If only the debate were really over

[MrGongGong]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/12/no-scientific-case-homeopathy-remedies-pharmacists-placebos?CMP=share_btn_fb

[umslopogaas]

If only. Unfortunately the people who believe in homoeopathy believe in it, and belief is where people go when reason becomes too uncomfortable.

I would love an argument with my local pharmacist, who sells this nonsense, but I havent been up for it because he also provides my heart pills, and I need them, it would be bad news if they were suddenly out of stock. Anyway, my view is that is if people are foolish enough to fork out money for obvious nonsense, one would be a fool not to cash in.

But ... dont let us underestimate the placebo effect, it can be very strong. As I understand it, homoeopathic medicines mostly deal with "conditions" which are more or less due to belief, rather than "infections", which are due to known infectious agents. In other works, if you have syphilis, go to the doctor and get some antibiotic, a homoeopathic drink wont help. But if you have oh I dont know, "midweek frustration", perhaps it will. Because if you have spirochaetes running around your blood stream, a drop of expensive water wont help. But if you feel unhappy because its Wednesday, try this, it will help, really it will.

Since my own field is disease in plants, rather than people, I'd better stop here. I've no experience of homoeopathic remedies for plants, but I expect Prince Charles and the Soil Association would be happy to oblige. PC was reported to talk to plants, but what they said back to him, I do not know. Personally, I recommend the appropriate fungicide. These formulations terrify homoeopaths, because they actually contain something that has an effect.

[Frances_iom]

If only. Unfortunately the people who believe in homoeopathy believe in it, and belief is where people go when reason becomes too uncomfortable. .

substitute "Unfortunately the people who believe in $RELIGION believe in it, and belief is where people go when reason becomes too uncomfortable" and you have an excellent description of many of the problems in the world today - since it appears our future King has the belief system of an i***t and is notorious for meddling in areas where he has no competence then I suspect the NHS will continue to waste an admittedly small amount of money tho the real damage is , as elsewhere, the abolition of any application of reason in solving problems, tho maybe like religion placebo's need the image of something beyond the patient/believer having a personal interest in their well being and all the patient needs to do is follow the explicit directions.

[teamsaint]

The NHS wastes far more money on inappropriate and dangerous conventional medicine than it ever does on homeopathy.

We all have powerful belief systems, and they all change over time.

[umslopogaas]

Teamsaint, what have you to say about the Catholic Church? You say "we all have powerful belief systems, and they change all the time". What do you think the Pope, or any Mullah, would say about that? I suspect they would change if they had to, but unless forced would carry on pulling out the fingernails of unbelievers, because it works. Why change, when you have a good system that deceives and subdues most of the people most of the time?

Of course the NHS wastes lots of money on inappropriate and dangerous conventional medicine. Trust me, I worked in this area [plants, not people] if you dont waste money on risky stuff, you wont progress. I'd PRAISE the NHS for wasting money, providing they could convince me it was a promising line of enquiry.

The role of the big drug companies in powering this process would be most interesting to hear. I tested a lot of plant protection new products, at government expense, and fed back the results to big business. As an independent scientist, I suspect I sometimes told them things they didnt want to hear.

Most money spent on research is wasted. But if we didnt waste it, we wouldnt score the occasional success.

[teamsaint]

Sloppers, all I am saying is that we all have belief systems, and even those of popes change over time.
Changes to our belief system happen for all kinds of reasons.

Recognising that what we think is fundamentally connected to a belief system that will change, is very important, IMO.

i' m not qualified to discuss what you say about " wasted " research money, so I am happy to accept what you say.

But that is different to money wasted on inappropriate or dangerous treatment, which I have see first hand, and , given the size of the budget is bound to happen.

[P. G. Tipps]

Teamsaint, what have you to say about the Catholic Church?.

Thought it wouldn't take long for a topic on everyday liberal/secular naivety and irrationality to swiftly and conveniently deflect to the old religious bogeyman.

[Frances_iom]

Thought it wouldn't take long for a topic on everyday liberal/secular naivety and irrationality to swiftly and conveniently deflect to the old religious bogeyman.:

- I guess all priests, mullahs rabbis etc, like the pharmicists in OP, need to make a living by exploiting creduility

try "http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/13/john-gray-steven-pinker-wrong-violence-war-declining" which touches on some relevant points and reaches IMO a quite pessimistic conclusion re rationality in homo sapiens

[MrGongGong]

The NHS wastes far more money on inappropriate and dangerous conventional medicine than it ever does on homeopathy.

and the prize for non sequitur of the day goes to......

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

and the prize for non sequitur of the day goes to......

Conventional medicine is like the National Curriculum: much of it is good, but also potentially dangerous when it takes a one-size-fits-all dogmatic attitude. I treat that report with some respect, but at the same time, with the scepticism of that report in recent years that claimed Marmite was worse than Coca Cola, because the former's salt content was higher than the latter's sugar content (without taking account of the fact that one was a concentrate, and the other a drink (mostly water)).

[MrGongGong]

Conventional medicine is like the National Curriculum: much of it is good, but also potentially dangerous when it takes a one-size-fits-all dogmatic attitude.

Indeed but that's not a reason accept any made up b*llocks as a credible alternative.

[teamsaint]

and the prize for non sequitur of the day goes to......

the non sequitur to a link and an emoticon.

[MrGongGong]

It's not the money
Its the spurious credibility that's the problem
People die of serious diseases because of this nonsense (Steve Jobs? )

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

It's not the money
Its the spurious credibility that's the problem
People die of serious diseases because of this nonsense (Steve Jobs? )

But some people live for longer because of alternative medicine. Sir Francis Chichester should have died, and was close to death, when following a regime of conventional medicine. By adopting Nature Cure, he recovered from cancer and went on to do several great sea voyages. On the other hand, when athlete Lilian Board tried to do the same thing, she deteriorated rapidly and died very soon afterwards. There's no simplistic answer.

[ahinton]

If only. Unfortunately the people who believe in homoeopathy believe in it, and belief is where people go when reason becomes too uncomfortable.

Sad, but true.

But ... dont let us underestimate the placebo effect, it can be very strong. As I understand it, homoeopathic medicines mostly deal with "conditions" which are more or less due to belief, rather than "infections", which are due to known infectious agents. In other works, if you have syphilis, go to the doctor and get some antibiotic, a homoeopathic drink wont help. But if you have oh I dont know, "midweek frustration", perhaps it will. Because if you have spirochaetes running around your blood stream, a drop of expensive water wont help. But if you feel unhappy because its Wednesday, try this, it will help, really it will.

Quite - but the risk of dangers arising from belief in this stuff can hardly be over-estimated, any more than can the fatuity and, frankly, immorality of continued NHS provision of it at taxpayers' expense.

Since my own field is disease in plants, rather than people, I'd better stop here. I've no experience of homoeopathic remedies for plants, but I expect Prince Charles and the Soil Association would be happy to oblige. PC was reported to talk to plants, but what they said back to him, I do not know.

But we cannot be sure that they even understand English, can we?

Personally, I recommend the appropriate fungicide.

Presumably for the diseased plants...

Prince Charles does himself no favours in advocating this kind of thing, especially when there is increasing and reliable evidence that it is of no credible medical benefit to anyone. Likewise, that otherwise largely fine organisation the Soil Association dents its credibility by appearing to endorse it and is far more credible when promoting organic farming and the like about which it actually has recorse to genuine expertise and, although even the products of this are not going to feed and clothe everyone, there are tangible benefits that will not be found anywhere in the bizarre demi-monde of homœopathy.

One problem associated with homœopathic practice is its tendency to be lumped together with other forms of "alternative" medicine because this can be damaging to some of those other forms of treatment; acupuncture, for example, certainly cannot justify some of the more rash claims made for it and won't help everyone with everything but at least it has had benefits for some patients whereas there is no evidence that homœopathy has actually produced any tangible positive result in anyone. It would be a pity indeed if the derision that homœopathy largely deserves is encouraged to spread to all "alternative" forms of treatment as though it's all mombo-jumbo.

The article and the research undertaken do indeed seem to put forward the case for game, set and match on this one and not before time.