Lancet study on homeopathy biased.
Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 11:55 am
Lancet study on homeopathy biased.
The Lancet has published the results of a study comparing peer-reviewed
studies
in homeopathy against studies in conventional medicine. Out of 110 matched
studies only 8 of the homeopathic studies were compared to 6 studies of
conventional medicine. The report concludes that homeopathy is no better than
placebo. The study is poor, but makes some very strong claims.
Researches were highly selective and looked at only double-blind
placebo-controlled homeopathic studies (which were probably prescribed on
allopathic rather than homeopathic principles). In a double-blind
placebo-controlled study normally only one medicine is given against the
placebo. Homeopathy will naturally do poorly if the selected medicine is not
similar to the symptoms displayed in the patient.
Prescribing methods for homeopathy are not compatible with this type of study
because the homeopath needs to make a homeopathic diagnosis, not a
conventional
diagnosis. For example, for someone with asthma there are a number of remedies
that could be used depending on the characteristics of the disease. It may be
more bronchial (wet) or dry asthma, be affected at different times (eg,
worse at
night) or in different seasons. Hence 10 people with asthma may require
different homeopathic medicines.
Constructing a study on homeopathy is difficult, as the method of diagnosis is
so different to conventional medicine. Also, the amount of funding for studies
into homeopathy is almost non-existent compared to the funds available for
conventional medical studies.
It also seems that the researchers of the Lancet study are quite biased in
anything that does not match their concept of treatment, as the following
quote
from a researcher suggests (emphasis mine):
[ Juni thinks the findings show that homeopathic remedies don’t have any
biological benefits. “Based on these trials, remedies which do not fit into
our
traditional concepts of biological mechanisms do not have a specific
effect,” he
said. “We cannot prove the negative, but we find an effect which might just
be a
placebo effect or a nonspecific effect.” ]
Not long ago a large study showing that homeopathy is more effective than
conventional medicine had a brief mention by one news source (the telegraph),
while this new study saying it is no better than placebo has been picked up
by a
number of news sources. It seems main stream media is keen to show
homeopathy in
a negative light, simply because it does not conform to the scientific status
quo.
This new study also conflicts with a preliminary report on homeopathy from the
World Health Organization. It states that the majority of peer-reviewed
placebo
controlled studies of homeopathy over the last 40 years demonstrate that
homeopathy is superior to placebo. The WHO study says that homeopathy is
equivalent to conventional medicine in its effectiveness.
Just recently placebo was found to have a physical effect on the body,
releasing
opioid like substances called endorphins. Endorphins are the body’s own
natural
pain-killing substance that are much more powerful than any pain killing drug.
Homeopathy is becoming very popular again. In Britain alone, sales of
homeopathic medicines have grown by a third in the past five years to 32
million
pounds in 2004. Recently Prince Charles issued an inquiry into alternative
medicine, which found that £480 million could be saved if just 10% of GP’s
prescribed homeopathy instead of conventional medicine. Homeopathy is not only
cheap it is effective.
The study is poor and goes against the general finding that homeopathy does
work
and is just as effective (in some cases more effective) than conventional
medicine. More disappointing is the mainstream media’s strong reporting of
such
a weak study as cold hard fact.
References at:
http://www.althealthinfo.com/2005/08/26 ... -biased-pr
opag%5Canda/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath
Well Within & Earth Mysteries & Sacred Site Tours (worldwide)
Vaccination Information & Choice Network
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm
homeopathycures@tesco.net
ONLINE Introduction to Homeopathy Classes
ONLINE Introduction to Vaccine Dangers Classes
Voicemail US 530-740-0561 UK phone from US 011-44-1874-624-936
The Lancet has published the results of a study comparing peer-reviewed
studies
in homeopathy against studies in conventional medicine. Out of 110 matched
studies only 8 of the homeopathic studies were compared to 6 studies of
conventional medicine. The report concludes that homeopathy is no better than
placebo. The study is poor, but makes some very strong claims.
Researches were highly selective and looked at only double-blind
placebo-controlled homeopathic studies (which were probably prescribed on
allopathic rather than homeopathic principles). In a double-blind
placebo-controlled study normally only one medicine is given against the
placebo. Homeopathy will naturally do poorly if the selected medicine is not
similar to the symptoms displayed in the patient.
Prescribing methods for homeopathy are not compatible with this type of study
because the homeopath needs to make a homeopathic diagnosis, not a
conventional
diagnosis. For example, for someone with asthma there are a number of remedies
that could be used depending on the characteristics of the disease. It may be
more bronchial (wet) or dry asthma, be affected at different times (eg,
worse at
night) or in different seasons. Hence 10 people with asthma may require
different homeopathic medicines.
Constructing a study on homeopathy is difficult, as the method of diagnosis is
so different to conventional medicine. Also, the amount of funding for studies
into homeopathy is almost non-existent compared to the funds available for
conventional medical studies.
It also seems that the researchers of the Lancet study are quite biased in
anything that does not match their concept of treatment, as the following
quote
from a researcher suggests (emphasis mine):
[ Juni thinks the findings show that homeopathic remedies don’t have any
biological benefits. “Based on these trials, remedies which do not fit into
our
traditional concepts of biological mechanisms do not have a specific
effect,” he
said. “We cannot prove the negative, but we find an effect which might just
be a
placebo effect or a nonspecific effect.” ]
Not long ago a large study showing that homeopathy is more effective than
conventional medicine had a brief mention by one news source (the telegraph),
while this new study saying it is no better than placebo has been picked up
by a
number of news sources. It seems main stream media is keen to show
homeopathy in
a negative light, simply because it does not conform to the scientific status
quo.
This new study also conflicts with a preliminary report on homeopathy from the
World Health Organization. It states that the majority of peer-reviewed
placebo
controlled studies of homeopathy over the last 40 years demonstrate that
homeopathy is superior to placebo. The WHO study says that homeopathy is
equivalent to conventional medicine in its effectiveness.
Just recently placebo was found to have a physical effect on the body,
releasing
opioid like substances called endorphins. Endorphins are the body’s own
natural
pain-killing substance that are much more powerful than any pain killing drug.
Homeopathy is becoming very popular again. In Britain alone, sales of
homeopathic medicines have grown by a third in the past five years to 32
million
pounds in 2004. Recently Prince Charles issued an inquiry into alternative
medicine, which found that £480 million could be saved if just 10% of GP’s
prescribed homeopathy instead of conventional medicine. Homeopathy is not only
cheap it is effective.
The study is poor and goes against the general finding that homeopathy does
work
and is just as effective (in some cases more effective) than conventional
medicine. More disappointing is the mainstream media’s strong reporting of
such
a weak study as cold hard fact.
References at:
http://www.althealthinfo.com/2005/08/26 ... -biased-pr
opag%5Canda/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath
Well Within & Earth Mysteries & Sacred Site Tours (worldwide)
Vaccination Information & Choice Network
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm
homeopathycures@tesco.net
ONLINE Introduction to Homeopathy Classes
ONLINE Introduction to Vaccine Dangers Classes
Voicemail US 530-740-0561 UK phone from US 011-44-1874-624-936