Homeopathy

[Skybird]

Do you believe in it (or variations of it) as an effective cure, or not?

Myself, I cut it short, I think it is quackery.

I see a chance of it being effective in the meaning of a placebo being effective. I also can imagine that this placebo effect can be transported via a mediating person (a mother orders homeopathic treatement for her child, and the child responds to her expecation and behavior by showing a placebo effect). However, I cannot ignore that I was unable to find hints for any serious study prooving the effectiveness of the method, but that many studies that were claimed to deliver evidence in the past years, have been withdrawn by their authors, or have been called back by publishers, or that the homeopathy fan group itself even admitted were extremely faulty. I also cannot ignore the many inherent inconsistencies of the theory, and the almost superstitious thinking behind the "Gleichheitsprinzip" (similiarity principle?), which reminds of the wearing of flower amulettes in the medieval. I knew people long time ago, who treated the "depressed mood" of their cat with Bachblüten, and swore that the cat became better and behaved differently. I knew those people quite well for some years, and their cat as well, and I did not see any change at all, i also did not see any depressed basic mood in that cat. I think the people just saw what they wanted to imagine into it.

In that a patient maybe denies regular medical treatement over attempts of trying homeopathy first, I even see risks involved.

The idea of information being written into water and carried by water molecules when the agents get deluded to ratios that finally not even one molecule would be left in all of earth's oceans, I cannot believe at all. I find Sheldrake's morphogenetic fields theory very interesting and fascinating (not proven wrong but also not proven right, however), but when comparing to homeopathy's basic assumptions, Sheldrake has presented a model and theory with hierarchic argument that compares to homeopathy like a Ferrari compares to an oxcart.

What do you think?

[Sailor Steve]

Don't know. I'm always ready to dismiss things, but my dad thinks it helped with his Parkinson's. Did it? If it did, was it the placebo effect?

I don't know.

[tater]

Quackery.

Homeopathy is to Medicine

as

Astrology is to Astronomy.

[Platapus]

First of all, in order for this poll to be useful, one should define what homeopathy means and does not mean. There is a big difference between homeopathy and herbal medicine, but some confuse the terms.

[tater]

I'm referring to the "medicine" practiced by "homepaths."

It's quackery.

[antikristuseke]

Its to medicine as bat**** is to sanity

[gimpy117]

I Had to take a Holistic health class first Semester At Western Michigan University. It was all commons sense and pseudo-scientific crap. Homeopathy is a joke. Some of these medicines can do actual harm, and not getting treatment in hopes that the "alternative medicine" will work is even more dangerous. Sure yoga,acupuncture, a good diet, and massage can help the ill recover faster, or improve quality of life during treatment...but taking fish oil to cure an actual disease...total bunk

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Platapus

First of all, in order for this poll to be useful, one should define what homeopathy means and does not mean. There is a big difference between homeopathy and herbal medicine, but some confuse the terms.

Homeopathy is not herbal medicine, not by name, and not by practice. I also never met anybody confusing the two. Even those who maybe did not know what homeopathy is, did not assume it was herbal medicine.

there are local variations of homeopathy, though, but all depend on the same set of basic assumptions, though they are called ifferent: Bachblüten in Germany, Caliornian Essences in America, and so on. That's why I mentioned "and variations".

Herbal essence uses cures that have actual chemically/physiologically more or less effective ingredients, while homeopathy from relatively early dilution-ratios on has none. It's two totally different things.

For a quick shot at what homeopathy is: German or English Wikipedia do a sufficient job on it.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

I Had to take a Holistic health class first Semester At Western Michigan University. It was all commons sense and pseudo-scientific crap. Homeopathy is a joke. Some of these medicines can do actual harm,

How'S that if there is almost no moleculae left in the "medicine" - it cannot work for bad or worse if it has no active agent!?

and not getting treatment in hopes that the "alternative medicine" will work is even more dangerous.

Yes indeed, that is the greatest risk I see as well.

Sure yoga,acupuncture, a good diet, and massage can help the ill recover faster, or improve quality of life during treatment...but taking fish oil to cure an actual disease...total bunk

Well, all that is no homeopathy, let's do not mix it all together. And codliver oil has high ammounts of vitamine A and D, omega-3-fatty acids, and thus could be of benefit for persons in need of these.

[Schroeder]

Actually I've never taken anything homoeopathic. But I know some people who did and they had great relief from it. It even works on animals as far as I know which would rule out the placebo effect as animals don't believe in our medicine.
I actually think that if it does help people in one way or another it has a right to exist.
Just my 0.02$.

[NeonSamurai]

Proving something works on animals can be difficult at best unless we are talking about a readily quantifiable illness. It also is theoretically possible to enduce the placebo effect on the animal if it has been given medication before with positive effects in a similar way as to the placebo.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Actually I've never taken anything homoeopathic. But I know some people who did and they had great relief from it. It even works on animals as far as I know which would rule out the placebo effect as animals don't believe in our medicine.
I actually think that if it does help people in one way or another it has a right to exist.
Just my 0.02$.

the problem with animals is that they cannot tell you they feel inner, mental relief - it's very much in the eye of the beholder that they "feel" better, and those cat owners I knew back then definitely interpreted things into it. The cat did not chnage at all. At that time,I visisted them several times per week, we were close friends from university. The cat I never saw as "depressed", it was always kind and friendly. The point is that the couple itself was in stress in the beginning, and then settled down and relief came over them - and that was when they started to perceive that change for the better in their cat! But the cat did not change although being treated with Bachblüten over "depression". The couple itself had changed, and so did it's perceptions. Possible that this change also fed back on the cat, but I did not perceive that. After all, it was a cat - kind, but lazy as hell.

and it still is possible that there is an indirect placebo effect in place, too. We have had dogs ourselves, when I lived at my parents. They used to boost their temper or became more alive" when one of us felt ill, and then became better, or something that worried us fell off our shoulders. the dogs perceived that improvement in us, and responded to it with relief by themselves. After all, a dog is in trouble when the big huge Alphadog is angry or ill and cannot lead the pack in the regular boss manner.

Children also can change their behavior in response to the expectations of their parents: mother thinks the cure is effective, child subconsciously perceives a change in her mother's behavior - and alters own behavior in reply. Animals do that for sure, too, especially dogs, cats, probably also horses - all those animals that live close together with humans since long and maybe even have a genetically founded ability now to interprete and understand basics of human gestures, mimics, and behavior/body language. For dogs, this is now strongly assumed to be the case. and it is not even a great surprise if you consider the principles of genetic evolution.

[Geno_Mariner]

I don't think it's quackery. But each to their own.
It seems to be pretty good. I keep an open mind to anything, especially when I'm a horse owner. Works well to be open minded to any thing even if it may seem to be a bit far fetched. You can choose to either dismiss it as a whole or take out what you think works the best and dismiss the rest. I've always been doing that, works out well.

Again, each to their own. Everyone's entitled to opinions and as Schroeder said, it's got a right to exist if it works for some. Not everyone's forced to use it

[Schroeder]

@Skybird

I wasn't talking about mental treatment of animals.

One example for humans:
A friend of my mother has had problems with a tooth. There was a painful swelling in the upper jaw. After some days she took some homoeopathic pill and the swelling was gone within hours.
Even if this should have been only a placebo effect it definitely did cure the problem.

[tater]

Opinions don't matter. If it is not quackery, then it could prove it works in proper, controlled studies—more than the placebo effect. It does not.