Homeopathy

[bstach]

My wife just brought home a homeopathic rememdy for teething for our infant son. Which got me thinking...homeopathy: sound medicine or snake oil?

 

Sparay on.

 

To get you started:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html

[Crux]

You mebbee got two oxymorons in once sentence, sound-medicine and snake-oil, but either way it's the practice in the practice that counts.

[tvashtarkatena]

If gays wanna give each other dizeezes, thas their bidness.

[counterfeitfake]

Homeopathy is a bunch of crap.

[ClimbingPanther]

Homeopathy: If it works for you, then it works. Good luck separating the marketing from the facts.

[dmuja]

 

 

If I remember the history of it correctly, Homeopathy was once the predominate form of "medical practice" (in the US at least) until beaten down by the Allopaths. Allopathy uses many of its principles though.

 

Personally, I think Homeopathy may mostly be effective (if it is at all) based on the placebo effect. But then something like more than 40% of Allopathic doctors (read "AMA") have also proscribed "sugar pills" at some point for the same reason - placebo.

 

Bluntly, its mostly BS shit crap snake oil but, AMA doctors kill thousands upon thousands of people each year do to mistakes and infections as well - and then try to supress that information (there was a study a few years back that shook every body up on the amount of Allopathic patient deaths due to medical error - then the AMA put out their own "study" which drastically lower the numbers).

 

Homeopathy may work or may not, but often it is a less toxic choice -JMO

[kevbone]

homeopathy: sound medicine or snake oil?

 

 

So depends on who you ask. I personally believe in it, but have never seen it work.

[archenemy]

My wife just brought home a homeopathic rememdy for teething for our infant son. Which got me thinking...homeopathy: sound medicine or snake oil?

 

Sparay on.

 

To get you started:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html

The best remedy for a teething baby is to rub a bit of brandy on the gums. It numbs the area, soothes the kid, and a wee touch of alcohol is not going to kill the kid (unless s/he has a deathly alergy to it).

[dmuja]

 

 

I think also that Homeopathic concoctions are soooo diluted of their "key" ingredient (what ever that may be) that you are effectively taking nothing.

 

And just sayin..., when I shop for herbs and supplements, I almost never bother with the homeopathic section.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

My wife just brought home a homeopathic rememdy for teething for our infant son. Which got me thinking...homeopathy: sound medicine or snake oil?

 

Sparay on.

 

To get you started:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html

The best remedy for a teething baby is to rub a bit of brandy on the gums. It numbs the area, soothes the kid, and a wee touch of alcohol is not going to kill the kid (unless s/he has a deathly alergy to it).

 

my parents rubbed whiskey on my gums

 

I think it was the Kickin' Chicken

[dmuja]

T a wee touch of alcohol is not going to kill the kid (unless s/he has a deathly alergy to it).

 

Trains them young in the ways of pub clubary as well..

[JayB]

 

If I remember the history of it correctly, Homeopathy was once the predominate form of "medical practice" (in the US at least) until beaten down by the Allopaths. Allopathy uses many of its principles though.

 

Personally, I think Homeopathy may mostly be effective (if it is at all) based on the placebo effect. But then something like more than 40% of Allopathic doctors (read "AMA") have also proscribed "sugar pills" at some point for the same reason - placebo.

 

Bluntly, its mostly BS shit crap snake oil but, AMA doctors kill thousands upon thousands of people each year do to mistakes and infections as well - and then try to supress that information (there was a study a few years back that shook every body up on the amount of Allopathic patient deaths due to medical error - then the AMA put out their own "study" which drastically lower the numbers).

 

Homeopathy may work or may not, but often it is a less toxic choice -JMO

 

I think that your argument here would be quite a bit stronger if the patient populations that homeopaths and "allopaths" were treating were identical in terms of the nature of the conditions that they were presenting with, their acuity, and the nature of the medical intervention required.

 

When people collapsing from strokes, presenting with organ failure, major trauma, life-threatening infections, etc are rushed to the homeopaths - then you'll have a valid basis for comparing the relative mortalities of homeopathy and scientific medicine.

[dmuja]

 

If I remember the history of it correctly, Homeopathy was once the predominate form of "medical practice" (in the US at least) until beaten down by the Allopaths. Allopathy uses many of its principles though.

 

Personally, I think Homeopathy may mostly be effective (if it is at all) based on the placebo effect. But then something like more than 40% of Allopathic doctors (read "AMA") have also proscribed "sugar pills" at some point for the same reason - placebo.

 

Bluntly, its mostly BS shit crap snake oil but, AMA doctors kill thousands upon thousands of people each year do to mistakes and infections as well - and then try to supress that information (there was a study a few years back that shook every body up on the amount of Allopathic patient deaths due to medical error - then the AMA put out their own "study" which drastically lower the numbers).

 

Homeopathy may work or may not, but often it is a less toxic choice -JMO

 

I think that your argument here would be quite a bit stronger if the patient populations that homeopaths and "allopaths" were treating were identical in terms of the nature of the conditions that they were presenting with, their acuity, and the nature of the medical intervention required.

 

When people collapsing from strokes, presenting with organ failure, major trauma, life-threatening infections, etc are rushed to the homeopaths - then you'll have a valid basis for comparing the relative mortalities of homeopathy and scientific medicine.

 

Its not really meant as an argument JayB I totally agree that we're talking differnt types of medical problems/conditions - I don't think much of Homeopathy as it is or was anyway, but there is a history behind how modern medicine and "alternatives" have interacted in the past and sometimes the history is a bit dirty.

[JayB]

I'm pretty familiar with the history of American medicine and the efforts to reform and regulate it, from the late colonial period to the advent of the Flexner Report (~1910-1912 if I remember correctly).

 

There may have been some professional rivalries in play, and you certainly can't ever rule out greed when you are dealing with humans - but most of the efforts to impose a rigorous and uniform set of standards for anyone practicing medicine came about because "allopaths" thought that the state of medical care/training in the US was a national disgrace.

 

Most of the impetus behind reforms came from physicians who had been trained in the leading institutes in France/Scotland (~1800-1850) and Germany (~1850-1900)and wanted to import the standards and practices that they observed while in Europe. This was also the era of the Progressive Movement, and there were quite a few people involved in medicine in some capacity or another who were inspired to apply the philosophies associated with this movement to their own field.

 

One of the main arguments that they used to sell these changes to others in their field was that they wold provide a means by which they could more clearly differentiate themselves from the Homeopaths and every other species of professional quack selling their services at the time. I think that they also understood that the requirements that they were advocating for training, licensing, etc would put many of their rivals out of business, or at the very least put them at a disadvantage.

 

I happen to think that this also provided a significant benefit to the public, but I can see how the various quacks might take exception to such changes.

 

Speaking of "dirt," anyone remember the efforts to impose something vaguely resembling the regulations that drug companies have to abide by on the purveyors of homeopathic/naturopathic remedies, etc? If those folks were so confident in their remedies, you'd think they'd welcome the opportunity to demonstrate that they were both safe and effective...

[chucK]

Unfortunately the homeopathy thing is usually correlated with the counterculture "the man is trying to keep us down" thing, which in turn is quite suspicious of the concept of scientific rigor (tool of the man).

 

And with respect to the teething baby of the OP, get a freezable teething ring. It's a plastic thingy filled with water that you can freeze. The baby chews on it, the cold numbs out the gums (kid likes it) and it gets the teething process done more quickly.

[Dechristo]

... get a freezable teething ring. ...The baby chews on it, the cold numbs out the gums (kid likes it) and it gets the teething process done more quickly.

 

We used those and clove oil.

[bstach]

Unfortunately the homeopathy thing is usually correlated with the counterculture "the man is trying to keep us down" thing, which in turn is quite suspicious of the concept of scientific rigor (tool of the man).

I find it interesting that many people seem to associate "natural" with "safe". To which I point out how "natural" poison ivey is.

[rob]

poison ivy is great for the gums, though.

[Hugh Conway]

Unfortunately the homeopathy thing is usually correlated with the counterculture "the man is trying to keep us down" thing, which in turn is quite suspicious of the concept of scientific rigor (tool of the man).

I find it interesting that many people seem to associate "natural" with "safe". To which I point out how "natural" poison ivey is.

 

So's uranium!

[G-spotter]

And with respect to the teething baby of the OP, get a freezable teething ring. It's a plastic thingy filled with water that you can freeze. The baby chews on it, the cold numbs out the gums (kid likes it) and it gets the teething process done more quickly.

 

And the baby gets a high dose of phthalates!

[JayB]

My wife just brought home a homeopathic rememdy for teething for our infant son. Which got me thinking...homeopathy: sound medicine or snake oil?

 

Sparay on.

 

To get you started:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html

 

Just don't let those allopaths near him with their autism inducing vaccines and whatnot...

 

 

[dmuja]

I find it interesting that many people seem to associate "natural" with "safe". To which I point out how "natural" poison ivey is.

 

 

I think the choice maybe more like this;

 

I could sit on the couch like a slug, react to life as opposed to proact, eat processed salted crap, get fat, watch my blood pressure increase over time, complain about my "failing" health, go to a doctor and get put on meds. Not very "natural" (at least by my definition).

 

OR,

 

I could get off my fat ass, excersise, take responsibility for my health to the best of my ability, save the money I would have paid to get the fake health insurance I would need in order to actually see a doctor, eat something called "food" as opposed to synthesized chemicals, fillers, antibiotics and other toxic garbage, be proactive in my life instead of reactive, notice how great it feels to taste and eat REAL food and move my body easily and nearly pain free - the way it was meant to be. That, I call "natural".

 

JayB,

 

Sounds like you work in the allopathic medical field - doctor maybe? If so, good on ya! Seriously, I hold nothing against doctors - even if they (unfortunately) killed a few of my relatives off while trying to "cure" them. My gripe is more with the (thankfully now) slightly dated model of modern medicine which simply reacts to conditions and symptoms via "medical" solutions (aka pills, pills and more pills, and how about some surgery for good measure). I have a sister who was once "diagnosed" with Leukemia, she told the doctors off, walked out of the hospital and is doing quite well some 20+ years later. She did it the "natural" way - she did not have Leukemia btw. I could call them quacks as well but I save that one for the guy who wanted to needlessly cut my tonsils out when I was a teenager. He was quite pissed off because I changed my mind and opted out of the surgery a couple days prior to - guess the payment on one of his summer homes was a bit harder to come by that month on my account - he let me know it too.

 

Again, I think little of "Homeopathy" in general, but I am a big fan of the incorporation of some natural tactics/approaches into health treatments and remedies of many kinds. In fact, if its about the quality of health and well being of the person/patient and not about the quantity of the $$$ in the bank account of the "treator" (or the stock holders) Im all for it!

 

Take care....

 

 

of your health

[JayB]

Not a doctor - I work in basic research - but my wife is an ER doc.

 

I can't claim that my conversations are entirely representative, but to a person their greatest source of exasperation is the amount of easily preventable suffering and death that rolls through their doors on a daily basis.

 

It's not that most MD's aren't aware of the benefits of diet and excercise, or that they don't promote either to their patients - it's that human nature being what it is, there's a significant number of people who are either unwilling or unable to eat well, excercise regularly, and moderate their addictions. Most people who make the kinds of changes necessary to live a more healthy life ultimately do so not because a medical authority figure tells them to, but because they want to, so it's not clear to me that the medical community is at fault here.

 

When one of them rolls through the door after having sustained a massive heart attack from congestive heart failure, or a stroke because of the high-blood pressure they've never gotten under control - the time for life coaching is over and their role is to keep them alive by "treating the symptoms." Unlike homeopaths - they actually have the means to do so effectively. How this state of affairs represents a profound moral failure on the part of physicians is beyond me.

 

My main gripe with homeopathy and other bits of quackery is not their critiques of how physicians practice - it's that their "disciplnes" are the medical equivalent of creationism. The central principles that they have been founded upon are false. With the advent of techniques that are capable of empirically proving or disproving their claims, they've crossed the boundary from benign folklore into flat out frauds. If you think that an overreliance on pills and surgery is an ethical problem for physicians - then what kind of ethics are involved in charging fees to dispense concoctions formulated according to folklorish nonsense that has no scientific basis whatsoever? How about people that continue to "treat" their patients in this way even when they have a condition that can be safely and effectively treated by a proven rememedy that would require them to see a real doctor? If this is ethical conduct, then so is faith-healing.

 

 

 

 

[chucK]

dmuja,

I don't know much about homeopathy, but just because regular docs can do stupid stuff doesn't mean that homeopaths don't. "Regular" docs are not perfect and many are pretty scientifically clueless. There certainly are cases that where in hindsight they can be shown to be wrong, but it is a very challenging field.

 

Certainly one should always do some investigation before embarking on any recommended treatment with likely negative side effects (e.g. surgery). Don't take your doctor's word as the sole decider. No one is more invested in the outcome than yourself.

 

JayB,

it's that human nature being what it is, there's a significant number of people who are either unwilling or unable to eat well, excercise regularly, and moderate their addictions.

emphasis added

 

My oh my! Was that a slip of the tongue/fingers, or are you going soft on us? Conceding that for some percentage of sufferers lack of willpower is not the cause of all their problems? That would be quite a change in your usually presented worldview. What brought this about?

[JayB]

To me it's fairly clear that an absence of willpower and/or poor impulse control is behind most unhealthy behaviors that we have absolute control over. These include what and how much we eat, what drugs we put into our bodies and when, etc.

 

The real question, as far as I am concerned, is to what extent an absence of "willpower" or impulse control is hard-wired into us, and whether or not it's possible to overcome any inborn deficits in this area. I don't think that we have any answers that apply equally well to each and every individual, but I think that as a society we have to assume that people are responsible for their actions (unless there is a clear reason to conclude otherwise on account of profound retardation, insanity, dementia, etc), and that sane people can learn to overcome any deficits that they were born with in these areas - but that some people will require infinitely more help to do so.

 

Insisting that people are responsible for their actions doesn't preclude helping people who are struggling to control a given behavior. However, it's hard to imagine a scenario where cultivating an element of self-control isn't part of the help that they provide, even if that's as simple as taking their medications once a day.

 

Having said all of that - in a former job I worked with a woman who just could not seem to control her weight. She was probably one of my favorite people in the office, since as a former opera singer she brought an element of class, grace, and cultivation to the cube-farm that most of the other denizens couldn't come anywhere near. As time went on she started missing more and more work, as the health problems associated with her weight became compound and overlapping. I think that she was on permanent disability by the time I left, and the watching as a helpless bystander while she literally ate herself to death was very sad.

 

A girl that I grew up with had the opposite problem. Between 9th and 10th grade she went from fit and althetic to skeletal, and never seemed to get better. I was one of many people who went to the school nurse urge some kind of intervention, most of her friends tried to intervene as well, but there wasn't much that anyone outside of her family could do. I'd often see her hunched over on an excerise bike when I was visiting from college and hitting the gym at the local YMCA, and she'd still there two hours later when I was leaving. Whatever she was suffering from, it clearly wasn't a lack of willpower or discipline. A friend of mine passed along word that she died a few years ago.

 

Both were in dire need of, and deserving of help. It seems to me that any effective help would require showing them how to take the steps necessary to overcome whatever problems they had - inborn or otherwise - that were making it extremely difficult for them to eat properly and maintain the kind of weight they'd need to to survive.