Hiding homeopathic placebos behind deceptive titles

Originally posted by texasgirl
As for drinking water every day, are you saying it makes you feel better? Or is water a placebo?

He is saying that homeopathic remedies are nothing more than water. As crankyoldman pointed out above, the theory is that the "active ingredient" in the medicine gets diluted until there is practically none of it in any given dose but it has left its vibrational imprint on the water.

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by texasgirl
As for drinking water every day, are you saying it makes you feel better? Or is water a placebo?

He is saying that homeopathic remedies are nothing more than water. As crankyoldman pointed out above, the theory is that the "active ingredient" in the medicine gets diluted until there is practically none of it in any given dose but it has left its vibrational imprint on the water.

edit on 5-3-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

Yes, I know. I realized this right after I posted. My mistake. :-) (I used homeopathic pellets alot)

Originally posted by texasgirl


It is said that homeopathy deals with the life force inside you and finds a way to balance what's wrong with the body.

But there IS no 'life force'. There's nothing you can point to and say, there, there's 15 quatloos of life force on my lifeforce-a-mometer. Because there is nothing called 'life force'.

Of course, it still fits - homeopathy does nothing, so something with no effects could balance something that doesn't exist.

Originally posted by crankyoldman

No it is not, it is vibrational therapy, in which a similar vibration to the ailment is given to stimulate the body's entire system to create a remedy for itself. Does it work for everyone, no.

What's vibrating? How do you know? How was this vibration measured, detected, quantified?

Truthfully, when you get into "good vibrations", it's theosophy, which is loony to the max. There aren't any vibrations going on.

So, if you believe in homeopathy, you ought to be able to drink one drop of sea water and be cured of anything, right? After all, over time it's touched every plant, flowed over every mineral, and then been diluted beyond measure. One drop should be the most potent homeopathic solution EVAR.

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by texasgirl


It is said that homeopathy deals with the life force inside you and finds a way to balance what's wrong with the body.

But there IS no 'life force'. There's nothing you can point to and say, there, there's 15 quatloos of life force on my lifeforce-a-mometer. Because there is nothing called 'life force'.

Of course, it still fits - homeopathy does nothing, so something with no effects could balance something that doesn't exist.

You may not think it exists but many countries and cultures believe it does. Japan calls it 'Ki'. Russian researchers call it 'Bio Plasmic energy'. India calls it 'Prana'. A popular one: Taoists call it 'Chi'.

Some people believe Homeopathy does nothing, others swear by it. I feel it has helped my animals and that's good enough for me.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
That latest from "Big Placebo" is to avoid the stigma of their products being actually identified as homeopathy by labelling them as "supplements".

Homeopathy is, of course, nothing more then placebo therapy - but who wants to pay out money for placebos?? apart from the faithful folowers of het cult of course - they will pay for anything.

But the real money lies in fleecing the unsuspecting public - the sheer volume of sales of homeopathic placebo products makes billions of $$'s a year.

So how to keep sales up in the face of the truth?? Easy -

Rebranding products from homeopathic remedies to dietary supplements has helped one California entrepreneur boost sales by more than 80%.

- just tell lies

I study Pharmaceuticals and try to find what the base of their structure and where their knowledge comes from. Most of the drugs come from knowledge of plants and the chemistry of different foods. This is Alchemy that is renamed. You can't take one chemical out of a plant and concentrate it without having side effects of long term use though. They have also figured ways to make this same chemistry in the lab, chemistry found in nature.

If you are stating that homeopathy medicines don't work, than you are also saying that many drugs that are made do not work. That is a misstatement. Almost all chemotherapy drugs use homeopathic properties as their base as do vaccines. Many herbs are classified as homeopathic, using their adjuvant properties to help us fight things. If you are speaking or real homeopathy, I am not aware of one supplement that fits that definition, but Pharmaceuticals do use real homeopathic techniques.. I assume you are using the word loosely to include triggering a response from a similar material to fight something. Like the Chaga mushrooms ability to make the body detect cancer cells and tag them for destruction. It only works on certain cancers and is only effective on those 65 percent of the time though, percentages close to our chemo drugs with way less side effects.

Placebos are often bio effective, choosing the right placebo to discredit the effectiveness of a natural medicine or even a regular medicine is often done to discredit it. This practice is being looked into by the governments of the world, the Placebo's chemistry did not have to be disclosed. Pharma scientists know how to choose their comparison chemistry.

reply to post by rickymouse


Explanation: St*rred!

I am no expert but I fully concur and here is a single example of why ...

Ultra-low dose naltrexone potentiates the anticonvulsant effect of low dose morphine on clonic seizures. (Honar H, Riazi K, Homayoun H, Sadeghipour H, Rashidi N, Ebrahimkhani MR, Mirazi N, Dehpour AR. SourceDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO Box 13145-784, Tehran, Iran. 2004) [ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Abstract
Significant potentiation of analgesic effects of opioids can be achieved through selective blockade of their stimulatory effects on intracellular signaling pathways by ultra-low doses of opioid receptor antagonists. However, the generality and specificity of this interaction is not well understood. The bimodal modulation of pentylenetetrazole-induced seizure threshold by opioids provide a model to assess the potential usefulness of this approach in seizure disorders and to examine the differential mechanisms involved in opioid anti- (morphine at 0.5-3 mg/kg) versus pro-convulsant (20-100 mg/kg) effects. Systemic administration of ultra-low doses of naltrexone (100 fg/kg-10 ng/kg) significantly potentiated the anticonvulsant effect of morphine at 0.5 mg/kg while higher degrees of opioid receptor antagonism blocked this effect. Moreover, inhibition of opioid-induced excitatory signaling by naltrexone (1 ng/kg) unmasked a strong anticonvulsant effect for very low doses of morphine (1 ng/kg-100 microg/kg), suggesting that a presumed inhibitory component of opioid receptor signaling can exert strong seizure-protective effects even at very low levels of opioid receptor activation. However, ultra-low dose naltrexone could not increase the maximal anticonvulsant effect of morphine (1-3 mg/kg), possibly due to a ceiling effect. The proconvulsant effects of morphine on seizure threshold were minimally altered by ultra-low doses of naltrexone while being completely blocked by a higher dose (1 mg/kg) of the antagonist. The present data suggest that ultra-low doses of opioid receptor antagonists may provide a potent strategy to modulate seizure susceptibility, especially in conjunction with very low doses of opioids.

Such information was brought to my attentionspan by my father when we were discussing this very subject and I was pushing the placebo points ... and it seems a small but statistically significant (my dad worked as head IT in Bureau of Statistics Australia) portion of the human population (?%) is extremely susceptable to what would be classically considered an ineffective dose level.

The above article was sourced by me just before posting to this thread and although it does involve a well known drug ... it is the ULTRA LOW DOSE effectiveness that I am focusing on and which hopefully makes the point clear that a little can mean a whole lot for some people.

As I was not informed by my father as to the % of people affected by such low doses I kept looking and I happened to find this extra info in the same set of search results ...

Update on threshold doses of food allergens: implications for patients and the food industry. (Moneret-Vautrin DA, Kanny G. SourceDepartment of Internal Medicine, Clinical Immunology and Allergology, University Hospital, 29 avenue de Lattre de Tassigny, 54035 Nancy, France. [email protected] 2004) [ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to bring the reader up to date on the importance of assessing a food's lowest observed adverse-effect level (LOAEL) with two aims. Firstly, to help industry choose tests with a level of sensitivity capable of detecting food allergens hidden in industrial products. Secondly, to specify protective measures for highly allergic individuals in order to prevent recurrent severe anaphylaxis. The review also seeks to highlight the present issues and unsolved questions.

RECENT FINDINGS: Thanks to standardized oral-provocation tests (double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges), LOAELs have been identified for many IgE-dependent food allergies. Most studies concern the pediatric population. Data is available for milk, egg, peanut, wheat flour, and sesame. The LOAELs are commonly in the range of 1-2 mg of natural foods, representing a few hundred micrograms of protein. These minimal reactive doses characterize about 1% of people allergic to milk, egg, or peanut. The level at which no observed adverse effect is seen might be a few tens of micrograms of protein for peanut. At the present time, allergy to oil seems to be restricted to unrefined cold-pressed oils.

So about 1% are possibly deeply affected by lose doses of chemicals.

Personal Disclosure: I hope this helps!

reply to post by rickymouse


I think you are confusing herbalism with homeopathy. They are both alternative but not the same.

reply to post by OmegaLogos

Homeopathy isn't low dose or ultra low dose, it is no dose. The active ingredient is a toxin or group of toxins that mirror the symptoms that a patient has and this is diluted to the point that there is nothing left but the vibration of that active ingredient stored in the waters "memory".

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by OmegaLogos

 

Homeopathy isn't low dose or ultra low dose, it is no dose. The active ingredient is a toxin or group of toxins that mirror the symptoms that a patient has and this is diluted to the point that there is nothing left but the vibration of that active ingredient stored in the waters "memory".

Since you seem to know a bit about homeopathy I am curious to know what you think of it. Do you use it yourself?

reply to post by OmegaLogos


Hmmmmm. checked it out. Burdock root, clover, and St. Johns Wort. Very interesting. St. Johns Wort is a little strong, my brother tried it. He got doped up and experienced unwanted side effects. I tried eating a couple of white Clover that the Bee had already visited and it stopped my backache for about two hours. In that two hours I was active and the backache came back with a vengeance. It stimulates the release of some chemicals sort of like Anexia does and can relieve the central nervous system pain. It does nothing for other kinds of pain though, and of course if you do not have the necessary chemicals in the body it does not work. Thanks for the link, it extended my knowledge.

reply to post by daskakik


Explanation: That is a partial truth ok!

Homeopathy [wiki]

The remedies are prepared by repeatedly diluting a chosen substance in alcohol or distilled water, followed by forceful striking on an elastic body, called succussion. Each dilution followed by succussion is said to increase the remedy's potency. Dilution sometimes continues well past the point where none of the original substance remains.

The low concentration of homeopathic remedies, which often lack even a single molecule of the diluted substance, has been the basis of questions about the effects of the remedies since the 19th century.

Homeopathic dilutions [wiki]

The idea is considered a pseudoscience, because at common dilutions, no atoms of the original material are likely to remain.

'Likely to remain" is no GARANTEE that there wont be any atoms of the original remaining!

And just as in medicine there are many levels of dosage in homeopathy ...



And here is another thing ... during the dilution process ... nothing is thrown away!

So if I take a 1liter amount of a substance [lets say plutonium] and throw that into the ocean ... it is diluted by an extreme amount ... but the ocean does contain it and are you going to tell me 1 atom of plutonium inside you isn't going to have an effect! :shk:

Now that is an extreme example I provide ... to prove a point!

The claims that there is zero atoms in all of these extremely highly diluted 'remedies' is a false one.

[Edit] A false one based only on the statistics of probability of encountering any atoms or the original solution.

Lies ... Damned Lies ... and Statistics ok! [/Edit]

Personal Disclosure: And hence they are indeed ultra low dose ... to claim otherwise is not logical ok!

NOTE: I in no way endorse the practice of homeopathy and nor do I discount it as a possible alternative medical therapy!

Buyer beware and you generally get what you pay for ok!

reply to post by texasgirl

I don't use it. I think the theory is flawed. Even if there were something to the idea that the active ingredient leaves its imprint in the water, there is nor reason why this would trigger anything that hasn't already been triggered by the illness itself.

Here is an interesting trial putting allopathy, homeopathy and placebo against each other.
St. Ptersburg homeopathy trial

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.

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by rickymouse

 

I think you are confusing herbalism with homeopathy. They are both alternative but not the same.

There was a guy near Iron mountain a while back that would try to help people fight cancer. He would get some blood from someone and inject it into a cow. He then let the cow get cancer and after a while the cows milk contained antibodies to the cancer, a process of a cow giving immunity to the calf. The guy would then kill the cow and bury it, the cancer made the cow unedible. The guy got busted for this. Basicly for selling milk that was not pasteurized and practicing pharmacology without a license. The next part is what is interesting.

The law enforcement tried to get the Pharma industry to condemn this and push for charges for creating possible toxins. The Pharma companies said they are investigating similar tactics so did not get involved. They did say that the guy does not have the testing equipment or knowledge to evaluate what is happening. They did not deny that this is real medicine. I agree that this use of a cows antibodies is viable but I also agree with the Pharma company in that everyone should not be doing this on their own. The antibodies in the milk trigger a reaction by the body to fight the cancer. This is real but the problem is that other antibodies may also form that are not good for humans. I believe the Pharma companies are way past this point myself and lets say they may have made their mistakes already and learned from them

Technically this is homeopathic therapy. It can work but can also be very dangerous. I'll leave this to the Pharma companies to work with. I am looking for ways to stop from getting cancer or killing it within a week of being formed. I have no reliable knowledge to correctly kill cancer when it is real bad, there are treatments available for that in hospitals. I am trying to find out how to not get cancer. The cause is in our food, the cure is also in a selection of foods and herbs/spices. It all depends on what your personal ancestors ate and what genetic variants they have.

Originally posted by rickymouse
Technically this is homeopathic therapy.

No it just looks similar on the surface. Homeopathy involves vibrating water that emulates the patients illness not actually infecting a living creature with disease. Your example is closer to how antivenoms are made and how vaccines work.

reply to post by daskakik


But in the case of the cow, none of the molecules of the cancer are in the milk, only the antigens which were created. By this way it is related to homeopathic medicine. I'm sure a lot of Homeopathic medicine is quackery but not all of it. Discounting things that use homeopathic ways as quackery without investigating them totally is not right either. I find a lot of flaws in interpretations of science and a lot of misinterpreting the exact way it works which can cause real cures to be discounted. I guess I read and compare too many research articles to medical interpretations, seeing this is second nature to me. I often find in another research article that the interpretation was right but not for the reason that was stipulated in the interpretation. Skeptics love when evidence is misapplied, they can pick things apart and discredit something that is real by using flaws in the interpretation. This happens a lot, we have thrown out cures for many diseases that are now plaguing us. It is not profitable to re-investigate these old meds though, they are not patentable. Adding an adjuvant and patent it as a new drug may sometimes be profitable. It's all about money.

Originally posted by texasgirl

Originally posted by crankyoldman

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Homeopathy is, of course, nothing more then placebo therapy - but who wants to pay out money for placebos?? apart from the faithful folowers of het cult of course - they will pay for anything.

[/url]

No it is not, it is vibrational therapy, in which a similar vibration to the ailment is given to stimulate the body's entire system to create a remedy for itself. Does it work for everyone, no.

No one has ever died from homeopathy. Big pharma on the other hand kills, yes, out right kills, 100k people a year in the US due to prescription errors, and the AMA establishment kills 200k plus a year, by their own admission. World wide, that number is over a million. Vioxx, thalidimide are fun examples of non homeopathic treatments.

This is mainly why I feel better using homeopathy on my animals. I also work with animals and I see the illnesses in pets that are taking drugs like Prednisolone, Rimaydl, Baytril...and it's not helping. A client's cat lost his vision from taking Baytril. (Baytril can also cause seizures, elevated liver enzymes, vomiting) Another client's dog had a bad reaction to Leukeran where he couldn't breathe.

If homeopathy doesn't work, it just doesn't work. And it most likely doesn't work because of improper dosage or the symptons and behavior doesn't fit the kind used.

edit on 5-3-2013 by texasgirl because: deleted a wrong word.

All true, a lot of animal issues can be traced back to diet. Dogs and Cats eating raw food resolves most issues rather quickly, but that scares people more then homeopathic cures do. We're all upside down.

reply to post by rickymouse

I think you are missing the point that the creation of antibodies in a host as in antivenom is not homeopathic. Homeopathy doesn't involve infecting any living creature with a disease much less taking the antibodies that it creates and administering them to another living creature. That is the difference.

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by crankyoldman

No it is not, it is vibrational therapy, in which a similar vibration to the ailment is given to stimulate the body's entire system to create a remedy for itself. Does it work for everyone, no.

What's vibrating? How do you know? How was this vibration measured, detected, quantified?

Truthfully, when you get into "good vibrations", it's theosophy, which is loony to the max. There aren't any vibrations going on.

So, if you believe in homeopathy, you ought to be able to drink one drop of sea water and be cured of anything, right? After all, over time it's touched every plant, flowed over every mineral, and then been diluted beyond measure. One drop should be the most potent homeopathic solution EVAR.

Okay, so you don't "get it." If you were alive 100 years ago you wouldn't get the nuclear bomb either, and if you were alive 20 years ago you wouldn't get the iphone tech either. Okay, because you don't get it does not mean you need to go on a campaign to stop it. I don't get vaccines, I don't get how including cancer virus' in each stick is useful to the goal of "helping" the immune system - just don't get it.

But, since it will personally make you feel better, almost joyful, to see someone stop using this stuff, I'll stop. Now, have a pint, celebrate with your friends, and enjoy your accomplishment, "one crankyoldman has stopped using that vile homeopathic stuff because of my campaign!!!!". But......... in exchange for me quitting the homeopathic silliness, you have to stop crusading against things you know little about, and stick to things you have experience with. okay?

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
Personal Disclosure: And hence they are indeed ultra low dose ... to claim otherwise is not logical ok!

The ultra low dose of naltrexone in the study that you posted for a 176 pound person would be 12.74 billion to 12.74 trillion molecules. Below is the math:

molecular mass of a naltrexone molecule is 378 dalton = 0.000000628 fg or .0000000000628 ng

the dose cited was (100 fg/kg-10 ng/kg) or 8000 fg - 800 ng for a person weighing 80 kg (176 lbs)

8,000 fg/0.000000628 = 12,738,853,503.18471
800 ng/.0000000000628 = 12,738,853,503,184.713375796178343949

That is so far from the single digit amounts that might be present in a homoepathic dose that you can't possibly consider them to be the same.