Homeopathy and Placebo

[JetLeg]

I think that even in case that Homeopathy is just placebo, people should use homeopathy.

Placebo effect really helps people.

So, if homeopathy is placebo, it will help people - just as placebo does.


(Of course, not when it is taken instead of treatments that work better-than-placebo).

 

[Mojo]

Treatments that work better than placebo also produce the placebo effect.

 

[drkitten]

I think that even in case that Homeopathy is just placebo, people should use homeopathy.

Because it's so much better to use expensive treatments that don't work well than it is to use cheap treatments that don't work well?

If you will get the same effect from a one-cent sugar pill as from a two-dollar sugar pill, why do you recommend using the two-dollar one?

 

[JetLeg]

Treatments that work better than placebo also produce the placebo effect.

(1) Not always. I think that people that go to alternative medicine, disbelieve in conventional and therefore it might not have a placebo effect for them. Additionally, alternative medicine spends lots of efforts to create trust and hope - it is better at inducing placebo than conventional medicine.

(2) Even if what you said is true, then taking homeopathy additionally to conventional is helpful. And in cases when no treatment is available - terminal diseases - also.

 

[JetLeg]

Because it's so much better to use expensive treatments that don't work well than it is to use cheap treatments that don't work well?

If you will get the same effect from a one-cent sugar pill as from a two-dollar sugar pill, why do you recommend using the two-dollar one?

one-cent sugar pill is better indeed.

But in order for it to work as placebo, people need to believe that it will help them. So they need to think it is not placebo.

 

[Blue Wode]

alternative medicine spends lots of efforts to create trust

So how have the alt-medders managed to resolve this ethical dilemma…

• In the absence of specific research, it seems reasonable to suppose that individuals who are susceptible to placebo effects, will get the best results if their treatment is surrounded by as much impressive mumbo jumbo as possible.
  
• This suggests that, in order to maximixe the placebo effect, it will be important to lie to the patient as much as possible, and certainly to disguise from them the fact that, for example, their homeopathic pill contains nothing but lactose.
  
• Therein lies the dilemma. The whole trend in medicine has been to be more open with the patient and to tell them the truth. To maximise the benefit of alternative medicine, it is necessary to lie to the patient as much as possible.

http://dcscience.net/?page_id=10

Surely this is a far more honest approach…

…we don't need placebos to generate placebo effects. This may sound paradoxical but, actually, is quite simple. The placebo-effect is a bonus that comes ‘free' (so to speak) with any treatment regardless whether it also has specific effects or not. It is therefore neither logical nor appropriate to use pure placebos that only rely on placebo effects – one might as well use treatments that have both specific effects and placebo-effects. In this way one makes optimal use of the “free bonus”.

http://www.arc.org.uk/news/arthritistoday/131_1.asp

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

You also need to quantify the size of this placebo effect that you are so keen on before declaring it is worth having. Has the placebo effect cured cancer or AIDS, rabies or Ebola?

 

[JetLeg]

You also need to quantify the size of this placebo effect that you are so keen on before declaring it is worth having. Has the placebo effect cured cancer or AIDS, rabies or Ebola?

I agree, this is why it has to be used together with conventional-medicine (in case there is).

 

[fls]

I think that even in case that Homeopathy is just placebo, people should use homeopathy.

Placebo effect really helps people.

So, if homeopathy is placebo, it will help people - just as placebo does.

(Of course, not when it is taken instead of treatments that work better-than-placebo).

This question comes up regularly and has been discussed before.

The problem with your idea is that there isn't really a placebo effect. That is, you get better or worse regardless of whether or not you are taking a sugar pill, making the sugar pill redundant.

Linda

 

[Mojo]

I agree, this is why it has to be used together with conventional-medicine (in case there is).

The problem here is that homoeopaths consistently oppose the use of real medicine, with their claims that, for example, it makes the patient's condition worse by suppressing their symptoms.

 

[blutoski]

I think that even in case that Homeopathy is just placebo, people should use homeopathy.

Placebo effect really helps people.

So, if homeopathy is placebo, it will help people - just as placebo does.


(Of course, not when it is taken instead of treatments that work better-than-placebo).

fls has the best answer to this question: there is very little evidence of an actual placebo 'effect' from taking a placebo.

Usually, the placebo group does about as well as non-treatment. It's fraudulent to take credit for the natural course of improvement, and even more fraudulent to charge money for it.

There is some evidence that it may have trivial effect on pain, but that is questionable, since we can't objectively measure pain, and these studies are entirely dependent on patient self-reporting.

 

[Loss Leader]

I think that even in case that Homeopathy is just placebo, people should use homeopathy.

Placebo effect really helps people.

So, if homeopathy is placebo, it will help people - just as placebo does.


(Of course, not when it is taken instead of treatments that work better-than-placebo).

I think that even in case genocide helps redistribute the world's resources, people should commit genocide.

Increasing everyone's per capita share of world resources really helps people.

So, if genocide increases resources for those who are left, it will help people - just as increasing per capita resources does.

(Of course, not when genocide is substituted for scientific advancements that do a better job of increasing the world's per capita resources).

 

[Mojo]

There is some evidence that it may have trivial effect on pain, but that is questionable, since we can't objectively measure pain, and these studies are entirely dependent on patient self-reporting.

Oddly enough, while acupuncture appears to have some positive trial results, they all seem to be for things like reducing pain or nausea, and it is so very difficult to devise a convincing placebo for it...

 

[blutoski]

Oddly enough, while acupuncture appears to have some positive trial results, they all seem to be for things like reducing pain or nausea, and it is so very difficult to devise a convincing placebo for it...

I've seen some with reasonably good double-blinding, but their results are mixed.

And that's the point: there are a few one-offs out there that get repeated in media and placebo-apologetics, but the overall picture is that it might be slightly more effective than non-treatment.

In any case, the tiny measured improvement - even if real - is probably not worth the investment in time and effort.

 

[drkitten]

But in order for it to work as placebo, people need to believe that it will help them. So they need to think it is not placebo.

That's a common misconceptions, yes. It just happens to not be true.

 

[fls]

A review looking at placebo compared to no treatment.

What was found was that there were no differences on objective measures. There were also no differences on binary measures (for example, the presence or absence of nausea). For subjective measures on a continuous scale (like a pain scale) there was a small difference.

Basically, you can fool yourself into thinking you feel a little less nauseated, but you can't fool yourself into thinking your nausea is gone.

Linda

 

[Mojo]

I've seen some with reasonably good double-blinding, but their results are mixed.

And, of course, there was the one which found that sticking needles any old where produced just as big a placebo effect as sticking them in the "proper" places.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Have any of you thought that perhaps homoeopaths do some things better than conventional medicine?

For example, the average consultation time for a GP is about 15 minutes (if you're lucky). A homoeopath will double or quadruple that.

For illnesses where tea and sympathy are all that can be offered, how someone feels while they are recovering is often just as important to them as the objective improvements they are going to have over time.

 

[blutoski]

Have any of you thought that perhaps homoeopaths do some things better than conventional medicine?

For example, the average consultation time for a GP is about 15 minutes (if you're lucky). A homoeopath will double or quadruple that.

For illnesses where tea and sympathy are all that can be offered, how someone feels while they are recovering is often just as important to them as the objective improvements they are going to have over time.

To be frank, I've never seen reliable statistics about homeopathy practice turnarounds. The profession is very evasive in this regard.

However, I do have friends who are registered practicing homeopaths here in BC, and they're quite happy boasting about how many patients they can crank through in a day. I've attended some of their practice-building seminars (which for some reason qualify as continuing education credit), and the lecturer is usually promoting some family of strategies to build an assembly-line patient management system.

 

[Mojo]

Have any of you thought that perhaps homoeopaths do some things better than conventional medicine?

For example, the average consultation time for a GP is about 15 minutes (if you're lucky). A homoeopath will double or quadruple that.

Well, yes, but they do everything else much worse.

For illnesses where tea and sympathy are all that can be offered, how someone feels while they are recovering is often just as important to them as the objective improvements they are going to have over time.

On the other hand, if they have a condition that there is an effective treatment for, they'll most likely take a lot longer before they are actually better if they go to a homoeopath than if they go to a proper doctor.

And if their condition isn't self limiting they might not recover at all.