DR. SANJAY VASHI, Sub-Continent Homeopath

[Psiload]

Re: Missing anatomy parts!

In his latest communication with Kramer, the good 'doctor' said:

"...I donot have any objection regarding your diabetes proposal. The only condition is the patient should not be a case of Juvenile diabetes which I think should be acceptable to you. To get cured of diabetes one should have the pancrease in the body atleast."


Why would anyone trust their heath to a 'doctor' of any kind who thinks that juvenile diabetes is caused by a lack of a pancreas in the body?

This guy is nuts and dangerous; or dangerous and nuts, if you prefer.

Reminds me of "The girl with X-Ray eyes":

"Appendixes don't grow back."

Natasha- "They do in Russia."

 

[MRC_Hans]

I'd like to rephrase the situation slightly.

The proposed testing method actually seems to be testing NOT homeopathy NOR the homeopath but merely the patient. It is simply a test of how long the patient can go without meds until serious if not potentially fatal problems occur. In some patients this may be indefinitely, in others it may be but hours or days. Overall, it's neither a reliable test, nor is it properly directed, and it's bad PR to boot.

I would like to reiterate my support for the proposed method where the homeopath has to reliably and consistently distinguish between blank solvent (or substrate) and "potentised" solvent (or substrate) under DBPC conditions. This is actually a test of both the homeopath AND a prime homeopathic paradigm. It potentially harms no-one but the testee themself, and therefore requires THEM ALONE to produce the phenomenon. PR-wise, if they carry it off, they bring kudos on themselves. If not, well...

I would vote no to the live trials on patients - it's bad news all round.

Agreed.

I have said it before, and I say it again: I must MOST STRONGLY advice the JREF not to get involved in any kind of experiments with patients, be it serius diseases or not.

The JREF is based in the USA under FDA jurisdiction, and this means that there are a number of regulations you will have to comply with, no matter where in the world the actual experiment takes place. That is just the legal side; add to this the considerable uncertainty inherent in such experiments, ESPECIALLY on small groups.

To endorse an unorthodox test protocol on a single subject, in a remote part of the world, is total folly. IMHO, (where H stands for honest), you are out in the deep end with this one.

If homeopaths want to try for the challenge, let them make a proving test. Simple, safe, and no ethical problems.

Hans

 

[edthedoc]

I also have grave concerns about this test, especially withdrawing insulin from an insulin-dependent diabetic.

I'm goint to post a link on doctors.net (a large UK-based medical forum) to see what the response is and will keep you informed.

 

[teck49]

If this guy is so good, then why don't you ask him to cure 10 bad cases of Psoriasis. Since neither success nor failure will have any effect on a patient physically, it seems like a much safer route for the JREF to take.

 

[definitely]

a question...

Wahrheit wrote: "it's okay to equate homeopathic remedies to tap water". I have heard some of them also consists of alcohol and perhaps other stuff as well - is this correct? Not that I believe for a moment in those ludicrous ideas about effects of extreme dilutions and "like cures like", but can you really always be sure it is only tap water and nothing else?

 

[Katachresis]

If he could cure a broken heart, I'd fly to India.

 

[teck49]

If he could cause Roger Waters to re-join Pink Floyd and go on tour, I'd fly to India!!!

 

[NiallM]

I have to agree. I don't think that JREf should get involved in any claim that involves any risk to any patient under medical supervision.

It simply lends itself to to many allegations - and that's not to mention lawsuits.

Testing hsould be performed purely against the "cure" itself - testing whether the creator can distinguish it against pure water for instance.

If it can create a reaction in the human body, then surely it can be discerned by medical means. It acts on the body; it does this through chemical interactions; if the practitioners know what's in there, they should be able to confidently predict chemical reactions in a laboratory setting. If they can't, then their "cures" are clearly misunderstood by them, and they cannot be used in medicine.

Above all else, though, for the JREF, there really is no place for them to allow people to use other sick people as a means to get their hands on the million.

I completely understand the JREF'sdesire to ask people to stand up and answer the challenge to their claims.

I strongly feel though, that they should completely bar any medical claims at this stage.

I hate to think of someone dying over the challenge. The JREF would be left very exposed by that.

I would suggest that in the future, snake-oil salesmen be shown the door and be directed to the FDA.

Seriously.

 

[definitely]

Hello again! Is there anyone among you well-informed people who could provide an answer to my question above, please? I guess it may seem a bit off-topic but I would be most grateful if somebody would like to take the time and comment it...

 

[tkingdoll]

Hello again! Is there anyone among you well-informed people who could provide an answer to my question above, please? I guess it may seem a bit off-topic but I would be most grateful if somebody would like to take the time and comment it...

Dr Bach's Rescue Remedy contains a whole heap of alcohol. In fact, that's why it has such a renowned 'calming' effect! It's cheaper to buy a miniature of brandy before your flight though...

 

[definitely]

well?

Thanks for answering, tkingdoll. However, I still don't feel I understand what there may be to understand... Maybe I should point out that I'm serious about this question. I have tried to search the web for relevant information and there is indeed a lot to read about Hahnemann and most useful as well as entertaining comparisons regarding the extreme dilution processes - but not much about alcohol or alternative ingredients. The point I'm trying to make here is: exactly how valid is the skeptic's favorite claim "homeopathic remedies are equal to tap water"? Say for instance that I intend to "commit suicide" by gulping down a whole bottle of some homeopathic sleeping drug in order to prove what crap this whole business is, then how sure can I be of what I'm doing? Please, could somebody inform me - and if my question seems for some reason silly to you, then please explain to me what I don't understand...

 

[Robaato]

I have to agree. I don't think that JREf should get involved in any claim that involves any risk to any patient under medical supervision.

Check the application thread -- JREF has rejected this protocol, and Randi himself has weighed in on the matter, stating much the same thing.

 

[Gayle]

"definitely" wrote:

The point I'm trying to make here is: exactly how valid is the skeptic's favorite claim "homeopathic remedies are equal to tap water"?

"definitely", your question is not silly. I think you're asking if homeopathic medications have something else in them besides water or alcohol with a memory of some highly dilute substance that could have an active effect upon a person. Either the substance itself or a contaminate. Is that close?

My answer for homeopathic cures is that they probably do not contain anything except the water, alcohol or lactose base that holds the alleged "memory" ... unless they have been purposely or accidentally contaminated.

As far as I know, it is not common for homeopathic cures to be contaminated. However, it is common with herbal remedies. More about contaminated herbals in a minute.

I, personally, would be willing to drink a quart of homeopathic remedy of any kind, as long as it was in a water base. I would not drink a quart of alcohol or eat a pound of lactose for obvious reasons.

I just crossed the street and was loaned three homeopathic remedies, one liquid and two in pill form.

The liquid says it contains hawthorn in 48-54% grain alcohol and distilled water. The directions say to take 30-40 drops, two to four times per day. It tastes like grain alcohol to me. Whoa! If I gulped the whole bottle, I'd have a pretty good buzz.

One of the pills is called Rhus Tox 3X. There is no list of ingredients. Rhus Tox is poison oak/ivy. I'm highly susceptible to poison oak. Highly! But 3X is dilute and I doubt if this will hurt me. I will soon know for sure. "definitely", I will come back and tell you if I have a poison oak reaction. I handled the pill and swallowed one. If there is any active Rhus Tox in there, I will soon look like the Toxic Avenger. I'll let you know, okay?

The other pill lists various homeopathic ingredients in strengths from 2X to 12X in a lactose base. It's for bladder irritation. Gosh, I'll even tell you how my bladder feels.

I'm willing to do this because I am healthy (of body, if not mind.)

Both pills taste the same, although one is hard and the other is soft and melts in my mouth. They taste like sugar pills. Lactose is milk sugar. If I gulped the whole bottle I'd be sick in a short while because I have lactose intolerance. (Mild, otherwise I wouldn't have swallowed the pills.)

I agree with the comments made here regarding the dangers of the JREF doing medical testing on human subjects as part of the Challenge.

Homeopathic remedies themselves may be harmless -- I just swallowed three of them without fear -- however, withholding standard medical care from ill patients can be life threatening.

[Slight derail from homeopathy into herbal remedies]

In the case of herbal remedies, the herb itself can be deadly or the remedy may be laced with real prescription drugs. These things have been reported in the news.

Here's an article about a deadly herb. "Some traditional Chinese remedies have been found to contain a toxic herb that causes kidney failure..."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/405968.stm


Here's an article about herbal remedies for male potency containing prescription drugs for erectile dysfunction

"This product contains the prescription medicine tadalafil which is known to interfere with some heart medication and could be fatal to some individuals."

http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/0/ae47d6c31a10cd3ccc256f350014cc75?OpenDocument

[/End derail from homeopathy]

Medical testing on human subjects as part of a JREF Challenge application represents ethically challenging and legally risky territory. I'm singing with the chorus here.

No medical testing on patients.


Gayle

 

[definitely]

Thank you very much, Gayle, that was a nice and exhaustive answer. I consider myself a skeptic but I am not a scientist and I have never studied medicine (which may seem obvious) and precisely therefore this very basic information is most valuable to me. I don't think I will be able to engage in debates with quackers and believers if I don't have enough knowledge of these things. Could you please also tell me:

When alcohol is used in the cures (which apparently sometimes is the case), exactly what is the alcohol for?

What you call a homeopathic remedy "in a water base" I understand as 100 % pure water. Is this correct or is it somehow a simplification?

Many thanks for taking your time!

 

[jmercer]

Check the application thread -- JREF has rejected this protocol, and Randi himself has weighed in on the matter, stating much the same thing.

JREF's position is also stated in the application:

"JREF will also NOT test claims that are likely to cause injury of any sort "

 

[Mojo]

One of the pills is called Rhus Tox 3X. There is no list of ingredients. Rhus Tox is poison oak/ivy. I'm highly susceptible to poison oak. Highly! But 3X is dilute and I doubt if this will hurt me. I will soon know for sure. "definitely", I will come back and tell you if I have a poison oak reaction. I handled the pill and swallowed one. If there is any active Rhus Tox in there, I will soon look like the Toxic Avenger. I'll let you know, okay?

Actually, at 3x there will still be some of the mother tincture present, although not very much. It's been diluted tenfold three times, which if I've got my arithmetic right is equivalent to a single 1 to 1,000 dilution. I don't know if there'll be enough to have any detectable effect though. It depends on how much there was in the original tincture. How are you doing?

Homeopathic remedies are typically used at higher dilutions than this. For example, the remedies sold in the UK by Boots (mentioned in the commentary recently) are at 6c and 30c. 6c means that the remedy has been diluted a hundred fold 6 times; this is (again, if I've got my sums right) equivalent to a 1 to 1,000,000,000,000 dilution. There will still be some molecules of the original remedy present, but I doubt that they will be detectable, and I suspect that for many remedies there is likely to be more of the remedy substance present as a contaminant in the solvent.

The 30c remedy (that's equivalent to a 1 to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 dilution) is so dilute that there will not be a single molecule of the original remedy present.

Incidentally, one of the conditions for licensing homeopathic remedies for sale in the UK is that they must be sufficiently dilute as to have no possible adverse effects. This effectively means that they must be so dilute as to have no effect of any kind.

There's been some discussion of what is the greatest dilution at which pharmacological effects of certain substances could possibly be observed in another thread recently, but I haven't managed to find it yet.

The other pill lists various homeopathic ingredients in strengths from 2X to 12X in a lactose base. It's for bladder irritation. Gosh, I'll even tell you how my bladder feels.

I'm willing to do this because I am healthy (of body, if not mind.)

Both pills taste the same, although one is hard and the other is soft and melts in my mouth. They taste like sugar pills. Lactose is milk sugar. If I gulped the whole bottle I'd be sick in a short while because I have lactose intolerance. (Mild, otherwise I wouldn't have swallowed the pills.)

I agree with the comments made here regarding the dangers of the JREF doing medical testing on human subjects as part of the Challenge.

Homeopathic remedies themselves may be harmless -- I just swallowed three of them without fear -- however, withholding standard medical care from ill patients can be life threatening.

Aha! You took 3 remedies together. This gives at least some homeopaths an out, I believe. In classical homeopathy, only one remedy should be given at a time. They'd probably claim that the three remedies you've taken will interfere with each other and prevent each other from having any effect. They also claim that things like coffee or peppermint, for example, will interfere with their remedies. What was the quotation again? "A system of excuses masquerading as medicine."

 

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

How about this for a test then.

We get the good Doctor, hold him down and inject him with HIV contaminated blood. Once the onset of HIV is certain, we let him cure himself using whichever homeopathic remedies he likes, making sure he recieves no treatment from real doctors or hospitals. If we were feeling generous we might substitute something less life-threatening but very obvious to the naked eye, and we would then see the wonders of tap-water in action.

Or would he immediately run to the nearest hospital?

 

[Mojo]

When alcohol is used in the cures (which apparently sometimes is the case), exactly what is the alcohol for?

The alcohol is simply used to dilute the remedy. I don't think it is supposed to have any effect of its own.

What you call a homeopathic remedy "in a water base" I understand as 100 % pure water. Is this correct or is it somehow a simplification?

See what I've just posted in reply to Gayle.

At lower dilutions, there will be small amounts of the original remedy present, although at the dilutions commonly used by homeopaths there is unlikely to be enought to have any effect. At dilutions above 24x (that is, diluted tenfold 24 times) or 12c (diluted one hundred fold 12 times) there will be none of the original remedy present. This is because the value of Avagadro's constant, which is a measure of the number of molecules in one mole of a compound, is about 6 X 10²³. if you dilute something more than this, you will have less than one molecule present in a particular sample.

 

[tkingdoll]

The 30c remedy (that's equivalent to a 1 to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 dilution) is so dilute that there will not be a single molecule of the original remedy present.

I know this might sound a bit naive, but please bear with me! How can something actually be that dilute? What is the process that is undertaken to get the dilution? Say I have, I dunno, a drop of Belladonna, and I want to get a 30c dilution. I can't put that one drop into 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 drops of water, stir it all up, then bottle the lot.

So maybe I put my drop of Belladonna into a litre of water, then take a drop of that and put it into another litre, and keep repeating until I have the correct dosage. But what happens to all the water I discard? Wouldn't it be dangerous (it does have poison in it) and wasteful to pour it away? And how long would the process take? Can we get the homeopaths prosecuted for wasting water during times of drought etc?

And if that is the method, then surely all the water in the system of the homeopath's resident country must have been through a homeopathic process at least once before? How do they account for the molecules already present? What about the chemicals added to tap water etc?

Sorry for so many basic questions, I'm really trying to get my head round the logistics of the stuff.

 

[Mojo]

I know this might sound a bit naive, but please bear with me! How can something actually be that dilute? What is the process that is undertaken to get the dilution? Say I have, I dunno, a drop of Belladonna, and I want to get a 30c dilution. I can't put that one drop into 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 drops of water, stir it all up, then bottle the lot.

So maybe I put my drop of Belladonna into a litre of water, then take a drop of that and put it into another litre, and keep repeating until I have the correct dosage. But what happens to all the water I discard? Wouldn't it be dangerous (it does have poison in it) and wasteful to pour it away? And how long would the process take? Can we get the homeopaths prosecuted for wasting water during times of drought etc?

Your second suggestion is more or less the case, except that I think (for a 100 fold dilution) they take 1ml and add it to 100ml of solvent each time, than shake it and repeat the process. For example, in a 6c remedy, the c refers to a 100 fold dilution, and the 6 to the number of times it's been done.

There is someone on the forum who has actually had a job doing this in the past, so may be a better person to answer this point. I think it's Ashles.

And if that is the method, then surely all the water in the system of the homeopath's resident country must have been through a homeopathic process at least once before? How do they account for the molecules already present? What about the chemicals added to tap water etc?

Well, yes, but I think they prefer to ignore all that. Remember also that they claim that the more a remedy is diluted, the more powerful it is, so I suppose the lower dilutions they discard will actually be weaker...

You didn't expect homeopathy to make sense, did you?