HELP, studies!!!

[Shannon Nelson]

Argh, I am trying to match wits with someone who wants STUDIES
"proving that homeopathy works." (Don't worry, this is just in fun,
and I'll play until it gets boring...)

He's asking if I can show him any studies showing that this or that
certain remedy is found in this study to cure that certain disease.
I've given the "individualization" rap, but maybe there's some study
that would come close? Anything about Belladonna and meningitis, for
instance? Ah, arnica and post-op recovery might do it, if anyone
knows a link? He wants a remedy he could buy locally, for some
disease that he might be able to contract here in the US. (I don't
think he's planning to do it...)

I don't follow studies, because I have limited time and even more
limited patience, but maybe someone else...?

Shannon

[John Harvey]

It seems to me that it's a trap, trying to find a specific in homoeopathy; the medicine, as you know, is specific to the entire state into which the individual has fallen. Maybe you could more usefully direct his attention to outcome studies, which look at the total health outcome rather than focus on removal of a particular ailment. (If you're looking at a genuine acute illness, they amount to the same thing; but the long-term consequences of repeated homoeopathic treatment are markedly different from the long-term consequences of repeated conventional treatment.)

Cheers --

John

[Shannon Nelson]

His total understanding of homeopathy appears to have come from the likes of James Randi, whom he views with utmost respect. Sigh. I think his questions are sincere -- *not* necessarily meaning that he actually wants to know, but meaning that I don't think he's being deliberately obtuse or misleading, just kind of clueless. And he's into studies. : x

But, I don't know where I'd look for outcome studies either.
Oh well, a few minutes here and there, and maybe I'll turn something up...

Thanks,
Shannon

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

Tell him to read the book "THe emerging science of homeopathy" by Bellavite and Signori, from cover to cover.
Pretty hard core science!!!
Joe.
 
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit my new website www.naturamedica.webs.com

[Shannon Nelson]

Man, that'll serve him right!!!!!

He's complaining about technical terminology like... well, not very technical.
I think the contest will be winding to a close soon, with him not really the wiser.
The only thing that will convince him is studies--but he's not able to even make it through the abstracts.
Oh well!

(But FWIW, how common is it to find entire studies available free on-line? That might be asking a bit too much?)

I'll pass along the book -- the thrown gauntlet!! lol

Thanks,
Shannon
Tell him to read the book "THe emerging science of homeopathy" by Bellavite and Signori, from cover to cover.
Pretty hard core science!!!
Joe.
 
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit my new website www.naturamedica.webs.com

[John Harvey]

Hi, Shannon --

Yes, the Bellavite & Signorini book is full of great research.
Of published studies of homoeopathy in general, there's a surprising number available on the web in full text. A beautiful site I came across just recently has a number of links, often to full text, not only organised by broad topic and research method but also accompanied by the most pertinent findings pulled out in a single sentence, including a probability score:

.

You'll get a good idea of the kinds of thing the studies evidence, just by reading through the underlined headings, which range from high-dilution research to triple-blind studies and cohort/observational studies (of which at least the studies under "1. public health" and "4. complementary & alternative medicine" appear to be outcome studies, which are most pertinent to a holistic assessment) to evidence for specific disease conditions and homoeopathy improving quality of life. As well, there are several categories of comparison between homoeopathy and allopathy. It's a pretty rich resource!

Let's always remember, though, that when people ostensibly criticise homoeopathy, they're almost always actually criticising ultrapotencies, not homoeopathy. The same site links to many studies demonstrating beyond much doubt the ability to discern an ultrapotentised medicine from water, from succussed diluted water, and from other ultrapotencies. Once somebody is clear on what he's criticising, you can suggest he look to those if he has any interest in science rather than common sense.
There's an equally broad range of papers whose abstracts and sometimes full text are available, at

.

It is unfortunately in a complete jumble. But there's gold amongst it.
The Faculty of Homeopathy has references (but no links) to systematic reviews of random controlled trials, at

,

and to basic-science studies (i.e. on the nature of potency), at

http://www.facultyofhomeopathy.org/rese ... earch.html.
The Homeopathy Plus! site has lots and lots of references (and almost no links) both to clinical studies and to in vitro studies (i.e. studies of potency) put together by Robert Medhurst, at

.

It may be exactly the same list that Medhurst has up at hpathy.com , at

.
With regard to the real question at issue, which is the ability of water somehow to behave medicinally as though its former solute were still present, though many of the abovementioned papers illuminate the matter very brightly indeed, one site stands out as pulling the research together, and that's Professor Martin Chaplin's water site,

, which opens up a whole world of amazements via its table of contents.
From memory, the British Homeopathic Association also has a fair collection of references, possibly with links, to research, but it hasn't turned up in a scroll through my bookmarks, and perhaps this will give him something to chew over.
If the topic ever becomes relevant of the supposedly stronger evidence base for allopathic prescriptions than for homoeopathic medicine, you might like to gently suggest that there's food for thought in an editorial by Fiona Godlee, editor, and Elizabeth Loder, associate editor, in the British Medical Journal, discussing findings of widespread research fraud, at

, from which I'll quote here:

"Like us, you have probably grown accustomed to the steady stream of revelations about incomplete or suppressed information from clinical trials of drugs and medical devices. If so, this issue of the BMJ features a pair of papers that will dismay but not surprise you. Researchers for an official German drug assessment body charged with synthesising evidence on the antidepressant reboxetine encountered serious obstacles when they tried to get unpublished clinical trial information from the drug company that held the data, an experience from which they draw several lessons (doi:10.1136/bmj.c4942).
"Once they were able to integrate the astounding 74% of patient data that had previously been unpublished, their conclusion was damning: reboxetine is “overall an ineffective and potentially harmful antidepressant” (doi:10.1136/bmj.c4737). This conclusion starkly contradicts the findings of other recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses published by reputable journals."

These sentiments reflect those of Marcia Angell, editor of the New England Journal of Medicine --

"it is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine"
-- as well as those of Richard Smith, editor of the BMJ from 1991 to 2004 --
"We are all more interested in the conflicts of interests of others than we are in our own, and editors are no exception. Having preached to authors and reviewers on conflict of interest, editors have largely neglected their own… Editors know well that they may be able to sell a million dollars worth of reprints of [an article funded by industry], with a profit margin of perhaps 70%… Publishing a drug company sponsored trial rather than, say, a study of changing the built environment to increase physical activity will bring both profit and an increased impact factor. How tempting"
-- as quoted from and referenced on Avilian,
.
Many other medical-journal editors echo the same sentiments, and I think I can supply you with some links to those if they're helpful.
To consider a single sample of how the best-intended medical research can overestimate the effectiveness of a drug -- in this case, a flu vaccine -- he might like to see Simonsen, L., Viboud, C., and Taylor, R., "Influenza vaccination in elderly people", Lancet 366(9503):2086,
.
(It has implications too for other studies of flu-vaccine effectiveness in the elderly.)
Cheers --
John

[Patricia Adams]

lol just tell him that he next time he bangs his thumb with a hammer, try Arnica lol Hubby jammed his finger in the garage door and it was awful looking and super painful- Arnica made a believer of him lol.
Patricia

From: Shannon Nelson
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 10:07 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] HELP, studies!!!
Argh, I am trying to match wits with someone who wants STUDIES
"proving that homeopathy works." (Don't worry, this is just in fun,
and I'll play until it gets boring...)

He's asking if I can show him any studies showing that this or that
certain remedy is found in this study to cure that certain disease.
I've given the "individualization" rap, but maybe there's some study
that would come close? Anything about Belladonna and meningitis, for
instance? Ah, arnica and post-op recovery might do it, if anyone
knows a link? He wants a remedy he could buy locally, for some
disease that he might be able to contract here in the US. (I don't
think he's planning to do it...)

I don't follow studies, because I have limited time and even more
limited patience, but maybe someone else...?

Shannon

[Shannon Nelson]

Ah, but is semi-educated on the topic (Randi et al.) and dismisses all of that as "anecdote".
But you're right, at least I should mention the very first-person glories of Arnica.

Shannon

[Lynn Cremona]

Hi

I think I weeded out duplications

Here is a list of sites referencing Homeopathic Research Articles:
Health Salon

http://www.healthsalon.org/142/double-b ... of-arnica/

The Society of Homeopaths

http://www.homeopathy-soh.org/research/ ... -research/

http://www.homeopathy-soh.org/research/ ... eopathy-2/

ECH

http://www.homeopathyeurope.org/Research

New Scientist

http://www.netklinik.de/naturtherapie/s ... _basis.htm

Homeopathy Resource

http://homeopathyresource.wordpress.com/

Nash

http://www.homeopathy.org/portfolio_cat ... -research/

Homeopathic Educational Services

https://www.homeopathic.com/Articles/Ho ... c_research

Aude Sapere

http://www.audesapere.in/researchstudies/#.T_wt7fXNleM

Aligarh Lifecare

http://drmukhtarahmad.wordpress.com/

Homeopathy.com

http://hpathy.com/scientific-research/h ... -medicine/

Lynn
---------------------------------
John Harvey wrote:
--
Imagine Peace

[Shannon Nelson]

Thanks, Lynn!
More riches!