (doctor adds "and homeopathy (specialist whatever)" for example it is though to find one which does not).

 

[Garrette]

I can tell you the effect this news has had on the two persons I know which swear homeopathy is good for them.

Zero.

Yep.

Which deprime me to not end.

I wish I could be deprimed, too. Then maybe I would not end.

Please take this in the good humor intended. Those, like you, who communicate so often, so clearly, and so well in a second language impress me to no end. I just found it humorous. And on the off chance it was more than a simple typo, the phrase you are looking for is "Which surprised me to no end."

 

[pgwenthold]

One of the funniest comments of all time:

I invoke Dullmans law. You're wrong by virtue of being Dana Ullman commenting on a medical/science comment thread.

That's awesome.

 

[Fudbucker]

But since we're in a simulation, homeopathy only doesn't work in controlled studies. Every other time you do it, it works great. It's just one of the many Easter Eggs hiding in our reality....

 

[mike3]

One of the funniest comments of all time:



That's awesome.

I've seen some of the "Dana Ullman" comments. They were claiming that it was important to not dismiss "small" studies in favor of larger ones. Really? REALLY? Hint hint: if it only appears in a SMALL study but DISappears in a LARGE one, then it's probably a statistical fluke or error. REAL effects don't shrink with more data. They only become ever more and more sharply clear and distinct.

But I don't expect "Dana Ullman" to ever be convinced. You could be THE world's best TRUE expert in all relevant medical science and methodology and tear apart every single study he cites with utterly ruthless precision, and he would not budge one BIT. This guy is making freakin' MONEY off this stuff -- no way he's gonna let his gravy train go off the rails for the sake of truth or science. My only concern is with the too gullible or desperate not being able to avoid getting shlocked by that train.

 

[angrysoba]

But what about the one study that disagrees? Among 1800 studies which shows otherwise, that reaches homeopathic levels of potency.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

But what about the one study that disagrees? Among 1800 studies which shows otherwise, that reaches homeopathic levels of potency.

Nooo, that's not even close. You'd need at least 10¹⁰ studies disagreeing to reach true homeopathic levels.

 

[Kumar]

Link.
Not really a surprise, homeopathy has been disproved numerous times before, but a major Australian meta-study which analysed more the 1,800 papers has shown that homeopathy is completely ineffective.

Washington Post
The Guardian

It is quite surprising that inspite of these types of meta-studies, how million of people in many part of world are still taking homeopathic treatments and how it is not yet banned?

Information presence in higher potencies is also a big issue which may raise a need for homeopathy to divide into two parts to sustain. 1. Molecular Based Homeopathy 2. Sub-molecular based Homeopathy. Studies conducted by considering these two parts can give better idea about effects from homeopathic remedies.

 

[Pixel42]

It is quite surprising that inspite of these types of meta-studies, how million of people in many part of world are still taking homeopathic treatments and how it is not yet banned?

It's not surprising at all. There are lots of idiots in the world, and I know of no country which has laws against being an idiot.

 

[Aepervius]

It is quite surprising that inspite of these types of meta-studies, how million of people in many part of world are still taking homeopathic treatments and how it is not yet banned?

Information presence in higher potencies is also a big issue which may raise a need for homeopathy to divide into two parts to sustain. 1. Molecular Based Homeopathy 2. Sub-molecular based Homeopathy. Studies conducted by considering these two parts can give better idea about effects from homeopathic remedies.

100 of millions people still smoke cigarette and it is provably negatively affecting their health up to drastic results like cancer. And we have not even banned them , they are only not allowed in public zone where other people coulod get affected by smoke.

So what's your point ?

 

[Kumar]

It's not surprising at all. There are lots of idiots in the world, and I know of no country which has laws against being an idiot.

Are you doubting integrity of regulating and government agencies as well as of million of well educated and well informed modern people in most part of world and abusing them?

 

[Kumar]

100 of millions people still smoke cigarette and it is provably negatively affecting their health up to drastic results like cancer. And we have not even banned them , they are only not allowed in public zone where other people coulod get affected by smoke.

So what's your point ?

Yes but it is not a well organized healing system. It is just a somewhat sucidal habit.

 

[Pixel42]

Are you doubting integrity of regulating and government agencies as well as of million of well educated and well informed modern people in most part of world and abusing them?

I'm doubting the willingness of governments and regulating agencies to ban something useless, but harmless, that idiotic voters want to do. And I'm doubting the ability of uneducated and uninformed idiots to understand the scientific method, and grasp the reliability of its findings compared to the impressions resulting from their own fallible perceptions and cognitive biases.

 

[Kumar]

I'm doubting the willingness of governments and regulating agencies to ban something useless, but harmless, that idiotic voters want to do. And I'm doubting the ability of uneducated and uninformed idiots to understand the scientific method, and grasp the reliability of its findings compared to the impressions resulting from their own fallible perceptions and cognitive biases.

How can you claim it is harmless?

Are you not doubting their honesty and modern manship?

 

[Pixel42]

How can you claim it is harmless?

It has no active ingredients. It's harmless by definition.

The only way homeopathy can do harm is by persuading people to waste their time and money on its remedies when they could be taking medicine that actually works.

Are you not doubting their honesty and modern manship?

Whose honesty? And what the hell is 'manship'?

 

[Kumar]

It has no active ingredients. It's harmless by definition.

The only way homeopathy can do harm is by persuading people to waste their time and money on its remedies when they could be taking medicine that actually works.


Whose honesty? And what the hell is 'manship'?

That can be the bigger harm than some side effects. No one can ignore it esp regulating and govt agencies. Inspite of it, How & Why question mark will remain till either homeopathy die in itself or by these agencies ot till it is proved.

I just looked at limitation part of this meta-study:

Limitations of the assessment and evidence base
for homeopathy
The studies of homeopathy were generally poor quality. For some health conditions, this meant that no conclusion could be made on whether or not homeopathy was effective. For other conditions,this meant that NHMRC could not be confident that the results reported by studies were reliable.
The overview was based on finding systematic reviews of homeopathy, rather than searching for all individual published studies of homeopathy..
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/cam02a_information_paper.pdf

 

[fagin]

The limitations were that the initial studies (generally carried out by homeopaths) were of poor quality?

What a surprise.

 

[Kumar]

Whose honesty? And what the hell is 'manship'?

.....2

Honesty of regulating & government agencies and of manship(denoting skill in a subject or activity esp. of a competitive nature) i.e of people takeing this treatment. Are you doubting these or not?

 

[Pixel42]

That can be the bigger harm than some side effects.

True. Which is why those who promote homeopathy in the face of the overwhelming evidence against its efficacy should be ashamed of themselves.

No one can ignore it esp regulating and govt agencies.

As has been pointed out to you even smoking has not yet been banned, despite ample proof that it is harmful. Likewise alcohol. In most countries people are reasonably free to do as they wish as long as they harm no-one else. Attempts to force people to act in their own best interest are usually derided as imposing a "nanny state".