Should Homeopathy be illegal?

[Guest]

Nowhere have you backed up your claim that ”Half of all illnesses around are caused by the side effects of modern medicines”. If you had any basis for this claim you would have posted it by now. But you haven’t. It’s an empty claim. And wrong.

I have no idea what this is about. But again you have not backed up your claim that ”you treat same with same that cures the whole“. Hardly surprising. No one has ever been able to show any reason to believe this.

Your claims are empty. There is no reason to believe in any of the claims of homeopathy.

I BELIEVE IT works in certain aspects. You cant say arnica doesnt work as its been taken over by the big manufacturers.

Why do I have to back up my claim? Go look at links for side effects in any newsparer celebrex is investigated for its side effects and was banned a while back, what isnt that proof? Vallium addicts are they not proof of side effects?

me knowing arnica works on bruising, and sayng about the ban issued by the over pond medical overlords about celebrex and vioxx side effect as per news item and paper.

 

[Guest]

We are quite capable of producing demineralized water, thank you very much. There's no reason to suppose the alcohol is any more pure- how do you suppose the alcohol was made? Generally it's distilled from a water-alcohol mixture produced by fermentation.

However, that's beside the point. It doesn't matter what you mix the "mother tincture" with- after diluting it to the point of one part in 10^23, you'd be lucky to have a single molecule of the active ingredient left. That corresponds to a homeopathic dilution of 23X or just under 12C.

Imagine you have a bottle with a solution containing 10g of pure elemental arsenic. That corresponds to

82,500,000,000,000,000,000,000

molecules of arsenic. Now consider how many jars of the same volume as the original it would take to make a 30C dilution. 30C means that the source bottle is divided up amongst 100 bottles of solvent and shaken, then a single bottle is taken from the 100 and becomes the new source bottle. The process is repeated 29 more times. That means the total number of bottles those 82,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules are divided amongst is 10^60 or 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

There just aren't enough molecules to go around, whether you use water, alcohol, Pine Sol, or Mountain Dew as a solvent.

no to make 30x its 30 tubes and each tube is made twice not its made each tube 30 times that is wrong, not what I read in front of me. and put up.

research stored data unknown source saying about the x and how it is made up according to my hardrive.

 

[Ipecac]

not in all cases yes i have already said if tha is the case ban that particular healing agent if it doesnt prove to work.

circles again.

I'm sorry, R-S, but without punctuation, I can't even tell what you're trying to say here.

 

[Foodbunny]

The fact of the matter is that if homeopathy worked, if they could just put incredibly small amounts of an active chemical into water or alcohol or any cheap to produce material and sell it for the same amount with the same level of effectiveness the pharmaceutical companies be all over it. They'd make more money if homeopathy worked. But they'd have to prove it through double-blinded clinical trials, unlike Joe P. Neighborhood who can sell his stuff as a food supplement without doing any tests at all.

 

[Guest]

Have it your way. Can you provide any support for your claim that pervuvian bark produces symptoms similar enough to malaria so as to link the two to the exclusion of all other diseases and possible substances?

Can the principles of homeopathy explain why, if the entire bark is required to produce similar symptoms, only the quinine is required to effectively treat malaria?

Dr hahenemann did that on himself all it says he used crude doses of peruvian bark(cichona bark ehich quinine is dererived) he came out with similar symptons to malaria, which stopped when he stopped taking the bark. like cure like principle or the law of similars was formed this was after disageeing with the treatment for maria by another doctors translated work.


me using the recalled memoryand hardrives stroed data of Dr h work aslo available in all god websites promtoing his ideals.

 

[Guest]

The fact of the matter is that if homeopathy worked, if they could just put incredibly small amounts of an active chemical into water or alcohol or any cheap to produce material and sell it for the same amount with the same level of effectiveness the pharmaceutical companies be all over it. They'd make more money if homeopathy worked. But they'd have to prove it through double-blinded clinical trials, unlike Joe P. Neighborhood who can sell his stuff as a food supplement without doing any tests at all.

what and risk losing revenue on the other products they never swallow that.

me proving I havent a gold diggers personality, and the big co do.

 

[Flatworm]

1 why does it. that can be said for many things in science too.

Really, it does? If an effect disappears under scrutiny in mainstream science, we suspect (and rightly so) that someone is being fooled into believing there was an effect, whether by mistake or intentionally.

2 and so?

And so there is no more basis for claiming effectiveness of homeopathic remedies or the accuracy of homeopathic principles than there is for claiming that sugar pills are effective against all ailments.

3 said it before depends on strength of orignal remedy. 3 x of lachesis is far beeter than getting that neat thats for sure.

To a certain point, yes. When homeopaths dilute tinctures to the point where the original ingredient is still present in quantities that can affect living tissues, they are essentially practicing amateur pharmacology.

When they use dilutions that exceed one part in about 10^24 (i.e. 24X or 12C) the strength of the original tincture doesn't enter into it because there isn't any of it left at all.

4 I know that gee thats hey pharmacies are going into the great unknown armed with yes herbalistic records. Theres validity for you. Every one knows th side effects fromeating certian plants or not that is documented not only by toxicolgists, but by plants people the world over including the australian army.

Yes, pharmacology is informed by herbalism. Herbalism is to modern pharmaceuticals what alchemy is to modern chemistry. Pharmacology has grown far beyond herbalism, using evidence-based methods for ensuring effectiveness, safety, and consistent dosing.

6a, if i put you under riorous testing i suspect you wouldnt qualify for something either.

I'm not the one making claims.

sceince does not explain everything as it improves it can look at past things, DNA for one look how that reopened cases, until science is at the stage where it can answer everything and dismiss or endorse, then what its current stage is minor and i cant accept its word as yet. that s my belief I equally ahve disbelief that make me more sketptical thatn you could ever be.

Science hasn't answered everything, but that doesn't imply that unscientific doctrines like Homeopathy answer anything. In this case, the specific question was whether homeopathy works, and science did find an answer: No.

This homeopahy isnt one of them, peole find it helps and I wont knock it for allowing them some people pain free time.
If that makes me a woose glady I accept it I am human and have feelings I'll admit that willingly.

I'm sure that many people can find relief through the psychological effect of a placebo. That has been repeatedly demonstrated. Modern medicine shies away from giving people phony medication in the hopes it will have a psychosomatic effect because of ethical principles. We expect doctors to be honest with us about what medicines do and whether they're effective.

 

[Guest]

I'm sorry, R-S, but without punctuation, I can't even tell what you're trying to say here.

not in all cases,

yes i have already said if that is the case ban that particular healing agent if it doesnt prove to work.

circles again. ] not that hard to read.

me being rc

 

[Darat]

The fact of the matter is that if homeopathy worked, if they could just put incredibly small amounts of an active chemical into water or alcohol or any cheap to produce material and sell it for the same amount with the same level of effectiveness the pharmaceutical companies be all over it. They'd make more money if homeopathy worked. But they'd have to prove it through double-blinded clinical trials, unlike Joe P. Neighborhood who can sell his stuff as a food supplement without doing any tests at all.

And if you think about it further EVERY homeopathic remedy must be "homoeopathically contaminated" since the "effect" is present at such a level that no human agency could "homoeopathically sterilise” the water used in the original 1:10 dilution.

At the dilution that is meant to be effective EVERY homeopathic remedy must contain, homoeopathically, EVERY SINGLE "active" homeopathic substance! Therefore every remedy is the same – yet they are all meant to have “specific activities”.

 

[Flatworm]

Dr hahenemann did that on himself all it says he used crude doses of peruvian bark(cichona bark ehich quinine is dererived) he came out with similar symptons to malaria, which stopped when he stopped taking the bark. like cure like principle or the law of similars was formed this was after disageeing with the treatment for maria by another doctors translated work.

So all you have to support this idea is Hahneman's say-so? Did Hahnemann ever suffer from malaria?

 

[Guest]

One day they may realise soon
when my words suddenly go boom
That if there is nothing left but blanks
then the medince is removed from the ranks
If the substance is still in there
and it works thats all I care
If it isnt then thats the end
now stop driving me round the bend
I belive if people are helped
if nobody is then spank me with a leather belt.


me and the joy of arghhhhhhhhhh

 

[RichardR]

I BELIEVE IT works in certain aspects. You cant say arnica doesnt woras its been taken over tby the big manufacturers.

Is that what your claim boils down to – I believe? OK, it’s official – homeopathy is faith healing. Thanks for confirming that for us RS.

Why do I have to back up my claim? Go look at links for side effects int eh ny newsparer clebrex is investigated for its side effects and was banned a shile back, what isnt that proof? Vallium addicts are they not proof of side effects?

Why do you believe it if you don’t have any reason you can articulate? Why make a claim if you can’t back it up?

You don’t have to back it up. But if you don’t, why should I take you seriously anymore? I’m not going to waste any more time replying to someone who just makes claims but won’t back them up. Bye.

 

[Foodbunny]

what and risk losing revenue on the other products they never swallow that.

They'd lose nothing. They'd release the exact same stuff, for the exact same price, only diluted down to near nothing. They'd get the same money and the same effects (or even better effects if we go with the "less is better" mentality) for less cost to them. They'd literally have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

 

[Guest]

So all you have to support this idea is Hahneman's say-so? Did Hahnemann ever suffer from malaria?

Flatworm he took the substence, from the experince he then found it was similar he then gave it to malaria suffers and it healed them, he didnt have the disease he tok it on himself to prove another docotrs recommendation was wrong and it was .

I am not that old, I wasnt around and if Iwas I havent found that memory

HOMEOPATHY
"->Homeopathy is a scientific method of therapy based on the principle of stimulating the body's own heating processes in order to accomplish cure. The basic system was devised and verified by Samuel Hahnemann, a German physician, nearly 200 years ago. Hahneman's research revealed that diluted substances had the ability to stimulate the body to cure diseases that would be caused by the same substance in large dosages. Homeopathy's astounding success rates in both chronic and acute diseases has resulted in not only standing the test of time, but rapidly achieving wide-spread acceptance in Europe, India and South America. In Homeopathy each of us is a total, complete individual, no aspect of which can be separated from any other. To be effective, any valid therapy must be based on a deep understanding of and respect for the uniqueness of each individual.

Ruta is a common homeopathic remedy that has been used for over 100 years for the treatment of eye strain. Symptoms such as aching over the eyebrows, eye fatigue after reading, blurred vision, burning, headaches, letters running together and tearing are all symptoms that ruta can benefit as reported by A. B. Norton, MD in the book Ophthalmic Disease and Therapeutics. Since the laws of homeopathy deal with dilute substances to stimulate the healing of the body, a large amount of Ruta is not needed. One pellet of the Ruta, taken every 2 hours during eye strain is all that is necessary. During severe periods of eye strain, one pellet should be dissolved in a glass of water and one teaspoon can be taken every 15 minutes. The water should be stirred gently between each dose"<--

oh me and my hardrive go strolling for research unknown data strored again.

 

[Guest]

Is that what your claim boils down to – I believe? OK, it’s official – homeopathy is faith healing. Thanks for confirming that for us RS.

Why do you believe it if you don’t have any reason you can articulate? Why make a claim if you can’t back it up?

You don’t have to back it up. But if you don’t, why should I take you seriously anymore? I’m not going to waste any more time replying to someone who just makes claims but won’t back them up. Bye.

GRRRRRRR I said I belived in it you started demanding such like and so forth. I gave you what I knew, I am not a scientist nor medically trained yet you still kept on its my own views. I dont demand you back up your own thoughts do I.

Its well known or are you going to deny all the medical negligence cases from the side effects cases and tell all the vallium prozac vioxx users nah prove it?

me getting dizzy

 

[Guest]

http://www.positivehealth.com/permit/Articles/Homoeopathy/lewith17.htm

Good read Hahnemanns for yourself.

me and a search engine could have been worse go boil your head often gets shouted by me too

 

[Yahzi]

Sunflower

What the x is in that no clue or what is left but that is a typical homepathic remedy

The procedure you described is not a homeopathic procedure. The result is not a homeopathic remedy.

It is folk medicine, or even herbal medicine. But it is not homeopathy.

You would do well to stop defending an art you don't actually practice.

To be effective, any valid therapy must be based on a deep understanding of and respect for the uniqueness of each individual.

One pellet of the Ruta, taken every 2 hours during eye strain is all that is necessary.

First they tell you it's all individualized, then they tell you the standard treatment that suffices for everyone.

It's like the people who say God's plan is to great for human minds to comprehend, and BTW here is your part in it.

i gave you what I knew, I am not a scientist nor medically trained

Then what you know isn't sufficient.

I dont demand you back up your own thoughts do I.

You should.

 

[Guest]

http://www.wddty.co.uk/

25th April 2001

Author:
Catrin Barker, Principal Pharmacist, DIAL


The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have raised safety concerns about the use of propofol (Diprivan) in children. Their concerns are based on the review of data from a randomised controlled clinical trial that evaluated the safety and effectiveness of Diprivan against other standard sedative agents in paediatric ICU patients. In the study a total of 327 paediatric patients were randomised to receive either Diprivan 2% (113 patients), Diprivan 1% (109 patients) or a standard sedative agent (eg. lorazepam, chloral hydrate, fentanyl, ketamine, morphine or phenobarbital). Diprivan was initiated at an infusion rate of 5.5mg/kg/hr and titrated as needed to maintain sedation at a required level. 25 patients died during the trial or during a 28 day follow up period: 11%,8% and 4% in each of the respective groups. In the FDAs opinion, careful review of the deaths failed to reveal a correlation with underlying disease status or a definite pattern to the causes of death. Astra Zeneca are initiating a new clinical trial designed specifically to evaluate any differences in adverse events and deaths in paediatric patients randomised to propofol or standard sedative agents for ICU sedation.

Comment: Propofol (Diprivan) is not licensed in the USA or in the UK for sedation of children under 16 years of age in intensive care. In 1992 The Committee On Safety of Medicines in the UK warned about serious adverse effects and fatalities in children associated with the use of propofol (Diprivan) for sedation in ICU.(1) In 1998, Bray (2) published a series of case reports in 18 children who had received propofol infusions and had suffered serious adverse effects, described as “propofol infusion syndrome”. An association with a mean dose greater than 4mg/kg/hr and a duration of 48 hours or longer was reported. However a causative relationship could not be proven because of the nature of the study and the small number of patients included.

Propofol infusion is sometimes used (off licence) for sedation of paediatric patients on PICU but the maximum infusion rate is usually limited to 4mg/kg/hr and the duration to 24 hours. High dose, long term infusion in children is not recommended. (2)

death nice side effect....not


asprin has just been banned to all under 16yrs old(fever never give for) as it causes reyes syndrome(side effect)

FDA Warn Health Professionals of Occular Side Effects of Topiramate (Topamax).

Date:
5ht October 2001

Author:
Catrin Barker, Principal Pharmacist, DIAL


Janssen Cilag (US) are issuing a “Dear Doctor” letter in the USA to advise possible occular toxiciy with Topiramate. The labelled warnings for Topiramate have been revised following 23 reported cases (22 adult and 1 child) of acute myopia and secondary acute angle-closure glaucoma.

Janssen Cilag in the UK are in discussion with the Medicines Control Agency and expect to circulate a similar “Dear Doctor” letter in the near future.

The letter issued in the US can be viewed at http://www.fda.gov/medwatch.safety/2001/safety01.htm

Prepared by Susan Wileman (Medicines Information Technician DIAL)

Date of Preparation: 5th October 2001

guess what yep your right its quoted what ever gave that away?

 

[Guest]

Why should I demand such a thing?

I am not arrgoant or rude and dont wish to be, I take what people say and make my mind up not demand they fit mine.

Do you ever consider your wrong?

me on a soap box, so cute when angry

 

[Flatworm]

Flatworm he took the substence, from the experince he then found it was similar he then gave it to malaria suffers and it healed them, he didnt have the disease he tok it on himself to prove another docotrs recommendation was wrong and it was .

He never had the disease, so he never experienced both sets of symptoms- yet he claims they were similar enough to link the two to the exclusion of all other substances and diseases... and we're supposed to take his word for it? Does he even actually describe what the exact symptoms were or do we only get to hear that they were "similar"?

What follows is a rather interesting bit of plagiarism:

HOMEOPATHY
Homeopathy is a scientific method of therapy... based on a deep understanding of and respect for the uniqueness of each individual.

Appears:

http://www.pipeline.com/~ekondrot/whathom.htm

http://homeopathiceye.com/ho.html

Ruta is a common homeopathic remedy ...stirred gently between each dose

The complete text appears:

http://nutritionalresearch.net/featured.htm

http://www.eyerescue.com/homeopathy.htm

Perhaps you're not used to this forum, but it is generally considered dishonest here, as it is in any professional or academic setting, to post material without indicating your source.

Homeopaths, like naturopaths, make reference to very warm and fuzzy principles like "treating the whole person" and being "all-natural". The problem is that these principles are horifically simplistic and as yet have failed to produce results on par with "cold, unnatural" science-based medicine.