Homeopathy is 'rubbish', says chief medical officer

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
I get the distinct impression here that people responding have ZERO clue what a homeopathic remedy is. People do realize that many homeopathic remedies have zero of the original active ingredient in them after being diluted right? Many homeopathic remedies are diluted to 30c. At 13c there is ZERO of the 'active ingredient' left. I do not mean very little, I mean literally zero, not even one molecule

homeopathic medicine is very powerful and dangerous. We have the case where someone made homeopathic water.... and one of the people who took it (called 06p in the study) was a female, and when she was interviewed 6 months later said she suffered from "Redness of scrotum (sustained)"

Yes, that is how silly they are. Read how they made the homeopathic water here:
www.hominf.org...

and the interview 6 months later here:
www.hominf.org...

That water is a 30c solution. That means not even a single atom of the original 'medicine' is in the final product.

then they made homeopathic badger that was from roadkill
www.hominf.org...

Well, who can argue with this ....

Badger in The Wind in The Willows sums up these qualities as grumpy and averse to company, a curmudgeon, but also loyal and kindly and fiercely defensive of his friends and of tradition and historical values. Thus the badger has qualities that go beyond its actual nature. These metaphorical qualities are often indicative that the substance will make an important remedy.

Clearly badgers make for a potent remedy.

Then a homeopathic stone circle
www.maryenglish.com...

That was a 6c solution, so at least there was some active ingredient in it. Who knew a stone could be so curative.

then homeopathic light from Saturn
www.interhomeopathy.org...

do not forget homeopathic shipwreck
www.maryenglish.com...

or homeopathic thunderstorm
www.maryenglish.com...

you can even get a homeopathic great wall of China...
www.maryenglish.com...

The rest I won't bother going into. To quote the Dr. in the OP ... Rubbish.

The placebo-effect, which is the power of belief, is not "rubbish". Of course homeopathy peddles their stuff as something other than the placebo effect, and thats certainly rubbish, but on the other hand, if they didnt peddle it as something special, the placebo-effect would not come into effect. There's your catch-22.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
The placebo-effect, which is the power of belief, is not "rubbish". Of course homeopathy peddles their stuff as something other than the placebo effect, and thats certainly rubbish, but on the other hand, if they didnt peddle it as something special, the placebo-effect would not come into effect. There's your catch-22.

They never called the Placebo effect rubbish, they called homeopathic remedies rubbish. They are. It is not medicinal in any way, a certain percent will get better through the placebo effect. Many more will not get better, and will be worse off for not having sought real medical care. I would prefer a person use home remedies and get the placebo effect without spending money to make quacks rich.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

I would prefer a person use home remedies and get the placebo effect without spending money to make quacks rich.

You're wrong; Anybody can make a homeopathic remedy, you don't need 'to make a quack rich'.....But of course you want to babble on about anything that someone could make money off of that is not mainstream; but don't say a damn thing about all the GMO's, HFCS, Aspartame, prescription pills with side effects, that companies make billions off of...

Stop cherry picking..Everybody is always out to attack the 'outcasts' but never turns the same attacks on their 'in crowd' who are guilty of the same damn things...

Fully trust allopathy? Fully trust doctors? I trust my instincts! Although my self-healing through natural means is only considered to be anecdotal, I personally don't give a rat's a## what the medical profession believes! I am not a lab rat and refuse to be treated as one.

Eight Medical Lies.... and Why I Abandoned Medicine

After describing how Ioannidis delved into the medical literature and was shocked by the number of seemingly important and significant published findings that were later reversed in subsequent studies, Freedman boils down the what I consider to be the two most important messages that derive from Ioannidis’ work:

This array suggested a bigger, underlying dysfunction, and Ioannidis thought he knew what it was. “The studies were biased,” he says. “Sometimes they were overtly biased. Sometimes it was difficult to see the bias, but it was there.” Researchers headed into their studies wanting certain results—and, lo and behold, they were getting them. We think of the scientific process as being objective, rigorous, and even ruthless in separating out what is true from what we merely wish to be true, but in fact it’s easy to manipulate results, even unintentionally or unconsciously. “At every step in the process, there is room to distort results, a way to make a stronger claim or to select what is going to be concluded,” says Ioannidis. “There is an intellectual conflict of interest that pressures researchers to find whatever it is that is most likely to get them funded.

Perhaps only a minority of researchers were succumbing to this bias, but their distorted findings were having an outsize effect on published research. To get funding and tenured positions, and often merely to stay afloat, researchers have to get their work published in well-regarded journals, where rejection rates can climb above 90 percent

Read more at Science-Based Medicine

Originally posted by Toots
Fully trust allopathy? Fully trust doctors? I trust my instincts! Although my self-healing through natural means is only considered to be anecdotal, I personally don't give a rat's a## what the medical profession believes! I am not a lab rat and refuse to be treated as one.

Being that you don't trust doctors, I assume that you have no intention of going to the ER if you have a heart attack, stoke, get into a traffic accident, or experience any other major health issue. I hope your natural self-healing method works out for you.

Originally posted by alkali

Originally posted by Toots
Fully trust allopathy? Fully trust doctors? I trust my instincts! Although my self-healing through natural means is only considered to be anecdotal, I personally don't give a rat's a## what the medical profession believes! I am not a lab rat and refuse to be treated as one.

Being that you don't trust doctors, I assume that you have no intention of going to the ER if you have a heart attack, stoke, get into a traffic accident, or experience any other major health issue. I hope your natural self-healing method works out for you.

Excuse me, but where did I write NO trust? Due to personal experiences (multiple bad ones) I have limited trust.

For your information, I was on the brink of death (literally) a few years ago as a direct result of human error and repeated incompetency in the medical profession.....after being misdiagnosed for 6-months! Then again last year, it was the medical profession that put me in a very precarious position, once again. The resulting complications required a specialist and constant monitoring for over 9-months.

I do know what I speak of!

reply to post by alkali


Let me point out a little something about Doctor's incompetency as far as heart attacks go, mkay?

My father suffered a heart attack back last May/June, due to the undiagonsed atherosclerosis he was suffering from...It almost killed him, and even though he had been going to see a Cardiologist for quite some time, they never caught it....I don't know if you are aware, but atherosclerosis is a progressive disease, it doesn't just 'show up' over night. It comes from a buildup of plaque and calcium in the arteries of the heart, which makes them start to harden and become inflamed. Now instead of going in, and REMOVING the calcium and plaque, they stick 4 stents in his arteries, which does nothing but push that acidic calcium and plaque up further against the artery wall, allowing blood to flow through easier...

Now what is the problem with this? The calcium and plaque is still there, causing the arteries to harden, and inflamming them at the same time; especially because they have now been compressed against the artery wall where they will cause more damage....

These people are incompetent, and only worried about charging him 10000 for that procedure, even though they have only made the situation worse....They are not in the business of curing disease, but putting a band-aid on it, and I challenge you to ever prove otherwise....

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Your implication that the doctor is incompetent due to your father having undiagnosed atherosclerosis is ridiculous, at best. In over 50 percent of men who have atherosclerosis, the first symptom they experience is a heart attack. The point where chronic plaque buildup within the artery limits blood flow to the extent that demand begins to exceed supply is around 70% occlusion. In other words, you are asymptomatic until the plaque has occluded 70% of the artery. It is well recognized that a patient who suffers a heart attack does not necessarily have a severely stenotic lesion. Many people without symptoms have a serious risk of heart attack. There is no reliable detection method to predict if an individual will have a plaque disruption resulting in MI.

Continuing on, did you ever give any thought to the efficacy of removing the plaque or the possible risks? The answer is no, you did not. Atherectomy, as it turns out, does not improve patient outcome in the least and is only indicated in about 5% of cases. On top of not improving the outcome, there is a significantly higher risk of vasospasm, perforating the artery, and embolization. It's not much of an intellectual stretch to understand that taking a roto-rooter to the arteries that keep the heart beating isn't a super awesome idea. Balloon angioplasty is much safer and is just as effective as atherectomy, not to mention it's cheaper. Furthermore, if a stent is used, the stent is often coated with a drug that prevents restenosis.

You're complaining about a procedure that is effective, minimally invasive, safe, relatively cheap, minimizes hospital stay, and prevents restenosis which decreases the risk of future hospital visits.

Also, it saved your father's life.

reply to post by alkali


Atherosclerosis is the heart disease due to buildup of plaque and calcium in the arteries....How do you cure that disease? BY REMOVING IT.....It isn't rocket science!

Damage to the blood vessel wall by angioplasty triggers physiological response that can be divided into two stages. The first stage that occurs immediately after tissue trauma, is thrombosis. A blood clot forms at the site of damage and further hinders blood flow. This is accompanied by an inflammatory immune response.

A stent is a mesh, tube-like structure often used in conjunction with angioplasty to permanently hold open an artery, allowing for unrestricted blood flow, or to support a weakness in the artery wall called an aneurysm. The artery can react to the stent, perceive it as a foreign body, and respond by mounting an immune system response which leads to further narrowing near or inside the stent.

These stents do more harm than good...But by all means keep using wikipedia and google to mount your rebuttals...

Atherectomy has nothing to do with what I am talking about, either...

Haven't you ever heard of Vitamin K2? What about Vitamin C? Both have been shown to break down the plaque buildups so that they may be carried out of the body, and Vitamin K2 even takes the calcium out of your soft tissues and arteries and deposits it back into your bones and teeth where it is supposed to be...

This can even be a sign of an underlying parathyroid dysfunction, because when the parathyroid is deprived of Boron, it will start releasing too much PTH, which causes the teeth and bones to release calcium....Which goes where in the deficiency of Vitamin K2? Straight into your soft tissues and arteries..

I would like to also point out that restenosis does indeed happen a good percentage of the time with patients who have received stents; not to mention either that heart disease kills about 350,000+ people a year....They are doing such a fantastic job aren't they?

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

I would prefer a person use home remedies and get the placebo effect without spending money to make quacks rich.

You're wrong; Anybody can make a homeopathic remedy, you don't need 'to make a quack rich'.....But of course you want to babble on about anything that someone could make money off of that is not mainstream

Please give me an example of a homeopathic remedy you make? Professional Homeopaths will tell you NOT everyone can do it. It's a 'science'. You have to go to a specialist who will see your symptoms and determine exactly what is the best course of action. If you have the Flu, there are maybe 10 different remedies which require a professional to diagnose which one is the right one to use. This has nothing to do with being mainstream, it has to do with the fact it doesn't work and is proven to not work.

but don't say a damn thing about all the GMO's, HFCS, Aspartame, prescription pills with side effects, that companies make billions off of...

You seem to know a lot about me. Please show me which posts I have made that make you believe that? You're making stuff up, I guess that you have to be good at doing that in order to believe in homeopathy. Your post is especially rediculous in light of the fact I spoke in support of home remedies.

Stop cherry picking..Everybody is always out to attack the 'outcasts' but never turns the same attacks on their 'in crowd' who are guilty of the same damn things...

What did I cherry pick? Why are we talking about 'outcasts' when the topic is homeopathy? I will await you to answer which homeopathic remedies you make at home.

Originally posted by Toots
Fully trust allopathy? Fully trust doctors? I trust my instincts! Although my self-healing through natural means is only considered to be anecdotal, I personally don't give a rat's a## what the medical profession believes! I am not a lab rat and refuse to be treated as one.

Eight Medical Lies.... and Why I Abandoned Medicine

After describing how Ioannidis delved into the medical literature and was shocked by the number of seemingly important and significant published findings that were later reversed in subsequent studies, Freedman boils down the what I consider to be the two most important messages that derive from Ioannidis’ work:

This array suggested a bigger, underlying dysfunction, and Ioannidis thought he knew what it was. “The studies were biased,” he says. “Sometimes they were overtly biased. Sometimes it was difficult to see the bias, but it was there.” Researchers headed into their studies wanting certain results—and, lo and behold, they were getting them. We think of the scientific process as being objective, rigorous, and even ruthless in separating out what is true from what we merely wish to be true, but in fact it’s easy to manipulate results, even unintentionally or unconsciously. “At every step in the process, there is room to distort results, a way to make a stronger claim or to select what is going to be concluded,” says Ioannidis. “There is an intellectual conflict of interest that pressures researchers to find whatever it is that is most likely to get them funded.

Perhaps only a minority of researchers were succumbing to this bias, but their distorted findings were having an outsize effect on published research. To get funding and tenured positions, and often merely to stay afloat, researchers have to get their work published in well-regarded journals, where rejection rates can climb above 90 percent

Read more at Science-Based Medicine

What does your post have to do with homeopathic remedies? You clearly have no idea what a homeopathic remedy is. 'Natural Means' does not equal homeopathic.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


So please tell me what Homeopathic remedy you recommend for your father's disease.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Lets take it step by step.

These stents do more harm than good...But by all means keep using wikipedia and google to mount your rebuttals...

Every shred of research produced says you're wrong. This is basic material that is drilled into every medical student in the country. Having been through medical school and finished a residency in emergency medicine, I can say without any reservation that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Restenosis occurs in about 5-10% of patients who receive drug-eluting stents. The percentage of patients who experience a hypersensitivity reaction is less than 5%.

Haven't you ever heard of Vitamin K2? What about Vitamin C? Both have been shown to break down the plaque buildups so that they may be carried out of the body, and Vitamin K2 even takes the calcium out of your soft tissues and arteries and deposits it back into your bones and teeth where it is supposed to be...

Are you suggesting that vitamin K2 and vitamin C be used in place of angioplasty to treat acute MI?

I would like to also point out that restenosis does indeed happen a good percentage of the time with patients who have received stents; not to mention either that heart disease kills about 350,000+ people a year....They are doing such a fantastic job aren't they?

As I pointed out above, you're wrong. Restenosis occurs in only about 5-10% of patients who receive drug-eluting stents.

As of 2010:
Number of adults with diagnosed heart disease: 26.5 million
Number of deaths due to heart disease: 597,689
Number of deaths per 100,000 population: 193.6
Approximately one half of deaths related to heart disease occur before the individual reaches a hospital.

Age-Adjusted Death Rates for Heart Disease and Cancer in the United States, 1999--2009

painconsortium.nih.gov...

placebo affect 60%

www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...

The latest study, a randomized trial of 80 women and men published in Plos One by Harvard researchers, shows that even when clinicians told women with irritable bowel syndrome they are getting fake pills, the fake pills still worked...

Incredibly, according to a new study of patients with irritable bowel syndrome, the placebo effect, even when patients were in on the secret, worked almost as well as the leading medication on the market

Even though the author here was trying to downplay it, the Harvard results still existed.

So a big question? Why would so many get better even if they're told its a placebo?

What is big pharma meds?

I have a feeling people are going to need to do a lot more investigation into their meds and what they need. But it seems there may be some power of intent and innate healing in patients that actually does the work.

But if the placebo affect is pointing out that maybe big pharma is creating some rubbish medicine. Maybe nature gave us the real stuff.

reply to post by Unity_99


You quote one study, one illness, with a population of 80 people, and then try to draw conclusions on every drug there is. I hope you see the problem with that, if not, I don't think I can help you.

reply to post by alkali


And how many of them actually receive those stents? Hmm?

reply to post by alkali

Every shred of research produced says you're wrong. This is basic material that is drilled into every medical student in the country. Having been through medical school and finished a residency in emergency medicine, I can say without any reservation that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Restenosis occurs in about 5-10% of patients who receive drug-eluting stents. The percentage of patients who experience a hypersensitivity reaction is less than 5%.

I don't see you quoting a single source on this....Oh you went to medical school did you? That's hearsay pal, you have no proof to back that up period....You keep throwing the part in there about drug-eluting stents, however are you trying to infer that EVERY single patient who receives a stent, receives that particular kind?

Are you suggesting that vitamin K2 and vitamin C be used in place of angioplasty to treat acute MI?

Depends on what kind of Vitamin, and how it is administered....But of course not; I'm not suggesting it, Linus Pauling is...Linus Pauling > Anything you have to say, because he's actually a real doctor...

As I pointed out above, you're wrong. Restenosis occurs in only about 5-10% of patients who receive drug-eluting stents.

Mkay so there are stents, and then there are drug-eluting stents...How many of these patients receive the latter? I bet you can't pull up that statistic can you?

As of 2010: Number of adults with diagnosed heart disease: 26.5 million Number of deaths due to heart disease: 597,689 Number of deaths per 100,000 population: 193.6 Approximately one half of deaths related to heart disease occur before the individual reaches a hospital.

Sources? I would like to point out that more people die of Heart Disease than violent crime, and prescription pills >.> Something ain't working...Maybe your methods? Those statistics do not say anything in regards to how many patients experience restenosis..

But I'll throw in my own quote here bub...

In cardiac procedures, balloon angioplasty has been associated with a high incidence of restenosis, with rates ranging from 25% to 50%, and the majority of these patients need further angioplasty within 6 months.

Treatment with PCI for patients with stable coronary artery disease reduces chest pain, but does not reduce the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or other major cardiovascular events when added to optimal medical therapy.[5] [edit]

And lots of stuff here...

www.ptca.org...

Not everyone receives the same DES you keep referring to; you know that right?

Also ;

In 2010, despite all the promising technology and all the research, creativity, effort, and dollars poured into the field, the problem of restenosis, although vastly reduced, has not been eliminated. It is not an exaggeration to state that at my institution, Scripps Clinic, nearly every working day we see at least 1 patient with restenosis of a drug-eluting stent (DES). One report estimated 200 000 repeat revascularizations are performed every year in the United States for DES failure.

Following placement of a bare-metal stent, restenosis can occur when abnormal cells grow within the stent. Since these cells accumulate over time, symptoms caused by slowing of the blood flow through the stent tend to occur slowly, as opposed to suddenly. DES -- which are stents coated with drugs that inhibit cell growth -- were developed specifically to address this "typical" kind of restenosis. And indeed, DES proved remarkably effective in preventing this restenosis, which led to their widespread adoption by cardiologists. Unfortunately, a few years ago it became apparent that a different kind of restenosis could occur with DES. This restenosis appears to be caused by the sudden formation of a blood clot within the stent, causing rapid occlusion of the artery. This can lead to a sudden, total blockage of the artery, leading to an acute myocardial infarction (heart attack) or even sudden death. Why does this happen? Apparently, while DES successfully inhibits cell growth within the stent, this inhibition of cell growth leaves the surface of the stent itself directly exposed to the blood flow for a very long period of time - months or years. And when blood comes in direct contact with the surface of the stent, the clotting mechanism can be engaged, which can lead to thrombosis within the artery.

This is an interesting bit of information on the subject:
‘An innocent deception’: placebo controls in the St Petersburg homeopathy trial, 1829-1830

The ‘no treatment’ patients, in fact, did better than those in both the allopathic and homeopathic wards. The trial had important implications not just for homeopathy but also for the excessive allopathic drugging and bleeding that was prevalent. As a result of the report, homeopathy was banned in Russia for some years, although allopathy was not.

While both homeopathy and allopathy fared badly, allopathy has the advantage of progress and growth while it would seem that homeopathy is stuck in the role of being a placebo with the results dependent on the patients faith.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


I'm still waiting on you to tell me what homeopathic remedy you prefer for heart attacks.