Sign in to follow this  
Smilie

`homeopathy, The Ultimate Fake

Recommended Posts

Not everything can be explained away by science.

We have a young kid who has died a day after receiving the flu shot- and doctors were baffled and "couldn't find what was wrong with him." Does that mean there was nothing wrong with him? For him to up and die from nothing is pretty remarkable.

Just because science cannot explain it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are many dimensions and ones we cannot explain. Doesn't mean they aren't there.

Science is only as good as capacity/knowledge of the brain studying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a healthcare professional, I am not a fan of "homeopathy." As a registered dietitian and a nutrition professional, I am, however, a HUGE fan of preventative medicine and would ALWAYS prefer to "treat" (and prevent) with nutrition if possible.

However, I also have an auto-immune disease which requires multiple daily injections. If I were to NOT have my medication, I would die (potentially in a period of days). That said, how/when/what I eat have a huge impact on my health. Anyway, now I'm getting a little bit on a tangent.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of "nutritionists" out there with no credentialing (or no "real" credentialing... sorry, paying some money for a "fake" degree online isn't going to cut it). A lot of times, these "nutritionists" also practice natural medicine/homeopathy. And they got those "credentials" online at a degree mill as well.

Unfortunately, my grandfather was seeing a "natural doctor" and a chiropractor for some severe back pain and they kept misdiagnosing him. He had stage 4 cancer and died. I am not blaming the "doctor," but he should have been going to an actual MD who has adequate education and experience and maybe he'd still be here with us today (or have lived a longer life).

Along those same lines, an R.D. has to meet specific requirements before being able to apply for an internship (which are highly competitive with <50% of applicants "matching"). From there, the intern must complete 1200 supervised practice hours in a hospital setting before being R.D. eligible to sit for the national board exams. After passing, the R.D. must maintain a minimum number of continuing education hours every five years to remain licensed. This does not exist for "nutritionists." I guess my point is nurititionist =/= dietitian.

Wow, I definitely got on a tangent there. Hopefully I sort of answered with my opinion of the OPs original argument. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember who said this, but this is basically how I feel. "There is no 'traditional medicine' or 'natural medicine', or 'alternative medicine'. There are only 2 kinds of medicine: Medicine that works, and medicine that doesn't."

My boyfriend's best friend's mother is a Homeopathic Doctor. After learning about how these people diagnose and treat 'patients', there's no way in **** I'd ever go to one for treatment. :blink:

Edited by The Last Super Power aka Rapscallio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean, there are actually people out there licensed to do this?! That's very scary!!

A person sees this guy is licensed so thinks, he must be okay.....then is given a potion of different herbs to drink for their appendicitis.

Edited by equicrzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there are homeopathic DOCTORS (both in human and animal treatment) who do not get their degrees online. They still have to go to medical school, they simply also take additional courses in the areas that they want... homeopathy and alternative medicine being one of them.

Modern medicine does save people and animals- but I am a believer in that nature gives to us what we need to cure most things, it is just a matter of finding it. I also believe that while modern medicine does help, it also does harm and thousands die a year from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets not confuse homeopathy with natural remedies, preventive medicine etc- homeopathy is based on dilution principles that ends with no detectable original substance in that final dilution, thus it is contrary to all we know about physics and chemistry. Also, it has never been up held by double blind clinical trials and results are no different that what is achieved with placebos,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everything can be explained away by science.

We have a young kid who has died a day after receiving the flu shot- and doctors were baffled and "couldn't find what was wrong with him." Does that mean there was nothing wrong with him? For him to up and die from nothing is pretty remarkable.

Just because science cannot explain it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are many dimensions and ones we cannot explain. Doesn't mean they aren't there.

Science is only as good as capacity/knowledge of the brain studying it.

I am not denying that vaccines and medications can have side effects. Vaccines themselves do not cause immunity, but rather the body`s immune response to that antigen. If an individual has a faulty immune system, either one that is un able to respond, or one that is over reactive, then a negative out come is very possible. The vaccine itself could have been contaminated. Point being, there can be a scientific explanation, and before that vaccine was approved, clinical trials proved it`s efficacy in the presence of a disease out break or chellenge, with minimal side effects in the general population. It will stand up to double blind studies. which can show true efficacy against expected placebo effect in a given %. . The contents of that vaccine also can be detected and measured

Homeopathy can do none of the above.

We are supposed to take it on faith that water has a memory, able to still have the properties of that molecule effective against whatever it was supposed to treat, yet can`t be measured by any method

If you take the time to actually read the link I posted, even if there existed some un known science that could account for this `phenomen, at that dilution to infinity, no matter how clean that lab, other molecule memories would also be present in that final dilution

This is not an argument between traditional and alternative medicine but rather the fact that we need good medicine period, backed by solid science. Some alternative medicine is viable and credible, but homeopathy is not, unless you made some new break through in either chemistry or physics., and if so, please share!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The genesis of homeopathy

Homeopathy is a system of health care based on the idea that “like cures like” – substances that cause the same symptoms as an illness can cure that illness.

And the idea that extremely small dilutions, so small that there’s almost no chance of the original substance being present, are more effective than more concentrated solutions.

If the former sounds a bit like alchemy, that’s because it is. “Like cures like” is a fundamental principle of medical alchemy, endorsed by no less than the father of pharmacology Paracelsus.

Homeopathy reflects this idea because when its founder Samuel Hahnemann first formulated his approach in 1796, alchemy was on the wane but still influential.

Medicine looked nothing like it does today at the time, with extreme treatments like bleeding, purgatives and heroic concentrations of opiates in common usage.

Using fruit juice to combat scurvy would only be widely implemented in five years' time; vaccination lay six years in the future; and the germ theory of disease and the Law of Mass Action over 50 years in the future.

So it’s not surprising that homeopathy became popular: in an era where conventional treatment was just as likely to kill you as cure you, the gentler ultra-dilute tonics of homeopathy would at the very least not harm you.

Medicine evolved as we came to better understand the body and developed effective medicines.

But homeopathy didn’t. It remained mired in the same 18th century alchemical thinking.

The homeopathic hospitals of the 19th century either closed or were converted (the former Prince Henry’s Hospital in Melbourne where I used to work started life as a homeopathic hospital).

A little drop won’t do it

Homeopathy has a symptom-based approach to medicine – it ignores the actual mechanisms of disease. Take insomnia, for instance, the treatment for it is (among other things) “Coffea 30C”.

Coffea is caffeine, the substance in coffee that keeps you awake and the 30C describes how much the caffeine is diluted.

Now, most people would instinctively feel that giving caffeine to someone with insomnia is not the best idea, but the magic is apparently in the dilution.

The C in 30C means the solution has been diluted to one part in a hundred and 30C means the solution has been diluted one in a hundred 30 times.

If you take a drop of your morning coffee and drip it into the nearest dam, the concentration of caffeine in the dam would be higher than 30C dilution of caffeine.

In fact, a 30C dilution is highly unlikely to contain a single molecule of caffeine.

Erhart_n_karl.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to comment about natural vs man-made medicines.

IMO, all medicines are a natural thing, since everything that goes into making anything considered "modern medicine" was found here. On Earth. Naturally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Smilie, I read the link you posted many months ago, so fear not, I did "take the time to actually read the link." ;)

And Heidi, my medication is synthetic (insulin analog), which is much preferable to my first form of insulin I took which was from swine. The analogs now created are in so many ways superior to what was originally collected from pigs and cattle, and the synthetic better mimics what naturally is produced in humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to comment about natural vs man-made medicines.

IMO, all medicines are a natural thing, since everything that goes into making anything considered "modern medicine" was found here. On Earth. Naturally.

This is off topic. My post was not concerning made made medicines versus 'natural, for as a lab tech and having had cancer treatment, I am well aware that some of the most effective chemotherapy agents were isolated from plants, as many others-digitalis, penicillin, etc etc. It is also a fact that many .natural substances are extremely poisonous- hemlock, risin , . Snake venom is used to breat up blood clots, etc , etc.

No, this post is directed against the flawed or non existent science behind homeopathy-period. So let's not muddy the waters by trying to convert this topic into 'traditional versus alternative medicine in general.

When I was taking chemo and conventional treatment for breast cancer, some 20 years ago, I also used Essiac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Smilie, I read the link you posted many months ago, so fear not, I did "take the time to actually read the link." ;)

And Heidi, my medication is synthetic (insulin analog), which is much preferable to my first form of insulin I took which was from swine. The analogs now created are in so many ways superior to what was originally collected from pigs and cattle, and the synthetic better mimics what naturally is produced in humans.

"Synthetic" insulin is made from genetically modified E.Coli bacteria. Anything genetically modified is less preferable in my book and absolutely not found in nature. http://www.diabeticconnect.com/diabetes-discussions/general/5842-synthetic-insulin-side-effects

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all approaches to health care there has to be commonsense used, & there seems to be a lack, of it in some cases. These so called natural treatments work well for minor problems, but medical doctors shouldn't be ruled out, when problems persist. I've heard people say they don't trust doctors, then they suffer the consenquences. PD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is pretty clear that Smilie doesn't want us veering off topic on this thread but I do have to note something.

Smokum, are you REALLY telling me you'd rather a person with type 1 diabetes NOT use an insulin analog because it's genetically modified when it is ACTUALLY going to be effective? What if one of your kids were to develop type 1 diabetes (which happened to all three of my parents children, two when they were toddlers)? Would you REALLY not do EVERYTHING you could possibly do to ensure they live the healthiest lives possible, even if you were "opposed" to something genetically modified? That's rhetorical, because I know any parent would.

I will graduate with my PhD in nutritional sciences in one year's time. In my professional experience (as well as my very personal experience having used both types of insulins), I would ALWAYS choose what actually works. Sorry, but a blog post on a website will not, and absolutely should not, make my decision about using what is most effective. (PS- I'm also not anti genetically modified in and of itself).

I am not trying to "attack" anyone, but it is bothersome to me when people (any people) come in and start spreading information that has no scientific backing behind it.

I think Smilie might kill us if we get off on this tangent, but if anyone would like to continue the discussion via PM (or another thread) I'm game!

Editing to address the comments on the link Smokum posted: All of the complaints people are reporting are due to hypoglycemia, which is low blood sugar. The only way a type 1 diabetic becomes hypoglycemia is by using too much insulin. The reason these patients are reporting hypoglycemia is because they're finally on an effective insulin, created to mimic what a healthy pancreas produces. Because of this, there is absolutely a learning period associated, but using these insulins is going to allow a patient to have potentially near "perfect" control, thus drastically reducing their risk of diabetes complications.

Edited by GiddyUpHighly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is off topic.

.... this post is directed against [xyz subject] -period.

So let's not muddy the waters by trying to convert this topic ....

*blink-blink*

Blondy made a random comment and I interjected a personal opinion. Pardon the heck outta me for the interruption.

Back to your regularly scheduled program:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are risks with every medication, treatment even with homeopathy.....


Modern medicine does save people and animals- but I am a believer in that nature gives to us what we need to cure most things, it is just a matter of finding it. I also believe that while modern medicine does help, it also does harm and thousands die a year from it.

Fact is after trying everything in homeopathy, that didn't help, time to seek a medical doctor, clinic..

Did you know when aspirin first came out, it was a homeopathy treatment from willow bark, Person named Bayer, discovered it, manufactured it known as Bayer it helped with flu epidemic, yet people did die from it, known aspirin poisoning . Later become modern medicine, which was discovered to affect some children that become ill, known as Reye's syndrome.

Edited by Ann Wheeler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.

I had no idea that the word "homeopathy" actually referred to minute dosing.

In my head - to me - it means honey and lemon and mustard plasters. AKA Home remedies.

Shows you what I know.

$(KGrHqRHJCIFI-QRK9VdBSTSmfs5,Q~~60_35.J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CR. Yeah, me too!

I always thought it was mostly just bunk, like kerosene for lung problems, and coal tar for warts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that many people confuse natural remedies or Naturopathy (holistic treatment) with Homeopathy. In homeopathy, it is believed that a super diluted solution of whatever it is that made you sick, will cure you. So, if 500g of dark chocolate gives you an allergic reaction, then .000005g will cure your allergy. Oh, and don't forget that once the 'cure solution' is prepared the container its in must be slammed down on the table/hard surface in order to 'activate' and energize the molecules. :rolleye0014: Nothing I've read or seen will convince me that this is medicine, or that the people who do this are doctors. It's quackery, and it's dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all i can say on this subject is that when i got stung by a wasp in 2006 my arm swelled within 30 minutes to the size of a half football. i went to our doctor and he prescribed 1000 mg of tylenol, which my husband who is in the pharmecutical industry, said would tear up my stomach since i never take that stuff, so i decided to live with the swelling instead.

the same thing happened again in 2007, and my neighbor gave me 5 little tiny *globulis* to take immediately after being stung (had no idea what they were), and it didn't happen again. there was only a slight redness and puffiness at the sting site. turns out it was a homeopathic remedy for poisonous insect bites. my gardener--and i figure he should know--swears by the stuff. it's called dulcemara C12, and i have a little bottle of it at home, in my car and at the barn.

Bach flower remedies, invented by dr. edward bach, are used for a whole spectrum of maladies with positive results. you can claim it's all a placebo effect, but dr. edward bach was a pathologist. somebody with a very solid basis in western medicine.

and while we're pointing the finger at industries in the "health care branch", how about taking a squint at subscription pain killers? one of the biggest drug problems we have in the u.s.? (don't know about the rest of north america).

edited: because i can't spell today.

Edited by nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that many people confuse natural remedies or Naturopathy (holistic treatment) with Homeopathy.

I did. Guess I still do. I can't really comment about homeopathy, but it does seem there are plenty of "dilution principles" applied for immunizations, so it seems within the realm of possible for curative, as well. I am never one to completely swear for or against anything in reason, but reason and knowledge must be applied.

I am with Blondyy in that not everything can be explained by science, and science is not perfect. Nor is it worthy of demonization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this