Homeopathy is everywhere!

Ah, me see. Thanks for educating me. :)

D2O - You can still drink it? I guess we all do...

D2O is found at the level of about 1 in 20 million water molecules.

http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/sno/D2O.html

Deuterium is chemically identical to hydrogen, but it is heavier because it contains an extra neutron.

http://physicsweb.org/article/news/5/10/1


An ordinary hydrogen atom has a nucleus consisting of a single proton. A deuterium atom has a nucleus consisting of a proton and a neutron, so it is twice as heavy as an ordinary hydrogen atom. This means that a molecule of heavy water has a mass of 20 units while an ordinary water molecule has a mass of 18 units. Thus the name heavy water. Pure heavy water is 10% denser than ordinary water; it freezes at 3.8°C and boils at 101.4°C. It is not radioactive.


http://www.physicspost.com/articles.php?articleId=69
 
Eos of the Eons: D2O - You can still drink it? I guess we all do...
http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/sno/D2O.html
D2O is found at the level of about 1 in 20 million water molecules.
Thus each fluid ounce of water contains 50,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of D<sub>2</sub>O, since there are about 10<sup>24</sup> molecules of water per fluid ounce (cite).

Or to use homeopathic notation, naturally occurring heavy water is between 7X and 8X.
 
Wow, there is a heck of a lot more heavy water in homeopath remedies than active ingredients then right?
 
Eos of the Eons said:
Wow, there is a heck of a lot more heavy water in homeopath remedies than active ingredients then right?
There are no active ingredients in homeopath remedies.

edited to note: my statement is in error. please see xouper's correction below.
 
Oh yeah, so there's only maybe some exposure to an active ingredient for some remedies?

With everything in this thread I am still feeling naive about how the hell that crap can ever be sold if the stuff is only water with heavy water and whatever other crap is in it from the source (flouride from tap water).

There are soooo many studies on the 'properties of water', but what is all this voodoo that supposedly makes homeopath water so effective? Is it like holy water then...being 'blessed' or whatever to make it 'work'?

In all the junk I tried to read in defence of it, I still can't see the justification...but I am forgetting most of what I read already as it was mostly "well this person has a PhD and he knows what he is talking about".

What again is the main claim about what makes it 'work'?

This is my favorite reference:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html


Hahnemann declared that diseases represent a disturbance in the body's ability to heal itself and that only a small stimulus is needed to begin the healing process.


He also claimed that chronic diseases were manifestations of a suppressed itch (psora), a kind of miasma or evil spirit. At first he used small doses of accepted medications. But later he used enormous dilutions and theorized that the smaller the dose, the more powerful the effect -- a notion commonly referred to as the "law of infinitesimals." That, of course, is just the opposite of the dose-response relationship that pharmacologists have demonstrated.


I mean, it's only common sense that this homeopathy theory is flawed. How can anyone even attempt to prove it has any merit at all? No study in the world can prove Hahnemann right for gosh sakes!


Oscillococcinum, a 200C product "for the relief of colds and flu-like symptoms," involves "dilutions" that are even more far-fetched. Its "active ingredient" is prepared by incubating small amounts of a freshly killed duck's liver and heart for 40 days. The resultant solution is then filtered, freeze-dried, rehydrated, repeatedly diluted, and impregnated into sugar granules. If a single molecule of the duck's heart or liver were to survive the dilution, its concentration would be 1 in 100200. This huge number, which has 400 zeroes, is vastly greater than the estimated number of molecules in the universe (about one googol, which is a 1 followed by 100 zeroes). In its February 17, 1997, issue, U.S. News & World Report noted that only one duck per year is needed to manufacture the product, which had total sales of $20 million in 1996. The magazine dubbed that unlucky bird "the $20-million duck."

Actually, the laws of chemistry state that there is a limit to the dilution that can be made without losing the original substance altogether. This limit, which is related to Avogadro's number, corresponds to homeopathic potencies of 12C or 24X (1 part in 1024). Hahnemann himself realized that there is virtually no chance that even one molecule of original substance would remain after extreme dilutions. But he believed that the vigorous shaking or pulverizing with each step of dilution leaves behind a "spirit-like" essence -- "no longer perceptible to the senses" -- which cures by reviving the body's "vital force." Modern proponents assert that even when the last molecule is gone, a "memory" of the substance is retained. This notion is unsubstantiated. Moreover, if it were true, every substance encountered by a molecule of water might imprint an "essence" that could exert powerful (and unpredictable) medicinal effects when ingested by a person.

The magazine dubbed that unlucky bird "the $20-million duck."

Quack quack quack!!!!
 
Pyrrho: There are no active ingredients in homeopath remedies.
Well, pedantically speaking, a typical one ounce vial of 12X homeopathic remedy does contain about 1,000,000,000,000 molecules of active ingredient (or should if it's true to its labeling). Still, that's 10,000 times less than the safe level of arsenic according to the EPA.

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/arsenic.html
 
Most remedies today range from 6X to 30X, but products of 30C or more are marketed.

A 30X dilution means that the original substance has been diluted 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times. Assuming that a cubic centimeter of water contains 15 drops, this number is greater than the number of drops of water that would fill a container more than 50 times the size of the Earth. Imagine placing a drop of red dye into such a container so that it disperses evenly. Homeopathy's "law of infinitesimals" is the equivalent of saying that any drop of water subsequently removed from that container will possess an essence of redness. Robert L. Park, Ph.D., a prominent physicist who is executive director of The American Physical Society, has noted that since the least amount of a substance in a solution is one molecule, a 30C solution would have to have at least one molecule of the original substance dissolved in a minimum of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of water. This would require a container more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth.


Note: We are interested in filing consumer-protection suits against homeopathic sellers. If you have purchased a homeopathic product within the past year and concluded that the product did not work as represented on packaging or in any advertisement, please contact us homeo@quackwatch.com


Um, scroll down to the very bottom of the page of the link I gave in my las post before this (where I got everything in this post) and read what the cussing morons who wrote in to defend homeopathy have to say.


This one at least lacks swear words:

Homeopathic practices tend to be from the biblical roots of good natural medicine. There are millions that will fight any intrusion on homeopathy and its tenets. God have mercy on the persecutors.


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ugh, yeah, 'natural' and 'bilblical'=effective?? Not!
 
Eos of the Eons said:
What again is the main claim about what makes it 'work'?
Ummm, it could be the memory of water. Or the mystical energies imbued by all the shaking - referred to as "kinetic energy" by one proponent. This page here has a summary of quite a lot of the various suggested methods of action (each one madder than the last, as far as I can see), and links to more detailed papers.

The really cutting-edge researchers are now working on the theory that it is quantum entanglement between the patient, the practitioner and the remedy, at the macroscopic level. The latest paper along these lines made it to the Guardian's bad science feature last week. Personally, if some of the people putting this idea forward don't like to call this magic, I think we are only differing in semantics.

Of course the actual practitioners don't think about how it works. They just insist that it does - maybe not in controlled trials, but for them on their patients. I had a colleague expounding that to me on Friday - he just has seen it work so often, he says :rolleyes:. Personally, I think most of the training course must consist of intensive practice in deluding yourself.

Rolfe.
 
Thus each fluid ounce of water contains 50,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of D<sub>2</sub>O, since there are about 10<sup>24</sup> molecules of water per fluid ounce (cite).

Or to use homeopathic notation, naturally occurring heavy water is between 7X and 8X.
[/QUOTE]

Hmm... I wonder how much I can get for selling 10 ml vials of pure water as "Deuterium oxidum 7x"...;)
 
Well, you better get a patent before I get in on that!


Of course the actual practitioners don't think about how it works. They just insist that it does - maybe not in controlled trials, but for them on their patients. I had a colleague expounding that to me on Friday - he just has seen it work so often, he says

Yes they do delude themselves. I lost a friend to "essential oils". She believes they work and are the only things that can 'protect you' from illness.


Never mind that Young is a complete fraud.

http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/young.html

My friend has no idea how parasites infect a body. She doesn't believe me that a viruse uses our cells in order make more of itself. I tried to explain it all using my microbiology text, but she just said she 'doesn't believe it'.

Ugh. So yeah, there are millions of folks out there that don't believe how microbes actually enter the body and reproduce. To them it is just a bad energy to chase out by strengthening the immune system (by applying orange oil or drink homeopathic water). Yeesh.
 
Further to assertions that mainstream physicians are NOT at all interested in exploring alternative therapies, here is an advert (not copywritten and certainly reproducible here or anywhere there might be interest) for no less than Volume V in a series published by Thomson, publishers of the PDR or Physician's Desk Reference. Specially note that completion of this book carries 30 Category I AMA continuing education (CME) credits needed by physicians to renew their licenses:


The Physician's Guide to Alternative Medicine, Volume V


Code: S03159
Price: $249.00







Volume V of this evidence-based series is completely new and up-to-date delivering valuable, clinical information on the therapies your patients are using. Entirely written and reviewed by physicians and clinical experts in the field of alternative medicine, this vital resource offers 300 pages of information on what's safe, what works and what's unproven or even dangerous.

Physician's Guide to Alternative Medicine, Volume V, is CME-accredited, offering up to 30 AMA Category 1 CME credits.

This volume includes in-depth chapters on alternative medicine as it relates to:

* Coronary health
* Neurology
* Behavioral health
* Musculoskeletal health
* Men's health
* Women's health
* Herbal medicine
* Allergy and immunology
* Weight management
* Cancer

With the latest information on:

* Supplements
* Herb-drug interactions
* St. John's wort
* Chelation therapy
* CoEnzyme Q10
* Vitamin A
* Reiki
* Exercise
* Homeopathy
* Ephedra
* Acupuncture
* Estriol
* Soy
* Black cohosh
* Saw palmetto
* Antioxidants
* Echinacea
* Ginkgo biloba
 
So what's your point? Evidence-based information is what is important, and, getting back to the topic at hand, the overwhelming evidence is that homeopathy has no clinically significant benefit over placebo.
 
Martinm said:
And obviously the mere presence of a video camera would have completely invalidated their results :rr:

Well it's that terrible sceptical effect
.. if you don't really really really really believe or if there is some nasty doubter who records the entire event the sceptic effect is invoked..
and every-one knows how effective controls are for eliminating psychic ability:rolleyes:
 
So what's your point? Evidence-based information is what is important, and, getting back to the topic at hand, the overwhelming evidence is that homeopathy has no clinical significant benefit over placebo.

The point(s) are:

1. Physicians (e.g. M.D.s) are interested enough in this subject for a major producer of books such as the PDR to go out on a limb and prduce a $250.00 volume for sale to this market.

2. The American Medical Association is apparently interested enough in the interest of the above physicians enough to go out and offer readers of this tome no less than 30 CMEs. In the bigger picture that's a lot of CMEs.

Not having coughed up $250.00 and acquired/read this book, I am not in a position to say whether or not the evidence for any of the topics listed is pro or con including homeopathy.

My point was clear. There have been assertions made that mainstream medicine is NOT interested in alternative medicine. Incorrect. There have been assertions and innuendos that unless the AMA publishes a paper anything appearing elsewhere, even in peer reveviewed publications such as the Lancet is bunk. Well the J of the AMA may not have accepted a study for publication on this subject but plenty of other non-homeopathic as well as homeopathic journals have. You can keep going on that the papers you nominate demonstrate the placebo effect and true skeptics can keep going on that there are papers that say otherwise.

And until this matter is settled by further studies, preferably adhering to FDA protocols (even if not required by the FDA), anything you say or I say on either side of this debate means anything.
 
SteveGrenard said:


My point was clear. There have been assertions made that mainstream medicine is NOT interested in alternative medicine. Incorrect. There have been assertions and innuendos that unless the AMA publishes a paper anything appearing elsewhere, even in peer reveviewed publications such as the Lancet is bunk. Well the J of the AMA may not have accepted a study for publication on this subject but plenty of other non-homeopathic as well as homeopathic journals have. You can keep going on that the papers you nominate demonstrate the placebo effect and true skeptics can keep going on that there are papers that say otherwise.

No, you miss the point again. There is no such thing as "alternative medicine". Either something is safe and effective (i.e. medicine), or either unsafe, ineffective, or both (quackery). Some of what you call alternative medicine does have merit and is being seriously studied. Homeopathy does not fall in this category. I'm quite certain if you read the book that will be the conclusion as well. If you like to think of yourself as a "true skeptic" for thinking there is something to homeopathy, knock yourself out and study it. I know as a scientist there is absolutely nothing to this 18th century absurdity.

SteveGrenard said:

And until this matter is settled by further studies, preferably adhering to FDA protocols (even if not required by the FDA), anything you say or I say on either side of this debate means anything.

Don't hold your breath. You really think homeopathic remedy manufacturers will ever conduct FDA quality studies? Why haven't they done so yet?? A true skeptic would know the answer to this question...
 
No, you miss the point again. There is no such thing as "alternative medicine".

That's strange. If there is no such thing then why do reputable, serious publishers such as this incorporate the term in the title? Why does the NIH have a branch that is looking into, er, this term? Why are there thousands of websites that incorporate or integrate the term into what they are describing? Do you know what it means? Obviously not if you think or would have us believe it does not exist.

You just think you can declare something as non-existent and the world will bow to your infinite wisdom and knowledge?
I doubt it.
 
BoTox: Alternative Medicine does Not Exist

I guess the following authors disagree with you boTox. An excerpt from their abstract follows:

------------------------------------------

Searching biomedical databases on complementary medicine: the use of controlled vocabulary among authors, indexers and investigators

Linda S Murphy1 , Sibylle Reinsch2 , Wadie I Najm3 , Vivian M Dickerson4 , Michael A Seffinger5 , Alan Adams6 and Shiraz I Mishra7

1Science Library Reference Department, University of California, Irvine, P.O. Box 19557, Irvine, CA 926233-9557, USA
2Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, University of California, Irvine, Medical Center, 101 City Drive, Orange, CA 92868, USA
3Department of Family Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Medical Center, 101 City Drive, Orange, CA 92868, USA
4Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of California, Irvine, Medical Center, 101 City Drive, Orange, CA 92868, USA
5Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine, College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences, 309 E. 2nd St., Pomona, CA 91766-1854, USA
6Office for Academic Affairs and Office of the Provost, 212 Westcott Building, Tallahassee, Florida 32306, USA
7Office of the Dean, College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences, 309 E. 2nd St., Pomona, CA 91766-1854, USA

BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2003 3:3

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at:

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/3/3

Received 25 April 2003
Accepted 7 July 2003
Published 7 July 2003

© 2003 Murphy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outline Abstract

"The increasing research in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) and the importance placed on practicing evidence-based CAM require ready access to the CAM scientific literature. The optimal retrieval of a literature search in biomedicine depends on the appropriate use of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), descriptors and keywords among authors, indexers, and investigators [1]. It has been recognized that available online databases covering CAM differed in their thesaurus construction and indexing procedures, making effective and efficient searching difficult [2].



"The controlled vocabulary for biomedicine has been developed and continuously updated by the National Library of Medicine (NLM). It is referred to as the NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). The purpose of MeSH is to provide uniformity and consistency to the indexing of the biomedical literature [3].

"With the recent development of CAM on PubMed [4,5], MeSH descriptors for CAM have been expanded.

"As of December 2002, there were a total of 21,973 MeSH descriptors found in the NLM Medical Subject headings – Annotated Alphabetic list, 2002 [6].

"While the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) has identified over 360 healing modalities, MeSH currently included only 83 descriptors for CAM, arranged hierarchically under the sets of terms in Complementary Therapies[7].

"In 2001, there were only 41 MeSH descriptors for CAM, arranged under Alternative Medicine[8].

"Cross-references have been available to assist searchers in finding the most appropriate MeSH Heading, for example, Alternative Medicine see Complementary Therapies[9].

"Therapeutic Cults was the MeSH descriptor between 1963 and 1993. It was only in 1994 that the term Alternative Medicine was implemented in the NLM MeSH thesaurus."
 
Placebo Effect in Experimental Animals??

I asked earlier if anyone had an explanation for how the placebo effect could work in experimental animals treated sucessfully with homeopathic remedies. I did not get any replies but I did get requests asking me to put up or shut up---that is, asking me for such studies, implying such did not exist.

Animal studies, of course, are an early part of most new drug studies per FDA protocols. Right boTox? I will work backwards and give one of the most recent studies first. More to follow if necessary. Anyone interested can read the full text at the URL given below.
-----------------------------------------------

Effect of a homeopathic drug, Chelidonium, in amelioration of p-DAB induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice

Surjyo Jyoti Biswas and Anisur Rahman Khuda-Bukhsh

Cytogenetics Laboratory, Department of Zoology, University of Kalyani, Kalyani-741 235, W.B., India

BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2002 2:4

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/2/4

Received 7 December 2001
Accepted 10 April 2002
Published 10 April 2002

© 2002 Biswas and Khuda-Bukhsh; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in any medium for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outline Abstract
Abstract
Background
Materials and methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Acknowledgements
References
Pre-publication history


Background

Crude extracts of Chelidonium majus, and also purified compounds derived from crude extracts of this plant, have been reported to exhibit anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, anti-tumor and anti-microbial properties both in vitro and in vivo. Chelidonium is a homeopathic drug routinely used against various liver disorders including cancer in humans. Two potencies of Chelidonium (Ch-30, Ch-200) have been tested for their possible anti-tumor and enzyme modulating activities in liver and anti-clastogenic effects during p-DAB-induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice compared to suitable controls.

Methods

Several cytogenetic and enzymatic protocols were used at three fixation intervals; at 60 days, 90 days and 120 days of treatment. Different sets of healthy mice were fed: i) hepatocarcinogen, p-DAB plus phenobarbital (PB), ii) only PB, iii) neither p-DAB nor PB (normal control). One set of mice fed with p-DAB plus PB was also fed Ch-30 (iv) and another set Ch-200 (v). All standard currently used methods were adopted for cytogenetical preparations and for the enzyme assays.

Results

All group (i) mice developed tumors in liver at all fixation intervals, while none of group (ii) and (iii) mice developed any tumors. About 40% mice in group (iv) and group (v) did not show tumor nodules in their liver. Feeding of Chelidonium to group (iv) and (v) mice reduced genotoxic effects to a significant extent (p < 0.05 to p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The homeopathic drug Chelidonium exhibited anti-tumor and anti-genotoxic activities and also favorably modulated activities of some marker enzymes. Microdoses of Chelidonium may be effectively used in combating liver cancer.


Outline Background
Abstract
Background
Materials and methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Acknowledgements
References
Pre-publication history


Chelidonium majus L. (Papaveraceae) is a plant of great interest for its use in various diseases in European countries and in Chinese herbal medicines. Crude extracts of various parts such as the root, shoot and leaves have been reported to have several isoquinoline alkaloids, such as, sanguinarine, chelidonine, chelerythrine, berberine and coptisisine. Both crude extracts of C. majus and purified compounds derived from it have been reported to exhibit interesting anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, anti-tumor and anti-microbial properties both in vitro and in vivo[1-3]. Besides, inhibitory effect of Chelidonium majus herb extract has been reported on growth of keratinocytes in human, and on lipoxygenase activity in mice [4] while stimulatory effect has been reported on bile acid independent flow in isolated perfused rat liver [5].

In the homeopathic mode of treatment, various micro doses (potencies) of Chelidonium herb extract are routinely used against several forms of liver disorders, including liver cancer [6] with good effect. But, to our knowledge, whether ultra-low doses of Chelidonium majus, namely, Chelidonium-30 (Ch-30) and Chelidonium-200 (Ch-200), could also have similar anti-tumor or anti-genotoxic activities had not been experimentally tested so far in mice in vivo. The present investigation was therefore undertaken primarily to examine if Ch-30 and Ch-200, prepared as per homeopathic procedure, could show i) anti-tumor activity in liver, ii) anti-clastogenic effect in bone marrow cells, iii) protective/repair ability on sperm heads, and iv) ameliorating effects in the activities of some marker enzymes like acid and alkaline phosphatases, and peroxidase in various tissues during azo dye induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice.
 
SteveGrenard said:
*snip*
My point was clear. There have been assertions made that mainstream medicine is NOT interested in alternative medicine. Incorrect.

- and these assertions maily comes from proponents of alternative medicine. They need to perpetuate this lie bacause otherwise they need to answer one very simple question:
If [insert alternative remedy in question] is so effective, how come it is not all over the pharmacies?


There have been assertions and innuendos that unless the AMA publishes a paper anything appearing elsewhere, even in peer reveviewed publications such as the Lancet is bunk.

ANYBODY can publish in peer-reviewed journals. And if the investigation is scientifically sound, and the result is interesting, it will be recognized.

*snip*

And until this matter is settled by further studies, preferably adhering to FDA protocols (even if not required by the FDA), anything you say or I say on either side of this debate means anything.

I agree that studies should adhere to FDA protocols, but in many cases, additional studies are not needed; the result is already clear.

This was originally a homeopathy thread. I have been having some "Interesting" debates with hard-core homeopaths elsewhere, so I'm going through the central book on homeopathy, "The Organon of Medicine". This will take another couple of weeks (it is a big volume), then I will publish my comments and conclusions. I can, however, already tell you that my studies are leaving me thoroughly unconvinced about the virtues of homepathy.


Hans
 
Just a small point everyone is talking about x molecules of compound y in water. I just don't see how totally 100% pure water can be produced in the first place especially considering that these solutions are not prepared under total vacuum (even this isn't totally possible).

So in essence the water your using is contaminated to begin with - relative to the levels were talking here.

So far we have no definative proof of homeopathy only wild unsubstantiated theories. Yes we have some +ve results but they are not repeatable - many times in science +ve results are found to have a mundane cause. With so many different experiments unless one is repeatable by all then your left with a hideously large number of possible flaws in the methodology to determine.

So far when a specific claim has been investigated properly it fails completely. Just because something is peer reviewed does not mean it's correct - many theories have been published and peer reviwed and shown later to be incorrect, we just didn't know any better at the time - it's called advancement.

People assume and believe Homeopathy works, in my mind what has belief got to do with the truth?.

So far Homeopathy isn't able to demonstrate anything other than a method for making money for shaken fairly pure water. It's main advantage is the placebo effect it can cause so it does have some use i suppose. Yet i'm sure we could come up with a cheaper placebo alternative ;-)

AX
 

Back
Top Bottom