This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Anyone here have any experience of their pets been cured by a homeopathic vet after a regular vet has failed to cure it?
4
27
30
2
In reply to Jim C:
FTFY
> Anyone here have any experience of their pet's condition later improving after a vet had failed to cure it?
FTFY
46
2
In reply to Jim C:
Just made it more acceptable for UKC
> Anyone here have any experience of their pets been cured by a homeopathic vet after a regular vet has failed to cure it, and how will this be affected by Brexit.
Just made it more acceptable for UKC
20
14
In reply to Big Ger:
Given that after Brexit animals will no longer be sentient the placebo effect of homeopathy will no longer work!!
Given that after Brexit animals will no longer be sentient the placebo effect of homeopathy will no longer work!!
46
5
In reply to Jim C:
The ethics and value of homeopathy in veterinary medicine are being challenged at the moment.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/news/college-publishes-complementary...
http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/181/8/198
If things are not going well consider seeking a referral to a RCVS recognised specialist rather than turning to homeopathy.
The ethics and value of homeopathy in veterinary medicine are being challenged at the moment.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/news/college-publishes-complementary...
http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/181/8/198
If things are not going well consider seeking a referral to a RCVS recognised specialist rather than turning to homeopathy.
20
In reply to Jim C:
Sorted my unicorn right out. Normal vet was not interested. She is back to flying gracefully around the garden after the vet rubbed some arnica gel on her wings. Pricey tho.
Sorted my unicorn right out. Normal vet was not interested. She is back to flying gracefully around the garden after the vet rubbed some arnica gel on her wings. Pricey tho.
59
2
In reply to Jim C:
Sort of but only in one case.
My mum's cat has all kinds of joint problems and is or was very stiff when he walks, she gives him glucosamine and condratin everyday and the difference is astounding.
Sering as it is crushed in his food and he is a cat I'm pretty sure it's not a placebo
Edited to add.
It was a regular vet from the Yorkshire vets chain of robbing bastards who suggested trying it.
Sort of but only in one case.
My mum's cat has all kinds of joint problems and is or was very stiff when he walks, she gives him glucosamine and condratin everyday and the difference is astounding.
Sering as it is crushed in his food and he is a cat I'm pretty sure it's not a placebo
Edited to add.
It was a regular vet from the Yorkshire vets chain of robbing bastards who suggested trying it.
Post edited at 08:49
5
1
In reply to Dax H:
Glucosamine and chondroitin aren’t homeopathic; they actually contain something other than water...
Glucosamine and chondroitin aren’t homeopathic; they actually contain something other than water...
40
In reply to Dax H:
But I doubt the glucosamine and condratin were given in homeopathic doses, more as dietary supplements so not far from 'conventional' medicine
But I doubt the glucosamine and condratin were given in homeopathic doses, more as dietary supplements so not far from 'conventional' medicine
13
In reply to Jim C:
Our cat came home with a leg dangling off after an altercation with a car, luckily the emergency vet put her straight onto 1 part Vauxhall Astra diluted in 1Bn parts saline, IV, and she was right as ninepence.
Our cat came home with a leg dangling off after an altercation with a car, luckily the emergency vet put her straight onto 1 part Vauxhall Astra diluted in 1Bn parts saline, IV, and she was right as ninepence.
35
In reply to SouthernSteve:
Agreed.
> If things are not going well consider seeking a referral to a RCVS recognised specialist rather than turning to homeopathy.
Agreed.
3
In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
You wrongly assume that homeopathic medicines (whether they work or not), only contain water.
You wrongly assume that homeopathic medicines (whether they work or not), only contain water.
3
43
In reply to Dave Perry:
One part in a million, million, trillion? Near as damn it.
https://www.livescience.com/31977-homeopathy.html
One part in a million, million, trillion? Near as damn it.
https://www.livescience.com/31977-homeopathy.html
Post edited at 09:59
9
In reply to Oceanrower:
Then neither the author or you have ever looked at homeopathic pills - which cannot possibly contain water.
Then neither the author or you have ever looked at homeopathic pills - which cannot possibly contain water.
1
27
In reply to JIMBO:
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=674678&v=1#x8681587
I think you'll find that that report was somewhat misleading.
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=674678&v=1#x8681587
I think you'll find that that report was somewhat misleading.
1
2
In reply to Dave Perry:
I don't think it really matters what they contain as the effect is still the same, ie. placebo at best. As the saying goes, there's a name for 'alternative medicine' that's been proven to work, its called 'medicine'.
> Then neither the author or you have ever looked at homeopathic pills - which cannot possibly contain water.
I don't think it really matters what they contain as the effect is still the same, ie. placebo at best. As the saying goes, there's a name for 'alternative medicine' that's been proven to work, its called 'medicine'.
14
1
In reply to yorkshireman:
Actually not all medicine work with total effectiveness for all people.
In many, many cases you are given medicines for things which cannot be cured by pills & potions . For example 'bad backs' - all you'll get from a gp is pain killers/and or, anti-inflamitories.
You'll probably be aware that if you get a cold or flu, nothing a doctor can give you will 'cure' it. It will cure itself, but many pill poppers still trot off to the doctor in the believe the medicine/doctor will cure them.
Why, with all the modern medicines do you think people still die after or during an illness???
Actually not all medicine work with total effectiveness for all people.
In many, many cases you are given medicines for things which cannot be cured by pills & potions . For example 'bad backs' - all you'll get from a gp is pain killers/and or, anti-inflamitories.
You'll probably be aware that if you get a cold or flu, nothing a doctor can give you will 'cure' it. It will cure itself, but many pill poppers still trot off to the doctor in the believe the medicine/doctor will cure them.
Why, with all the modern medicines do you think people still die after or during an illness???
3
26
In reply to Dave Perry:
No dispute there.
Again, I don't see any argument.
Nobody suggested we 'cure' a cold. But paracetamol relieves symptoms in the body which is what it sets out to do. Its efficacy can be demonstrated in thousands of clinical trials and science is agreed that it 'works' within this scope.
Because of your first point? But all you've done is indulge in 'whatabouterry'. None of the points above make homeopathy any more effective.
> Actually not all medicine work with total effectiveness for all people.
No dispute there.
> In many, many cases you are given medicines for things which cannot be cured by pills & potions . For example 'bad backs' - all you'll get from a gp is pain killers/and or, anti-inflamitories.
Again, I don't see any argument.
> You'll probably be aware that if you get a cold or flu, nothing a doctor can give you will 'cure' it. It will cure itself, but many pill poppers still trot off to the doctor in the believe the medicine/doctor will cure them.
Nobody suggested we 'cure' a cold. But paracetamol relieves symptoms in the body which is what it sets out to do. Its efficacy can be demonstrated in thousands of clinical trials and science is agreed that it 'works' within this scope.
> Why, with all the modern medicines do you think people still die after or during an illness???
Because of your first point? But all you've done is indulge in 'whatabouterry'. None of the points above make homeopathy any more effective.
44
In reply to Dave Perry:
Homeopathic pills are just sugar or lactose pills, with a drop of the homeopathic solution allowed to evaporate on them (if they even bother).
> You wrongly assume that homeopathic medicines (whether they work or not), only contain water.
Homeopathic pills are just sugar or lactose pills, with a drop of the homeopathic solution allowed to evaporate on them (if they even bother).
19
In reply to Jim C:
If homeopathy actually works then we will have to rewrite all of our current laws of physics and much of our current understanding of chemistry, biology and physics would be incorrect.
Countless studies have shown that homeopathy is no more effective than a placebo.
If homeopathy actually works then we will have to rewrite all of our current laws of physics and much of our current understanding of chemistry, biology and physics would be incorrect.
Countless studies have shown that homeopathy is no more effective than a placebo.
25
1
In reply to Jim C:
I like the Bayesian way of looking at it:
Posterior odds of an idea being right = effect of a trial on those odds x prior odds of the idea being right.
Thus, to transform a fantastically implausible idea into one for which the odds are better than evens, meaning that it is more likely right than wrong, you need an amazingly conclusive experiment. Where would that be for homeopathy?
I like the Bayesian way of looking at it:
Posterior odds of an idea being right = effect of a trial on those odds x prior odds of the idea being right.
Thus, to transform a fantastically implausible idea into one for which the odds are better than evens, meaning that it is more likely right than wrong, you need an amazingly conclusive experiment. Where would that be for homeopathy?
1
2
In reply to Alpenglow:
The advertising of homeopathy is, however, somewhat more effective, tapping as it does into the human weakness for unsupported belief. It seems that we've evolved to find it difficult to accept our ignorance, often preferring to believe any old made up crap we're told, rather than accept we actually haven't a clue yet about some fairly ordinary things.
> Countless studies have shown that homeopathy is no more effective than a placebo.
The advertising of homeopathy is, however, somewhat more effective, tapping as it does into the human weakness for unsupported belief. It seems that we've evolved to find it difficult to accept our ignorance, often preferring to believe any old made up crap we're told, rather than accept we actually haven't a clue yet about some fairly ordinary things.
9
In reply to Dave Perry:
Placebo's have well documented beneficial effects, there's a fairly good summary of Placebo/Nocebo effects on wikipedia (URL posting not working), in fact some medical insurance even covers homeopathy (Mine does), recognising in cases it can help, particularly with managing chronic diseases,
I doubt that the expectations of the owner will translate into an improvement in the pet's condition, although if Jim want's to try then all power to the effort,
Placebo's have well documented beneficial effects, there's a fairly good summary of Placebo/Nocebo effects on wikipedia (URL posting not working), in fact some medical insurance even covers homeopathy (Mine does), recognising in cases it can help, particularly with managing chronic diseases,
I doubt that the expectations of the owner will translate into an improvement in the pet's condition, although if Jim want's to try then all power to the effort,
6
2
In reply to alanblyth:
Isn't that exactly what does happen, if it's the owner who is assessing the apparent improvement?
> I doubt that the expectations of the owner will translate into an improvement in the pet's condition
Isn't that exactly what does happen, if it's the owner who is assessing the apparent improvement?
Post edited at 14:08
12
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Indeed it is.
Not only do placebos work (in the sense that they produce a 'placebo effect') on pets, they even work on inanimate objects. Just look at all the stuff, gold plated mains fuses and wotnot, that hi-fi buffs spend a fortune on and find improves the sound of their stereo so much it's worth the money.
Indeed it is.
Not only do placebos work (in the sense that they produce a 'placebo effect') on pets, they even work on inanimate objects. Just look at all the stuff, gold plated mains fuses and wotnot, that hi-fi buffs spend a fortune on and find improves the sound of their stereo so much it's worth the money.
12
4
In reply to Wsdconst:
You know nothing.
http://egotvonline.com/2012/12/13/the-last-real-unicorn/
> Obviously a lie, unicorns don't have wings.
You know nothing.
http://egotvonline.com/2012/12/13/the-last-real-unicorn/
2
In reply to Wsdconst:
FFS, she has tearfully just admitted to being a half blood Pegasus. She is begging me not to return her to Pets At Home but I dunno, I paid for a f*cking Pedigree Unicorn!
> Obviously a lie, unicorns don't have wings.
FFS, she has tearfully just admitted to being a half blood Pegasus. She is begging me not to return her to Pets At Home but I dunno, I paid for a f*cking Pedigree Unicorn!
14
In reply to snoop6060:
Always better to get a mongrel, those pure bred Unicorns are afflicted by dreadful BOAS these days - just compare them to a 19th century photograph of one and you will see what I mean!
> FFS, she has tearfully just admitted to being a half blood Pegasus. She is begging me not to return her to Pets At Home but I dunno, I paid for a f*cking Pedigree Unicorn!
Always better to get a mongrel, those pure bred Unicorns are afflicted by dreadful BOAS these days - just compare them to a 19th century photograph of one and you will see what I mean!
5
In reply to Jim C:
There was an interesting video about homeopathy treatment on YouTube youtube.com/watch?v=DvuzpeAIm24&
There was an interesting video about homeopathy treatment on YouTube youtube.com/watch?v=DvuzpeAIm24&
In reply to Dave Perry:
You are on a par with the woman on Question Time who stated that "Britain has been a light to the world for a thousand years". Your views are ignorant, delusional and have zero basis in fact, even though I know you'll argue that you don't need actual facts to prove that homeopathy works, and that there are alternative facts that "Big Pharma" doesn't want you to know etc etc etc. You might as well believe in god, Santa and the Great Spaghetti Monster.
> You wrongly assume that homeopathic medicines (whether they work or not), only contain water.
You are on a par with the woman on Question Time who stated that "Britain has been a light to the world for a thousand years". Your views are ignorant, delusional and have zero basis in fact, even though I know you'll argue that you don't need actual facts to prove that homeopathy works, and that there are alternative facts that "Big Pharma" doesn't want you to know etc etc etc. You might as well believe in god, Santa and the Great Spaghetti Monster.
14
2
In reply to Dave Perry:
Just to put you right. Because you’re wrong here quite apart from the homeopathy angle.
The pills in actual medicine are largely made of filler material that is not itself medicine. The same is true for homeopathic pills. Even the raving lunatics who believe in homeopathy don’t claim that the material their pills are made from has a medical effect, just the splash of homeopathic water they put on it.
> Then neither the author or you have ever looked at homeopathic pills - which cannot possibly contain water.
Just to put you right. Because you’re wrong here quite apart from the homeopathy angle.
The pills in actual medicine are largely made of filler material that is not itself medicine. The same is true for homeopathic pills. Even the raving lunatics who believe in homeopathy don’t claim that the material their pills are made from has a medical effect, just the splash of homeopathic water they put on it.
6
In reply to Frank the Husky:
I haven't expressed any view regarding the effectiveness or otherwise of homeopathic medicine. I have pointed out that they are not simply water - pills cannot be for example.
I also pointed out that not all conventional medicines are effective and that doctors often give us pills/medicines when it is know they can have no effect at all.
At no stage have I written that homeopathic medicine works - have I? Clearly it is you that is ignorant, delusional and have zero basis for your arguement - but then you don't need actual facts to ............etc., etc.,
I haven't expressed any view regarding the effectiveness or otherwise of homeopathic medicine. I have pointed out that they are not simply water - pills cannot be for example.
I also pointed out that not all conventional medicines are effective and that doctors often give us pills/medicines when it is know they can have no effect at all.
At no stage have I written that homeopathic medicine works - have I? Clearly it is you that is ignorant, delusional and have zero basis for your arguement - but then you don't need actual facts to ............etc., etc.,
4
13
In reply to snoop6060:
Could have been worse...
http://pbfcomics.com/comics/the-last-unicorns/
> I dunno, I paid for a f*cking Pedigree Unicorn!
Could have been worse...
http://pbfcomics.com/comics/the-last-unicorns/
3
In reply to Dave Perry: You're right, your posts do not explicitly state that homeopathy works, but they introduce fuzziness into the question, by suggesting that maybe pills have "something" in them because they're not made of water. Liquid remedies contain 100% water. Pill remedies contain 100% filler. Neither contain any active ingredient - these are scientifically proven facts.
Some medicine (there is just "medicine" not "conventional medicine" or "alternative medicine" BTW) does not work, but that's a different argument so let's not cloud this issue of what is in homeopatic remedies & whether they work.
I have indeed misrepresented what you said, but the fact is that anyone who - in the age of science and enlightenment - makes any sort of apologetic noises for the harm and quackery of homeopathy or crystal healing etc really needs to be taken to task and shut down.
Please come off your fuzzy fence and make a clear statement as to whether you think homeopathy works or not, and what you believe is actually in the liquid and pill versions - I assume you have opinion, one way or the other!
Some medicine (there is just "medicine" not "conventional medicine" or "alternative medicine" BTW) does not work, but that's a different argument so let's not cloud this issue of what is in homeopatic remedies & whether they work.
I have indeed misrepresented what you said, but the fact is that anyone who - in the age of science and enlightenment - makes any sort of apologetic noises for the harm and quackery of homeopathy or crystal healing etc really needs to be taken to task and shut down.
Please come off your fuzzy fence and make a clear statement as to whether you think homeopathy works or not, and what you believe is actually in the liquid and pill versions - I assume you have opinion, one way or the other!
17
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
Hi Dave, doctors would only prescribe medication or treatments when there is reasonable evidence to support that the benefits outweigh the risks.
If for whatever reason a drug you have been prescribed simply has absolutely no effect I would return to your doctor to get their opinion on the matter. Yes you could be the million one case, but most likely you are not. By the time drugs have got through NICE to be used in the NHS then they have been around for a while and will a substantial body of evidence behind them to support their efficacy and effectiveness.
Hi Dave, doctors would only prescribe medication or treatments when there is reasonable evidence to support that the benefits outweigh the risks.
If for whatever reason a drug you have been prescribed simply has absolutely no effect I would return to your doctor to get their opinion on the matter. Yes you could be the million one case, but most likely you are not. By the time drugs have got through NICE to be used in the NHS then they have been around for a while and will a substantial body of evidence behind them to support their efficacy and effectiveness.
7
In reply to Dave Perry:
You can do a little experiment yourself to see if homeopathy actually works.
1. Buy a tank full of petrol/diesel
2. Once you've used half of your tank, top up the rest with water until it's full
3. Run the tank to half full again
4. Repeat steps 2-3 10 times
5. See whether your car runs on homeopathic petrol/diesel. According to homeopathic theory it should be better/stronger than the original petrol/diesel
6. Get your car towed to the garage when you've wrecked your engine because your pistons have tried to compress/combust water
7. Pay a lot of money for a new car/engine
8. Get a taxi home and rethink your life and views on homeopathy
You can do a little experiment yourself to see if homeopathy actually works.
1. Buy a tank full of petrol/diesel
2. Once you've used half of your tank, top up the rest with water until it's full
3. Run the tank to half full again
4. Repeat steps 2-3 10 times
5. See whether your car runs on homeopathic petrol/diesel. According to homeopathic theory it should be better/stronger than the original petrol/diesel
6. Get your car towed to the garage when you've wrecked your engine because your pistons have tried to compress/combust water
7. Pay a lot of money for a new car/engine
8. Get a taxi home and rethink your life and views on homeopathy
26
2
3
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
No you haven’t but if you’d ever looked at the rationale behind homeopathy you’d be aware that it is a water treatment, which is just water, or water dropped into a sugar pill.
Now that we’ve cleared that up and can agree that homeopathy treatment *is* just water, do you think it works?
I’m not sure what you mean about doctors prescribing medicines known to not work. Yes there will be examples but not the ones you have mentioned. If I have a cold I don’t care that a virus is replicating in the respiratory tract, what I do care about is that my throat hurts, I have a temperature, cough, runny nose and feel crap. Paracetamol is great for that and there is a wealth of scientific evidence to back it up.
> Then neither the author or you have ever looked at homeopathic pills - which cannot possibly contain water.
No you haven’t but if you’d ever looked at the rationale behind homeopathy you’d be aware that it is a water treatment, which is just water, or water dropped into a sugar pill.
Now that we’ve cleared that up and can agree that homeopathy treatment *is* just water, do you think it works?
I’m not sure what you mean about doctors prescribing medicines known to not work. Yes there will be examples but not the ones you have mentioned. If I have a cold I don’t care that a virus is replicating in the respiratory tract, what I do care about is that my throat hurts, I have a temperature, cough, runny nose and feel crap. Paracetamol is great for that and there is a wealth of scientific evidence to back it up.
6
In reply to Jim C:
Your best bet with them is dry cure. I've heard the salt solution they use is too weak for preserving.
> Anyone here have any experience of their pets been cured by a homeopathic vet after a regular vet has failed to cure it?
Your best bet with them is dry cure. I've heard the salt solution they use is too weak for preserving.
14
5
In reply to Dave Perry:
You can get homeopathic batteries, you may already have one, you'll find the car gets more power the deader the battery gets and lower the charge.
Cheers
Toby
You can get homeopathic batteries, you may already have one, you'll find the car gets more power the deader the battery gets and lower the charge.
Cheers
Toby
9
In reply to Dave Perry:
Well that's total bollocks, isn't it?
The influenza virus is susceptible to both antibodies (which are generated by having the vaccine) and neuraminidase inhibitors suh as zanamivir.
The common cold is a rhinovirus (RNA based) and so *could* be treated by reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (mainly reserved for HIV). The medicines are not used because colds are pretty minor really - rest, warmth, fluids and paracetemol if you're feeling rough.
But both viruses could be treated. That's not to say that they *should* be.
Meanwhile homeopathy is just a tax on gullible people.
> You'll probably be aware that if you get a cold or flu, nothing a doctor can give you will 'cure' it.
Well that's total bollocks, isn't it?
The influenza virus is susceptible to both antibodies (which are generated by having the vaccine) and neuraminidase inhibitors suh as zanamivir.
The common cold is a rhinovirus (RNA based) and so *could* be treated by reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (mainly reserved for HIV). The medicines are not used because colds are pretty minor really - rest, warmth, fluids and paracetemol if you're feeling rough.
But both viruses could be treated. That's not to say that they *should* be.
Meanwhile homeopathy is just a tax on gullible people.
22
2
In reply to Dave Perry:
Fuel the Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (Gas Power Station) with homeopathic fuel then, then see if your battery gets charged!
Fuel the Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (Gas Power Station) with homeopathic fuel then, then see if your battery gets charged!
1
In reply to Deadeye:
Perhaps, but your doctor won't give you those will he/she?
And if they are totally effective for all people why do we still have influenza ??
Have read this?
http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/drugs-effective-for-the-few-prescribed-...
Perhaps, but your doctor won't give you those will he/she?
And if they are totally effective for all people why do we still have influenza ??
Have read this?
http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/drugs-effective-for-the-few-prescribed-...
1
5
In reply to Alpenglow:
Of course I don't have an electric car but either way my Van, unlike humans can't be effected by a placebo - unfortunately! So it goes to the garage.
Of course I don't have an electric car but either way my Van, unlike humans can't be effected by a placebo - unfortunately! So it goes to the garage.
1
2
In reply to alx:
So what about Statins, (for Lowering cholesterol; Asprins for vascular disease:, Anti cholnergice, for Bladder Control Cholinaerase for Alzheimer's, and anti depressants for major depression? In some of these the proven 'effectiveness' is extremely low. https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-015-0494-1
I have said NOTHING about the risks.
What I keep repeating is that not all the medicines you take are effective for all people and not all the time. In other words they are not entirely 100% effective. http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/drugs-effective-for-the-few-prescribed-...
And as you may know even if a drug hasn't been approved it can still be (in certain instances) be prescribed by a doctor.
So what about Statins, (for Lowering cholesterol; Asprins for vascular disease:, Anti cholnergice, for Bladder Control Cholinaerase for Alzheimer's, and anti depressants for major depression? In some of these the proven 'effectiveness' is extremely low. https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-015-0494-1
I have said NOTHING about the risks.
What I keep repeating is that not all the medicines you take are effective for all people and not all the time. In other words they are not entirely 100% effective. http://www.mensjournal.com/magazine/drugs-effective-for-the-few-prescribed-...
And as you may know even if a drug hasn't been approved it can still be (in certain instances) be prescribed by a doctor.
2
3
In reply to Dave Perry:
Two easy questions for you:-
Do you believe that homeopathic remedies are clinically effective?
What do you believe is in the water based and pill based treatments?
Two easy questions for you:-
Do you believe that homeopathic remedies are clinically effective?
What do you believe is in the water based and pill based treatments?
2
1
In reply to Deadeye:
So if the common cold*could* be treated and cured why is it so???,,,,....common? Or isn't the drug 100% effective?
So if the influenza virus is susceptible to both antibodies.......(blah, blah, blah etc.,) why do we still have flu?
And why do doctors prescribe antibiotics so commonly for colds and flu?
So if the common cold*could* be treated and cured why is it so???,,,,....common? Or isn't the drug 100% effective?
So if the influenza virus is susceptible to both antibodies.......(blah, blah, blah etc.,) why do we still have flu?
And why do doctors prescribe antibiotics so commonly for colds and flu?
9
In reply to Frank the Husky:
(sorry for the late reply but I've been watching Blue Planet)
The only effect of Homeopathic medicine is a placebo effect. But then so is much of the medicine we get when folk rush of to the doctor.
As for your second question, I haven't got a clue, I have no real interest in homeopathic remedies. But I still don't understand how one of their pills can only be water. Or is it sugar?
(sorry for the late reply but I've been watching Blue Planet)
The only effect of Homeopathic medicine is a placebo effect. But then so is much of the medicine we get when folk rush of to the doctor.
As for your second question, I haven't got a clue, I have no real interest in homeopathic remedies. But I still don't understand how one of their pills can only be water. Or is it sugar?
1
5
2
In reply to Dave Perry:
Cholinesterase inhibitors do work for Alzheimer’s disease, albeit not nearly as well as would be desired, and improvement is sadly not experienced by everyone. But the are better than no treatment; and the benefits experienced are hard to fully capture by the small changes on cognitive rating scales, and much appreciated by patients and relatives.
Antidepressants- the problem is that this is a complex condition, and in fact almost certainly a number of conditions which share aspects of their clinical presentation. When they work, and they do work, they can be transformative and indeed life saving. They are also unhelpful for many people, and 30-50% of people will fail to respond to any particular antidepressant. We have no way of telling who they will help now (other than the more severe the depression the more likely they will work) , and while talking therapies can certainly be useful, they are not desired or effective for everyone either.
We need advances in our understanding of the basis of depression, at a genetic and molecular level, so we can start to tailor therapies; until then we just have to do the best we can with what we’ve got.
Cholinesterase inhibitors do work for Alzheimer’s disease, albeit not nearly as well as would be desired, and improvement is sadly not experienced by everyone. But the are better than no treatment; and the benefits experienced are hard to fully capture by the small changes on cognitive rating scales, and much appreciated by patients and relatives.
Antidepressants- the problem is that this is a complex condition, and in fact almost certainly a number of conditions which share aspects of their clinical presentation. When they work, and they do work, they can be transformative and indeed life saving. They are also unhelpful for many people, and 30-50% of people will fail to respond to any particular antidepressant. We have no way of telling who they will help now (other than the more severe the depression the more likely they will work) , and while talking therapies can certainly be useful, they are not desired or effective for everyone either.
We need advances in our understanding of the basis of depression, at a genetic and molecular level, so we can start to tailor therapies; until then we just have to do the best we can with what we’ve got.
Post edited at 21:41
7
In reply to Dave Perry: As for a pill being made of water why would you pay such an obviously untrue statement any heed - unless you were being contrary? The pills only contain inactive filler, and the liquids only water - these facts have been proven in widely available research by chemists and other brainy people.
2
In reply to Frank the Husky:
Of course I don't believe homeopathy 'works' in that there is some magic ingredient.
But then it is well known and well researched that many illnesses, disorders, and such like can be cured by being given placebos - unfortunately in this country GPs are not allowed to prescribe them so we still believe that everything we throw down our neck cures us because of the cocktail of chemicals in the pill. And this is quite clear from the vitriolic replies on here.
And it is, (or so I thought until this came up) extremely well known that most of us will get better regardless of whether we take medicines prescribed by a GP, or bought in a health food shop or on E-Bay.
Of course I don't believe homeopathy 'works' in that there is some magic ingredient.
But then it is well known and well researched that many illnesses, disorders, and such like can be cured by being given placebos - unfortunately in this country GPs are not allowed to prescribe them so we still believe that everything we throw down our neck cures us because of the cocktail of chemicals in the pill. And this is quite clear from the vitriolic replies on here.
And it is, (or so I thought until this came up) extremely well known that most of us will get better regardless of whether we take medicines prescribed by a GP, or bought in a health food shop or on E-Bay.
2
3
In reply to Dave Perry:
Cold- not treatable at present. If a drug company wanted to invest 1bn + in developing an antiviral they could, but getting people to shell out for an expensive treatment for a self limiting minor inconvenience would be a toughie
Flu- this is a potentially deadly disease for which effective treatment would be highly desirable. There are antiviral treatments, they do work, but not well enough to justify widespread usage outside of specific clinical situations
Not sure what you mean by ‘susceptible to both antibodies’
Prescribing is complex, doctors know they don’t work for colds and flu, but people get bacterial complications of flu, and bacterial infections can mimic flu; you can get sued for getting it wrong and failing to prescribe, so sometimes doctors err on the defensive side when they prescribe
> So if the common cold*could* be treated and cured why is it so???,,,,....common? Or isn't the drug 100% effective?
> So if the influenza virus is susceptible to both antibodies.......(blah, blah, blah etc.,) why do we still have flu?
> And why do doctors prescribe antibiotics so commonly for colds and flu?
Cold- not treatable at present. If a drug company wanted to invest 1bn + in developing an antiviral they could, but getting people to shell out for an expensive treatment for a self limiting minor inconvenience would be a toughie
Flu- this is a potentially deadly disease for which effective treatment would be highly desirable. There are antiviral treatments, they do work, but not well enough to justify widespread usage outside of specific clinical situations
Not sure what you mean by ‘susceptible to both antibodies’
Prescribing is complex, doctors know they don’t work for colds and flu, but people get bacterial complications of flu, and bacterial infections can mimic flu; you can get sued for getting it wrong and failing to prescribe, so sometimes doctors err on the defensive side when they prescribe
1
In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
Sorry but Dead Eye disagrees with you.
I agree with you!
Nothing is 100%. Thats why lots of folk don't die of 'old-age'. Isn't it?
Oh, "Susceptible to both antibodies...." I was just quoting Dead Eye's post. Perhaps you need take it up with him.
Sorry but Dead Eye disagrees with you.
I agree with you!
Nothing is 100%. Thats why lots of folk don't die of 'old-age'. Isn't it?
Oh, "Susceptible to both antibodies...." I was just quoting Dead Eye's post. Perhaps you need take it up with him.
3
In reply to Jim C:
Good night! I'm off to take my non prescribed medication. A couple of glasses of red wine. Proven to be effective!!
Anyway whats wrong with the dog?
Good night! I'm off to take my non prescribed medication. A couple of glasses of red wine. Proven to be effective!!
Anyway whats wrong with the dog?
In reply to Dave Perry:
I’m not sure we’re really that much in agreement- you seem to be creating a straw man, that doctors claims their treatments are 100% effective when their not
Doctors are fully aware of the issues around NNTs, though whether they are as good at communicating this to their patients is another matter- in mitigation, effectively getting across complex statistical arguments is not s straightforward matter.
For prevention of catastrophic outcomes like stroke or myocardial infarction, high NNTs do not invalidate effectiveness; when 100s of thousands of people have these each year, even preventing 1 in 100 means preserving life and independance for 1000s of people every year. Widespread use of Statins and control of hypertension are also one of our best guesses as to why incidence of dementia is lower now than was predicted 15 years ago.
I’m not sure we’re really that much in agreement- you seem to be creating a straw man, that doctors claims their treatments are 100% effective when their not
Doctors are fully aware of the issues around NNTs, though whether they are as good at communicating this to their patients is another matter- in mitigation, effectively getting across complex statistical arguments is not s straightforward matter.
For prevention of catastrophic outcomes like stroke or myocardial infarction, high NNTs do not invalidate effectiveness; when 100s of thousands of people have these each year, even preventing 1 in 100 means preserving life and independance for 1000s of people every year. Widespread use of Statins and control of hypertension are also one of our best guesses as to why incidence of dementia is lower now than was predicted 15 years ago.
3
In reply to Dave Perry:
Ask anyone on ACV if they get colds.
- They think the issue is something else (a bacterial lung infection causing pneumonia being typical)
- The patient insists and bullies them into it (and yes, the doctor should resist, but they get bullied a lot and sometimes just can't be arsed to argue)
- They're f*ckwits.
In my experience it's mainly 1 and a bit of 2.
> So if the common cold*could* be treated and cured why is it so???,,,,....common? Or isn't the drug 100% effective?
The drugs work fine - but all drugs have side effects and since a cold is a minor ailment, it's not appropriate to prescribe them.Ask anyone on ACV if they get colds.
> So if the influenza virus is susceptible to both antibodies.......(blah, blah, blah etc.,) why do we still have flu?
See above. The main drug works to reduce the duration and severity of the illness. It's stockpiled to administer to risk groups during a pandemic. Issues include managing shelf life.> And why do doctors prescribe antibiotics so commonly for colds and flu?
One of three reasons:- They think the issue is something else (a bacterial lung infection causing pneumonia being typical)
- The patient insists and bullies them into it (and yes, the doctor should resist, but they get bullied a lot and sometimes just can't be arsed to argue)
- They're f*ckwits.
In my experience it's mainly 1 and a bit of 2.
3
In reply to Dave Perry:
Antibodies. The product of vaccination
> Sorry but Dead Eye disagrees with you.
> I agree with you!
> Nothing is 100%. Thats why lots of folk don't die of 'old-age'. Isn't it?
> Oh, "Susceptible to both antibodies...." I was just quoting Dead Eye's post. Perhaps you need take it up with him.
Antibodies. The product of vaccination
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
Oh, and another thing!
Antigenic shift and antigenic drift. The influenza virus is amazingly elegant in the way that it reorders its DNA both in major chages (shifts) and by being prone to minor mutation (drift). Makes choosing what vaccine to grow a tough call.
> And if they are totally effective for all people why do we still have influenza ??
Oh, and another thing!
Antigenic shift and antigenic drift. The influenza virus is amazingly elegant in the way that it reorders its DNA both in major chages (shifts) and by being prone to minor mutation (drift). Makes choosing what vaccine to grow a tough call.
2
In reply to Dr.S at work:
I'm surprised that you used the acronym BOAS. I presume that most people on here would not know what you meant.
Anyway, in the future the unicorns could come from DNA interfered with stock, like the weird Arab horse that they have produced in the states with unduly dished/streamlined appearance.
You would be bored in your job if you did not get the steady supply of brachycephalic cases, that you presumably do.
I'm surprised that you used the acronym BOAS. I presume that most people on here would not know what you meant.
Anyway, in the future the unicorns could come from DNA interfered with stock, like the weird Arab horse that they have produced in the states with unduly dished/streamlined appearance.
You would be bored in your job if you did not get the steady supply of brachycephalic cases, that you presumably do.
In reply to Alpenglow:
I only asked as I have spoken with someone who turns out to be a HV (and who makes a nice living out of it! )
> If homeopathy actually works then we will have to rewrite all of our current laws of physics and much of our current understanding of chemistry, biology and physics would be incorrect.
> Countless studies have shown that homeopathy is no more effective than a placebo.
I only asked as I have spoken with someone who turns out to be a HV (and who makes a nice living out of it! )
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
I don't have pets of any kind.
> Good night! I'm off to take my non prescribed medication. A couple of glasses of red wine. Proven to be effective!!
> Anyway whats wrong with the dog?
I don't have pets of any kind.
1
In reply to Jim C:
"No one in this world, so far as I know ... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."
> I only asked as I have spoken with someone who turns out to be a HV (and who makes a nice living out of it! )
"No one in this world, so far as I know ... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."
Post edited at 02:28
1
In reply to llechwedd:
I don't have pets, I just wondered , after meeting a HV, if anyone ( who had a pet) had, had their pet cured by a HV ?
> Your best bet with them is dry cure. I've heard the salt solution they use is too weak for preserving.
I don't have pets, I just wondered , after meeting a HV, if anyone ( who had a pet) had, had their pet cured by a HV ?
In reply to Big Ger:
I understand Prince Charles is a supporter of HM ( not that I'm underestimating his intelligence) so it's not just the 'plain people'
> "No one in this world, so far as I know ... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."
I understand Prince Charles is a supporter of HM ( not that I'm underestimating his intelligence) so it's not just the 'plain people'
In reply to Big Ger:
Should that not have read:-
' and how this can be blamed on Brexit' ( even more acceptable to UKC
Should that not have read:-
' and how this can be blamed on Brexit' ( even more acceptable to UKC
In reply to Thugitty Jugitty:
It was actually a genuine question after asking a friend what his wife did for a living , and bring told she was a HM vet .
As I don't have livestock or pets, I have no experience of vets ( of any kind)
As livestock or pets ( presumably) cannot be influenced by suggestion, then I assume that any placebo effect ( on the animals ) can be discounted, so therefore if one is cured ,after HM treatment, then is it really cured, or has the placebo effect perhaps worked on the owner?
I just wondered if any UKC pet owners had any stories of their livestock/ pets being cured that could realistically be attributed to HM.
> Well done. Troll of the year.
It was actually a genuine question after asking a friend what his wife did for a living , and bring told she was a HM vet .
As I don't have livestock or pets, I have no experience of vets ( of any kind)
As livestock or pets ( presumably) cannot be influenced by suggestion, then I assume that any placebo effect ( on the animals ) can be discounted, so therefore if one is cured ,after HM treatment, then is it really cured, or has the placebo effect perhaps worked on the owner?
I just wondered if any UKC pet owners had any stories of their livestock/ pets being cured that could realistically be attributed to HM.
2
1
In reply to veteye:
Happily they all have access to Mr.Google.
Yeah, that example did spring to mind
Well, I do have an interest in Difficult airways, but BOAS cases are so common that they are routine rather than especially exciting.
> I'm surprised that you used the acronym BOAS. I presume that most people on here would not know what you meant.
Happily they all have access to Mr.Google.
> Anyway, in the future the unicorns could come from DNA interfered with stock, like the weird Arab horse that they have produced in the states with unduly dished/streamlined appearance.
Yeah, that example did spring to mind
> You would be bored in your job if you did not get the steady supply of brachycephalic cases, that you presumably do.
Well, I do have an interest in Difficult airways, but BOAS cases are so common that they are routine rather than especially exciting.
1
In reply to Jim C:
Does anyone else keep reading this thread title as homeopathic vests?
Not sure what that would be? A string vest with more hole than string or the emperor's new clothes?
Does anyone else keep reading this thread title as homeopathic vests?
Not sure what that would be? A string vest with more hole than string or the emperor's new clothes?
In reply to DaveHK:
You drink the water you washed your vest in - impossibly diluted of course - and then it keeps you warmer than wearing a duvet. It works by remembering the 'energy' from your vest and harnessing your body's natural ability to do incredible things that science will deny is even possible. I'm living proof that it works, because I stayed warm in Thailand one time even with no vest on at all.
You drink the water you washed your vest in - impossibly diluted of course - and then it keeps you warmer than wearing a duvet. It works by remembering the 'energy' from your vest and harnessing your body's natural ability to do incredible things that science will deny is even possible. I'm living proof that it works, because I stayed warm in Thailand one time even with no vest on at all.
15
In reply to Jim C:
When measuring the efficacy of quite a few medical interventions, it's always worth remembering the well-known adage:
'Medicine is what we do to amuse our patients while nature takes its' course...'
When measuring the efficacy of quite a few medical interventions, it's always worth remembering the well-known adage:
'Medicine is what we do to amuse our patients while nature takes its' course...'
Post edited at 09:09
1
In reply to Alpenglow:
That's obviously not going to work, you missed the stage where you spend quarter of an hour per fill smacking your fuel tank with a scientifically shaped leather paddle to beat the memory of petrol out of the petrol and into the water
jk
> 1. Buy a tank full of petrol/diesel
> 2. Once you've used half of your tank, top up the rest with water until it's full
...> 2. Once you've used half of your tank, top up the rest with water until it's full
> 7. Pay a lot of money for a new car/engine
> 8. Get a taxi home and rethink your life and views on homeopathy
> 8. Get a taxi home and rethink your life and views on homeopathy
That's obviously not going to work, you missed the stage where you spend quarter of an hour per fill smacking your fuel tank with a scientifically shaped leather paddle to beat the memory of petrol out of the petrol and into the water
jk
7
In reply to Jim C:
Not at all, animals are very sensitive and reactive to human emotion which itself is easily influenced by charlatans exchanging hope for money. It's not at all surprising that someone told their pet will get better (or worse) following an 'intervention' (even a fake one) will observe changes in the animal's condition.
Obviously not. Homeopathy doesn't work, at least not in a pharmacological sense. It's pretty good at transferring wealth from the credulous to homeopaths and those who train them. I suspect it's probably also a reasonably cost effective intervention for anxiety and loneliness in some people.
jk
> As livestock or pets ( presumably) cannot be influenced by suggestion, then I assume that any placebo effect ( on the animals ) can be discounted, so therefore if one is cured ,after HM treatment, then is it really cured, or has the placebo effect perhaps worked on the owner?
Not at all, animals are very sensitive and reactive to human emotion which itself is easily influenced by charlatans exchanging hope for money. It's not at all surprising that someone told their pet will get better (or worse) following an 'intervention' (even a fake one) will observe changes in the animal's condition.
> I just wondered if any UKC pet owners had any stories of their livestock/ pets being cured that could realistically be attributed to HM.
Obviously not. Homeopathy doesn't work, at least not in a pharmacological sense. It's pretty good at transferring wealth from the credulous to homeopaths and those who train them. I suspect it's probably also a reasonably cost effective intervention for anxiety and loneliness in some people.
jk
4
In reply to Jim C:
The 'caregiver placebo' effect is well recognised in veterinary medicine and up to 70% of patients have improved on placebos in veterinary literature.
> As livestock or pets ( presumably) cannot be influenced by suggestion, then I assume that any placebo effect ( on the animals ) can be discounted, so therefore if one is cured ,after HM treatment, then is it really cured, or has the placebo effect perhaps worked on the owner?
The 'caregiver placebo' effect is well recognised in veterinary medicine and up to 70% of patients have improved on placebos in veterinary literature.
4
In reply to Jim C:
My in-laws' doctor in Germany prescribes homeopathy. She does it for the type of person that wants antibiotics for a cold i.e. it's her way of fobbing them off
My in-laws' doctor in Germany prescribes homeopathy. She does it for the type of person that wants antibiotics for a cold i.e. it's her way of fobbing them off
4
In reply to Toerag:
I'm unsure whether I find that brilliant or horrible.
> My in-laws' doctor in Germany prescribes homeopathy. She does it for the type of person that wants antibiotics for a cold i.e. it's her way of fobbing them off
I'm unsure whether I find that brilliant or horrible.
In reply to Thugitty Jugitty:
Sorry, coming into this thread a bit late. Someone is trying to treat their troll with homeopathy?
Madness, total madness.
> Well done. Troll of the year.
Sorry, coming into this thread a bit late. Someone is trying to treat their troll with homeopathy?
Madness, total madness.
3
In reply to SenzuBean:
Well, it was not so long ago that a placebo was given frequently and intentionally by ‘conventional’ medical praticioners. I went to a fascinating lecture last year in which the speaker made the point that having identified the placebo effect, and ways to maximise its magnitude, it was rather surprising that the western medical community had stopped utilising it.
> I'm unsure whether I find that brilliant or horrible.
Well, it was not so long ago that a placebo was given frequently and intentionally by ‘conventional’ medical praticioners. I went to a fascinating lecture last year in which the speaker made the point that having identified the placebo effect, and ways to maximise its magnitude, it was rather surprising that the western medical community had stopped utilising it.
1
1
In reply to Dr.S at work:
I think there's a view that maybe the doctor - patient relationship should not be based on deception.
I think there's a view that maybe the doctor - patient relationship should not be based on deception.
2
In reply to Jim C:
17 years ago our dog kept getting horrid skin infections - mange? I can't remember really. Our local vet could not get rid of it. Mrs P had heard and later spoke to a local horse race trainer/breeder who took many of his expensive animals to this qualified vet (we lived there). http://tomfarringtonvet.ie/ I thought it a complete waste of effort as I'm not convinced it would work and we had little money spare. Using homeopathic medicine he treated our dog and she never had another instance of it.
I can't explain it. But then there are many things science and scientists cannot explain. And there are many things science has claimed over the years which has later been proved incorrect by later scientists. Scientists once claimed the atom couldn't be split; that heavier than air machines can't work and that bumble bees can't fly all coming up with their proof.
But the absence of evidence is not evidence that it cannot happen or work..
17 years ago our dog kept getting horrid skin infections - mange? I can't remember really. Our local vet could not get rid of it. Mrs P had heard and later spoke to a local horse race trainer/breeder who took many of his expensive animals to this qualified vet (we lived there). http://tomfarringtonvet.ie/ I thought it a complete waste of effort as I'm not convinced it would work and we had little money spare. Using homeopathic medicine he treated our dog and she never had another instance of it.
I can't explain it. But then there are many things science and scientists cannot explain. And there are many things science has claimed over the years which has later been proved incorrect by later scientists. Scientists once claimed the atom couldn't be split; that heavier than air machines can't work and that bumble bees can't fly all coming up with their proof.
But the absence of evidence is not evidence that it cannot happen or work..
1
7
In reply to Dave Perry:
Obviously, the less evidence you have for a therapy, the stronger it's effectiveness. Stands to reason....
The difference with all your examples is that there was a definite endpoint (split atom, flight) which scientists investigated and found logical theories to explain.
Homeopathy starts with an illogical and inexplicable theory and claims it achieves an endpoint, even though there is no proof when investigated that it ever actually achieves anything.
> But the absence of evidence is not evidence that it cannot happen or work..
Obviously, the less evidence you have for a therapy, the stronger it's effectiveness. Stands to reason....
The difference with all your examples is that there was a definite endpoint (split atom, flight) which scientists investigated and found logical theories to explain.
Homeopathy starts with an illogical and inexplicable theory and claims it achieves an endpoint, even though there is no proof when investigated that it ever actually achieves anything.
Post edited at 10:05
6
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
>Scientists once claimed ... that bumble bees can't fly all coming up with their proof.
Isn't that a complete fallacy? Iirc someone once calculated that if you model the flight characteristics of a bee as you would an aeroplane - i.e. treat the wings as static aerofoils - then it would not be able to fly. They were well aware that the flapping of a bee's wings has a role in its ability to fly.
>Scientists once claimed ... that bumble bees can't fly all coming up with their proof.
Isn't that a complete fallacy? Iirc someone once calculated that if you model the flight characteristics of a bee as you would an aeroplane - i.e. treat the wings as static aerofoils - then it would not be able to fly. They were well aware that the flapping of a bee's wings has a role in its ability to fly.
5
1
In reply to Jim C:
Yes, he died
> Anyone here have any experience of their pets been cured by a homeopathic vet after a regular vet has failed to cure it?
Yes, he died
1
In reply to Jim C:
Science does not know all the answers does not mean you can make up whatever you like...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL8ZdS6Gyb0tEG0gfNuD8Pynm1_8fk35C8&v=D...
Wonderful and spot on.
Toby
Science does not know all the answers does not mean you can make up whatever you like...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL8ZdS6Gyb0tEG0gfNuD8Pynm1_8fk35C8&v=D...
Wonderful and spot on.
Toby
6
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
No creditable scientist has ever claimed that bumble bees can't fly; their abilities are perfectly in line with scientific theory.
Every time homeopathic remedies have been tested in empirical trials they have been proven to be no more effective than placebo.
In addition, there is no theory that lends credence to the mechanism of Homeopathy; there is no reason to believe it has any validity.
You're right, science cannot explain everything. However, it both attempts to define the boundaries of its ignorance and celebrates its ability to be proven wrong. One of the easiest way to spot pseudoscience is to look how open it is to criticism. That process where we proved previous generations wrong and expanded our domain of knowledge has also been discrediting homeopathy for the last 200 years.
If, by some miracle, homeopathy was proved to work in the future (by which I mean, have an effect greater than placebo) I would spin on a dime and embrace it wholeheartedly. However, I would wonder why it has repeatedly been proven to be ineffective up to now. Maybe we weren't hitting it with a paddle the right number of times.
No creditable scientist has ever claimed that bumble bees can't fly; their abilities are perfectly in line with scientific theory.
Every time homeopathic remedies have been tested in empirical trials they have been proven to be no more effective than placebo.
In addition, there is no theory that lends credence to the mechanism of Homeopathy; there is no reason to believe it has any validity.
You're right, science cannot explain everything. However, it both attempts to define the boundaries of its ignorance and celebrates its ability to be proven wrong. One of the easiest way to spot pseudoscience is to look how open it is to criticism. That process where we proved previous generations wrong and expanded our domain of knowledge has also been discrediting homeopathy for the last 200 years.
If, by some miracle, homeopathy was proved to work in the future (by which I mean, have an effect greater than placebo) I would spin on a dime and embrace it wholeheartedly. However, I would wonder why it has repeatedly been proven to be ineffective up to now. Maybe we weren't hitting it with a paddle the right number of times.
10
1
In reply to Jim C:
17 years ago our dog kept getting horrid skin infections - mange? I can't remember really. Our local vet could not get rid of it. Mrs P had heard and later spoke to a local horse race trainer/breeder who took many of his expensive animals to this qualified vet (we lived there). http://tomfarringtonvet.ie/ I thought it a complete waste of effort as I'm not convinced it would work and we had little money spare. Using homeopathic medicine he treated our dog and she never had another instance of it.
I can't explain it
There we are, I've limited my reply to answering Jim C's question.
17 years ago our dog kept getting horrid skin infections - mange? I can't remember really. Our local vet could not get rid of it. Mrs P had heard and later spoke to a local horse race trainer/breeder who took many of his expensive animals to this qualified vet (we lived there). http://tomfarringtonvet.ie/ I thought it a complete waste of effort as I'm not convinced it would work and we had little money spare. Using homeopathic medicine he treated our dog and she never had another instance of it.
I can't explain it
There we are, I've limited my reply to answering Jim C's question.
In reply to Toby_W:
Dara became a comedian when he gave up astronomy. I haven't made anything up. I've simply replied to Jim C;'s question. Is that wrong?
Dara became a comedian when he gave up astronomy. I haven't made anything up. I've simply replied to Jim C;'s question. Is that wrong?
In reply to BFG:
"Every time homeopathic remedies have been tested in empirical trials they have been proven to be no more effective than placebo"
So are you saying placebos don't work either??.
"Every time homeopathic remedies have been tested in empirical trials they have been proven to be no more effective than placebo"
So are you saying placebos don't work either??.
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
No I'm saying homeopathy doesn't work. I'm setting the bar for what constitutes 'work' at the level of placebo. The difference is important.
No I'm saying homeopathy doesn't work. I'm setting the bar for what constitutes 'work' at the level of placebo. The difference is important.
4
In reply to Dave Perry:
Probably just needed a good wash
> 17 years ago our dog kept getting horrid skin infections - mange? I can't remember really. Our local vet could not get rid of it. Mrs P had heard and later spoke to a local horse race trainer/breeder who took many of his expensive animals to this qualified vet (we lived there). http://tomfarringtonvet.ie/ I thought it a complete waste of effort as I'm not convinced it would work and we had little money spare. Using homeopathic medicine he treated our dog and she never had another instance of it.
Probably just needed a good wash
5
In reply to Dave Perry:
Yes because you’re propagating utter nonsense and encouraging the exploitation of people. You have no idea why your animal got better but one thing we can rule out is homeopathy.
From that vets site:
Following on from the inspiring story about complete recovery from lung cancer. I once had a cat called Miss Raccoon who got gas gangrene in her hind leg following an attack by a wild critter and almost died. She had great care from a homeopathic vet – thanks Tom Farrington and survived.
She came home with a back leg devoid of fur and flesh. Just bone. I wish I had a photo to show nut this was back in the day, before we photo-ed everything!
We watched in astonishment as over a period of two or three legs she grew a new leg! As if there was a blueprint there already and her body knew just what to do.
I see know reason why we wouldn’t be able to do the same if we interfered less in the process and supported it with inside out healing rather than managing it with outside in interventions…
Should he be taking her money? People die because of this sort of stuff.
Cheers
Toby
Yes because you’re propagating utter nonsense and encouraging the exploitation of people. You have no idea why your animal got better but one thing we can rule out is homeopathy.
From that vets site:
Following on from the inspiring story about complete recovery from lung cancer. I once had a cat called Miss Raccoon who got gas gangrene in her hind leg following an attack by a wild critter and almost died. She had great care from a homeopathic vet – thanks Tom Farrington and survived.
She came home with a back leg devoid of fur and flesh. Just bone. I wish I had a photo to show nut this was back in the day, before we photo-ed everything!
We watched in astonishment as over a period of two or three legs she grew a new leg! As if there was a blueprint there already and her body knew just what to do.
I see know reason why we wouldn’t be able to do the same if we interfered less in the process and supported it with inside out healing rather than managing it with outside in interventions…
Should he be taking her money? People die because of this sort of stuff.
Cheers
Toby
1
In reply to john arran:
How dare you question my dogs personal hygiene! Scoundrel! You have no proof. (Nor does the dog). She's still with us at 17 years old and so far as I can tell neither she (nor the house) smells. But probably one of the most amusing answers!!
How dare you question my dogs personal hygiene! Scoundrel! You have no proof. (Nor does the dog). She's still with us at 17 years old and so far as I can tell neither she (nor the house) smells. But probably one of the most amusing answers!!
In reply to Toby_W:
Toby, I haven't propagated any utter nonsense regarding homeopathy. and I have not once suggested going to a homeopath has any validity at all. Poor old Jim C simply asked a genuine question I assume, and I gave an honest example.
As for your quote from the website. Well all I'd normally say is what a load of rubbish! But then I've no idea whether she is simply inaccurately describing what happened or is totally mistaken. Unless of course her cat was in actual fact a lizard, frog, or crab in disguise. Like I've said before I don't see quite how homeopathy can work.
However it is clear from the number of dislikes Jim C got from simply asking a question that there's a lot of people who object to certain questions being asked - and equally don't like him being provided by an honestly given answer.
Toby, I haven't propagated any utter nonsense regarding homeopathy. and I have not once suggested going to a homeopath has any validity at all. Poor old Jim C simply asked a genuine question I assume, and I gave an honest example.
As for your quote from the website. Well all I'd normally say is what a load of rubbish! But then I've no idea whether she is simply inaccurately describing what happened or is totally mistaken. Unless of course her cat was in actual fact a lizard, frog, or crab in disguise. Like I've said before I don't see quite how homeopathy can work.
However it is clear from the number of dislikes Jim C got from simply asking a question that there's a lot of people who object to certain questions being asked - and equally don't like him being provided by an honestly given answer.
Post edited at 16:17
In reply to Dave Perry:
Try not to mistake copious evidence of absence-of-effect with absence of evidence.
Then try not to use one uncontrolled study with one sample to explain anything.
> But the absence of evidence is not evidence that it cannot happen or work..
Try not to mistake copious evidence of absence-of-effect with absence of evidence.
Then try not to use one uncontrolled study with one sample to explain anything.
Post edited at 18:00
2
In reply to wintertree:
But there appears (for some) some effect even though there is an absence of evidence.
I'm not aware I've tried to use one uncontrolled or controlled study to explain anything.
All I've done is explain my one - and only example. I didn't say homeopathy works. I simply said our dog didn't get any further occurrence. Although one would agree that might be splitting hairs.
But there appears (for some) some effect even though there is an absence of evidence.
I'm not aware I've tried to use one uncontrolled or controlled study to explain anything.
All I've done is explain my one - and only example. I didn't say homeopathy works. I simply said our dog didn't get any further occurrence. Although one would agree that might be splitting hairs.
In reply to AdrianC:
The placebo effect works even if you tell patients that you are giving them a placebo
> I think there's a view that maybe the doctor - patient relationship should not be based on deception.
The placebo effect works even if you tell patients that you are giving them a placebo
2
In reply to Dave Perry:
Juvenile demodicosis will self-cure in some cases - there you are – a possible scientific explanation!
> 17 years ago our dog kept getting horrid skin infections - mange? Using homeopathic medicine he treated our dog and she never had another instance of it.
Juvenile demodicosis will self-cure in some cases - there you are – a possible scientific explanation!
Post edited at 20:54
3
In reply to SouthernSteve:
Beat me to it. Seems a pretty logical explanation.
Around 90% of cases resolve without treatment.
(or alternatively, around 90% of cases can be cured by Homeopathy......)
Beat me to it. Seems a pretty logical explanation.
Around 90% of cases resolve without treatment.
(or alternatively, around 90% of cases can be cured by Homeopathy......)
3
In reply to SouthernSteve:
Another entirely plausible explanation, at least by the standards of demonstrated homeopathy benefit, is that his pet was cured by a great dyslexic Dog in the sky.
Another entirely plausible explanation, at least by the standards of demonstrated homeopathy benefit, is that his pet was cured by a great dyslexic Dog in the sky.
1
In reply to SouthernSteve:
Thank you very much Steve.
And apparantly just about the only explanation which didn't involve a vitriolic reply.
Although I was only ever answering the Op's original question.
Thank you very much Steve.
And apparantly just about the only explanation which didn't involve a vitriolic reply.
Although I was only ever answering the Op's original question.
Post edited at 21:10
In reply to Ron Rees Davies:
Thank you too for a polite explanation, rather than an attack on things I didn't say.
Thank you too for a polite explanation, rather than an attack on things I didn't say.
In reply to john arran:
Have you read the OP's original question? Obviously not. He wasn't asking for explanation.
Have you read the OP's original question? Obviously not. He wasn't asking for explanation.
In reply to Dave Perry:
You may have noticed that my reply wasn't to the OP. But thank you for your concern.
You may have noticed that my reply wasn't to the OP. But thank you for your concern.
In reply to john arran:
As I've made it clear in every post, that I don't believe in Homeopathy perhaps you'd like to explain the following:
0
http://facultyofhomeopathy.org/randomised-controlled-trials/ ?
As I've made it clear in every post, that I don't believe in Homeopathy perhaps you'd like to explain the following:
0
http://facultyofhomeopathy.org/randomised-controlled-trials/ ?
In reply to Dave Perry:
That's easy to explain. How many homeopathy trials do you think may have been carried out by industry groups looking for affirmation, whose results failed to show any benefit, and which therefore were never published?
That's easy to explain. How many homeopathy trials do you think may have been carried out by industry groups looking for affirmation, whose results failed to show any benefit, and which therefore were never published?
2
In reply to john arran:
Although to be fair there are a number of vocal anti-homepaths we conduct trials - one wonders if they could possibly suppress results as well?
Although to be fair there are a number of vocal anti-homepaths we conduct trials - one wonders if they could possibly suppress results as well?
In reply to john arran:
I assume thats also possible by drug companies and the NHS, mainstream medicine etc., etc., or whoever else conducts trials.?
BTW, I'm not supporting Homeopathy, I'm just curious.
I assume thats also possible by drug companies and the NHS, mainstream medicine etc., etc., or whoever else conducts trials.?
BTW, I'm not supporting Homeopathy, I'm just curious.
In reply to Jim C:
I have had a new homeopathic dispenser fitted in my house.
a really nice brushed steel and it even has a hot and cold version available. my dispenser really does work,it cures my thirst .
I have had a new homeopathic dispenser fitted in my house.
a really nice brushed steel and it even has a hot and cold version available. my dispenser really does work,it cures my thirst .
In reply to Dr.S at work:
It does, but considerably less.
Anyway, how would that conversation go? What would you give them?
Is it not likely to cause other unintended consequences, like creating further doctor (or vet) dependency, reinforcing health seeking behaviour for minor, self limiting conditions, and stretching already stressed resources?
Is it not better to work towards the slightly more equal and mature aim, of slowly educating people that a script or medication is not always needed or best management?
Then if the individual still wanted a placebo, you could have one clearly labelled as such for sale in pharmacies, this wouldn’t be far removed from a lot that is already, like cough syrups, minus the clear labelling.
> The placebo effect works even if you tell patients that you are giving them a placebo
It does, but considerably less.
Anyway, how would that conversation go? What would you give them?
Is it not likely to cause other unintended consequences, like creating further doctor (or vet) dependency, reinforcing health seeking behaviour for minor, self limiting conditions, and stretching already stressed resources?
Is it not better to work towards the slightly more equal and mature aim, of slowly educating people that a script or medication is not always needed or best management?
Then if the individual still wanted a placebo, you could have one clearly labelled as such for sale in pharmacies, this wouldn’t be far removed from a lot that is already, like cough syrups, minus the clear labelling.
In reply to Dave Perry:
It's very much also a problem with conventional pharma too. If you haven't read Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science then I'd highly recommend you do. It's an eye opener as to how people's trust in science can be abused by unscrupulous marketing. It's also led to an ongoing AllTrials campaign http://www.alltrials.net/ trying to achieve exactly the kind of full disclosure we're talking about.
> I assume thats also possible by drug companies and the NHS, mainstream medicine etc., etc., or whoever else conducts trials.?
It's very much also a problem with conventional pharma too. If you haven't read Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science then I'd highly recommend you do. It's an eye opener as to how people's trust in science can be abused by unscrupulous marketing. It's also led to an ongoing AllTrials campaign http://www.alltrials.net/ trying to achieve exactly the kind of full disclosure we're talking about.
In reply to damowilk:
I’m not sure - I think there is a lot to mental manipulation of patients, good bedside manner if you like. Is it wrong? It can feel so, does it work? Yes - so is what works right?
I’m not sure - I think there is a lot to mental manipulation of patients, good bedside manner if you like. Is it wrong? It can feel so, does it work? Yes - so is what works right?
In reply to Dave Perry:
Just had another quick look at that link. It seems to be an example of exactly the kind of misrepresentation I was referring to, as it states: "Statistically non-significant trials are described as ‘non-conclusive’"
If the objective of the study is to find out whether an intervention is effective, then anything that doesn't show it to be effective to any significant level is not a 'non-conclusive' outcome, it's a 'negative' outcome. I.e. it shows no observable support for the hypothesis, a.k.a. the homeopathy treatment is no more effective than a placebo.
With this in mind, the paper actually should be concluding that in a clear majority of studies, even ignoring the fact that many will never have been reported if they don't confirm the desired narrative, homeopathy has clearly been shown to be bollox.
> As I've made it clear in every post, that I don't believe in Homeopathy perhaps you'd like to explain the following:
Just had another quick look at that link. It seems to be an example of exactly the kind of misrepresentation I was referring to, as it states: "Statistically non-significant trials are described as ‘non-conclusive’"
If the objective of the study is to find out whether an intervention is effective, then anything that doesn't show it to be effective to any significant level is not a 'non-conclusive' outcome, it's a 'negative' outcome. I.e. it shows no observable support for the hypothesis, a.k.a. the homeopathy treatment is no more effective than a placebo.
With this in mind, the paper actually should be concluding that in a clear majority of studies, even ignoring the fact that many will never have been reported if they don't confirm the desired narrative, homeopathy has clearly been shown to be bollox.
3
In reply to Dr.S at work:
I think that there's absolutely nothing wrong with good bedside manners -or manipulation of patients - if it works ........... why not?
Isn't that the basis by which in many societies, the local 'medicine' man/woman worked?
I think that in our society we generally place ourselves, and our trust in doctors, solicitors, teachers and so on. So when we go to the doctor we trust that he is going to cure us. We are generally so confident in our trust of modern medicine that if, the doctor told someone he was giving them a placebo, I guess it would work because the patient would trust the doctor would not be doing anything to harm them.
I believe in some countries doctors are actually allowed to prescribe placebos?
I think that there's absolutely nothing wrong with good bedside manners -or manipulation of patients - if it works ........... why not?
Isn't that the basis by which in many societies, the local 'medicine' man/woman worked?
I think that in our society we generally place ourselves, and our trust in doctors, solicitors, teachers and so on. So when we go to the doctor we trust that he is going to cure us. We are generally so confident in our trust of modern medicine that if, the doctor told someone he was giving them a placebo, I guess it would work because the patient would trust the doctor would not be doing anything to harm them.
I believe in some countries doctors are actually allowed to prescribe placebos?
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
You have an un-reserved apology from me if I was vitriolic or rude. I was aiming for humourous and a bit cutting. I think the whole scientific community is tired.
Cheers
Toby
You have an un-reserved apology from me if I was vitriolic or rude. I was aiming for humourous and a bit cutting. I think the whole scientific community is tired.
Cheers
Toby
In reply to Toby_W:
Thats OK Toby. I wasn't particularly aiming my remarks at any one person. Its difficult sometimes to tell just from the printed word what the intention was sometimes !!
Thats OK Toby. I wasn't particularly aiming my remarks at any one person. Its difficult sometimes to tell just from the printed word what the intention was sometimes !!
In reply to Jim C:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/lostinshowbiz/2017/nov/30/have-a-h...
See, someone out there is on the ball!
> “In most countries outside of the US, homeopathics are the first line of defence against ailments.”
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/lostinshowbiz/2017/nov/30/have-a-h...
See, someone out there is on the ball!
Post edited at 04:00
1
In reply to Jim C:
There are plenty of people who *believe* their pet has been cured by a homeopathic remedy, but they are mistaken.
In order to be cured, the pet must have a specific condition (e.g. cancer) which includes a diagnosis from a vet. Then, all actual medicine must be removed and the only thing given is the water (i.e. homeopathic remedy) The condition should then have disappeared within a reasonable timeframe and the all clear given by a vet.
I know a couple who believe their horse was cured by homeopathy, but the condition the horse had was fairly vague, the conditions for the cure were murky and they "can't remember" if the horse had actual medicine at the same time.
These "cures" rely on the perception of the owner about a condition they don't necessarily understand. Pet homeopathy is simply a cure for the worry the human suffers. I recently had a half kilo tumour removed from my furry flank, and when my owner offered homeopathy to get rid of it, I bit his fat arse because even dogs know homeopathy is bollocks. Drugs and surgery please. And then more drugs.
There are plenty of people who *believe* their pet has been cured by a homeopathic remedy, but they are mistaken.
In order to be cured, the pet must have a specific condition (e.g. cancer) which includes a diagnosis from a vet. Then, all actual medicine must be removed and the only thing given is the water (i.e. homeopathic remedy) The condition should then have disappeared within a reasonable timeframe and the all clear given by a vet.
I know a couple who believe their horse was cured by homeopathy, but the condition the horse had was fairly vague, the conditions for the cure were murky and they "can't remember" if the horse had actual medicine at the same time.
These "cures" rely on the perception of the owner about a condition they don't necessarily understand. Pet homeopathy is simply a cure for the worry the human suffers. I recently had a half kilo tumour removed from my furry flank, and when my owner offered homeopathy to get rid of it, I bit his fat arse because even dogs know homeopathy is bollocks. Drugs and surgery please. And then more drugs.
Post edited at 09:40
4
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...