Friday, November 30, 2007

A medical revolution...


According to Dagbladet, UK has now discovered that homeopathy is a fraud. Apperantly, homeophatic medicin is just water. It also seems that homeopathy How would have thought that...

In the other news: It seems there isn't any green men on Mars anyway, Spice Girls is a constructed group with crappy songs and you really do get fat if you eat all your meals at McDonald's.
Edit:
In all fairness (and since I'm a general nice guy), I should place an link to the homeopaths respons in Dagbladet.
Funny thing: The only "publication" that did not come from a "Journal of Homeopaths'R'U A" or "Advances in diluted water and snakeoil" journals, is a comment (yes, not a publication, but a comment) in The Lancet. And this comment is by a homeopath on a publication that shows there are no difference between placebo effect and homeopahtic medicin. But using the same method, there was a significant difference between the placebo effect and conventional drugs. Surely if you are the leader of the homeopathic organisation in Norway, you should be able to dig up better scientific material than that (i.e. publications in a well know, scientific journal). If there are any...

23 comments:

Pigeon said...

Spice Girls is a constructed group with crappy songs

Whaaaaaaaaaaat ?????????

Seriously, at last ...

Pigeon said...

and when I read your post I was scared that you would comment with somethin like: (upset voice) "That's not true, I have a neighbour that use that all the time and he's never sick, so it proves that it works just fine"
I've heard that so many times.

Wilhelm said...

I hear ya.


Of course - it's meaningless to compare two paradigms, like religion through science and vice versa, so I don't really see why proponents of homeopathy try to argue that it works by using science, 'cause it doesn't work. Much like science can't disprove that it ain't Thor with The Hammer who creates thunder and lightning.

Pigeon said...

Much like science can't disprove that it ain't Thor with The Hammer who creates thunder and lightning.

There's no need to prove it, it's common knowledge. BTW Thor was french !! (also common knowledge)

Wilhelm said...

...and therein lies most of the problem. For example; "common knowledge" means that most people know, so you're putting your faith in a knowledge base which is derived from among others Uncle Joe with the Glass Eye, that crazed britney fan and at least a couple of people who need medication to stop the voices in their heads from taking over completely. Common knowledge could mean that it's derived from empirical evidence, or it could mean that it's based on jack and Shit, and unfortunately Jack left town with all the Shit, so that leaves the equivalent of the evidence of communism actually working in real life.

Pigeon said...

at least a couple of people who need medication to stop the voices in their heads from taking over completely

You mean homeopathy ?

Anders said...

Of course - it's meaningless to compare two paradigms, like religion through science and vice versa, so I don't really see why proponents of homeopathy try to argue that it works by using science, 'cause it doesn't work

If you read the whole story, you see that some homoepaths (is that the correct term?) advises people to NOT the anti-malaria medicin, but instead take homeopathic tablets. And the "traditional" medicin is proven effective for this very serious decease. Homeopatic medicin has not. The these two worlds collide.

And this seems to be the main problem. Scientist isn't bother too much with homeopathy, because even if it doesn't work, it doesn't do any damage either. But when the "therapist" leads people away from a cure that works, to something that doesn't, then it's serious...

Wilhelm said...

True, but again - seen from their perspective it's probably reasonable.

Just look at creationists - if you assume that all evidence for the Earth being older than 6000 years or whatever is deliberately put there by an almight God, then everything falls back into place.

Every model has assumptions, and people choose the model with underlying assumptions closest to what they believe to be true, like in the creationist example

Anders said...

In theory I agree with you. But I don't like it when people use "alternative" medicine (or religion) to harm other, innocent people. Regardsless of what what "paradigm" you got.

Wilhelm said...

I hear ya, but in this case we actually have laws against it, so it's not a philosophical question.

Anders said...

I hear ya, but in this case we actually have laws against it, so it's not a philosophical question.


Obviously not. Homoepaths have advised people to not take malaria tablets, and go for the homoepathic alternative.. That's quite serious. It would be quite different if the they advised people to take homeopathic medicin in addition to malaria medicin. Even worse, many homeopaths advise parents not to give MMR vaccine to their kids. This vaccine has saved millions of lives world wide and any decrease in the vaccination rate would have severe consequences. And as far as I know, the law doesn't forbid this practise. At least I haven't heard any homoepaths going on trial for this...

Wilhelm said...

Hmm...maybe I'm screwing up here, then. I'm sure I've read about court cases like this, but I can't be sure it wasn't in USA......

Medically trained said...

This is typical when not medically trained people try to discuss medical issues.

There is no medical treatment against malaria with a 100 % effect. There are many cases of people on malaria drugs that still got malaria. Additionally the drug are strongly toxic and destroy the kidneys, hearing, hair growth, and there has even been reported suicidal tendencies. So it is not that easy. Then if you should go to an area where malaria is active (it is not all year around) it is not so simple that everybody in the same group with the same exposure gets it. One out of 20 might get it. You need a susceptibility to get any disease. You need a weakness or lack of fighting ability to that particular challenge. There is research that shows that homeopathy works for many conditions where similar mechanisms are activated. So it is not so strange that some homeopaths recommend their treatment. If your paradigm is to strengthen the body rather than fighting the bug, I am not surprised that these UK homeopaths have said what ever they had said.

Speaking with researches in the UK - I was there two weeks ago - I was told this whole campaign is pushed forward by pharmaceutical industry realising they are loosing marked to complementary medicine and particularly homeopathy.

Wilhelm said...

Agreed - if seen from the pov that whatever strengthens the immune system helps prevent and/or fight any kind of disease, then sure. However, you still need to justify that any practive does just that. And, preferably, that bolstering ones immune system works better than trying to knock out whatever triggers it.

Anders said...

Hmm...maybe I'm screwing up here, then. I'm sure I've read about court cases like this, but I can't be sure it wasn't in USA......

If so, great.

Anders said...

There is no medical treatment against malaria with a 100 % effect. There are many cases of people on malaria drugs that still got malaria. Additionally the drug are strongly toxic and destroy the kidneys, hearing, hair growth, and there has even been reported suicidal tendencies.

Ok, show me a drug with 100% efficacy and no side effect...
Malaria is a potential lethal decease, and compared to that, it may not seem so bad. But I'll give you that those are pretty nasty side effects.

And, btw, it's not A drug. It's several, with several different side effect. And with different uses.

You need a susceptibility to get any disease. You need a weakness or lack of fighting ability to that particular challenge. There is research that shows that homeopathy works for many conditions where similar mechanisms are activated.

Yes, this is what we call homeopathy. But there hasn't been any research accepted in a major medical publication that supports the principle of homeopathy. Got references?

So it is not so strange that some homeopaths recommend their treatment. If your paradigm is to strengthen the body rather than fighting the bug, I am not surprised that these UK homeopaths have said what ever they had said.

No, but as Wilhelm said, then they must show that their medicine/ method is more effective then the drugs. Otherwise it would be ethical wrong and a potential death sentence.

In my opinion, it's even worse if it's true that half of the homeopaths advise against the MMR vaccine.

Speaking with researches in the UK - I was there two weeks ago - I was told this whole campaign is pushed forward by pharmaceutical industry realising they are loosing marked to complementary medicine and particularly homeopathy.

Not only that, they collaborate with the government. Big Pharma has a universal drug that can cure all know diseases, but they don't would loose all of their marked if it came out. They are hiding out in the dessert in Area 54.

Seriously, sciences has never accepted homeopathy as a science. Its different paradigm, as religion and science is. So it's not a new thing that pharmaceutical industry against it. Actually, producing homeopathic drugs would be enormous beneficial for the industry. Homeopathic medicine aren't necessary any cheaper the conventional pharmaceuticals, but they are enormously cheaper to produce. And the industry already has the infrastructure and facilities to produce, marked and transport homeopathic medicine.

Out of curiosity, may I ask what field those UK researchers worked in?

Wilhelm said...

Ok, show me a drug with 100% efficacy and no side effect...
Malaria is a potential lethal decease, and compared to that, it may not seem so bad. But I'll give you that those are pretty nasty side effects.

And, btw, it's not A drug. It's several, with several different side effect. And with different uses.


The targeted drug delivery vectors I'm working on show no side effects and close to 100% efficacy.

Oh wait - you meant in real life, not lab-scale.... ;-)

Sure there are side effects and exceptions to efficacy, but we're talking about statistics here, right. For drugs related to cancer, a drug which proves to be efficient for the 25% or so of patients which overexpress a certain receptor is more than sufficient to get approval, for example.

Yes, this is what we call homeopathy. But there hasn't been any research accepted in a major medical publication that supports the principle of homeopathy. Got references?

Damn straight, and you wouldn't expect there to be either. Much like you won't find any major research on Darwinism and "Why the Earth isn't Flat After All" in the "Journal of Extreme Bible Thumpers and Advanced Prejudice" (J. Extr. Bible Thmp. Adv. Prejudice)

Different paradigms, babee, and never shall the twain meet.

No, but as Wilhelm said, then they must show that their medicine/ method is more effective then the drugs. Otherwise it would be ethical wrong and a potential death sentence.

In my opinion, it's even worse if it's true that half of the homeopaths advise against the MMR vaccine.


Word up, A-bomb. Statistics again. That's essentially what's stopping people from running prime-time TV ads on how they've found that drinking a "special" smoothie (Snake Oil Smoothies) made of lard, canned tuna, sour cream, salt and dishwasher detergent helps prevent and/or cure any damn disease known to mankind. For only 99.99........ The actual ads might be slightly more sophisticated, but snake oil is snake oil...

Not only that, they collaborate with the government. Big Pharma has a universal drug that can cure all know diseases, but they don't would loose all of their marked if it came out. They are hiding out in the dessert in Area 54.

Oh snap Anders - you've done it now......you've gone and exposed the Big Government Secret. better watch out for people with mirrored sunglasses in black suits, and stay away from unmarked, black sedans and SUV's

Anders said...

J. Extr. Bible Thmp. Adv. Prejudice

LOL
I gotta start subscribing to that one...

Wilhelm said...

If ya like that one you might also want to check out "Billy Ray's Journal of NASCAR, UFO Sightings and Complicated Science" (B.R. J. NASCAR UFO Sgth. Compl. Sci.), "Advances in Barbecue Nanotechnology" (Adv. Barbecue Nanotechnol.), "Journal of Hypothetical and Purely Fictional Chemistry" (J. Hyp. Pure. Fict. Chem.) and "Birmingham Alabama Journal of Faith Healing" (Birmingham Ala.J. Faith Heal.).

Anders said...

"Advances in Barbecue Nanotechnology"

I've always wondered about that, what are the latest trends in the use of nanotechnology in barbequing? Guess there aren't any "go large" burgers there?


Btw, our household trained monkey, eh, I mean, trained medical professional seems to have disappeared from this blog.

Wilhelm said...

Lurking, more like it.

But if Turtlewax can repackage their wax as "Nanotech" using slightly smaller wax beads, then I can't see why there shouldn't be a market for Barbecue nanotechnology.

Anders said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dr. Nancy Malik said...

Homeopathy cures where Conventional Allopathic Medicine (CAM) fails