Respectful Insolence

Pity the poor UK homeopath…

…because, via Skeptico and DC’s Improbably Science, I’ve learned something that could only warm the coldest cockles of my evil scientific and skeptical heart. It’s something that tells us that, maybe, just maybe, what we bloggers do in favor of evidence-based medicine may actually be having an effect. British homeopath Manish Bhatia, Director of hpathy.com, has sent out a frantic e-mail bemoaning how those poor, poor homeopaths are having trouble making a living, going so far as to say that homeopathy is “bleeding to death” (great analogy, given that homeopathy is a lot like the medieval medical intervention of bleeding for everything):

Do you know that Homeopathy is facing such a huge and systematic campaign in UK and most parts of the western world that even its existence is now threatened?

We have always heard about the 1 Million prize to prove homeopathy and the numerous skeptics forums on the Internet that try to ridicule our Homeopathy but things are rapidly spiraling downwards since last 3 years. The big slide started after the Lancet issue.

Would it were the case that there was an organized effort to get rid of homeopathy! In reality, all this “huge and systematic conspiracy” is nothing more than a handful of bloggers who can’t abide this nonsense, one of which was actually almost silenced with threats with legal action by the Society of Homeopaths. But, let’s hear Bhatia tell us more of this lovely news:

After that there have been VERY SYSTEMATIC efforts to clip homeopathy from the corners. Look at the occurrences below:

1. Homeopathic Remedies were publicized as TOXIC! As a result Nosodes got banned in France and many western countries. You can not even buy Arsenic-alb, Nux-vom, and Opium in 30C or 200C in Canada, US and many other places ..because they are toxic! What a big joke!

But the bigger joke is that practitioners, schools and organizations of the world’s so called second most popular system of medicine, i.e. Homeopathy, are unable to do anything to prevent that!

2. Homeopathy Remedies are then publicized as PLACEBO! The Lancet issue just fueled the propaganda. The biggest scientific minds and political leaders (idiots!) can not decide whether our remedies are placebo or toxic.

But what have YOU done so far to make the people aware of the truth??

Heh. But homeopathic remedies are placebos (except when they contain contaminants or actual pharmaceuticals put in them to make them actually do something), which is the truth…

But let’s not forget the massive conspiracy:

3. Then a couple of UK scribes setup a sting operation against Homeopaths in London to prove that Homeopaths are looting people of their money by giving them prophylactic remedies for Malaria. And next day Homeopathy was again in the headlines ..for all the wrong reasons!

And what did the homeopathic community do? Everyone made a big round mouth and said ‘Oh! How could those 9 fools do that!’. NOBODY tried to defend these people by giving forward our own philosophical approach and historical evidence. Whether the remedies work prophylactically or not is debatable.

BUT WHY WAS THE COMMUNITY NOT ABLE TO SEE THE LARGER PURPOSE OF THE WHOLE INCIDECE? It was a stage managed negative publicity event for homeopathy! Nobody asked the most basic questions – who tipped of the scribes with such information? Who financed the sting operation? And WHY??

It’s tempting at this point to wish that we skeptics were so powerful and ruthlessly efficient in stamping out non-evidence-based medicine and magical thinking. Instead, we’re more like a rag-tag posse of snake oil vigilantes. At best. (Well, that and the occasional broadside by someone like Richard Dawkins.)

Bhatia goes on to whine about how skeptics have supposedly threatened the B.Sc. in Homeopathy to the point where UK universities may not offer it anymore and have campaigned to close the homeopathic hospitals being run by the UK NHS on the premise that the government should be spending health care dollars only on effective remedies.

Good.

But pity the poor homeopath. Look at the horrible price homeopaths are paying for this evil conspiracy:

Those who are organizing this anti-homeopathy campaign have been SO SUCCESSFUL that most homeopaths in UK have seen a 50% drop in their practice in the last 2 years. In fact most of them get to see only 3-4 patients a week…

[...]

We know that Homeopathy has revived in the last 3 decades, that Homeopathy cures, that Homeopathy remedies are not placebo, that the Big Pharma and so called scientists are raging an anti-homeopathy war ..in fact an anti-alternative medicine campaign.

Damn. Skeptics in the U.K. are so much better organized than here in the U.S. I’m with Skeptico, though, on this one. Why should these homeopaths be worried about declining income? Wouldn’t diluting their income make it stronger, according to homeopathic principles?

Oh, wait. That’s what they’re doing. To make ends meet, they’re diluting homoepathy with other forms of woo:

Most of them are looking to add other things with their practice like massage, acupuncture etc. They can’t earn their bread with their homeopathic practice.

Hilarious! Given the way that homeopaths and other advocates of “alternative” medicine castigate Big Pharma for supposedly being concerned about only profits, it’s hard not to feel a little schadenfreude looking at homeopaths complain because their profits are falling. Because people are starting to realize that homeopathy is woo, making it difficult for homeopaths to profit, what are homeopaths doing? Adding different woo to their practice!

Just as any business would do.

Comments

  1. #1 PalMD
    December 6, 2007

    I have to admit that I feel sorry for Bhatia…such poor writing skills.

  2. #2 Freddy the Pig
    December 6, 2007

    This proves that if you keep beating your head against the brick wall of irrationality long enough, you will eventually make a hole in it. Of course it helps that the UK homeopaths have a unique talent for shooting themselves in the foot with their attempts to silence critics.

  3. #3 Armchair Dissident
    December 6, 2007

    We have always heard about the 1 Million prize to prove homeopathy

    If they’re bleeding dry, you’d think they’d be lining up in droves for the prize. Not only would that help ease the problem of their depleted coppers, but would – once and for all – shut us poor skeptics up.

    I won’t be holding my breath.

  4. #4 lowell
    December 6, 2007

    Once Hillary is elected, she will nationalize the health care system, and ivory tower specialists like our fearless blogger will be as bummed as these homeopaths.

  5. #5 Orac
    December 6, 2007

    Not necessarily. My income doesn’t depend upon how many patients I see. I’m on salary, and I don’t make as much as most surgeons with equivalent experience in private practice. So, whatever I would think if U.S. healthcare were nationalized, concern about my income probably wouldn’t be a major part of it.

    There are advantages to the “ivory tower.” Higher income just isn’t one of them.

  6. #6 Godless Geek
    December 6, 2007

    Wouldn’t diluting their income make it stronger, according to homeopathic principles?

    You made me LOL with this one. Literally.

  7. #7 Ken Shabby
    December 6, 2007

    I’ve been thinking of developing Homepathic Heroin Candy, and marketing it to small children. The label will clearly say: “Heroin diluted 800C. Contains no heroin.”

    Will the FDA go ballistic? Or will the homeopaths go postal?

  8. #8 Evan
    December 6, 2007

    Interesting: similar to a dogmatic follower of religious you also insist that your stance “is the truth…” ;-)

  9. #9 wfjag
    December 6, 2007

    “Bhatia goes on to whine about how skeptics have supposedly threatened the B.Sc. in Homeopathy to the point where UK universities may not offer it anymore”

    And the trivium and quadrivium are no longer offered, either. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01760a.htm

  10. #10 David D.G.
    December 6, 2007

    Evan, the fact that religious demagogues misuse the word “truth” doesn’t mean that the word is meaningless. It just means that some people make that claim in error, some in bald-faced lying, and some — like Orac in this instance — in correct, factual truth.

    ~David D.G.

  11. #11 Warren
    December 6, 2007

    Interesting: similar to a dogmatic follower of religious you also insist that your stance “is the truth…” ;-)

    Posted by: Evan

    The difference being that religion has no evidence to support it.

    All I can say about Manish Bhatia’s plight is: Yay!

  12. #12 PalMD
    December 6, 2007

    The fact that a “rag-tag posse of snake oil vigilantes” can actually make such a difference encourages me. Maybe we’ll get lucky on the academic woo as well.

  13. #13 Coin
    December 6, 2007

    You know, it’s funny, his wording is so strong it almost sounds like the opponents of homeopathy had been doing something to him. Instead of. You know. Just talking.

    I mean, there was the bit about France banning some substances (…wait, Opium?), and he brings up the thing about the attempts to get the British NHS to close down their homeopathy centers. But these almost seem like just bullet points to him. The NHS thing seems like the only real strike or tangible action taken against homeopathy he mentions anywhere in his piece, but it’s bullet point #5 of 5. He seems much more concerned about, you know, negative press coverage.

    I’m particularly fascinated by this one line:

    They are killing your freedom to choose what works for you.

    Again, what exactly is it that is being done to take away “freedom to choose?”. Nothing really more than that the people making the choices are being given access to information about the choice. Funny way to take away freedom.

    I kinda suspect though that this “freedom” thing isn’t just hyperbole or demagoguery on his part, though– I think gives us a hint of something larger within his thinking. It’s almost as if as he sees it, an informed choice is not a free one.

    Also for the record, I’m kinda curious what exactly he’s suggesting here:

    The most that the homeopathic community was able to do at that time was …find faults with the article!

    What an impotent response!!

  14. #14 Evinfuilt
    December 6, 2007

    I’ve diluted some tears in water and am promptly mailing it to him. Its the only viable cure!

  15. #15 Dangerous Bacon
    December 6, 2007

    “I kinda suspect though that this (“freedom to choose”) thing isn’t just hyperbole or demagoguery on his part, though– I think gives us a hint of something larger within his thinking.”

    It’s very simple. The terms “freedom to choose” or “health freedom” in an altie context are synonymous with “my ability to make money”.

  16. #16 sailor
    December 6, 2007

    An indication that education works!

  17. #17 Coin
    December 6, 2007

    Once Hillary is elected, she will nationalize the health care system, and ivory tower specialists like our fearless blogger will be as bummed as these homeopaths.

    So what you’re saying is, you haven’t actually read Hillary Clinton’s health care plan.

  18. #18 David Colquhoun
    December 6, 2007

    The funny thing is that there is no organised conspiracy in the UK either. Just a bunch of people who decided to draw a line in the sand and go for the jugular. Nobody is more amazed than me at the success we seem to be having (at the moment anyway).

    But some of the things that happen in universities seem more important than a few crackpot homeopaths. I’d be interested in the US perspective on the “Honey is better than cough medicine” story that I investigated at http://dcscience.net/?p=209

    Of course the Alties (as well as the National Honey Board) are delighted. But where’s the truth?

  19. #19 Mary P
    December 6, 2007

    Colquhoun omitted to mention his coverage of a recent homeopaths’ newsletter:

    It seems to be part of an organised campaigh to discredit homeopathy , with enquiries focusung on AIDS, malaria and vaccination. Members’ responses are then being used on anti-homeopathy blogs and web sites.

  20. #20 David Colquhoun
    December 6, 2007

    Thanks for the link Mary P. I don’t much like plugging myself on other sites, and the clinical corruption (pretty low level spin in the honey case) is certainly not restricted to the US, but I’m visiting the US soon (for the first time in several years) and I’ve been asked to give a few badscience talks as well as the day job stuff, so the US perspective is particularly interesting to me at the moment.

  21. #21 sharon
    December 6, 2007

    (great analogy, given that homeopathy is a lot like the medieval medical intervention of bleeding for everything)

    I don’t get this analogy at all, Orac. Bleeding actually has some physical effect (even if it is only to cause anaemia…), unlike homeopathy. Plus, bleeding made sense in the context of the accepted medical knowledge (humoral theory and all that) of its time; homeopathy doesn’t.

    (And besides, medieval medics didn’t really ‘bleed for everything’.)

  22. #22 Sastra
    December 6, 2007

    We know that Homeopathy has revived in the last 3 decades, that Homeopathy cures, that Homeopathy remedies are not placebo, that the Big Pharma and so called scientists are raging an anti-homeopathy war …

    “Homeopathy cures?” I thought it just allowed the body to heal itself. Or do I have my apologetics mixed up?

    “Homeopathy remedies are not placebo?” But I’ve been told that “placebo” reactions are strangely powerful, the result of a Mind-Body connection using the intentional force of perception to shift the framework of the space-time continuum, creating a new reality through the quantum entanglement of consciousness with the cosmos. Or do I have my apologetics — and pretty much everything else — mixed up?

  23. #23 Marcus Ranum
    December 6, 2007

    You can not even buy Arsenic-alb, Nux-vom, and Opium in 30C or 200C in Canada, US and many other places ..because they are toxic!

    Why would 200C opium be restricted? There’s no actual opium in it, at that dilution. Ditto the Arsenic/whatever, etc. It’s just water.

    By preventing the sale of homeopathic water, uh, “remedies” isn’t the state arguably granting them claim to effectiveness?

  24. #24 DLC
    December 6, 2007

    At least you folks in the UK have been able to get the NHS to have a critical look at homeopathy. Here in the USA it’s big business. Companies with slick advertising on cable channels, the internet and in magazines. You only see in the fine print that the stuff is homeopathic. It’s in almost every drug store, grocery store and in online shops. In my opinion, what we need is for the FDA to regulate this crap out of business.
    I won’t be holding my breath.

  25. #25 Ed
    December 6, 2007

    This makes me want to stand up, hand on heart, salute the Queen (not Prince Charles though – he likes woo) and drink some tea. Go, mighty Britan! Ben Goldacre must be laughing himself silly.

  26. #26 HCN
    December 6, 2007

    DLC, the difference between the USA and the UK is that taxpayers in the UK pay for homeopathy through the NHS.

    Sure the stuff is sold in American stores, but I bet the insurance companies balk at paying for it. The folks in the UK want to stop having homeopathy tax supported. They still have homeopathic hospitals there:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/09/homeopathic_ambulances.php

  27. #27 Felix Kasza
    December 6, 2007

    HCN @6-Dec 9:12pm:

    > Sure the stuff is sold in American stores,
    > but I bet the insurance companies balk at
    > paying for it.

    I wish. My company-supplied health plan (for which my salary is reduced by a good-sized chunk of money, but about which I have no other complaints) is run by Premera and administered by BCBS of Alaska. Acupunturists, seedy chiropractors, naturopaths — all paid for with a part of my salary.

  28. #28 HCN
    December 6, 2007

    Felix, I bet if you look back you will someone in your state legislature pushed it on the insurance company.

    It happened here, and the insurance companies did balk… but lost (but I suspect they are finding ways to limit payments, just like they do for speech therapy). The upshot was that the person who pushed for them to pay for Supplemental, Complementary Alternative Medicine actually died fairly young, and quickly. It may something that may have been helped by real medicine, not the alternative stuff he pushed:
    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/117612_pullen15.html

    Yeah, we were the first state… Sorry about that. But it is not a problem with most of the states in the USA.

  29. #29 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 7, 2007

    Here is one simple and open statement for all those who are against homeopathy. You could be individual / organization, patient / doctor. Can you honestly give one single reason to be against homeopathy. I said honestly. If you are honest with no prejudice and have patient’s welfare as topmost priority, if you do not have any selfish motive, can you then give single reason to be against homeopathy. I invite you to write about ‘your’ reason. I will explain how ignorance has fooled you. If you honestly believe in welfare of patients and humanity you can not have any reason to be against homeopathy. That is my challenge. One thing is said about homeopathy that it is not scientific. On what basis you can say that. Around the world its results can be verified. And what is scientific. FIRST RULE OF SCIENCE IS NOT TO ACCEPT OR REJECT ANYTHING WITHOUT FACTS. But unfortunately all those so called scientific people start talking about homeopathy without knowing ABC of homeopathy.That shows that it is not logic but some other motive that drives them to talk about homeopathy. Learn the basics of homeopathy, see its result then say anything. You will only be delighted by its wonderful results. If you have doubt, ask me, I will tell you how it works. Homeopathy is a blessing for mankind. Do not try to kill it because of your selfish motive or ignorance. It will be a crime against humanity. A big Crime.

  30. #30 Andrew Dodds
    December 7, 2007

    ‘Dr’ Sharma -

    I don’t need a reason to be against homeopathy.

    I need reasons to believe that it is effective. And not just a load of unverifiable anecdotes.

    I have seen no evidence whatsoever that homeopathy is effective, therefore I regard promoting homeopathy as fraud.

    If you have a problem with that, then you can shut me up with just a couple of well designed peer reviewed studies showing a strong effect. What are you waiting for?

  31. #31 Tom
    December 7, 2007

    “Doctor”:

    You say:

    “Here is one simple and open statement for all those who are against homeopathy. You could be individual / organization, patient / doctor. Can you honestly give one single reason to be against homeopathy. I said honestly. If you are honest with no prejudice and have patient’s welfare as topmost priority, if you do not have any selfish motive, can you then give single reason to be against homeopathy. I invite you to write about ‘your’ reason. I will explain how ignorance has fooled you. If you honestly believe in welfare of patients and humanity you can not have any reason to be against homeopathy. That is my challenge. One thing is said about homeopathy that it is not scientific. On what basis you can say that. Around the world its results can be verified. And what is scientific. FIRST RULE OF SCIENCE IS NOT TO ACCEPT OR REJECT ANYTHING WITHOUT FACTS. But unfortunately all those so called scientific people start talking about homeopathy without knowing ABC of homeopathy.That shows that it is not logic but some other motive that drives them to talk about homeopathy. Learn the basics of homeopathy, see its result then say anything. You will only be delighted by its wonderful results. If you have doubt, ask me, I will tell you how it works. Homeopathy is a blessing for mankind. Do not try to kill it because of your selfish motive or ignorance. It will be a crime against humanity. A big Crime.”

    Why do I not prescribe homeopathic remedies? Because water only cures dehydration.

  32. #32 Amenhotep
    December 7, 2007

    The Manual of Interventional Homeopathy

    “For a really effective homeopathic consultation, the patient is placed in a blender, then the resultant rendering is put through a system of multiple dilutions and re-homogenisation(“succussion”), before being pronounced cured, then discharged (down the sink). It has been shown to be highly effective, and no patients have yet complained. The relatives are proposed to retain a “memory” of the patient that is much more rosy than the real thing was in its pre-dilution form.”

  33. #33 Mongrel
    December 7, 2007

    Can you honestly give one single reason to be against homeopathy. I said honestly.

    Why are homeopathy proponents unwilling to be held to the same standards of safety and efficacy as normal medicine?

    In the 200 years since it’s ‘discovery’ how much has homeopathy added to medical\scientific knowledge? Heck – even the Psychologists have got their act together on this one (j/K)

  34. #34 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 7, 2007

    it is a matter of shame that doctors of various stream fight to prove that other is useless. Homeopaths say allopathy is dangerous and allopaths say homeopathy is useless. I am MBBS(allopathy) dr with PG in homeopathy. I have studied both sciences. Both have their own utility. I can say homeopathy works with good effect. Doctors should not have ego problem to fight for their own therapy but should keep patients welfare as topmost priority. Judicious use these can help people live a healthy life. I am open with my treatment. I treat with homeopathy but always keep an eye on patients health through investigations. In cases where I am not able to help there I refer them to respective specialists. I agree homeopaths must not make tall claims of curing AIDS or cancer and if at all they take up such cases it should be in close coordination with conventional medicine. Remember both therapies have succesful and failed cases but failed cases of homeopathy are propagated as failure of homeopathy whereas failed cases of allopathy are taken as failure of that particular doctor. We should avoid such attitude. What is required is not to reject homeopathy but to train homeopaths in such a way that they know which way they are taking the case to. As far as evidence is required my clinic has records of succesful cases. I give you example – In any blunt injury take arnica 1m and see your pain goes or not. If someone is having high fever with great excitement, anxiety restlessness and predicts that he is going to die – Give aconite 200 and see fever going down. Homeopathy requires careful selection of remedy, its power and frequency. Remember homeopathy is very specific medicine. It says that symptoms are the expression of disease. Medicine is given on symptom totality. Quacks and semitrained doctors have spoiled name of real homeopathy which has solid principles to guide course of treatment. Such things are there in allopathy too. That doesnot mean that allopathy is useless.

  35. #35 Andrew Dodds
    December 7, 2007

    ‘Dr’ Sharma -

    Just the evidence, please. Cut the quacking.

  36. #36 MartinM
    December 7, 2007

    Homeopathy is a blessing for mankind. Do not try to kill it because of your selfish motive or ignorance. It will be a crime against humanity. A big Crime.

    Were homeopathy as effective as you claim, the biggest crime of all would be the abject failure of its proponents to provide reliable scientific evidence to support it.

  37. #37 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 7, 2007

    evidence is there in clinics around the world. you are most welcome. come to my clinic. test all my medicines (no steroids). see my cases. see results with your own eyes. listen to patients with your own ears. the healing itself is biggest scientific proof. still not satisfied. nobody can wake someone posing to be asleep.

  38. #38 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 7, 2007

    Evidence is there. Studies have been conducted proving its efficacy.(visit http://www.trusthomeopathy.org for details of some of the studies conducted) But people who are against it will definitely ignore them. They will speak aloud about one study which was conducted by those who did not know ABC of homeopathy. If you do not give medicine as per its principles, you are bound to fail. This is just like if you have hepertension and given medicine for hypothyroidism, can you succeed.

  39. #39 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 7, 2007

    Yes its principles have remained same. Because only those assumptions are proved wrong by later discoveries which were not true in first place. But since its principles are correct, they are not changed. If you honestly want evidence then what are you waiting for. Read it and use for common day to day ailments (but as per principles not in haphazard manner) see the results yourself.

  40. #40 Andrew Dodds
    December 7, 2007

    ‘Dr’ Sharma -

    I assume that you mean this:

    http://www.trusthomeopathy.org/case/res_table1.html

    I wouldn’t point anyone at that if you wanted them to think that homeopathy was effective. The conclusion (especially through time) appears to be moving towards ‘No effect over placebo’.

    I also see that you think the people should find their own evidence by trying it. That not only sounds like a sales patter, but clearly contravenes all standards of evidence.

  41. #41 PalMD
    December 7, 2007

    In the year or so that I have bothered to take an interest in it, I have done quite a bit of research on homeopathy. I’ve read the medical literature extensively; I’ve even read the homeopathic literature.

    There is no evidence of efficacy, no reasonble proposed mechanism of action.

    Basically, it should be criminalized as a form of fraud. Yes, I mean that.

  42. #42 Evinfuilt
    December 7, 2007

    Didn’t you notice how only real Homeopaths should be critique’d, all those who failed tests were just shams and con artists. Honestly he’s the real deal… honest.

    Just a whole bunch of hooey. Can I get your address and send you some diluted tears to help you recover.

    Evidence is easy if it works (200+ years and no evidence, hmmmm.) Real evidence doesn’t exist, your only evidence is that your wallet gets fatter as you con more people out of money for a glass of water.

  43. #43 doctorgoo
    December 7, 2007

    I have a distant cousin who is into this stuff. He’s a synthetic chemist who works (or worked) over at John Lynch’s university.

    At first, I was just merely disappointed with his incredibly gullible views on creationism… but when I found out that he had a new part-time job synthesizing the chemicals for dilutions for a company that creates homeopathic pet medications… well, let’s just say that all my respect for this guy was thrown completely out the window.

    I mean… being a chemist doesn’t necessarily mean that he’s educated in evolutionary principles to know that his hovind-like creationism is totally bizzare, even to most other creationists/IDists. But being a degreed chemist ‘earning’ (actually stealing) money for something that he damn well should know couldn’t possibly be scientifically valid? Damn!… it makes me angry at him just to think about it.

    What’s worse is that our relatives on that shared side of the family don’t realize what a total quack he’s become, and shame on me for ever criticizing his profession…

  44. #44 Sastra
    December 7, 2007

    Homeopaths say allopathy is dangerous and allopaths say homeopathy is useless. I am MBBS(allopathy) dr with PG in homeopathy. I have studied both sciences. Both have their own utility.

    I’d like to point out that this tactic is common among proponents of alternative medicine — because it’s very effective on the people they sell to. It’s sometimes called The Argument from the Middle. “If there is a middle position between two extremes, it’s probably right.” It takes the best of BOTH, you see. It doesn’t go too far either way.

    Everyone wants to be a tolerant, moderate person, and so the quack benefits by appealing to our social instincts. When the goal is to all get along together, then compromises and give-and-take negotiations are reasonable, and make everything nicer. “Look, we’re not telling ‘allopathic’ doctors they’re completely wrong — shouldn’t they be just as fair with the homeopaths?” Why don’t we do science nicer?

    The scientific method consists of rigorous criteria which evolved over time to winnow out the human tendency to make errors when we are biased. It is the opposite of the “try it for yourself and see if it works” empiricism which is “folk” science. And it is not interested in everybody getting along.

  45. #45 Deacon Barry
    December 7, 2007

    There’s a homeopathic department attached to a hospital in Glasgow. I only found out because I had to ring them on behalf of one of my patients. It was a chore, having to be businesslike, and not being able to tell them what I thought about their treatment, but inside I was going, “Woo, woo, woo!”

  46. #46 marquer
    December 7, 2007

    All of these complaints about how dreadful scientists are
    insisting on adherence to actual standards of proof, to
    the financial detriment of UK homeopaths, are nothing
    more than a red herring to disguise the real problem.

    The real problem being patients who will walk in for a
    homeopathic consultation and who will then, at the end,
    briefly dip a fifty pound note in a glass of water and
    deliver over the water to the homeopath as payment
    for services rendered.

    What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

  47. #47 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 8, 2007

    Intentions are in doubt. Evidence proving efficacy of homeopathy are ignored and false evidence of studies conducted by allopaths who do not know abc of homeopathy are put forward. Strange when I talk about coordination of two system for welfare of humanity that is taken as negotiation for earning money. Great !! You intentions are becoming clear. I could have earned more remaining in allopathy but I switched to homeopathy as I found its indepth capacity to PREVENT & TREAT diseases in safe and effective manner. But I know those who are ignoring abundance of positive evidence and only talking about false study are nothing else but posing asleep, cant be awaken. If you are honest want evidence both in clinics and research studies, it is available. But you have to drop prejudice. Homeopathy has not fooled anyone, it has not forced anyone to go for it. It has helped suffering people to whom allopathy could do nothing and left to suffer. Then say that allopathy is useless. Thats why I say its a crime against humanity.

  48. #48 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 8, 2007

    And I can understand if you have come across self trained homeopaths. Quacks are there in allopathy too. I am talking about homeopaths with full medical training. They have full training in medical subjects including anatomy physiology pathology clinical medicine, surgery and investigations. They are fully aware of clinical presentation of sickness.

  49. #49 HCN
    December 8, 2007

    Dr. Sharma, I propose a test of your actual scientific and mathematical knowledge.

    One very common homeopathic remedy is Nat Mur 30C. The “Nat Mur” refers to sea salt, something which is mostly composed of NaCl (if you passed the chemistry to get any kind of medical degree you know what that is).

    One mole contains 6.022 * 10^23 molecules (10 raised to the 23th power, a “1″ followed by 23 zeros)… by the way, that is Avogadro’s Number.

    Molar mass of NaCl = 58.44 gram/mole

    the density of NaCl is about 2.165 gram/mL

    (Figures are from the Salt Institute website).

    Answer the following questions: How much of a mole of NaCl is in one mL (one thousandths of a liter, also known as a cubic centimeter, cc)?

    How many molecules of NaCl are in that mL?

    What happens when you divide that number by 100 thirty times? Do you have a whole NaCl molecule left, or a fraction?

    In short: How many molecules of NaCl are in one mL (or cubic centimeter) of Nat Mur 30C? Now explain why this would have any biological effect on the human body.

  50. #50 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 8, 2007

    I passed physics chemistry mathematics biology at high school level. I passed MBBS (graduation in allopathy) registrable in UK. I did PG in Homeopathy registrable in UK. I did PhD in Clinical Psychology. I have also done Fellowship in Holistic Healthcare from Apollo Hospital which is awarded the gold-standard certification from the Joint Commission International (JCI) USA . And which age you are living in my dear friend. This is the age of science and energy is one concept of science. Frankly speaking this is not a personal conflict. If homeopathy doesnot work then sure it should not survive a single day. But if it works then all people like you must be ashamed of yourself as you are trying to deprive lakhs of people of a great healing science. May God bless you with wisdom and yes concepts of science.

  51. #51 Freddy the Pig
    December 8, 2007

    “Intentions are in doubt. Evidence proving efficacy of homeopathy are ignored and false evidence of studies conducted by allopaths who do not know abc of homeopathy are put forward.”

    While studies by homeopathy supporters who do not know the abc of the scientific method are put forward as evidence of the efficacy of hemopathy. There has been a well established trend as Orac, Dr Novella, Dr Ben Goldacre and others have pointed out that the better the quality of the study, the less the efficacy of homeopathy.

    As to having studied phyiscs at the high school level, although you may have passed, it is clear that you know jack about physics or chemistry. For homeopathy to work, most of modern and classical physiucs would have to be overturned. As an engineer, I can assure you that the use of the word energy by traditional and new age woo heads merely indicates that they have no clue what energy is and they have no knowledge of even basic physics or thermodynamics.

    Energy as a “concept of science” – don’t make me laugh. The majority of the people posting here have a much greater understanding of energyt than you do.

  52. #52 Acleron
    December 8, 2007

    Homeopaths appear to have a difficult time understanding what is meant by real scientific evidence. As this concept appeared pretty easy to understand by my friends and myself while we were still at school is it perhaps that homeopaths are a group with low IQ? But this cannot be the case, some even have degrees.

    Perhaps it is because they cannot admit to understanding because that would mean a meaningful dialog can ensue, which of course results in homeopathy being debunked.
    A) because there is no credible scientific reason for it to work
    and B) most importantly, no real evidence has shown it works anyway.

    I suspect a portion of homeopaths are just delusional but that makes the others scam artists.

  53. #53 HCN
    December 8, 2007

    Dr. Sharma said “I passed physics chemistry mathematics biology at high school level. ”

    Then answer the question! If you had high school chemistry and math you can give the answer. You have all the analytical tools to tell us exactly how many molecules of NaCl are in a mL or cubic centimeter of Nat Mur (or Natrum Mur). Show us that you really actually PASSED those subjects. Failure to do so will show how homeopaths are so grossly incompetent.

    One thing I’ve noticed is that homeopaths cannot answer simple direct questions. They refuse to calculate the actual numbers that involve Avogadro’s Number, and talk in generality. Things like a “sickness”, not specific illnesses like syphilis, influenza or tetanus.

  54. #54 Bronze Dog
    December 8, 2007

    One of the things that really irritates me about quacks who demand that we try it ourselves, rather than test their woo under the standards we demand of everything else in life: They’re asking us to be hypocrites so that they can make money.

  55. #55 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 9, 2007

    Ideally it should not have become personal. Focus should have remained on homeopathy, its scientific basis and its efficacy. But some of you get pleasure in personal attack. Well I do not need certificate from you about my education and integrity. Such questions can be asked about you also but my focus is not to demean you or allopathy or allopathic doctors. Because I know no person or therapy is complete and all doctors and therapist must coordinate to relieve suffering of humankind. You forgot to understand that I did biochemistry at graduation level as part of medicine study. Still if you want to have pleasure by negative talk, you can do that. May God Bless You. ‘Holier than thou’ attitude can give you ego satisfaction but can not help mankind. My education is good, yours not. My science is science, yours not. My medicine is medicine yours not. My research is good research, yours bad. My successful cases are remarkable, yours only placebo effect. My failed cases are just aberrations; yours prove that homeopathy does not work. Fortunately people around the world now understand hollowness of this attitude. They need relief from suffering as well as scientific & methodical working of healing sciences.
    People talk about how doctors today do not have time to listen and have become money minting machines. Doctors sit and discuss not about welfare of sick person but how costlier investigations and treatment can be prescribed. This over commercialization of medical system in itself is cancer. And homeopathy does not fit because it can provide cheaper and effective alternative. For a sick, healing is equally important if not more than Avogadro’s number. Research has come up proving scientific basis of homeopathy (even with respect to Avogadro’s number). Keep talking about numbers and molecules but tell me by increasing and giving bigger and bigger doses are you able to treat all sick people on earth. But I am equally concerned (if not more) about healing the suffering souls. And remember science itself is not complete. It is also evolving. Science itself is never perfect. Science requires your mind to be open, to explore. Not to become blind and see things from one singular aspect.

    Strange is the fact that you do not want to read about real homeopathic research, you do not want to see its efficacy by looking at successful cases in clinics around the world. You do not want to try it yourself. And still you have scientific attitude. By closed eye closed mind negating homeopathy you will only prove yourself wrong and unscientific. And if you are honest than look around yourself. You will find many people who continue to suffer inspite of thorough investigation and years of treatment. Then why don’t you say that allopathy is useless. Because most of you get confused by taking medicine as allopathy or the other way round. Studies of anatomy physiology biochemistry pathology as well as clinical diagnosis including investigation is not allopathy. This is common to all healing sciences. Apart from antibiotics where else allopathic medicines can say that it will ‘sure’ help the sick. It has its own positive as well as negative results. Still I say that allopathy has its own utility because for me healing a sick is equally important (if not more) than just blind negative talk.

    Some of you said about specific sickness. Yes homeopathy always talks about specific sickness. In fact if you read homeopathy honestly it is more specific about sickness. It requires more careful investigation of sickness. It not only talk about specific sickness but also about entire constitution of person including state of physiological functions. Its effect has been shown on babies, animals and unconscious people that proves it is not vague and only psychological. One of my patient living in one developed country was having sterility because of low sperm count. He took best of the treatment for seven years but to no relief. Under homeopathic treatment in two months time his count improved and he was blessed with a child. Another patient was having Irritable Bowel Syndrome. She was on allopathic drugs for two years but no relief. She took homeopathic medicines and got better in one month. Another one was suffering from chronic sinusitis for 5 years. Repeated antibiotics and anti histaminics were not helping. Under homeopathic treatment he got better in about two months time (Confirmed by X Ray). Another case of metrorrhagia (not premenopausal) because of uterine myoma, who was spending 10 days every month in hospital, got better and myomas got shrunk in size in two months time. (confirmed by ultrasound) Another case of warts all over body saw his warts disappearing in three months of homeopathic treatment. You think this is psychological. This is not ‘feel good’ feeling. In all these cases no simultaneous allopathic treatment was given. Cases are many. But you have to drop prejudice to accept truth. And remember in your life, if someone you really love falls sick, is not relieved by allopathic medicines and cries in pain, tell him or her – Shut up, you have been given everything conforming to Avogadro’s number. (Remember this situation will sure arise in your own life). But I won’t do that. To me suffering of sick is equally important (if not more) and I will see which is more appropriate in this case – allopathy or homeopathy to relieve his or her pain.

  56. #56 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 9, 2007

    Someone was talking about IQ and competency. The science has realized that every human mind has great potential. The whole concept of IQ is false. And practice of homeopathy requires even higher clinical acumen. Homeopathy has always asked physicians to dare to be wise, to dare to face the truth. Scietific attitude requires open mind, ability to explore, think different. I understand few concepts you have learned. But scientific attitude requires honesty to challenge itself. I once again request you to be honest and sincerely learn homeopathy before you speak about homeopathy.

  57. #57 guthrie
    December 9, 2007

    Great, another lovely long screed of anecdotal evidence, without any actual real evidence.
    Hey, Sharma, I believe there is a large pink spider sitting on the ceiling above your computer. Can you prove to me that it isn’t there?

  58. #58 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 9, 2007

    Great !! Another one who is blind to evidence right in front of eyes. I feel sad for you. You need evidence about homeopathy. Understand from the fact that it told about psychosomatic complaints more than 200 years ago which is now accepted by science. It told about lifestyle induced complaints more than 200 years ago which science accept now. It told more than 200 years ago that sickness starts much before than it becomes apparent clinically and this is accepted by science today. Are you still sleeping ??

  59. #59 Orac
    December 9, 2007

    Great !! Another one who is blind to evidence right in front of eyes. I feel sad for you. You need evidence about homeopathy.

    I’ve seen a lot of evidence about homeopathy. I remain unimpressed, and your anecdotes and blather impress me even less. If you have scientific studies in reputable journals to support your claims, then by all means show them. Otherwise, I write you off as yet another true believer homeopath who hasn’t the slightest clue about how to determine whether a therapy does or does not work.

  60. #60 Peter McGrath
    December 9, 2007

    There is still a Royal Homeopathic Hospital, in receipt of wads of Government cash for this kind of thing, and there are plenty of alternative clinics offering therapies in mainstream NHS hospital. What they do offer is time for a patient to talk: a luxury that time-pressed, target-harassed GPs and hospital clinicians don’t have.

    Prince Charles is a big supporter of woo therapy, and with him there is a true homeopathic effect. The less I hear from him the better I feel.

  61. #61 guthrie
    December 9, 2007

    Peter- if he was to get into the wooo business he could rake in millions. Imagine being told to get better by the heir to the throne!

  62. #62 HCN
    December 9, 2007

    Oh my word… in all that blathering he failed to answer my simple question. He is truly grossly incompetent.

  63. #63 Luna_the_cat
    December 9, 2007

    I understand few concepts you have learned. But scientific attitude requires honesty to challenge itself.

    “Physician”, heal thyself. Perhaps you should take the time to learn what ‘evidence-based’ means.

  64. #64 The Crack Emcee
    December 9, 2007

    Read this: http://themachoresponse.blogspot.com/2007/11/duh-its-cult.html

    I cannot believe – after all this blather – you guys, who are sooo smart otherwise, can’t see this is a cultist. You can’t get this guy to admit jack, or see reason, but you go on talking to him – like he’s normal – when he’s, quite obviously, an actual living, breathing, zombie. Not “delusional” but an actual cultist. He’s lost, guys/gals, and yet you go on like nothing’s off about him at all: He’s just got his figures wrong, or something. No. Someone’s (cue music) eaten his brain.

    For goodness sakes, look over his posts, again, and tell me he’s “normal”. He’s as normal as water is medicine. I really can’t believe you guys don’t see it. To me, trying to give this loon the benefit of the doubt makes YOU seem delusional. I mean, how PC are you guys trying to be? You’re talking to a zombie!!! Why? Is it fun to you? Shouldn’t you be trying, as I am, to get him some help? He needs Rick Ross – not a course in physics.

    I’m telling you, once you start dealing with this problem for what it is – a serious, long-term, belief in the European/medieval idea of the occult – then you’ll start to making some headway against it’s proponents.

    You just look silly otherwise.

  65. #65 Ginger Yellow
    December 9, 2007

    ” I give you example – In any blunt injury take arnica 1m and see your pain goes or not”

    Huh. I thought homeopathy couldn’t be double blind tested because every treatment was individualised. I guess Dr Sharma will be producing some double blind trials on the efficacy of arnica for pain relief shortly.

  66. #66 Orac
    December 9, 2007

    There is still a Royal Homeopathic Hospital, in receipt of wads of Government cash for this kind of thing,

    Sadly, indeed there is

  67. #67 CanadianChick
    December 9, 2007

    HCN – it is amazing isn’t it? You’d think that by refusing to provide the answer, he’d realize that he’s just making himself look even more stupid…especially given that even I, an accountant, can figure out the answer to your question based on the high school chemistry I took over 20 years ago…

  68. #68 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 10, 2007

    What great scientific attitude, what great scientific minded people. When you dont get answers you start blaming others. When truth shows you mirror, you start blaming others. You do not want to read about homeopathic research. You dont want to see its results. You dont want to read clinical studies. You dont want to see its efficacy by using it. And you have scientific mind. Scientific mind is not blind. It is ready to think explore challenge observe and also must have honesty to accept truth. Alas all this is missing in so called scientific people. Homeopathy told more than 200 years ago about psychosomatic disease, about lifestyle induced diseases about beginning of disease much before its appearance clinically. All this science accept today. For more than 200 years humanity suffered because of dumb people like you ( or dishonest). Be blind but know that humanity is still suffering because of people like you. Homeopaths are honest to say that yes no science is perfect and humanity needs both. You must read about Dr C Hering who was designated to denounce homeopathy, he read it used it and became a true follower of it. Because he had the honesty and guts to question. You too can study and understand. But only if you have honesty and guts. And yes dont talk about calculations, IQ and competence, you are exposing your own self. Only weak cowards and dishonest blame others.

  69. #69 Orac
    December 10, 2007

    You do not want to read about homeopathic research. You dont want to see its results. You dont want to read clinical studies.

    Bullshit.

    I have read many studies on homeopathy and its alleged effectiveness. I’ve read the best that homeopaths can show me (for example, this study or this one) The studies I have read are all quite unimpressive when I go over their methods in detail and entirely consistent with placebo effect. You’re not going to convince anyone by simply repeating the same mantra of “you don’t want to look at the studies” and calling those who criticize you stupid, dishonest, weak, and cowards, especially when you can’t produce a single convincing study to support your claim that homeopathy works so wonderfully for so many diseases and conditions.

    In fact, given your perseveration on that score, I’m beginning to think that your insults are nothing more than a case of projection. The bottom line is that homeopathy is nothing more than water (or alcohol, depending upon the diluent). The “effects” observed for it, when you look at them closely, are almost certainly placebo effect. I’ve never seen a single convincing study of homeopathy that shows any effect on the objectively measured course of a disease (for example, length of survival in cancer patients or MI rate in patients with heart disease). In short, homeopathy is pseudoscience. It’s nothing more than sympathetic magic tarted up with some pseudoscientific gobbledy-gook.

  70. #70 V Kimothi
    December 10, 2007

    Dear Dr Sunil why are wasting your time. These are not ignorant people they all know very well about efficacy of homeopathy. They are all putting intentional (but in vain) effort to discredit homeopathy. They know that homeopathy is fast becoming recognized even in USA and Canada. These are fearful souls. Have pity on them. If some of them do not know ask them to read about columbia university tie up with one homeopathic clinic in india for treatment of cancer and tumors through homeopathy.
    http://www.iaccgh.com/news/2003/070303.htm

  71. #71 trrll
    December 10, 2007

    Homeopathy is older than pharmacology. The fundamental tenets of modern pharmacology–that drugs act by binding to “receptive substances” (receptors) in the cells of the bodies to alter their function–goes back about about a century. Since that time, that postulate has been tested in a myriad of ways. The receptors for most drugs have been identified, their cellular functions have been determined, and in many cases the relationship of that function to the drug’s effect has been identified. Many of the receptors have been crystalized with drug bound, so the interaction between drug and receptor is understood in atomic detail.

    Homeopathy is nearly twice as old, so one would expect the mechanisms of homeopathic medications to be even more worked than allopathy. Yet what do we have to confirm the hypotheses of homeopathy and explain how homeopathic medications supposedly work? A lot of vague blather about energy, quantum mechanics, and water structure–all of these, by the way, fields in which there has been immense progress, yet none of that progress comes from homeopathic “research,” and there is not one hint in any of those fields of how a homeopathic preparation could produce its alleged effects, or indeed, function as anything other than a placebo.

  72. #72 Bronze Dog
    December 10, 2007

    We have a right to be afraid, but not for the reasons you think: We have a right to be afraid of our society going back to a dark age. We have a right to be afraid of people who demand that we adopt corporately convenient double-standards, and worst of all, get their demands.

    I’m doing exactly what a lover of truth and justice should do when he encounters acceptance of such gross dishonesty: Get afraid, and more importantly, angry. Why should I tolerate falsehood, deception (especially a lot of people’s self-deception), and sloppy medieval thinking that spawned stuff like allopathy?

  73. #73 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    December 10, 2007

    These are not ignorant people they all know very well about efficacy of homeopathy.

    Yes, yes they do. It’s pretty obvious that it is at best as effective as a placebo and nothing more.

    Perhaps if you dilute your bullshit enough it will because true….. but I doubt it.

  74. #74 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    December 10, 2007

    um… because = become

  75. #75 Bronze Dog
    December 10, 2007

    Homeopathy is so effective, they have to rely on the same tactics as all the other alties and woos out there, which typically includes poor record keeping and bogarting all the details we’d want to know.

  76. #76 The Crack Emcee
    December 10, 2007

    “We have a right to be afraid of our society going back to a dark age,…and sloppy medieval thinking,…”

    There you go, finally. And, now, I’ll turn to my fellow brothers and sisters of the Enlightenment and ask the same question V Kimothi asked of his fellow cultist:

    “Why are you wasting your time?”

    Look at his silly statement:

    “These are not ignorant people they all know very well about efficacy of homeopathy.”

    How do you, if you’re intelligent, argue with that? These people need deprogramming – not an honest debate – because they know no more about honest debate than they do about what constitutes good evidence: Nothing. Zilch. Nada. But what can we expect? They’re zombies – people in need of real help.

    2+2=4 stuff. That’s all they can handle.

  77. #77 HCN
    December 10, 2007

    V Komothi said “They are all putting intentional (but in vain) effort to discredit homeopathy. They know that homeopathy is fast becoming recognized even in USA and Canada. ”

    Well, it would really help you guys would answer our simple questions. What is with that? You claim we don’t want to learn about homeopathy, but you absolutely REFUSE to answer direct questions!

    Okay, try again:

    1) How many molecules of NaCl (or sodium and chlorine atoms) are in one cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C?

    2) Please come up with one incontrovertible example with references of homeopathy curing a non-self limiting condition.

    3) Please explain how diseases discussed by Hahnemann in his Organon are now treated. Examples of these included syphilis and gonorrhea.

    4) Please tell us what advances homeopathy has made over the last two centuries. Tell us which conditions have been improved, decreased or wiped out by homeopathy. Examples of these for real medicine include smallpox, rickets, measles, Scarlet fever, polio, Hanson’s Disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

    If you need assistance on the historical stuff check out this site: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/

  78. #78 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 11, 2007

    Earth is Flat
    Malaria by Mal Air

    Such people are not new. They keep ignoring facts. But thank God all are not blind like them. Homeopathy is getting officially recognized even in USA & Canada as healing therapy.

    http://www.boiron.com/en/htm/homeopathy-today/homeopathy-regulation.htm

    and what, are they talking about research. This article tells why Columbia university is forming RESEARCH alliance with Dr Bannerjee

    Dr. Pathak’s six year research on cancer cell lines has established on a cellular and molecular level the reasons why and how Dr. Banerji’s Ruta extracts work in putting the intracranial glioma tumors into remission. The primary effect of this particularly diluted solution is to immediately strengthen the chromosomal DNA segments called the Telomeres.

    Pathak explains that the Telomeric portions act like the gate keepers or, body guards of the Chromosomal DNA, to which they are normally attached like end-caps. If these Telomeres are weakened by intrinsic or, other extraneous harmful causes, they can no longer protect the chromosomes. These weakened and broken chromosomes then abnormally join with each other, thus, forming new types abnormal cells which either die or, start to multiply. The later event gives rise to tumors and cancerous growths. These cancerous cells are usually treated with removal surgery and followed by Chemo and Radiation therapies by modern oncologists in a hospital environment.
    Unlike Chemo and Radiation therapies which indiscriminately kill normal cells, bone marrow cells along with the cancer cells, the Ruta treatment acts quite differently. Once the Telomeres cells are strengthened by the Ruta the body’s own defense mechanism takes over and attacks not only the anomalous intracranial glioma growths but seems also to induce healthy cell divisions in the normal blood. This makes the patients recover their strength and feel healthier very quickly. While this technique showed various grades of positive in-vitro (In test tubes) results on many other types of human and mouse cancers, according to Pathak, the best results were seen on the human intracranial glioma.

    Are you still counting molecules ??

  79. #79 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 11, 2007

    great you got your fact. Diseases you have mentioned are not ‘visible’. But do you know the reality. If ever the virus (which are secretly stored in labs) leak out they will wipe out entite humanity. such is the state of immunity today.

  80. #80 HCN
    December 11, 2007

    What facts?

    You have not presented any. Your refusal to answer simple questions makes you look like a fraud.

    Oh, and Boiron is a pharmaceutical company that sells sugar water. Why should we care what they say? It is all advertisement. (by the way, the company websites lied about the USA… if a company there tries to sell a homeopathic nostrum for some that is NOT self-limiting they can get into big trouble: http://www.fda.gov/ora/about/enf_story/archive/2003/ch1/cber1.htm

    (unfortunately because of the efforts of Royal Copeland, one is allowed to sell homeopathy remedies for SELF-LIMITING conditions in the USA… just don’t get caught try to sell it as a remedy for HIV/AIDS, influenza, SARS, or other deadly diseases. Though the problem is that is is easy to get away with it, even for this loon:
    http://www.komotv.com/news/archive/4177556.html

    Where are the studies? Where are the journal articles? Where does it say that homeopathy even works for cancer. I’m sure Orac, as a cancer surgeon, would be very interested in those papers. How about you give us the PubMed link to those papers? See how they fair under the srutiny of those who do it for a living.

    What deficiencies do you have in your secondary school education makes you unable to answer the question of how many molecules of NaCl (or sodium and chlorine atoms) are in one cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C?

    Does providing a truthful answer to that question go against your faith in the religion called “Homeopathy?” Do you think some dead German guy called Samuel Hahnemann will haunt you in your dreams if you dare think about the reality of chemistry, physics and simple arithmetic? (oh, and Constantine Hering has still been dead for over a century).

    Come ON! Answer the simple science question! Prove that you are not completely incompetent!

    By the way, what happened to your website? It is now under construction. According the the Wayback Machine it had lots of stuff before, some of which credited Hahnemann with all sorts of stuff.

  81. #81 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 11, 2007

    Very sorry my dear friends. I did not know I have to take your permission before redoing my website. Please tell me the procedure, I will follow. BTW My site is being redone and will be up soon.

    Whatever I am doing is all legally, morally, professionally correct.. I am not fooling and denying humanity of safe healing therapy. I keep patient interest over any false conviction. I am not advocating one therapy over other sir. And I do not need any certificate of character or competency from you sir. As I said the more you do personal attacks the more you expose your inner frustration of trying to speak against truth. That’s what. Face the truth, you will get inner peace.

    You fail to understand I am not praising or proving myself. My fight here is not for myself but for homeopathy which can heal (and already healing) crores of people. And yes if one ‘incompetent’ person like me can heal so much of suffering what wonders will happen if great ‘competent’ people like you practice homeopathy. That would be great for humanity.

    And what did you say that homeopathic medicines are allowed only for ‘self limiting conditions’ This again tells how casually you take people’s health. Are you trying to say that allopathic medicines are incapable of treating even self limiting conditions? Why do you need homeopathic medicines for these ‘self limiting conditions’ Again I would say no, we respect both therapies and both in their own capacity are required to relieve suffering of people. And do not talk so casually about self limiting conditions. Even they cause suffering. Human body is not merely collection of few organs. If a person repeatedly gets affected by so called self limiting condition, it affects health. And you are not unaware of excessive use of antibiotics, antihistaminics, painkillers, and of course iatrogenic diseases.

    I am not running away it is you who is running away from facts. You just ignore and deny my questions. In fact you have you have amazing denial capacity.

    I have answered all your questions but you ignored or denied. And about your favorite question on molecules, I am sorry to note that so called scientific minded people are stuck on one single aspect. They have lost all logic, reasoning, all ability to think and explore. That’s where Hahnemann was a great scientist, yes more than 200 years ago he could reason and observe which you are not able to do today. Human mind is much more than a calculator. And whenever you talk about my incompetence you confirm that you have no knowledge of human mind I once again prove your denial mode.

    I write about homeopathic working methodology
    You deny.
    I quote about its research.
    You deny
    I write about its successful cases
    You deny
    I quote about its clinical studies
    You deny
    I write how it talked about psychosomatic, lifestyle induced conditions and about starting of disease process much before it become clinically apparent more than 200 years ago.
    You deny
    I quote about its growing recognition around the world.
    You deny.
    I quote about its research tie up with Columbia university
    You deny
    I ask you to study it yourself and confirm results. (Hering died more than 100 years ago but he proved that if you honestly study and practice homeopathy, you can repeat its results every time. Yes every time.
    You deny.
    I write about the likely errors committed while allopaths conducted research on homeopathy (you think that research is reputed whose researchers were not knowing how to apply homeopathy)
    You deny

    When I came here I thought these are few people who are not aware about homeopathy or have met some homeopath who is giving homeopathy without carefully studying and individualizing the case. But no, here are people who are blind to facts & logic. They have prejudice to only speak against homeopathy and curse people associated with homeopathy. I don’t blame them. It is their inability to face truth. They are shouting evidence evidence and when they see evidence they deny.

    I request all of you, if you are really honest and have scientific aptitude, please read it sincerely and use it to see its wonderful results yourself. I know for some of you it will be difficult to understand but I will not challenge your IQ or competency. I will say try with honesty and sincerity and you will sure understand it. Or visit some qualified homeopathic to ask about its working. But if you only wish to talk bad about homeopathy and homeopaths, keep doing that. People need quality health and are moving towards holistic health. Natural therapies like homeopathy are helping people around the world. That’s a truth and truth can not be denied.

  82. #82 MartinM
    December 11, 2007

    You complain about personal attacks, and yet your entire post was nothing but a diatribe against your opponents. You presented no evidence, and while claiming that you have answered our questions you once again avoided the very simple question HCN has put to you.

    When you have anything of substance to contribute, let us know.

  83. #83 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 11, 2007

    As I said one can wake a sleeping man but can not wake someone who is posing to be asleep. We all know who is right and honest in our hearts. My efforts are for humanity. I am not sad because of some wrong allegations. But I am sad for your ignorance and self deception. Because in our heart we know truth. I will again say may god bless you all with honesty, wisdom and grace. I will continue to spread the message of good health.

  84. #84 HCN
    December 12, 2007

    You say “But I am sad for your ignorance and self deception. ”

    Okay, show us how smart you really are, solve this high school level chemistry and algebra problem:

    How many atoms of sodium and chlorine are in one cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C. Please show your work. For information on how Nat Mur 30C is made you are allowed to refer to this “recipe” –
    http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/8e13fd1b374ce84b

  85. #85 Freddy the Pig
    December 12, 2007

    V Komothi said “They are all putting intentional (but in vain) effort to discredit homeopathy. They know that homeopathy is fast becoming recognized even in USA and Canada. ”

    Name one provincial medicare plan (in Canada we have universal compulsory health inusurance plans run by the provincial governments) that covers homepathy.

    If it was effective, they would be all over it since it would be far less costly than conventional medicine.

    BTW notice how these homeopaths keep repeating the “allopath” slur. It’s like calling those who disagree with you “Commies” or “racists” when they are nothing of the sort.

  86. #86 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 12, 2007

    Again same mistake as did in study. You are trying to study homeopathy from allopathic point of view. You fail to understand that every therapy works differently. Similarly no allopathic drug conform to homeopathic dynamic and proving test. Does that mean allopathy is useless. Homeopathy is indeed fast becoming recognized. It is a fact. It is already regulated in some states.

  87. #87 ajyle
    December 12, 2007

    wat rubbish. all this anti homeopathic campaign is bullshit. it works. i have seen its results. and i have also seen many allopathic doctors takinggg homeopathic treatment(but secretly). hahaha wat a sham.

  88. #88 Bronze Dog
    December 12, 2007

    i have seen its results.

    1. Were they under controlled conditions?
    2. Show us.

    If they weren’t under controlled conditions, why should we take them seriously? Hubris doesn’t compensate for sloppiness.

    i have also seen many allopathic doctors takinggg homeopathic treatment(but secretly). hahaha wat a sham.

    Why would I trust the opinion of a bunch of medieval leech-users who more or less died out a century ago?

    Sharma:

    Again same mistake as did in study. You are trying to study homeopathy from allopathic point of view. You fail to understand that every therapy works differently. Similarly no allopathic drug conform to homeopathic dynamic and proving test. Does that mean allopathy is useless. Homeopathy is indeed fast becoming recognized. It is a fact. It is already regulated in some states.

    You do realize that those “allopathic” (Why must homeopaths lie by calling us allopaths?) measures are based on the same principles for studying any phenomena, not just medicine. You know, the scientific method? Ever heard of it? Why should we throw out everything that’s advanced our society for your sake?

    All you’re doing is trying to give yourself a double-standard.

  89. #89 MartinM
    December 12, 2007

    Yet another comment from Sharma with no substance whatsoever. Didn’t see that one coming.

    You are trying to study homeopathy from allopathic point of view. You fail to understand that every therapy works differently.

    Look, if you want to claim exemption from normal scientific standards, it’s not enough to wave your hands and say ‘ooh, different!’ You’re going to have to actually explain what differences you’re referring to, and specifically how those differences invalidate the usual methods.

    Given that the usual method is what’s generally known as ‘counting,’ this should be rather entertaining.

  90. #90 Bronze Dog
    December 12, 2007

    Watch as he starts talking about individualization while deliberately ignoring the very common point that the treatment can be individualized among subjects in a test, and then the randomization process can divide the treatment and control groups by either giving them their individualized treatments or a placebo.

    Watch as he later claims a particular concoction works for a condition, without any mention of individualization.

    Thanks for making a point I should have, MartinM. So many woos out there treat counting as if it were a complex, proprietary, “Western” concept.

  91. #91 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 12, 2007

    If anyone has objection to word ‘allopath’ then its ok I will not use this word. Can you please tell me what word to use instead.

  92. #92 MartinM
    December 12, 2007

    Watch as he later claims a particular concoction works for a condition, without any mention of individualization.

    Oh, he already has:

    As far as evidence is required my clinic has records of succesful cases. I give you example – In any blunt injury take arnica 1m and see your pain goes or not. If someone is having high fever with great excitement, anxiety restlessness and predicts that he is going to die – Give aconite 200 and see fever going down.

    So many woos out there treat counting as if it were a complex, proprietary, “Western” concept.

    Well, it’s difficult! Young-earth creationists are off by 6 orders of magnitude, after all. Perhaps that could be homeopathy’s new slogan – up to five times more wrong than creationists!

  93. #93 HCN
    December 12, 2007

    Cut and pasting from Dr. Buzzo’s blog (depletedcranium.com), I saw a link to this book:
    http://www.accampbell.uklinux.net/homeopathy/homeopathy-pdf/homeobook.pdf

    I think I now understand the rank stubbornness and refusal to answer simple questions. Here are some select quotes:

    “The real importance of the miasm theory, it seems to me, is the insight it gives into Hahnemann’s character. We shall not understand the man unless we realize that for him, homeopathy was much more than a mere medical theory; it was a divine revelation. I am not exaggerating here. We know from his own writings that the idea of homeopathy came to him as the solution to a religious dilemma.”

    and

    “But whose authority are we to acknowledge? Presumably Hahnemann’s; but surely Hahnemann was a man, and therefore no more exempt from error than other men? Not so, Kent implies, for Hahnemann had discovered a divinely ordained law. Homeopathy is an inspired science, which is the only true kind of science; all the rest is mere opinion. It is therefore not merely foolish but actually impious to question Hahnemann. By implication it is also impious to question Kent.”

    The key quote is “Homeopathy is an inspired science, which is the only true kind of science; all the rest is mere opinion.”

    So in reality, homeopathy is more like a religion than a kind of medicine. There is no reasoning with someone who is invested in this kind of religion. This is why we cannot get straight answers to anything that goes counter to their beliefs, like the actual amount of substance in a 30C remedy. It is much like asking a creationist how Noah managed to fit two of all this planet’s animals on an ark, and then place them all back where they belong (llamas in the Americas, giraffes in Africa), because the answer will always be “God didit”.

    We have seen this kind of thinking with Mr. Sharma, along with the other delusional aspects that we have seen in conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxers and HIV/AIDS denialists. So the only thing to do is to keep asking questions and demanding real answers. It may not convince the truly delusional, but it could help educate others.

    (note: I will no longer address Mr. Sharma until he can show he can use real science and answer my simple chemistry problem.)

  94. #94 The Crack Emcee
    December 12, 2007

    HCN,

    Again – why won’t you guys just call a cult a “cult”? You’ve got the evidence right in front of you (including Mr. Sharma’s example) but, still, you resist diagnosing the patient accurately. Why?

  95. #95 HCN
    December 12, 2007

    Hmmmm…. I guess you are right, it is a cult. I thought calling it a delusional religion was sufficient. My bad.

  96. #96 Bronze Dog
    December 12, 2007

    Well, the current crop is definitely high on the cult index.

    Some of those who haven’t had the opportunity to do the homeopathic spit take (Pfffft! Higher numbers mean it’s more dilluted???) probably don’t qualify, so not all believers deserve the cult label. Most homeopaths who show up at places like this do, though.

  97. #97 david
    December 13, 2007

    are you nuts. this is a group of jokers or idiots. difficult to decide. homeopathy has wonderful treatment. i took it for bronchitis i had for years. i am not a smoker. i was on inhalers. still i i used to cough like hell. i was suggested one homeopathic doctor. i took treatment and cough was gone. i dont know it is proven or not. i got well and 4 years now i never had any cough.

  98. #98 MartinM
    December 13, 2007

    What is it with the drive-by illiterates? Wonder where they’re being directed here from.

  99. #99 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 13, 2007

    Please visit following for research in homeopathy. It has used control and double blind method. It is the government recognized research centre.

    http://ccrhindia.org/

  100. #100 Bronze Dog
    December 13, 2007

    david: Anecdotes are not evidence, unless you performed some truly amazing controls to eliminate your bias. How’d you feel if the FDA approved a pharmaceutical based off of one guy taking it?

    Sharma: Pick one double-blind control study from that site for criticism. I can’t find any over there at the moment. Please make sure you provide a direct link to the study itself, and not just a front page. I’ve had lots of people send me to a front page of a site that doesn’t contain what they say it does.

  101. #101 Orac
    December 13, 2007

    Perhaps he means this study or perhaps this study.

  102. #102 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    December 13, 2007
  103. #103 pradeep
    December 13, 2007

    Dr. Sharma,

    Dr. Sen Pathak, whom you mention in a few posts above from M. D. Anderson Hospital in Houston, is a close family friend of ours. He and my father (Dr. K. L. Satyaprakash), who is a cancer cytogeneticist, worked closely for many years. I will pass along this thread to him today and see if he would be willing to comment on your points about his research explaining Dr. Ruta’s homeopathic results.

    Pradeep Satyaprakash

  104. #104 Mojo
    December 13, 2007

    Dr Sunil Sharma wrote, “Such people are not new. They keep ignoring facts. But thank God all are not blind like them. Homeopathy is getting officially recognized even in USA & Canada as healing therapy.

    http://www.boiron.com/en/htm/homeopathy-today/homeopathy-regulation.htm

    and what, are they talking about research. This article tells why Columbia university is forming RESEARCH alliance with Dr Bannerjee”

    Actually, the article you link to there doesn’t say anything about research (it’s entirely concerned with regulation) and it doesn’t mention “Columbia university” or a “Dr. Bannerjee”.

    I guess that’s the standard of evidence we’ve come to expect from homoeopaths.

  105. #105 David
    December 13, 2007

    oh lord. You don’t believe in god religion philosophy anything. Einstein believed in god but you dnt. You are just pretending. You dnt believe in science too. Otherwise how can you ignore straight facts. I am sure none of you guys have any education in homeopathy. Otherwise you wud hav seen how nice it works.

  106. #106 HCN
    December 14, 2007

    David, how about you give us some actual evidence that homeopathy works? Use some real scientific evidence, like giving us an example of homeopathy effecting a cure on a non-self limiting condition.

    Also, give us some straight facts like this: How many sodium and chlorine atoms are in one cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C?

  107. #107 Freddy the Pig
    December 14, 2007

    David, that Einstein God line is bullshit. You are just parroting what magical thinking twits have told you without verifying it.
    Einstein did not believe in a personal god. His beliefs were closer to those of Spinoza, more or less pantheism.

  108. #108 drpkl
    December 14, 2007

    I was told by David that I have to answer some questions on homeopathy. I read this thread and saw that all has been discussed already. Everything has been told by some or the other. Research, clinical studies, cases, methodology etc etc. True if someone do not want to accept, then no point telling. One typical question is asked that how many molecules in 30 c natmur. you are watching natmur 30 c as dilution but it is not. it is dynamization. like when you convert radium into light you dont count radium molecules in light. i know those who dnt want to accept, will not. their choice. anyone in doubt who think homeopathy has no effect take glonoine 30 once day and see result. in few days watch BP goes high beyond roof. just keep taking, dont worry. homeopaths are there to save you.(are you afraid if no then take it).

  109. #109 Bronze Dog
    December 14, 2007

    David’s quick to claim we’re “ignoring” facts, but, like any homeopath, he’s very, very hesitant to talk about those “facts” or educate us on details we require.

    Of course, he also has to throw in some cynical ad hominems and make up our views, and evade the hard questions for propaganda purposes. All that matters to him is getting in bigoted rhetorical blows.

    David, why must you be such a giant ball of nihilism, cynicism, and dishonesty?

  110. #110 Bronze Dog
    December 14, 2007

    ne typical question is asked that how many molecules in 30 c natmur. you are watching natmur 30 c as dilution but it is not. it is dynamization. like when you convert radium into light you dont count radium molecules in light.

    1. You can still detect the radiation, and the byproducts of radioactive decay.

    2. If there aren’t any molecules, what’s in the homeopathic drug that makes it different?

  111. #111 Bronze Dog
    December 14, 2007

    Sorry about the multiposting, Orac. I just keep remembering something else to put up.

    i know those who dnt want to accept, will not. their choice. anyone in doubt who think homeopathy has no effect take glonoine 30 once day and see result. in few days watch BP goes high beyond roof. just keep taking, dont worry. homeopaths are there to save you.(are you afraid if no then take it).

    Translation: Lower our standards and conduct experiments designed to maximize personal bias and render statistical analysis impossible. Of course, homeopaths will never say that out loud and in a straightforward manner. After all, they like to rant about imaginary bias in protocols designed to eliminate bias because they’re biased against objectivity. Homeopaths can’t play Thought Police in a world where objective fact is obtainable.

  112. #112 Andrew Dodds
    December 14, 2007

    Drpkl.

    It’s very, very simple.

    Show us the studies. Don’t just say ‘there are studies’; it is your job to show us studies, done under properly controlled conditions, that show homeopathy actually *working*. IT IS YOUR JOB TO PROVIDE THIS EVIDENCE!!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND EVEN THE MOST BASIC BIT OF SCIENCE!!!

    Then you can make bizzare claims about ‘dynamization’ or whatnot.

  113. #113 drpkl
    December 14, 2007

    ah simple. just take homeopathic water glonoine 30 once a day. what makes you so scared of ‘homeopathic water’.

  114. #114 Bronze Dog
    December 14, 2007

    what makes you so scared of ‘homeopathic water’.

    You haven’t listened to a word we’ve said: We’re afraid of bias! We aren’t afraid of the impotent homeopathic stuff. Randi and other skeptics freely swallowed “dangerous” amounts of homeopathic sleep remedies without ill effect or fear.

    Like I’ve just now posted: Homeopathy is a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Obvious liars like drpkl who deliberately ignore our complaints of bias just prove it. He wants us to bias the results by suggesting we undertake personal trials.

  115. #115 HCN
    December 14, 2007

    In Bizarro World instead of giving the simple numerical answer to the actual quantity of atoms in a homeopathic remedy, giving a total nonsensical reply is an answer.

  116. #116 MartinM
    December 14, 2007

    Well, what you do is you take a factual response, then dilute it, whack it against a wall, and repeat until there are no actual facts left. Rather, the remaining words will acquire ‘factiness,’ making your argument all the more powerful.

    This is also why homeopaths favour personal experience. Take a perfectly good double-blind study, then dilute it until no controls remain. This will strengthen your conclusions.

  117. #117 drpkl
    December 14, 2007

    nop
    nop
    nop
    nop
    nop
    nop
    nop
    nop
    nop
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    nop
    nop
    nop

    wow nop nop nop
    all i know is yup yup yup
    that is what i say science

    nop

    huh no ears no mind only nop

    keep jerking

  118. #118 pradeep
    December 14, 2007

    Dr. Sharma,

    I got a response back from Dr. Pathak today. It does seem that he supports western medicine colloborating to learn about alternative medicines.

    Dear Pradeep:

    It is great to hear from you. The paper that we wrote with Dr. Prasanta Banerji and his son, Pratip Banerji on Ruta is published in the International J. of Oncology 23: 975-982, 2003. I am a strong believer of Homeopathy and M.D. Anderson Cancer Center is going to start clinical trials with some these H. drugs on cancer patients. I was recently invited by the Office of Cancer Complementary and Alternative Medicine CAM), National Cancer Institute of N.I.H. to speak in a conference in Bethesda, Maryland. The title of the conference was: Cancer Researchers and CAM Practitioners: Fostering Collaborations; Advancing the Science, on October 22-23, 2007. What lacks in H. medicine is the scientific evidence, molecular mechanism of action and so on. Those of us who are believers and have scientific background are now involved in homeopathic medicine research. National Cancer Institute (NCI) has allocated millions of dollars to do research on such medicines because they have seen cases that have been treated successfully by H. medicines. As a matter of fact. NCI is ready to offer now grants to Dr. Banerji for his research in Kolkata. Dr. Jeffrey White the Director of CAM has visited Dr. Banerji’s clinic in Kolkata many times and he is immensely impressed with his treatment results. On 18 October, 2007, Dr. Abdul Kalam, the former President Of India, visited M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and we had a great and very productive discussion with our Cancer Center President, Dr. John Mendelsohn who is very open minded to bring homeopathy and other ancient treatment modalities for cancer treatment.

    This is enough for today. I will not have time and energy to participate in those threads.

    Thanks,
    Sen Pathak
    Sen Pathak, Ph.D., F.N.A.Sc.
    Distinguished Research Professor
    Department of Cancer Genetics, Unit # 1010
    U.T.M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
    1515 Holcombe Boulevard
    Houston, Texas 77030
    Tel: (713) 563-1892
    E-mail: spathak@mdanderson.org

  119. #119 HCN
    December 14, 2007

    pradeep said “What lacks in H. medicine is the scientific evidence, molecular mechanism of action and so on. Those of us who are believers and have scientific background are now involved in homeopathic medicine research. ”

    Key phrase: “Those of use who are BELIEVERS”

    To continue: ” National Cancer Institute (NCI) has allocated millions of dollars to do research on such medicines because they have seen cases that have been treated successfully by H. medicines.”

    Good, now present these cases with decent notes and record keeping and you might have something. Where were they published? Giving the http://www.pubmed.gov link would be okay, a link to the whole paper would be better.

    Just be sure they are GOOD studies. Not the ones with limited numbers, nebulous claims and slanted placebo groups.

    Oh, and it would help if you guys could solve a simple high school level chemistry/algebra problem. Why is it that you guys cannot compute the number of sodium and chlorine atoms in a Nat Mur 30C remedy?

  120. #120 drpkl
    December 15, 2007

    oh lord you are great !! now all these ‘scientific’ minded people can ‘scientifically’ resort to homeopathy for safe treatment of their own sickness. thank you lord for your kind mercy on them !!!

  121. #121 HCN
    December 15, 2007

    And yet you still cannot answer a simple high school level chemistry/algebra problem. Are you morally prevented from computing the number of sodium and chlorine atoms in a cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C because of your worship of all things attributed to Hahnemann?

    Actually, re-reading your last two outbursts I notice you are getting less and less cogent. Are you consuming too many homeopathic remedies made in the original form that used alcohol instead of water and sugar pills?

    What sickness do I have? Is committing blasphemy against the temple of homeopathy a sickness in your holy books?

  122. #122 Mojo
    December 15, 2007

    Dr. Sharma: you assert that you are qualified in “allopathy”.

    Allopathy is a term invented by Sam Hahnemann to describe the “orthodox” medicine of his day, which was based on the idea of balancing four “humours”. These are ideas that have long since been abandoned by modern medicine, which can therefore not be described as allopathic. It occurs to me, though, that there are genuinely allopathic systems still surviving, one of which is prevalent in India: ayurveda (although it uses only three, rather than four, humours which it calls “doshas”). I also notice that ayurveda often appears to be practised alongside homoeopathy.

    Is this perhaps what you are qualified in?

  123. #123 drpkl
    December 15, 2007

    international j oncology 23 975 982 2003

    [ORAC note:Text removed, as it was a copyright violation for drpkl to have posted nearly the entire text of a scientific paper.

    The paper can be found here.]

  124. #124 Orac
    December 15, 2007

    Be very careful what you ask for, as I’ve actually read that paper fairly recently. It’s not exactly what it is represented as. For one thing, if I recall correctly, it uses a 10-12 of Ruta 6, which is hardly “homeopathic.” The would actually be active substance there, if Ruta 6 is indeed active. Moreover this alcohol-diluted “homeopathic” remedy was then subjected to drying, which probably concentrated it rather nicely. Indeed, 100 ml was dried down to 100 ul before being added to the cell culture plates and then the rest of the alcohol evaporated. Why they did that is beyond me. All this paper shows is that Ruta 6 may have anticancer activities; it shows nothing about homeopathy.

    There are other problems with the paper. Perhaps I’ll blog it next week, now that you’ve reminded me.

    Finally, because that is a copyrighted work, I cannot permit you to post huge bits of it on my blog. I have replaced your cut-and-paste job with a link to the paper.

  125. #125 Freddy the Pig
    December 15, 2007

    Mojo – ayurveda also resembles allopathy in that it uses toxic heavy metals. Health Canada regularly seizes imported aurvedic “medicines” because of their high concentrations of lead and other heavy metals. Very allopathic indeed.

  126. #126 HCN
    December 15, 2007

    Oh, this is delicious… So the upshot is that a homeopathic treatment actually WORKS when it is not actually homeopathic!

  127. #127 drpkl
    December 16, 2007

    you are really making everybody laugh. when its below 30 its not homeopathic so work is not sufficient to prove and above 30 you will not accept anything all cures are just chance. hahahaha. you say its just water. and you say nosodes etc banned as toxic even in 200 (lol no molecules then how come toxic. hahahahahahahaha

  128. #128 HCN
    December 16, 2007

    drpkl, just a few words of advice: do not attempt to type while drunk, you have become totally incoherent.

  129. #129 Mojo
    December 16, 2007

    I think drpkl’s claim about high potency remedies being banned because they’re toxic originates in this circular sent out by a homoeopath. No evidence to support it has so far emerged.

  130. #130 Orac
    December 16, 2007

    I’m with HCN here. drpkl is sounding increasingly incoherent and rambling. He no longer makes any sense. Not that he made much sense before, but at least I could still understand him earlier in the thread.

  131. #131 drpkl
    December 16, 2007

    dont say that man. here we have great highly scientific highly educated highly sensible highly intelligent people. plz plz plz tell the world what makes ars alba 200 ‘toxic’ to get it ‘banned’. is it toxic without any molecule. if there is ‘something’ what is that. simple and straight question man why are you looking for place to hide.

  132. #132 drpkl
    December 16, 2007

    dont say that man. here we have great highly scientific highly educated highly sensible highly intelligent people. plz plz plz tell the world what makes ars alba 200 ‘toxic’ to get it ‘banned’. is it toxic without any molecule. if there is ‘something’ what is that. simple and straight question man why are you looking for place to hide.

  133. #133 Mojo
    December 16, 2007

    drpkl: Nobody here has claimed that ars alba or any other homoeopathic remedy has been banned because it is toxic. It was a claim made by a homoeopath called Manish Bhatia. His claim that arsenic alb 30C cannot be bought in Canada has been demonstrated to be untrue, by the way.

    Please provide evidence that ars alba 200 is banned from sale because it is toxic. Missives from homoeopaths will not be considered reliable sources of evidence.

  134. #134 drpkl
    December 17, 2007

    infact these pseudo scientist are like cult. they will ask you to suffer and die even if they are not able to help you and relieve your suffering. it is good that people are realizing their pseudo pride.

  135. #135 Mojo
    December 17, 2007

    infact these pseudo scientist are like cult. they will ask you to suffer and die even if they are not able to help you and relieve your suffering. it is good that people are realizing their pseudo pride.

    An unusually insightful assessment of homoeopaths.

  136. #136 Dr Sunil Sharma
    December 17, 2007

    This is not a sincere debate. Both sides are trying to find faults and ridicule each other. This is not the way it should be. I hope people on both sides become more prudent in their approach. I am not against those who are against homeopathy. I am sure with time they will also understand homeopathy and play a positive and constructive role in healing the suffering.

  137. #137 HCN
    December 17, 2007

    Excuse me, Mr. Sharma, but how exactly is asking you to answer a simple high school level chemistry/algebra problem a form of ridicule? The ridicule comes about from your absolute refusal to even attempt to answer the question.

    You have not brought any substantial information to show that homeopathy is anything but a form of religion.

  138. #138 Bronze Dog
    December 17, 2007

    This is not a sincere debate. Both sides are trying to find faults and ridicule each other.

    That’s what a debate is. Note that the ridicule skeptics like us do often has a very clear purpose: It makes your logical fallacies stand out even more.

    I hope people on both sides become more prudent in their approach.

    Translation: We should be patronizing and inoffensive.

    I am sure with time they will also understand homeopathy and play a positive and constructive role in healing the suffering.

    It’s hard to be understanding when someone like you is rather tight-lipped about critical information we keep asking for. You’re all bluster and no useful information.

  139. #139 drpkl
    December 18, 2007

    Dr Sharma I have not ridiculed anyone. This is a group of people using the word science to mask their own ‘cult’. See how they ignore all questions posed by homeopaths. See how they simply refuse to understand all explained by homeopaths. They know how well homeopathy works. They have fixed plan. Refuse everything homeopaths say. Say bad words to them. Try to pose as if they know everything and homeopaths know nothing. They have only one question – how many molecules in natmur 30. They don’t count molecules in stress which causes hypertension. They have already accepted homeopathy by understanding that the dynamic effect of stress that affects health. They will keep talking about dilution whereas it is dynamization. They have accepted the vital force by accepting rebound effect of laxatives and decongestants. They have accepted everything but still pose that they don’t. Still they call homeopaths stubborn idiots. Who is stubborn and who is idiot who is illogical is proved by growing acceptance of homeopathy around the world. Now they will say whole world is stubborn, idiotic and illogical.

  140. #140 Orac
    December 18, 2007

    See how they ignore all questions posed by homeopaths. See how they simply refuse to understand all explained by homeopaths.

    The problem here is that neither you nor Dr. Sharma has explained anything about homeopathy. All you have done is to whine and dodge.

  141. #141 Bronze Dog
    December 18, 2007

    Not to mention that the homeopath’s questions are typically rhetorical evasions, demonstrate an inability to understand our position, or just generally being stupid or irrelevant.

    How about you pick one non-evasive question, drpkl. I’ll answer it.

  142. #142 MartinM
    December 18, 2007

    They don’t count molecules in stress which causes hypertension.

    And here was me thinking that stress was rather fundamentally related to hormone levels, which are of course all about counting molecules.

  143. #143 drpkl
    December 19, 2007

    your response tells how much sincere you are in answering. anyways first tell us has allopathy alone cured all diseases. if no then what do you want people to do. and do you think if people do not get relief (even after years of treatment) they have a right to opt for other options for relief. or do you want them to suffer in endless manner.

  144. #144 Bronze Dog
    December 19, 2007

    your response tells how much sincere you are in answering. anyways first tell us has allopathy alone cured all diseases.

    Allopathy is dead. Evidence-based modern medicine killed it for many of the same reasons we’re trying to do in homeopathy. I’ll thank you if you stop lying by calling modern medicine “allopathic”.

    EBM isn’t perfect, so, no, it hasn’t cured everything yet. Something is better than nothing, though. Homeopathy does nothing. Except empty the wallets of desperate people.

    if no then what do you want people to do. and do you think if people do not get relief (even after years of treatment) they have a right to opt for other options for relief. or do you want them to suffer in endless manner.

    Volunteer for genuine research into methods that could potentially work. You know, testing new treatments in a manner that gathers good evidence for future people to use.

    Homeopathy doesn’t qualify, since there is no reason to believe it has any potential. No mechanism for action. The failures of homeopathy under high-quality studies is an even bigger mark against it. That’s the same reason we won’t go back to allopathic leeches and bleeding: They don’t work, and neither does homeopathy.

    Medical research is much more useful than giving your time, money, trust, and so forth to some snake oil salesman preying on the desperate, who will gladly do nothing useful in order to make a profit.

  145. #145 drpkl
    December 20, 2007

    Just repeating that homeopathy does not work is not going to convince people. You talk about evidence based medicine. People have enough evidence of homeopathy working. Someone was talking of impact of stress through hormones. Yes what makes hormonal disbalance in stress. Even common cold is seen more in people with stress. Thats dynamic influence. So called modern medicine (so called because medicine is medicine, it keeps evolving) has already incorporated all concepts of homeopathy may be by giving it slightly different name.

  146. #146 Bronze Dog
    December 20, 2007

    People have enough evidence of homeopathy working.

    Then why won’t you show us a high-quality study? (Hint: Anecdotes are about as sloppy as you can get, and are thus near-zero-quality.) Get off your duff and show us the science.

    So called modern medicine (so called because medicine is medicine, it keeps evolving) has already incorporated all concepts of homeopathy may be by giving it slightly different name.

    Please explain. It should be interesting to hear someone explain how modern evidence-based medicine allegedly accepts gross violations of chemistry, physics, and so forth.

  147. #147 drpkl
    December 21, 2007

    everything written everything explained. its all intentional denial. anyways, be happy with your denials. but do not forget to visit a homeopath whenever you need in your sickness. you will then say, yes dear it works.

  148. #148 HCN
    December 21, 2007

    drpkl wrote “but do not forget to visit a homeopath whenever you need in your sickness. you will then say, yes dear it works.”

    For what?

    We know it does not work for eczema (the death of a baby called Gloria in Australia showed us that!), there are several examples of it not working for diabetes, asthma or epilepsy, it does not work for bacterial infections and nor does it work for high blood pressure.

    What blasted “sickness” does it work for?

    Come on! Give us one example of a non-self limiting condition that homeopathy has been proven to work for, with all the pertinent documentation.

  149. #149 drpkl
    December 21, 2007

    all conditions you named and much more it heals. eczema is every day case for homeopathy. i have myself treated eczema with purulent discharge. i have cured asthma where patient was waking up at nite to take inhalers. calcarea carb cured her asthma and now she is not taking any medicine. recently a lady was diagnosed of acute gastritis. two courses of antibiotics failed. her abdoman was bloated, she was in deep pain. one single dose of nux vomica 200 cured her in six hours. (this case is on record). i have treated a case of frost bite where amputation was only choice left because of threatening gangrene. chamomilla 30 cured him in three days. one man with sterility (oligospermia) took treatment for seven years but failed. phosphorus 1000 3 doses improved his count in one months time and now he is father of a sweet daughter. these are (and more) all cases treated by myself. these are not placebo effect my dear. and there are lakhs of failed cases of allopathic drugs, are you going to say allopathic drugs does not work.

  150. #150 HCN
    December 21, 2007

    drpkl said “eczema is every day case for homeopathy.”

    Yeah, right… http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22706946-5006009,00.html … didn’t help baby Gloria much, did it?

    I asked for evidence, not anecdotes. Now come up with one case of a non-self limiting condition being cured with homeopathy with REFERENCES. This includes a good journal paper with real data.

  151. #151 drpkl
    December 21, 2007

    what about failed cases of allopathy. how many patients die in hospitals every day under allopathic treatment (that includes babies also) what does that suggest to you.

  152. #152 HCN
    December 21, 2007

    This is about homeopathy, nothing else. You have not shown any real evidence that homeopathy works. You have not even given the number of sodium and chlorine atoms in one cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C.

    Your evasion is duly noted as an absolute failure to show any competence in science and basic algebra. Every time you refuse to answer basic questions you continue to reinforce that homeopathy is more of a religion, and is not in any way connected to real science.

    Try again:

    How many sodium and chlorine atoms are in one cubic centimeter of Nat Mur 30C ?

    Provide actual evidence that homeopathy was effective for a non-self limiting conditions, with references.

  153. #153 drpkl
    December 22, 2007

    You have answered yourself.

  154. #154 HCN
    December 22, 2007

    Actually, the real answer is that there is a very low probablity of there being anything but the solvent, and whatever impurities that might be in there. In the real world it is impossible to creat pure water or alcohol in the dilutions specified by homeopathy.

    In fact, the 200C amounts to more than several orders of magnitude of this universe’s estimated number of total atoms. It is physically impossible.

    Yes, I have answered the question: Homeopathy is not a real form of medicine, it is a religion. Anyone who places their faith with risk their health.

    The only reason to pity the homoepath is for their steadfast delusions.

  155. #155 drpkl
    December 23, 2007

    I need not write any further here. Evidence in favor of working efficacy of homeopathy (including lab and clinical evidence) has been given. It has also been proved that allopathy alone has not been able to provide relief to suffering souls. It has also been proved how homeopathy is becoming more popular and acceptable by people and governments around the world. My job done. Good Bye.

  156. #156 drpkl
    December 23, 2007

    and finally it was not a battle between allopathy and homeopathy.it was a battle against prejudice and misinformation. It was a battle for truth, for a safe natural effective healing system for humanity. Both allopathy and homeopathy (and others like acupuncture etc) are important and required to fight against sickness. God Bless !!!

  157. #157 HCN
    December 23, 2007

    drpkl whined: “Evidence in favor of working efficacy of homeopathy (including lab and clinical evidence) has been given.”

    Not by you, all you presented were unverified anecdotes. The studies that D Ullman produced were weak and easily shown to to say what he said they said.

    Do you have one conclusive report of homeopathy working for a non-self limiting condition with full references?

    Also, are you part of this ship of fools: http://depletedcranium.com/?p=295 ?

  158. #158 HCN
    December 23, 2007

    Ooop… must remember to finish coffee before typing… I said “easily shown to to say what he said they said”… What I meant to say was “easily shown to to NOT say what he said they said”

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!