I’m confused. All over this site we’re told that homeopathy is not medicine and not science because there’s a large element of it that’s purely belief and, in an case, there’s no active ingredients to speak of. However, you’re saying that homeopaths can and do prescribe active ingredients.

If there some active homeopathic ingredients are harmful, if misapplied, are those effective if used properly? Are there homeopathic active ingredients that work and those that don’t work?

Is this Zicam stuff a treatment prescribed and developed by homeopaths (registered or otherwise) or is it something that’s been developed by others to sell as a homeopathic remedy? Has it made its way on to a government list because it seems like a homeopathic remedy? Do homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathic?

Unintelligent Designer,

Homeopathy is defined as a system of ‘medicine’ where substances that would bring about symptoms in a healthy person are used – heavily diluted – to treat an unwell person who already has those symptoms. The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.

The manufacturers of Zicam state that their products are a 2X homeopathic solution, “packaged and distributed in full accordance with the HPUS”.

For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.

Thanks for that, WH. I see what you mean. However, I was wondering whether homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathy. This is an important point.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQ2bZ11tGtoiKx6BO5K70Lx1ETmgD98SK27G0:
“Dr. Iris R. Bell, a psychiatrist and homeopathy researcher at the University of Arizona, Tucson, says the suspended Zicam products deliver the homeopathic ingredient right into the nose — not an accepted homeopathic method. She says the FDA should act against such products.”

She says the Zicam delivery method doesn’t accord with homeopathic practice.

The US National Center for Homeopathy says Zicam isn’t homeopathy:
http://nationalcenterforhomeopathy.org/articles/view,341

Skeptico says Zicam doesn’t sound like a homeopathic preparation:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/06/if_it_has_any_i.html

We’re talking here about unscrupulous producer of over-the-counter pharmaceuticals that makes a bad product within state-registered legal definitions.

We’re not talking about an over-the-counter preparation registered as homeopathic, not a homeopathic preparation made and prescribed by homeopaths. There’s a difference between those two things. 30C is a world away from 2x.

I think you do a disservice to the facts by suggesting that the harm caused by a state-registered pharmaceutical that’s claimed to be homeopathic provides evidence that homeopathy is potentially dangerous.

“The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.”

Here, you’re offering a similar argument to the one the Zicam manufacturers use in protecting their product as homeopathic. They’re following the regulations to the letter.

I think we need to know whether Zicam is made by homeopaths and whether a wide community of homeopaths recognise it and recommend it as valid in their system of treatment. If they don’t, your linkage of Zicam, which is shown to cause harm to people, to their practice is at least unfair and at worst disingenuous.

The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?

So how many other 2x products are there? Are these harmful? How many 30C preparations are harmful?

Science is needed here, soon.

Lastly, I think we need to know who owns Matrixx Intiatives, the company that produces Zicam? Is it a small-scale operation run by deluded homeopathic enthusiasts? Or is it a subsidiary of a larger pharmaceutical company? If it’s not a subsidiary, where did it get the capital to succesfully launch an over-the-counter medication in such a cut-throat market?

By the way, I’m not a homeopath and don’t use homeopathic remedies.

Unintelligent Designer,

What I point out is that a 2X solution may very well have an active ingredient present. This was so in Zicam’s case, because a lot of people were harmed. At no point am I saying that homeopathy works: a cold remedy that destroys one’s sense of smell is certainly not my idea of successful treatment.

My association of Zicam with homeopathy is certainly not unfair. What Royal Copeland sowed has sadly been reaped, and I have already stated that Matrixx Initiatives is “trading objectionably on an already objectionable concept”.

“The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?”

UD I think you’re bringing up an unrelated issue. The above article isn’t about whether or not homeopathic remedies work, but the consequences of homeopathic remedies gaining automatic FDA approval. The FDA doesn’t just establish the efficacy of medical remedies, it also establishes their safety. Homeopathic remedies don’t have to go through the same long clinical trials to establish their safety before they hit the market. And in the case of this nasal spray, that means an unsafe product was let loose on the market.

??? ?????? ???????? ????? ??????????? ? ? ?????? ???????????
———————————————————
????????? [url=http://www.gaurastyle.kiev.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.
??????????? [url=http://www.starstudio.com.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.

“For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.”

Most homeopathic remedies are water. They are “safe” only if you’re treating for dehydration. They treat nothing else.

Once you start getting into these lower succussions, the remedies contain an active ingredient and they should be controlled by the FDA.

O Really Tom!! Have u ever tried Homeopathic Medicines??? They are not diluted but POTENTISED, which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds. Here it differs from simple Dilution, in which only water is added but not potentized.

Homeopathic medicines do work and many clinical trials are on to feed the rationalistic minds. Under WHO only trials have been conducted and it had been recommended to use them. How can someone treat ailments ranging from coryza, cough, acne to asthma, pneumonia, kidney stones by Placebo Effect… This type of comments surely doesnot suit to intelligent people li you, Tom!!

And Homeopathy is surely a hit on fortunes of pharmaceutical Companies due to it’s cost-effectiveness that’s why giants are behind it…

Every year there is 20-25% economic growth and homeopathic Heathcare industry is going to be somewhere near 52,000 crore by 2017, just because of it’s Placebo Effect… FUNNY!!!

I recommend you a thing, please try this so called Placebo under a good reputed clinician and feel changes in you.

Good Luck!!

Priyanka, Good luck with that. You enjoy your homeopathic “cure” and I will enjoy modern Western medicine.

I will come to your cremation with flowers for your family. Rest in peace.

@Priyanka: “which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds.”

So the solution gets hotter? Well, I suppose it would really, if you go around banging it against things. I’m just not sure what possible health value that has, since it’s going to cool down pretty rapidly.

Hey, thanks for the remarkable content. Honestly, about five months back I started taking reading blogs and there may be just so much nonsense available. I appreciate which you put terrific subject material out that’s clear and well-written. Wonderful luck and thank you for the terrific document!!!

I’m confused. All over this site we’re told that homeopathy is not medicine and not science because there’s a large element of it that’s purely belief and, in an case, there’s no active ingredients to speak of. However, you’re saying that homeopaths can and do prescribe active ingredients.

If there some active homeopathic ingredients are harmful, if misapplied, are those effective if used properly? Are there homeopathic active ingredients that work and those that don’t work?

Is this Zicam stuff a treatment prescribed and developed by homeopaths (registered or otherwise) or is it something that’s been developed by others to sell as a homeopathic remedy? Has it made its way on to a government list because it seems like a homeopathic remedy? Do homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathic?

Unintelligent Designer,

Homeopathy is defined as a system of ‘medicine’ where substances that would bring about symptoms in a healthy person are used – heavily diluted – to treat an unwell person who already has those symptoms. The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.

The manufacturers of Zicam state that their products are a 2X homeopathic solution, “packaged and distributed in full accordance with the HPUS”.

For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.

Thanks for that, WH. I see what you mean. However, I was wondering whether homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathy. This is an important point.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQ2bZ11tGtoiKx6BO5K70Lx1ETmgD98SK27G0:
“Dr. Iris R. Bell, a psychiatrist and homeopathy researcher at the University of Arizona, Tucson, says the suspended Zicam products deliver the homeopathic ingredient right into the nose — not an accepted homeopathic method. She says the FDA should act against such products.”

She says the Zicam delivery method doesn’t accord with homeopathic practice.

The US National Center for Homeopathy says Zicam isn’t homeopathy:
http://nationalcenterforhomeopathy.org/articles/view,341

Skeptico says Zicam doesn’t sound like a homeopathic preparation:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/06/if_it_has_any_i.html

We’re talking here about unscrupulous producer of over-the-counter pharmaceuticals that makes a bad product within state-registered legal definitions.

We’re not talking about an over-the-counter preparation registered as homeopathic, not a homeopathic preparation made and prescribed by homeopaths. There’s a difference between those two things. 30C is a world away from 2x.

I think you do a disservice to the facts by suggesting that the harm caused by a state-registered pharmaceutical that’s claimed to be homeopathic provides evidence that homeopathy is potentially dangerous.

“The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.”

Here, you’re offering a similar argument to the one the Zicam manufacturers use in protecting their product as homeopathic. They’re following the regulations to the letter.

I think we need to know whether Zicam is made by homeopaths and whether a wide community of homeopaths recognise it and recommend it as valid in their system of treatment. If they don’t, your linkage of Zicam, which is shown to cause harm to people, to their practice is at least unfair and at worst disingenuous.

The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?

So how many other 2x products are there? Are these harmful? How many 30C preparations are harmful?

Science is needed here, soon.

Lastly, I think we need to know who owns Matrixx Intiatives, the company that produces Zicam? Is it a small-scale operation run by deluded homeopathic enthusiasts? Or is it a subsidiary of a larger pharmaceutical company? If it’s not a subsidiary, where did it get the capital to succesfully launch an over-the-counter medication in such a cut-throat market?

By the way, I’m not a homeopath and don’t use homeopathic remedies.

Unintelligent Designer,

What I point out is that a 2X solution may very well have an active ingredient present. This was so in Zicam’s case, because a lot of people were harmed. At no point am I saying that homeopathy works: a cold remedy that destroys one’s sense of smell is certainly not my idea of successful treatment.

My association of Zicam with homeopathy is certainly not unfair. What Royal Copeland sowed has sadly been reaped, and I have already stated that Matrixx Initiatives is “trading objectionably on an already objectionable concept”.

“The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?”

UD I think you’re bringing up an unrelated issue. The above article isn’t about whether or not homeopathic remedies work, but the consequences of homeopathic remedies gaining automatic FDA approval. The FDA doesn’t just establish the efficacy of medical remedies, it also establishes their safety. Homeopathic remedies don’t have to go through the same long clinical trials to establish their safety before they hit the market. And in the case of this nasal spray, that means an unsafe product was let loose on the market.

??? ?????? ???????? ????? ??????????? ? ? ?????? ???????????
———————————————————
????????? [url=http://www.gaurastyle.kiev.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.
??????????? [url=http://www.starstudio.com.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.

“For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.”

Most homeopathic remedies are water. They are “safe” only if you’re treating for dehydration. They treat nothing else.

Once you start getting into these lower succussions, the remedies contain an active ingredient and they should be controlled by the FDA.

O Really Tom!! Have u ever tried Homeopathic Medicines??? They are not diluted but POTENTISED, which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds. Here it differs from simple Dilution, in which only water is added but not potentized.

Homeopathic medicines do work and many clinical trials are on to feed the rationalistic minds. Under WHO only trials have been conducted and it had been recommended to use them. How can someone treat ailments ranging from coryza, cough, acne to asthma, pneumonia, kidney stones by Placebo Effect… This type of comments surely doesnot suit to intelligent people li you, Tom!!

And Homeopathy is surely a hit on fortunes of pharmaceutical Companies due to it’s cost-effectiveness that’s why giants are behind it…

Every year there is 20-25% economic growth and homeopathic Heathcare industry is going to be somewhere near 52,000 crore by 2017, just because of it’s Placebo Effect… FUNNY!!!

I recommend you a thing, please try this so called Placebo under a good reputed clinician and feel changes in you.

Good Luck!!

Priyanka, Good luck with that. You enjoy your homeopathic “cure” and I will enjoy modern Western medicine.

I will come to your cremation with flowers for your family. Rest in peace.

@Priyanka: “which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds.”

So the solution gets hotter? Well, I suppose it would really, if you go around banging it against things. I’m just not sure what possible health value that has, since it’s going to cool down pretty rapidly.

Hey, thanks for the remarkable content. Honestly, about five months back I started taking reading blogs and there may be just so much nonsense available. I appreciate which you put terrific subject material out that’s clear and well-written. Wonderful luck and thank you for the terrific document!!!

The World Health Organisation has also warned against using homeopathy use:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8211925.stm

“People with conditions such as HIV, TB and malaria should not rely on homeopathic treatments, the World Health Organization has warned.

It was responding to calls from young researchers who fear the promotion of homeopathy in the developing world could put people’s lives at risk.

The group Voice of Young Science Network has written to health ministers to set out the WHO view.

WHO TB experts said homeopathy had “no place” in treatment of the disease.

In a letter to the WHO in June, the medics from the UK and Africa said: “We are calling on the WHO to condemn the promotion of homeopathy for treating TB, infant diarrhoea, influenza, malaria and HIV.

“Homeopathy does not protect people from, or treat, these diseases.

“Those of us working with the most rural and impoverished people of the world already struggle to deliver the medical help that is needed.

“When homeopathy stands in place of effective treatment, lives are lost.”

Dr Robert Hagan is a researcher in biomolecular science at the University of St Andrews and a member of Voice of Young Science Network, which is part of the charity Sense About Science campaigning for “evidence-based” care.

He said: “We need governments around the world to recognise the dangers of promoting homeopathy for life-threatening illnesses.

“We hope that by raising awareness of the WHO’s position on homeopathy we will be supporting those people who are taking a stand against these potentially disastrous practices.”

‘No evidence’

Dr Mario Raviglione, director of the Stop TB department at the WHO, said: “Our evidence-based WHO TB treatment/management guidelines, as well as the International Standards of Tuberculosis Care do not recommend use of homeopathy.”

The doctors had also complained that homeopathy was being promoted as a treatment for diarrhoea in children.

But a spokesman for the WHO department of child and adolescent health and development said: “We have found no evidence to date that homeopathy would bring any benefit.

“Homeopathy does not focus on the treatment and prevention of dehydration – in total contradiction with the scientific basis and our recommendations for the management of diarrhoea.”

Dr Nick Beeching, a specialist in infectious diseases at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital, said: “Infections such as malaria, HIV and tuberculosis all have a high mortality rate but can usually be controlled or cured by a variety of proven treatments, for which there is ample experience and scientific trial data.

“There is no objective evidence that homeopathy has any effect on these infections, and I think it is irresponsible for a healthcare worker to promote the use of homeopathy in place of proven treatment for any life-threatening illness.” “

The World Health Organisation has also warned against using homeopathy use:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8211925.stm

“People with conditions such as HIV, TB and malaria should not rely on homeopathic treatments, the World Health Organization has warned.

It was responding to calls from young researchers who fear the promotion of homeopathy in the developing world could put people’s lives at risk.

The group Voice of Young Science Network has written to health ministers to set out the WHO view.

WHO TB experts said homeopathy had “no place” in treatment of the disease.

In a letter to the WHO in June, the medics from the UK and Africa said: “We are calling on the WHO to condemn the promotion of homeopathy for treating TB, infant diarrhoea, influenza, malaria and HIV.

“Homeopathy does not protect people from, or treat, these diseases.

“Those of us working with the most rural and impoverished people of the world already struggle to deliver the medical help that is needed.

“When homeopathy stands in place of effective treatment, lives are lost.”

Dr Robert Hagan is a researcher in biomolecular science at the University of St Andrews and a member of Voice of Young Science Network, which is part of the charity Sense About Science campaigning for “evidence-based” care.

He said: “We need governments around the world to recognise the dangers of promoting homeopathy for life-threatening illnesses.

“We hope that by raising awareness of the WHO’s position on homeopathy we will be supporting those people who are taking a stand against these potentially disastrous practices.”

‘No evidence’

Dr Mario Raviglione, director of the Stop TB department at the WHO, said: “Our evidence-based WHO TB treatment/management guidelines, as well as the International Standards of Tuberculosis Care do not recommend use of homeopathy.”

The doctors had also complained that homeopathy was being promoted as a treatment for diarrhoea in children.

But a spokesman for the WHO department of child and adolescent health and development said: “We have found no evidence to date that homeopathy would bring any benefit.

“Homeopathy does not focus on the treatment and prevention of dehydration – in total contradiction with the scientific basis and our recommendations for the management of diarrhoea.”

Dr Nick Beeching, a specialist in infectious diseases at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital, said: “Infections such as malaria, HIV and tuberculosis all have a high mortality rate but can usually be controlled or cured by a variety of proven treatments, for which there is ample experience and scientific trial data.

“There is no objective evidence that homeopathy has any effect on these infections, and I think it is irresponsible for a healthcare worker to promote the use of homeopathy in place of proven treatment for any life-threatening illness.” “

Switzerland?!?!

Not the home of 25 Nobel prizes, one of which was won by a young up-and-comer known as Albert Einstein?!?

…or the place with the world’s largest laboratory and world-reknowned medical research facilities?!?

PLEASE, not from the guys who invented the army knife…with a bottle opener, scissors AND a toothpick!?!

Tell me they haven’t been conned by the homeopathetic “magic water” fairies

*sigh*

I’ve often suspected that most people go for CAM because it just seems all nice and holistic and alternative, rather than because they know anything about the specific treatments in question.

Why else would people so easily mix and match CAMs? I mean if you believe in homeopathy, then herbal medicines, traditional Chinese medicines, whatever, are just as bad as pharmaceutical drugs. They’re all “allopathic” and not diluted.

Interesting site, but much advertisments on him. Shall read as subscription, rss.

I have to wonder if people in the survey perhaps mixed up homeopathy with herbal remedies. I’d love to read the actual article but it appears you need to be a registered member or somesuch.

Thanks for discussing my paper. I’m afraid you need a subscription to read the full article, but I can assure you that the responders knew it was homeopathy that we were asking about, here are some of the questions..

There is good scientific evidence that homeopathy works
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

I know what homeopathy is
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

How concentrated are homeopathic products?
Very concentrated Moderately concentrated Moderately dilute Very dilute Nothing there

Cheers

Shaun

Thanks for replying Shaun. But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?

Oh I see…I don’t think that I can prove that, although the name of the survey and questions all referred to homeopathy, I guess that some may have confused them; I don’t think so, but can’t prove this. I’ll send you a pdf if you give me your email address. Cheers

“But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?”

Well, surely that is the point: if they think homoeopathy is the same thing as herbal remedies, then they don’t know what homoeopathy is.

Quite, Mojo.

of course even the Cochrane Collaboration have been known to confuse the two!

There’s still an important difference between people not realising that homeopathic remedies contain no active ingredient, and people not realising that homeopathy isn’t the same thing as herbalism. For example if people were confusing the two, and you explained that they were different, they may then admit “in that case I’ve never used homeopathy” … in which case the claim that people who *use* homeopathy don’t know what it is, is invalidated.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re very interesting results, but if you do a similar study in the future you may want to check this distinction.

Surely this is further proof that homeopathy works by the placebo effect? It’s ‘natural’, it’s ‘traditional’, its got the royal seal of approval etc.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with the “Placebo Effect”. If only everything worked properly because of expectations.

Dr Shaun does not know any thing about this science. He doesnt understand the depth and do not have any knowledge of this wonderful science. If is driving a car blindfolded. Sir please study this science first and then comment.

Switzerland?!?!

Not the home of 25 Nobel prizes, one of which was won by a young up-and-comer known as Albert Einstein?!?

…or the place with the world’s largest laboratory and world-reknowned medical research facilities?!?

PLEASE, not from the guys who invented the army knife…with a bottle opener, scissors AND a toothpick!?!

Tell me they haven’t been conned by the homeopathetic “magic water” fairies

*sigh*

I’ve often suspected that most people go for CAM because it just seems all nice and holistic and alternative, rather than because they know anything about the specific treatments in question.

Why else would people so easily mix and match CAMs? I mean if you believe in homeopathy, then herbal medicines, traditional Chinese medicines, whatever, are just as bad as pharmaceutical drugs. They’re all “allopathic” and not diluted.

Interesting site, but much advertisments on him. Shall read as subscription, rss.

I have to wonder if people in the survey perhaps mixed up homeopathy with herbal remedies. I’d love to read the actual article but it appears you need to be a registered member or somesuch.

Thanks for discussing my paper. I’m afraid you need a subscription to read the full article, but I can assure you that the responders knew it was homeopathy that we were asking about, here are some of the questions..

There is good scientific evidence that homeopathy works
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

I know what homeopathy is
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

How concentrated are homeopathic products?
Very concentrated Moderately concentrated Moderately dilute Very dilute Nothing there

Cheers

Shaun

Thanks for replying Shaun. But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?

Oh I see…I don’t think that I can prove that, although the name of the survey and questions all referred to homeopathy, I guess that some may have confused them; I don’t think so, but can’t prove this. I’ll send you a pdf if you give me your email address. Cheers

“But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?”

Well, surely that is the point: if they think homoeopathy is the same thing as herbal remedies, then they don’t know what homoeopathy is.

Quite, Mojo.

of course even the Cochrane Collaboration have been known to confuse the two!

There’s still an important difference between people not realising that homeopathic remedies contain no active ingredient, and people not realising that homeopathy isn’t the same thing as herbalism. For example if people were confusing the two, and you explained that they were different, they may then admit “in that case I’ve never used homeopathy” … in which case the claim that people who *use* homeopathy don’t know what it is, is invalidated.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re very interesting results, but if you do a similar study in the future you may want to check this distinction.

Surely this is further proof that homeopathy works by the placebo effect? It’s ‘natural’, it’s ‘traditional’, its got the royal seal of approval etc.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with the “Placebo Effect”. If only everything worked properly because of expectations.

Dr Shaun does not know any thing about this science. He doesnt understand the depth and do not have any knowledge of this wonderful science. If is driving a car blindfolded. Sir please study this science first and then comment.

I’d just shoot them.

So go ahead and shoot them. As for me, I dislike this involvement with other peoples’ business. A damn good case could be made for pretty much everyone fucking up their kids in a million and one ways – I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business. Oh, but you’re a do-gooder are ya? You just want to save the life of a suffering and dieing kid? Sure you are. That’s probably why you’re murdering children by the dozens right now as you wear unnecessary clothes, eat unnecessary foods and own an unnecessary computer, etc. – all on money that could save the lives of suffering and dieing children.

Stop playing cowboy on the web Davey. Spend a few days thinking, come up with a philosophy that makes some sense to you and then be willing to die and kill for it, until then stop farting your half-assed homicidal tendencies around the cybersphere. Thank you.

This story demonstrates to us that many people are wholly incompetent and (in some probably useless manner) cautions us against being similarly ignorant regarding matters of high importance to us. Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.

“Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.”

I must be a moron then because I see something quite prescriptive about this story. Parents who refuse real medical treatment in favour of quack medicine, and get their children killed as a result, will be prosecuted and hopefully spend a long time in jail.

In the meantime in the USA a mother has been charged guilty of second-degree murder for letting her daughter die of diabetes because she believed prayer would heal her. All the girl needed was insulin and fluids. But the mother didn’t call 911 until after her child was dead. For this she will face up to 25 years in prison.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/05/wis-mother-guilty-of-diabetic-daughters-death.html

Homeopathy is about as effective as faith healing.

Wow! “mnuez” is not only a ignorant blowhard, but a coward too!
Why do you hide behind a pseudonym?
(That’s a ‘false name’, for the educationally sub-normal).

I’ll wager that I do not get a coherent response…

Stop playing cowboy on the web coward. Spend a few days thinking.

“I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business.”

Nice sentiment “mnuez”…just stick you head in the sand and leave people to damage their kids…its not your problem is it? What a wonderful attitude. Did you live next door to Josef Fritzl?

the next baby p.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

Tragic story – but how is it different to the countless examples one could cite of individuals praying to a God(s) for a miraculous cure, instead of treating their children/themselves with conventional medicine? Homeopathy would seem to be a ‘faith’ cure that simply doesn’t stand up to science, much in the same way all faith based belief systems don’t.

Mr K

I just happened to land in this blog. People generally do not have understanding about any system. Do we eat tablets instead of food?
What is food any way? It has some Botanical Name ? We eat milder herbs a lot to fill our stomach to get the satiated feeling. What is a spinach ? What are the herbs we use to process our food for taste or nutrition ? Homeopathy medicines mostly are taken from plants and according to their strength they are used in small doses and they sure heal the body with proper nutrition to the affected part. Most of the damages are due to malnutrition. The nature has its own laboratory to make different chemicals and keep the goodness of them. The laboratory inside human body wonderfully absorbs such healthy chemicals without inhibition or resistance, only when the dose is proper. But the conventional medicines are strong chemicals which always leave a damage in some sort in some part which is technically called side effects or contra effects. Liver and kidney struggles to deal with such waste disposal. Mostly these medicines counter the symptoms more than dealing with the actual root of the problem. The curing formula of conventional medicine is Disease _ Medicine, but with alternative medicines Disease _ Body _ Medicine. Only if the Human Body allows the cure will take place and also the manifestation of disease also play a role. If the disease : Body management ratio is 40:60 any disease can be cured if it is inverted then curing seems impossible. Surgeries also help only to certain extent. Cancer drugs are more lethal than the disease itself. Dont try to categorise anything which you do not know in full. Go read some real good Anatomy books or Physiology books. At the same time read some good Materia Medica or Botanical Guide books to know the chemical construction of the plant. You will be astonished to know the composition is always C H O but in strange arrangement. Most of the modern medicines are also derived from many plants but researchers see only the active components in the plants considering the disease but nature also has passive components which help to balance the same when absorbed in the body. Herbal treatment is complete wholesome and really scientific. I know most of the Modern Medicines play havoc in major diseases but there is no time tested method to conduct autopsy to fix the medicine or the physician. Believe and Be cured,

Believe and be cured??? The Body has to allow medicine to work??? OK, mate, chuck down a whole bottle of pills and tell yourself not to die! I’ll save you the trouble; it won’t work.

And they wonder why we make fun.

No Zeke, they *don’t* wonder. Wonderment about one’s own failings requires a specific level of consciousness that breaks through the Dunning-Kruger effect.
If any of these fatuous dickheads had managed to break through that mental barrier, they (by definition) would not support the infantile magic nostrums that they do.

Eczema is really so itchy and i cant help but scratch it. Corticosteroid is a heaven sent because it can relieve the itchiness and redness. *

Wow, just found this story and comments. I’d like to add that society has made parenting such a complex arena that not a lot of people are really prepared for the event. Parents have to made important decisions everyday. Some good and some not so, yet those bad decisions do not necessarily make them evil people. I think in this case a very bad decision (probably based on poor advice) created a very terrible and sad outcome. Perhaps if society gave parents the tools for parenting and the confidence to use common sense rather than ramming lots options down their thoats parents may then become a lot more confident and will “sense” when there is something terribly wrong. A while ago, as an older parent I believe I was able to “sense” that something was wrong with my daughter just two hours after seeing the doctor and took her to the hospital. She was admitted for a week. The doctor’s advice was to send me home with medicine and have my daughter take fuilds. She may have died if I didn’t take her to the hospital. I that happened I could have then been seen as a evil mother for not doing the right thing.

I’d just shoot them.

So go ahead and shoot them. As for me, I dislike this involvement with other peoples’ business. A damn good case could be made for pretty much everyone fucking up their kids in a million and one ways – I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business. Oh, but you’re a do-gooder are ya? You just want to save the life of a suffering and dieing kid? Sure you are. That’s probably why you’re murdering children by the dozens right now as you wear unnecessary clothes, eat unnecessary foods and own an unnecessary computer, etc. – all on money that could save the lives of suffering and dieing children.

Stop playing cowboy on the web Davey. Spend a few days thinking, come up with a philosophy that makes some sense to you and then be willing to die and kill for it, until then stop farting your half-assed homicidal tendencies around the cybersphere. Thank you.

This story demonstrates to us that many people are wholly incompetent and (in some probably useless manner) cautions us against being similarly ignorant regarding matters of high importance to us. Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.

“Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.”

I must be a moron then because I see something quite prescriptive about this story. Parents who refuse real medical treatment in favour of quack medicine, and get their children killed as a result, will be prosecuted and hopefully spend a long time in jail.

In the meantime in the USA a mother has been charged guilty of second-degree murder for letting her daughter die of diabetes because she believed prayer would heal her. All the girl needed was insulin and fluids. But the mother didn’t call 911 until after her child was dead. For this she will face up to 25 years in prison.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/05/wis-mother-guilty-of-diabetic-daughters-death.html

Homeopathy is about as effective as faith healing.

Wow! “mnuez” is not only a ignorant blowhard, but a coward too!
Why do you hide behind a pseudonym?
(That’s a ‘false name’, for the educationally sub-normal).

I’ll wager that I do not get a coherent response…

Stop playing cowboy on the web coward. Spend a few days thinking.

“I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business.”

Nice sentiment “mnuez”…just stick you head in the sand and leave people to damage their kids…its not your problem is it? What a wonderful attitude. Did you live next door to Josef Fritzl?

the next baby p.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

Tragic story – but how is it different to the countless examples one could cite of individuals praying to a God(s) for a miraculous cure, instead of treating their children/themselves with conventional medicine? Homeopathy would seem to be a ‘faith’ cure that simply doesn’t stand up to science, much in the same way all faith based belief systems don’t.

Mr K

I just happened to land in this blog. People generally do not have understanding about any system. Do we eat tablets instead of food?
What is food any way? It has some Botanical Name ? We eat milder herbs a lot to fill our stomach to get the satiated feeling. What is a spinach ? What are the herbs we use to process our food for taste or nutrition ? Homeopathy medicines mostly are taken from plants and according to their strength they are used in small doses and they sure heal the body with proper nutrition to the affected part. Most of the damages are due to malnutrition. The nature has its own laboratory to make different chemicals and keep the goodness of them. The laboratory inside human body wonderfully absorbs such healthy chemicals without inhibition or resistance, only when the dose is proper. But the conventional medicines are strong chemicals which always leave a damage in some sort in some part which is technically called side effects or contra effects. Liver and kidney struggles to deal with such waste disposal. Mostly these medicines counter the symptoms more than dealing with the actual root of the problem. The curing formula of conventional medicine is Disease _ Medicine, but with alternative medicines Disease _ Body _ Medicine. Only if the Human Body allows the cure will take place and also the manifestation of disease also play a role. If the disease : Body management ratio is 40:60 any disease can be cured if it is inverted then curing seems impossible. Surgeries also help only to certain extent. Cancer drugs are more lethal than the disease itself. Dont try to categorise anything which you do not know in full. Go read some real good Anatomy books or Physiology books. At the same time read some good Materia Medica or Botanical Guide books to know the chemical construction of the plant. You will be astonished to know the composition is always C H O but in strange arrangement. Most of the modern medicines are also derived from many plants but researchers see only the active components in the plants considering the disease but nature also has passive components which help to balance the same when absorbed in the body. Herbal treatment is complete wholesome and really scientific. I know most of the Modern Medicines play havoc in major diseases but there is no time tested method to conduct autopsy to fix the medicine or the physician. Believe and Be cured,

Believe and be cured??? The Body has to allow medicine to work??? OK, mate, chuck down a whole bottle of pills and tell yourself not to die! I’ll save you the trouble; it won’t work.

And they wonder why we make fun.

No Zeke, they *don’t* wonder. Wonderment about one’s own failings requires a specific level of consciousness that breaks through the Dunning-Kruger effect.
If any of these fatuous dickheads had managed to break through that mental barrier, they (by definition) would not support the infantile magic nostrums that they do.

Eczema is really so itchy and i cant help but scratch it. Corticosteroid is a heaven sent because it can relieve the itchiness and redness. *

Wow, just found this story and comments. I’d like to add that society has made parenting such a complex arena that not a lot of people are really prepared for the event. Parents have to made important decisions everyday. Some good and some not so, yet those bad decisions do not necessarily make them evil people. I think in this case a very bad decision (probably based on poor advice) created a very terrible and sad outcome. Perhaps if society gave parents the tools for parenting and the confidence to use common sense rather than ramming lots options down their thoats parents may then become a lot more confident and will “sense” when there is something terribly wrong. A while ago, as an older parent I believe I was able to “sense” that something was wrong with my daughter just two hours after seeing the doctor and took her to the hospital. She was admitted for a week. The doctor’s advice was to send me home with medicine and have my daughter take fuilds. She may have died if I didn’t take her to the hospital. I that happened I could have then been seen as a evil mother for not doing the right thing.

What’s the point of regulating something that doesn’t work?! I saw the announcement of this new organisation being discussed on BBC Breakfast – not once did they mention that the treatments that will be ‘regulated’ are placebos at best.

The work ‘kitemark’ is a Registered Trademark of the British Standards Institute and I doubt they have given CNHC (aka OfQuack, http://www.ofquack.org.uk) permission to use that word.

I’ve emailed BSI and I’ll try to remember to post their response here.

I suspect OfQuack will have to change their website and all their literature when BSI tell them they can’t use the word ‘kitemark’!

A result! I got a response from the BSI. I’ve not checked OfQuack’s website yet, but at least they’ve had their wrists slapped. However, the thought of BSI issuing a British Standard for homoeopathy, just doesn’t bear thinking about!

“Thank you for your enquiry and your concern for Kitemark. Please be assured that we take the protection of our trademark extremely seriously and all potential mis-usage is reported to our Group Legal department where we have a team specialised in Intellectual Property and its protection.

The legal team have been in contact with CNHC about their use of Kitemark and the Co-Chair of this organisation has assured us that they did not intend to mis-use Kitemark, have issued sincere apologies and have committed to put this in writing along with a commitment not to use the word again.

If you re-visit the links you should see that they have removed reference to Kitemark. Naturally should CNHC be interested in commissioning a standard and a Kitemark scheme then BSI would be only to happy to discuss this with them.

Thank once again for your query and I hope that this clarifies the situation and our action.”

Worried that practitioners can get government certification from CNHC without showing that their treatments are effective, or even safe? Me too, so here’s a link to the Number 10 petition requiring evidence of efficacy and safety be made a requirement for CNHC approval.

Anti-Homeopathists have quite a terrible “problem” on their hands. They keep providing statistics, ignoring favorable Homeopathic research, and persist in innuendo and hysteria gainst it. GP’s, and other mediclal professionals keep learning its intricacies and people keep using it and getting better – getting better and getting cured WITHOUT the side effect laden pills, nostrums and hookery typical of pharmaceutical industry products. Oh it’s JUST placebo effect, it is proclaimed, and it is all quackery and nonsense. But people STILL keep using it and improving and getting out of their sickbeds, and start walking about healthy and happy after having gotten sicker with conventional remedies. What can the poor anti-Alternative medicine inuendo-ists do but keep repeating the same misrepresnetations and keep repeating pharmaceutical industry sponsored nonsense – attacking Prince Charles, printing anti-Homeopathy letters with offiical looking NHS logo seals, pretending that pro Homepathy research, does not exist and other anti-scientific hysteria fully indicative that both the politics and the medicine of suppression has reached the end of its road and has chosen to expire with a last gasp of unreasoning hysteria and hatred that anyone should dare disposses them of their sacred and self appointed position as owners of the one and only “standard” medicine. People are so fickle – how dare they abandon standards just because some inexpensive pill dares cure them, and promptly of some malady. How dare they!!!

Totally agree with you, Sceptics Bane…

I had Ulcerative Colitis, took loads of modern drugs, no effect; tried homeopathy, relieved 80%. In many poor countries like mine (Bangladesh), people get cheap but effective treatment by homeopathic, herbal and other alternative medicines, much to the distress of big pharmaceuticals. These alternative medicines have little side effects.

What’s the point of regulating something that doesn’t work?! I saw the announcement of this new organisation being discussed on BBC Breakfast – not once did they mention that the treatments that will be ‘regulated’ are placebos at best.

The work ‘kitemark’ is a Registered Trademark of the British Standards Institute and I doubt they have given CNHC (aka OfQuack, http://www.ofquack.org.uk) permission to use that word.

I’ve emailed BSI and I’ll try to remember to post their response here.

I suspect OfQuack will have to change their website and all their literature when BSI tell them they can’t use the word ‘kitemark’!

A result! I got a response from the BSI. I’ve not checked OfQuack’s website yet, but at least they’ve had their wrists slapped. However, the thought of BSI issuing a British Standard for homoeopathy, just doesn’t bear thinking about!

“Thank you for your enquiry and your concern for Kitemark. Please be assured that we take the protection of our trademark extremely seriously and all potential mis-usage is reported to our Group Legal department where we have a team specialised in Intellectual Property and its protection.

The legal team have been in contact with CNHC about their use of Kitemark and the Co-Chair of this organisation has assured us that they did not intend to mis-use Kitemark, have issued sincere apologies and have committed to put this in writing along with a commitment not to use the word again.

If you re-visit the links you should see that they have removed reference to Kitemark. Naturally should CNHC be interested in commissioning a standard and a Kitemark scheme then BSI would be only to happy to discuss this with them.

Thank once again for your query and I hope that this clarifies the situation and our action.”

Worried that practitioners can get government certification from CNHC without showing that their treatments are effective, or even safe? Me too, so here’s a link to the Number 10 petition requiring evidence of efficacy and safety be made a requirement for CNHC approval.

Anti-Homeopathists have quite a terrible “problem” on their hands. They keep providing statistics, ignoring favorable Homeopathic research, and persist in innuendo and hysteria gainst it. GP’s, and other mediclal professionals keep learning its intricacies and people keep using it and getting better – getting better and getting cured WITHOUT the side effect laden pills, nostrums and hookery typical of pharmaceutical industry products. Oh it’s JUST placebo effect, it is proclaimed, and it is all quackery and nonsense. But people STILL keep using it and improving and getting out of their sickbeds, and start walking about healthy and happy after having gotten sicker with conventional remedies. What can the poor anti-Alternative medicine inuendo-ists do but keep repeating the same misrepresnetations and keep repeating pharmaceutical industry sponsored nonsense – attacking Prince Charles, printing anti-Homeopathy letters with offiical looking NHS logo seals, pretending that pro Homepathy research, does not exist and other anti-scientific hysteria fully indicative that both the politics and the medicine of suppression has reached the end of its road and has chosen to expire with a last gasp of unreasoning hysteria and hatred that anyone should dare disposses them of their sacred and self appointed position as owners of the one and only “standard” medicine. People are so fickle – how dare they abandon standards just because some inexpensive pill dares cure them, and promptly of some malady. How dare they!!!

Totally agree with you, Sceptics Bane…

I had Ulcerative Colitis, took loads of modern drugs, no effect; tried homeopathy, relieved 80%. In many poor countries like mine (Bangladesh), people get cheap but effective treatment by homeopathic, herbal and other alternative medicines, much to the distress of big pharmaceuticals. These alternative medicines have little side effects.

This rather long list of recommendations seems sensible (and, broadly speaking, grounded in science):

http://www.mahalo.com/How_to_Cure_a_Hangover

But can you imagine actually doing all of that? Talk about killing the mood.

The only hangover cure I know if is to have another drink.

This advice is free. Pass it on…

Try a large plate of mashed spuds. Lots of butter and seasoning. Actually, a large plate of mashed spuds before you over-indulge helps no end as well.

Wait, what? Abstinence-only hangover prevention?

Good stuff, all of them are full of shit haha. Thanks for the article.

Ah hangovers aren’t tooooo great! Lots of water sometimes works, depends what mood my bodies in. if i’m gonna have more than a few drinks i always have my lifeline hangover defense. It makes me feel much better than without taking it, so i’m sure it does something good!

a wee bit harsh! There are loads of home remedies that work, and if you drink a vitamin drink before sleeping it really helps. There are some recommendations on this free site for example: http://www.prevent-hangovers.com
I haven’t tried them all but some at least help. There’s no 100% guaranteed cure anywhere though..

sleep and coconut water.

This rather long list of recommendations seems sensible (and, broadly speaking, grounded in science):

http://www.mahalo.com/How_to_Cure_a_Hangover

But can you imagine actually doing all of that? Talk about killing the mood.

The only hangover cure I know if is to have another drink.

This advice is free. Pass it on…

Try a large plate of mashed spuds. Lots of butter and seasoning. Actually, a large plate of mashed spuds before you over-indulge helps no end as well.

Wait, what? Abstinence-only hangover prevention?

Good stuff, all of them are full of shit haha. Thanks for the article.

Ah hangovers aren’t tooooo great! Lots of water sometimes works, depends what mood my bodies in. if i’m gonna have more than a few drinks i always have my lifeline hangover defense. It makes me feel much better than without taking it, so i’m sure it does something good!

a wee bit harsh! There are loads of home remedies that work, and if you drink a vitamin drink before sleeping it really helps. There are some recommendations on this free site for example: http://www.prevent-hangovers.com
I haven’t tried them all but some at least help. There’s no 100% guaranteed cure anywhere though..

sleep and coconut water.

Just to clarify, were these herbal remedies or homeopathic products? It *seemed* that the Mail article may have been talking about remedies with active ingredients remaining in them, though this wasn’t entirely clear

Good question. From the news reports, it’s not entirely clear (I’ve tweaked my post slightly to take this into account). If I manage to find out anything further, I’ll add it here. Thanks for the query.

It would appear to be homeopathic products that he is adding since he talks about “taking” arnica. Arnica is toxic if ingested at any significant dose – so not a problem in homeopathy (it also has no effect on bruising but, hey, let’s not get picky).

It pains me to defend him in any way but, in fairness, his car does not run on red wine – it runs on biofuel distilled from excess wine production. It is a little “tabloid” to suggest otherwise.

Charles is an ignorant buffoon. It is quite beyond me why we have any need for these parasites at all. They contribute almost nothing and take a huge amount. Still, at least the queen seems fairly inoffensive and shows no sign of abdicating in favour of her idiot child.

If we’re fortunate he may be dumb enough to try to enforce his will on parliament, and we all know what happened last time a King tried to do that!!

Mind you, we could do without the civil war bit in the middle I guess.

Let me get this right, you don’t know if your are talking about homeopathic or herbal medicine, Does this mean you cannot distinguish between the two?
I would suggest you get your facts right before posting your sneers

@Paracelsus (or is it Steve?)

No, it means there was a *possible* mistake in the article – it isn’t clear yet. But I made a change just in case.

Not Paracelsus nor Steve.
My name is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that at the time of writing you did not have knowledge what type of products ‘Dutchy Originals’ are planning to deal in.
I guess your original post was based on the premise of Charlie punting homeopathy, which is not what the news article states. OK so it was a mistake, A mistake that is not acceptable within a website that by its nature derides innacuracies, assumptions, hearsay and false information.
You obviously believe that the news article was in error by stating herbal remedies and herbal tintures, very possible.
Given, you did ammend your post but the post was based on him promoting homeopathy not herbal remedies, it kind of alters the applicability of the post does’nt it?

That’s some smart headgear the Prince is sporting there—stylish and functional. It allows the scalp to breathe. And it can double as an emergency facemask if the Prince is ever suddenly attacked by a swarm of angry bees.

In any case, the original article from the “Daily Mail” refers to the new product line being introduced as “herbal tinctures.” According to the Wikipedia article on “Herbalism,” a tincture is one of a number of different ways in which an herb may be administered. It describes an herbal tincture as an “alcoholic extract” that is “[u]sually obtained by combining 100% pure ethanol (or a mixture of 100% ethanol with water) with the herb. A completed tincture has an ethanol percentage of at least 40-60% (sometimes up to 90%).” So while the firm is described as “a leading British homeopathic manufacturer” in the article, the new products don’t appear to qualify as homeopathic.

Homeopathy is almost certainly absolute nonsense. And it’s perfectly fair and reasonable to raise questions about the efficacy and safety of non-homeopathic herbal products, as well. But it is important not to conflate the two.

Eric,
This loon is a known supporter of homeopathy. We’ll have to wait and see but I bet it’s a Duchy homeopathic treatment. Even if it’s a herbalist thing, it’s still silly – just not as silly.

Not Paracelsus nor Steve, you’re a troll.

From Wasp_Box: “Even if it’s a herbalist thing, it’s still silly–just not as silly.”

I’m inclined to agree with you.

@Wasp_Box

Thanks. I reserve the right to block IP addresses linked to persistent trolls. 195.11.59.55 is one such address.

@ Wasp_Box

‘Arnica is toxic if ingested at any significant dose – so not a problem in homeopathy (it also has no effect on bruising but, hey, let’s not get picky).’

I would tend to agree, as Sesquiterpene lactones take a while to permeate the skin at tincture concentrations, probably too long to reduce visible bruising.
The anti inflammatory and analgesic effects of SL are well documented in clinical studies however.
These would seem to validate the observations from the historical use of Arnica.
I would say that just because it is herbal does not mean care must not be taken in its use, as with any.

Even before the grotesque car phone conversations between HRH and his then concibine were revealed to the world, I suspected his brain was filled with mush. No I am absolutely convinced of it. God save the UK if this unfortunate chap ever becomes the king.

Panic over…….

http://www.duchyoriginals.com/herbals.php

the good thing about herbal remedies is that they do not have side effects.”*`

i like to have some herbal remedies because they do not have bad side effects compared to drugs.”.”

Just to clarify, were these herbal remedies or homeopathic products? It *seemed* that the Mail article may have been talking about remedies with active ingredients remaining in them, though this wasn’t entirely clear

Good question. From the news reports, it’s not entirely clear (I’ve tweaked my post slightly to take this into account). If I manage to find out anything further, I’ll add it here. Thanks for the query.

It would appear to be homeopathic products that he is adding since he talks about “taking” arnica. Arnica is toxic if ingested at any significant dose – so not a problem in homeopathy (it also has no effect on bruising but, hey, let’s not get picky).

It pains me to defend him in any way but, in fairness, his car does not run on red wine – it runs on biofuel distilled from excess wine production. It is a little “tabloid” to suggest otherwise.

Charles is an ignorant buffoon. It is quite beyond me why we have any need for these parasites at all. They contribute almost nothing and take a huge amount. Still, at least the queen seems fairly inoffensive and shows no sign of abdicating in favour of her idiot child.

If we’re fortunate he may be dumb enough to try to enforce his will on parliament, and we all know what happened last time a King tried to do that!!

Mind you, we could do without the civil war bit in the middle I guess.

Let me get this right, you don’t know if your are talking about homeopathic or herbal medicine, Does this mean you cannot distinguish between the two?
I would suggest you get your facts right before posting your sneers

@Paracelsus (or is it Steve?)

No, it means there was a *possible* mistake in the article – it isn’t clear yet. But I made a change just in case.

Not Paracelsus nor Steve.
My name is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that at the time of writing you did not have knowledge what type of products ‘Dutchy Originals’ are planning to deal in.
I guess your original post was based on the premise of Charlie punting homeopathy, which is not what the news article states. OK so it was a mistake, A mistake that is not acceptable within a website that by its nature derides innacuracies, assumptions, hearsay and false information.
You obviously believe that the news article was in error by stating herbal remedies and herbal tintures, very possible.
Given, you did ammend your post but the post was based on him promoting homeopathy not herbal remedies, it kind of alters the applicability of the post does’nt it?

That’s some smart headgear the Prince is sporting there—stylish and functional. It allows the scalp to breathe. And it can double as an emergency facemask if the Prince is ever suddenly attacked by a swarm of angry bees.

In any case, the original article from the “Daily Mail” refers to the new product line being introduced as “herbal tinctures.” According to the Wikipedia article on “Herbalism,” a tincture is one of a number of different ways in which an herb may be administered. It describes an herbal tincture as an “alcoholic extract” that is “[u]sually obtained by combining 100% pure ethanol (or a mixture of 100% ethanol with water) with the herb. A completed tincture has an ethanol percentage of at least 40-60% (sometimes up to 90%).” So while the firm is described as “a leading British homeopathic manufacturer” in the article, the new products don’t appear to qualify as homeopathic.

Homeopathy is almost certainly absolute nonsense. And it’s perfectly fair and reasonable to raise questions about the efficacy and safety of non-homeopathic herbal products, as well. But it is important not to conflate the two.

Eric,
This loon is a known supporter of homeopathy. We’ll have to wait and see but I bet it’s a Duchy homeopathic treatment. Even if it’s a herbalist thing, it’s still silly – just not as silly.

Not Paracelsus nor Steve, you’re a troll.

From Wasp_Box: “Even if it’s a herbalist thing, it’s still silly–just not as silly.”

I’m inclined to agree with you.

@Wasp_Box

Thanks. I reserve the right to block IP addresses linked to persistent trolls. 195.11.59.55 is one such address.

@ Wasp_Box

‘Arnica is toxic if ingested at any significant dose – so not a problem in homeopathy (it also has no effect on bruising but, hey, let’s not get picky).’

I would tend to agree, as Sesquiterpene lactones take a while to permeate the skin at tincture concentrations, probably too long to reduce visible bruising.
The anti inflammatory and analgesic effects of SL are well documented in clinical studies however.
These would seem to validate the observations from the historical use of Arnica.
I would say that just because it is herbal does not mean care must not be taken in its use, as with any.

Even before the grotesque car phone conversations between HRH and his then concibine were revealed to the world, I suspected his brain was filled with mush. No I am absolutely convinced of it. God save the UK if this unfortunate chap ever becomes the king.

Panic over…….

http://www.duchyoriginals.com/herbals.php

the good thing about herbal remedies is that they do not have side effects.”*`

i like to have some herbal remedies because they do not have bad side effects compared to drugs.”.”

much as I would like to think that this points to the demise of homeopathy, I can think of an alternative explanation of this data: let’s simplistically consider why people might search for something… one of the obvious cases (especially for a long, quasi-medical term) is that they don’t know what it is and they want a definition. The other main case would be people searching for services related to something.
I could imagine that it is at least possible that this data simply indicates that most people now understand homeopathy (er, well, as much as it possible to understand if you know what I mean) and therefore searches are dropping off while underlying demand is still constant.
I hope that’s not the case but let’s be a little more scientific with interpretation of data huh? Especially given that it is a complete disregard for scientific proof that supports all this nonsense in the first place

This data is not 100% scientific, Iain, and I think my post makes that very clear.

But your interpretation, that “it is at least possible that this data simply indicates that most people now understand homeopathy… and therefore searches are dropping off while underlying demand is still constant”, is possible but, in my opinion, much less likely.

Google is the internet’s most prevalent search tool – if people are googling “homeopathy” less, it probably shows less interest in the alternative medicine. People know who Prince Charles is, but that won’t stop them googling him if it is his birthday!

I don’t know, Ian may have a point. Check ISP for trends and there’s a more dramatic drop off
http://www.google.com/trends?q=isp&ctab=0&geo=GB&geor=all&date=all&sort=0
Would this suggest that ISPs are going out of business (if they were currently going out of business I guess that could cause a drop off, presumably in searches for everything though), I would suggest that 4/5 years ago a the start of the broadband explosion, noonoe knew what an ISP was, now people are familliar with the concept.

I do however wish you continued good fortune in any attempt to quash the evil homeopathy!!

Piers, that’s is an interesting observation. But I’m not sure there’s a link – homeopathy has been around (as I mentioned in the article) since the late 18th century. There was no homeopathy explosion in 2004, so no obvious reason for people to stop wanting to search for it now. I maintain that the most likely explanation for a drop in google searches is an overall lack of interest in the subject.

It would be interesting to see a comparison/contrast in the trends of multi-word searches. For example, we can infer different things from the trends in searches for

homeopathy buy now

versus trends in searches for

homeopathy scams

or

homeopathy criticism

I notice the same thing for “alternative medicine”.

On the other side of the fence, here’s Google trends on “counterknowledge” and “pseudoscience”:

“Your terms – counterknowledge – do not have enough search volume to show graphs.”

“Your terms – pseudoscience – do not have enough search volume to show graphs.”

(

Surely for a homeopath the less of something there is the *better* the result?

@ Steve

LOL!!!

Will, you don’t really get the whole scientific approach and constructive criticism thing do you?
I pointed out a perfectly plausible alternative interpretation of the data (and note, I know the *data* is not 100% accurate or ’scientific’ but I’m saying your *interpretation* is not scientific…). You just rejected it out of hand since in your “opinion” you think you’re right.
It didn’t take me very long to google and find the following articles for UK and US markets respectively which (sadly) suggests homeopathy booming:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/apr/20/healthandwellbeing.medicalresearch
http://www.retailwire.com/Discussions/Sngl_Discussion.cfm/13169
Perhaps a bit of research would have rounded out the article?

Now you might still be right and I hope you are… but the point is your article directly inferred a very simple correlation between searches and homeopathy demand. Which isn’t much better journalism than the media inferring that archeologists have just found oil which might have been used to wash Jesus’ feet (and which this site rightly derided as sloppy and sensationalist).
Start paying more attention to Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science site and be very careful about correlation…

Hi Iain,

Sorry for the delayed response. Your previous criticism was appreciated and, indeed, constructive!

But how it is really possible to have a scientific approach to what, as we both agree, is unscientific data?

I did accept your interpretation as “possible”/plausible, and my dismissal of it was largely because of my opinion. However, my opinion is based on other factors: Why did the “University” of Central Lancashire scrap its quack degrees earlier this year? And why has the Society of Homeopaths stopped publishing its membership figures?

My comment and the article make very clear that the Google correlation is not exactly concrete evidence (I even quote at length Google’s disclaimer!) but I still feel it was worth noting.

Your articles – thank you for the links – are not specific to homeopathy. And the Guardian, bless it, quotes Edzard Ernst, professor of complementary medicine at Exeter University. Research him, why don’t you?

All the best,

Will

For every article claiming a massive increase in those trying out alternative remedies, you find another claiming the contrary – or at least suggesting that the real number of CAM enthusiasts is actually very low.

It’s difficult to work out exactly where the truth lies, partly because a lot of the figures come from members of the CAM industry itself. When governments do conduct surveys, the results are often worrying:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/132568.php
(It should be noted that “alternative” is defined pretty broadly by this survey, though.)

http://health.usnews.com/blogs/comarow-on-quality/2008/12/12/alternative-medicines-rapid-spread-nonsense.html?s_cid=rss:comarow-on-quality:alternative-medicines-rapid-spread-nonsense

I would seriously doubt that homeopathy would be destroyed by 2012. The search volume drop simply means people are finding homeopathic products by other means. It will probably continue to grow throughout the UK and the rest of the world due to low cost of products.

Searches for everything are down because we are having a recession. Duh! Pretty graph though! Property searches are down. Does this mean the end of estate agents by 2012? I certainly hope so! Homeopathy saved my sisters life. She had terrible asthma requiring frequent hospitalization. I remember the ambulances. She was under the care of Great Ormond Street but nothing they had helped much at all. The doctors at the London Homeopathic Hospital made her better.

A decline in web search in a subject does never indicate reducing use of that branch of knowledge.On the other hand , one has to find out what age group of people and for which purpose they are mostly browsing web.I hope this will clear the storm in a tea pot., thanks.

much as I would like to think that this points to the demise of homeopathy, I can think of an alternative explanation of this data: let’s simplistically consider why people might search for something… one of the obvious cases (especially for a long, quasi-medical term) is that they don’t know what it is and they want a definition. The other main case would be people searching for services related to something.
I could imagine that it is at least possible that this data simply indicates that most people now understand homeopathy (er, well, as much as it possible to understand if you know what I mean) and therefore searches are dropping off while underlying demand is still constant.
I hope that’s not the case but let’s be a little more scientific with interpretation of data huh? Especially given that it is a complete disregard for scientific proof that supports all this nonsense in the first place

This data is not 100% scientific, Iain, and I think my post makes that very clear.

But your interpretation, that “it is at least possible that this data simply indicates that most people now understand homeopathy… and therefore searches are dropping off while underlying demand is still constant”, is possible but, in my opinion, much less likely.

Google is the internet’s most prevalent search tool – if people are googling “homeopathy” less, it probably shows less interest in the alternative medicine. People know who Prince Charles is, but that won’t stop them googling him if it is his birthday!

I don’t know, Ian may have a point. Check ISP for trends and there’s a more dramatic drop off
http://www.google.com/trends?q=isp&ctab=0&geo=GB&geor=all&date=all&sort=0
Would this suggest that ISPs are going out of business (if they were currently going out of business I guess that could cause a drop off, presumably in searches for everything though), I would suggest that 4/5 years ago a the start of the broadband explosion, noonoe knew what an ISP was, now people are familliar with the concept.

I do however wish you continued good fortune in any attempt to quash the evil homeopathy!!

Piers, that’s is an interesting observation. But I’m not sure there’s a link – homeopathy has been around (as I mentioned in the article) since the late 18th century. There was no homeopathy explosion in 2004, so no obvious reason for people to stop wanting to search for it now. I maintain that the most likely explanation for a drop in google searches is an overall lack of interest in the subject.

It would be interesting to see a comparison/contrast in the trends of multi-word searches. For example, we can infer different things from the trends in searches for

homeopathy buy now

versus trends in searches for

homeopathy scams

or

homeopathy criticism

I notice the same thing for “alternative medicine”.

On the other side of the fence, here’s Google trends on “counterknowledge” and “pseudoscience”:

“Your terms – counterknowledge – do not have enough search volume to show graphs.”

“Your terms – pseudoscience – do not have enough search volume to show graphs.”

(

Surely for a homeopath the less of something there is the *better* the result?

@ Steve

LOL!!!

Will, you don’t really get the whole scientific approach and constructive criticism thing do you?
I pointed out a perfectly plausible alternative interpretation of the data (and note, I know the *data* is not 100% accurate or ’scientific’ but I’m saying your *interpretation* is not scientific…). You just rejected it out of hand since in your “opinion” you think you’re right.
It didn’t take me very long to google and find the following articles for UK and US markets respectively which (sadly) suggests homeopathy booming:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/apr/20/healthandwellbeing.medicalresearch
http://www.retailwire.com/Discussions/Sngl_Discussion.cfm/13169
Perhaps a bit of research would have rounded out the article?

Now you might still be right and I hope you are… but the point is your article directly inferred a very simple correlation between searches and homeopathy demand. Which isn’t much better journalism than the media inferring that archeologists have just found oil which might have been used to wash Jesus’ feet (and which this site rightly derided as sloppy and sensationalist).
Start paying more attention to Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science site and be very careful about correlation…

Hi Iain,

Sorry for the delayed response. Your previous criticism was appreciated and, indeed, constructive!

But how it is really possible to have a scientific approach to what, as we both agree, is unscientific data?

I did accept your interpretation as “possible”/plausible, and my dismissal of it was largely because of my opinion. However, my opinion is based on other factors: Why did the “University” of Central Lancashire scrap its quack degrees earlier this year? And why has the Society of Homeopaths stopped publishing its membership figures?

My comment and the article make very clear that the Google correlation is not exactly concrete evidence (I even quote at length Google’s disclaimer!) but I still feel it was worth noting.

Your articles – thank you for the links – are not specific to homeopathy. And the Guardian, bless it, quotes Edzard Ernst, professor of complementary medicine at Exeter University. Research him, why don’t you?

All the best,

Will

For every article claiming a massive increase in those trying out alternative remedies, you find another claiming the contrary – or at least suggesting that the real number of CAM enthusiasts is actually very low.

It’s difficult to work out exactly where the truth lies, partly because a lot of the figures come from members of the CAM industry itself. When governments do conduct surveys, the results are often worrying:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/132568.php
(It should be noted that “alternative” is defined pretty broadly by this survey, though.)

http://health.usnews.com/blogs/comarow-on-quality/2008/12/12/alternative-medicines-rapid-spread-nonsense.html?s_cid=rss:comarow-on-quality:alternative-medicines-rapid-spread-nonsense

I would seriously doubt that homeopathy would be destroyed by 2012. The search volume drop simply means people are finding homeopathic products by other means. It will probably continue to grow throughout the UK and the rest of the world due to low cost of products.

Searches for everything are down because we are having a recession. Duh! Pretty graph though! Property searches are down. Does this mean the end of estate agents by 2012? I certainly hope so! Homeopathy saved my sisters life. She had terrible asthma requiring frequent hospitalization. I remember the ambulances. She was under the care of Great Ormond Street but nothing they had helped much at all. The doctors at the London Homeopathic Hospital made her better.

A decline in web search in a subject does never indicate reducing use of that branch of knowledge.On the other hand , one has to find out what age group of people and for which purpose they are mostly browsing web.I hope this will clear the storm in a tea pot., thanks.

Good for prince Charles…He has bene proven right. But as any one can tell, the only people who stand to benefit from GM and are pushing it are the corporations like the sinister Monsanto and scientists who developed GM.

AND as for Homeopathy:
Two New Studies Find Anti-Homeopathy Review Wrong
by Sherry Baker (see all articles by this author)

(NaturalNews) In August of 2005, the prestigious British medical journal the Lancet published a review comparing clinical trials of homeopathy with trials of conventional medicine. The conclusion of this study, which was widely hailed as evidence that homeopathy is worthless quackery, stated that homeopathic medicines are non-effective and, at best, just placebos. What’s more, an accompanying editorial in the Lancet said this “evidence” should close the door on the non-toxic, alternative treatment method, and flatly proclaimed this review should mark “the end of homeopathy”. Now two newly published studies, one in the journal Homeopathy and the other in the mainstream medical Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, have both gone on record to say the Lancet review was enormously flawed and downright inaccurate. Instead of showing homeopathy doesn’t work, the conclusion should have been that, at least for some ailments, it is effective.

Homeopathy involves giving very small doses of substances called remedies that, according to homeopathy, would produce the same or similar symptoms of illness in healthy people if they were given in larger doses. The goal of homeopathy is to stimulate the body’s defense system in order to prevent or treat illness. Homeopathy treatment is tailored to each individual and homeopathic practitioners work to select remedies according to a total picture of the patient, including not only symptoms but lifestyle, emotional and mental states, and other factors.

The original claim made in the Lancet review that homeopathic medicines are worthless treatments (other than being placebos) was based on six clinical trials of conventional medicine and eight studies of homeopathy. But what trials, exactly, were studied? It turns out the Lancet did not reveal this most basic information and, as the new studies point out, seriously flawed assumptions were made about the data that was presented. There are a limited number of homeopathic studies so it is not difficult to pick and choose facts to interpret selectively and unfavorably, which appears to be just what was done in the original Lancet anti-homeopathy article.

Bottom line: the Lancet’s report showing homeopathy is worthless lacked the academic care and scientific approach called for in medical journals. In fact, it could well be seen as a hack job.

In a statement to the press, George Lewith, Professor of Health Research at Southampton University in Great Britain, stated: “The review gave no indication of which trials were analyzed nor of the various vital assumptions made about the data. This is not usual scientific practice. If we presume that homeopathy works for some conditions but not others, or change the definition of a ‘larger trial’, the conclusions change. This indicates a fundamental weakness in the conclusions: they are NOT reliable.”

The two recently published scientific papers that investigated the previous Lancet review conclude that an analysis of all high quality trials of homeopathy show positive outcomes. What’s more, the eight larger and higher quality trials of homeopathy looked at a variety of medical conditions. The new studies point out that because homeopathy worked consistently for some of these ailments and not others, the results must indicate that homeopathic remedies can’t be simply placebos. In addition, the studies conclude that comparing homeopathy to conventional medicine was a meaningless apples-and-oranges approach. There are also concerns that the original anti-homeopathy review used unpublished criteria. For example, the researchers didn’t bother to define what they meant by “higher quality” homeopathy research.

The new studies not only cast serious doubts on the original Lancet review, which was headed by Professor Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne, but they strongly indicate Egger and his team based their conclusions on a series of hidden judgments that were prejudiced against homeopathy. So far,Professor Egger has declined to comment on the findings of the new studies in Homeopathy and the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,

A press statement from the National Center for Homeopathy explains that an open assessment of the current evidence suggests that homeopathy is probably effective for many conditions including allergies, upper respiratory tract infections and flu, but agrees that much more research is needed. To that end, the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) has announced it is currently supporting research in these areas:

* Homeopathy for physical, mental, and emotional symptoms of fibromyalgia (a chronic disorder involving widespread musculoskeletal pain, multiple tender points on the body, and fatigue).
* Homeopathy to help relieve or prevent brain deterioration and damage in stroke and dementia.
* Homeopathy (specifically the remedy cadmium) to potentially prevent damage to the cells of the prostate when those cells are exposed to toxins.

http://www.naturalnews.com/024852.html

Change the genetic structure of the food you eat and you change your OWN cell health. Longitudinal studies (over many years) have not been performed on GE crop seeds because agritech is expensive business and having a patent prior to contaminating farms creates a monopoly when seed patents come into play. I’m surprised to hear the Prince of Wales uttering such words about destruction. Perhaps he is aware of the Ark project. Why do we need such a thing? Perhaps there is growing concern by some of the elites surrounding the monopolisation and how it will work in with Codex Alimentarius.

Not sure about homeopathic treatments, but if you’re made of water and you treat yourself with water…I guess it must have some benefit – if only on a mind-over-matter basis. Good nutrition is key to maintaining good health and yes, sometimes vitamins can help, but unlike modern medicine which often treats the symptom rather than the cause (and makes a few people richer in the process), vitamins and minerals are meant to treat a cause, not just a symptom.

Interesting article and I really hope that Charles follows his mum’s example and doesn’t do himself out of a job by publicly expressing his views in his role as monarch.

In a separate but related point, does anyone else have a problem dealing with the consequences of the placebo effect ? People that are close to me get succour from homeopathy but obviously if I were to point out the counter knowledge of this belief I would be removing the benefit of the placebo effect that they gain. A bit of a bind and I would like to know how the blogasphere handle what must be a common problem ?

Interesting to see anti-GE sentiments going hand-in-hand with pro-homeopathy beliefs. Not just in his ‘highness’ but in some of the commenters here. I guess water must help, eh?

Disseminate, you may be happy with medicine in the Dark Ages, but I’m afraid I want mine to work.

Brian…you get all the proven scientific evidence you can find for homeopathy working and I will get all the proven evidence I can find on it not working and we’ll see who has the much bigger pile.

Meanwhile people will continue to die and suffer based on the deciets and half-truths pushed by people like yourself.

And as for your dig at the Lancet; if it is so easy to fool with bad science then I am surprised someone like you isn’t published in it constantly

In Response to Innoculated Mind’s comment: “Disseminate, you may be happy with medicine in the Dark Ages, but I’m afraid I want mine to work.”

Where does modern medicine originate from? Much of it is synthesised from naturally occurring extracts. Your comment seems to imply I am anti-prescription medicines. I am open to options. Some drugs do help, but they tend to treat the symptom and not the cause. Nutrition and vitamins seeks to help your body naturally. How do we engineer a crop in the lab? Insert something and change the structure. I want the option to choose whether to eat it or not. How will this affect those with allergies if the labelling of GE crops eventually becomes removed or it becomes impossible to know for sure whether the ingredients of a product contains lab-based genetically engineered crops?

Whatever anyone takes for a condition they want it to work (in reference to medicines, be it ‘natural’ or pharmaceuticals). Why bother taking them otherwise? I’ve experienced both sides of the coin and still utilise both but am wary of a doctor or any human being who would strictly state one or the other. Some of the old remedies help. Try consuming vinegar for a sore throat, instead of sucking on a lozenge. Which is more likely to kill the bugs and which is likely to simply utilise your own saliva to try and bring relief to a hot and inflamed throat but drag the pain out for days on end? (Sure, one tastes better, but one is also more expensive…funny that.) Sucking on a boiled sweet would have the same result as a throat lozenge.

Prince Charles has been proven right. But for me only the scientist can benefit the GM..

Las Vegas Chiropractor

Good for prince Charles…He has bene proven right. But as any one can tell, the only people who stand to benefit from GM and are pushing it are the corporations like the sinister Monsanto and scientists who developed GM.

AND as for Homeopathy:
Two New Studies Find Anti-Homeopathy Review Wrong
by Sherry Baker (see all articles by this author)

(NaturalNews) In August of 2005, the prestigious British medical journal the Lancet published a review comparing clinical trials of homeopathy with trials of conventional medicine. The conclusion of this study, which was widely hailed as evidence that homeopathy is worthless quackery, stated that homeopathic medicines are non-effective and, at best, just placebos. What’s more, an accompanying editorial in the Lancet said this “evidence” should close the door on the non-toxic, alternative treatment method, and flatly proclaimed this review should mark “the end of homeopathy”. Now two newly published studies, one in the journal Homeopathy and the other in the mainstream medical Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, have both gone on record to say the Lancet review was enormously flawed and downright inaccurate. Instead of showing homeopathy doesn’t work, the conclusion should have been that, at least for some ailments, it is effective.

Homeopathy involves giving very small doses of substances called remedies that, according to homeopathy, would produce the same or similar symptoms of illness in healthy people if they were given in larger doses. The goal of homeopathy is to stimulate the body’s defense system in order to prevent or treat illness. Homeopathy treatment is tailored to each individual and homeopathic practitioners work to select remedies according to a total picture of the patient, including not only symptoms but lifestyle, emotional and mental states, and other factors.

The original claim made in the Lancet review that homeopathic medicines are worthless treatments (other than being placebos) was based on six clinical trials of conventional medicine and eight studies of homeopathy. But what trials, exactly, were studied? It turns out the Lancet did not reveal this most basic information and, as the new studies point out, seriously flawed assumptions were made about the data that was presented. There are a limited number of homeopathic studies so it is not difficult to pick and choose facts to interpret selectively and unfavorably, which appears to be just what was done in the original Lancet anti-homeopathy article.

Bottom line: the Lancet’s report showing homeopathy is worthless lacked the academic care and scientific approach called for in medical journals. In fact, it could well be seen as a hack job.

In a statement to the press, George Lewith, Professor of Health Research at Southampton University in Great Britain, stated: “The review gave no indication of which trials were analyzed nor of the various vital assumptions made about the data. This is not usual scientific practice. If we presume that homeopathy works for some conditions but not others, or change the definition of a ‘larger trial’, the conclusions change. This indicates a fundamental weakness in the conclusions: they are NOT reliable.”

The two recently published scientific papers that investigated the previous Lancet review conclude that an analysis of all high quality trials of homeopathy show positive outcomes. What’s more, the eight larger and higher quality trials of homeopathy looked at a variety of medical conditions. The new studies point out that because homeopathy worked consistently for some of these ailments and not others, the results must indicate that homeopathic remedies can’t be simply placebos. In addition, the studies conclude that comparing homeopathy to conventional medicine was a meaningless apples-and-oranges approach. There are also concerns that the original anti-homeopathy review used unpublished criteria. For example, the researchers didn’t bother to define what they meant by “higher quality” homeopathy research.

The new studies not only cast serious doubts on the original Lancet review, which was headed by Professor Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne, but they strongly indicate Egger and his team based their conclusions on a series of hidden judgments that were prejudiced against homeopathy. So far,Professor Egger has declined to comment on the findings of the new studies in Homeopathy and the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,

A press statement from the National Center for Homeopathy explains that an open assessment of the current evidence suggests that homeopathy is probably effective for many conditions including allergies, upper respiratory tract infections and flu, but agrees that much more research is needed. To that end, the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) has announced it is currently supporting research in these areas:

* Homeopathy for physical, mental, and emotional symptoms of fibromyalgia (a chronic disorder involving widespread musculoskeletal pain, multiple tender points on the body, and fatigue).
* Homeopathy to help relieve or prevent brain deterioration and damage in stroke and dementia.
* Homeopathy (specifically the remedy cadmium) to potentially prevent damage to the cells of the prostate when those cells are exposed to toxins.

http://www.naturalnews.com/024852.html

Change the genetic structure of the food you eat and you change your OWN cell health. Longitudinal studies (over many years) have not been performed on GE crop seeds because agritech is expensive business and having a patent prior to contaminating farms creates a monopoly when seed patents come into play. I’m surprised to hear the Prince of Wales uttering such words about destruction. Perhaps he is aware of the Ark project. Why do we need such a thing? Perhaps there is growing concern by some of the elites surrounding the monopolisation and how it will work in with Codex Alimentarius.

Not sure about homeopathic treatments, but if you’re made of water and you treat yourself with water…I guess it must have some benefit – if only on a mind-over-matter basis. Good nutrition is key to maintaining good health and yes, sometimes vitamins can help, but unlike modern medicine which often treats the symptom rather than the cause (and makes a few people richer in the process), vitamins and minerals are meant to treat a cause, not just a symptom.

Interesting article and I really hope that Charles follows his mum’s example and doesn’t do himself out of a job by publicly expressing his views in his role as monarch.

In a separate but related point, does anyone else have a problem dealing with the consequences of the placebo effect ? People that are close to me get succour from homeopathy but obviously if I were to point out the counter knowledge of this belief I would be removing the benefit of the placebo effect that they gain. A bit of a bind and I would like to know how the blogasphere handle what must be a common problem ?

Interesting to see anti-GE sentiments going hand-in-hand with pro-homeopathy beliefs. Not just in his ‘highness’ but in some of the commenters here. I guess water must help, eh?

Disseminate, you may be happy with medicine in the Dark Ages, but I’m afraid I want mine to work.

Brian…you get all the proven scientific evidence you can find for homeopathy working and I will get all the proven evidence I can find on it not working and we’ll see who has the much bigger pile.

Meanwhile people will continue to die and suffer based on the deciets and half-truths pushed by people like yourself.

And as for your dig at the Lancet; if it is so easy to fool with bad science then I am surprised someone like you isn’t published in it constantly

In Response to Innoculated Mind’s comment: “Disseminate, you may be happy with medicine in the Dark Ages, but I’m afraid I want mine to work.”

Where does modern medicine originate from? Much of it is synthesised from naturally occurring extracts. Your comment seems to imply I am anti-prescription medicines. I am open to options. Some drugs do help, but they tend to treat the symptom and not the cause. Nutrition and vitamins seeks to help your body naturally. How do we engineer a crop in the lab? Insert something and change the structure. I want the option to choose whether to eat it or not. How will this affect those with allergies if the labelling of GE crops eventually becomes removed or it becomes impossible to know for sure whether the ingredients of a product contains lab-based genetically engineered crops?

Whatever anyone takes for a condition they want it to work (in reference to medicines, be it ‘natural’ or pharmaceuticals). Why bother taking them otherwise? I’ve experienced both sides of the coin and still utilise both but am wary of a doctor or any human being who would strictly state one or the other. Some of the old remedies help. Try consuming vinegar for a sore throat, instead of sucking on a lozenge. Which is more likely to kill the bugs and which is likely to simply utilise your own saliva to try and bring relief to a hot and inflamed throat but drag the pain out for days on end? (Sure, one tastes better, but one is also more expensive…funny that.) Sucking on a boiled sweet would have the same result as a throat lozenge.

Prince Charles has been proven right. But for me only the scientist can benefit the GM..

Las Vegas Chiropractor

It’s a good thing there’s nothing in homeopathic pills. Can you imagine – a mixture of Dandelion, Marshmallow and Artichoke? Poor Lesley would puke on the spot. One way of losing weight, I guess.

As alties say, don’t go to doctors because they’ll only prescribe a bunch of pills for you…

I’m not surprised she was “buzzing” after taking all those sugar pills.

Is the Quantum QXCI scan available on the NHS? And if not, why not?

(I first typed “scam” for “scan” – my fingers were obviously ahead of my brain.)

FYI
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/69.html

The resident homoeopath, Katie Jermine, quizzed me about my diet, stress levels and lifestyle. She then strapped on a wristband and plugged me into an electronic device called the Quantum QXCI, which scanned my system for vitamins, minerals, food intolerances, toxicity, organ function, hormone balance, parasites, digestive disorders and stress levels.

I love to eat Marshmallows every day he he he.~-,

i love to roast marshmallows on open fire, they taste great`-:

It’s a good thing there’s nothing in homeopathic pills. Can you imagine – a mixture of Dandelion, Marshmallow and Artichoke? Poor Lesley would puke on the spot. One way of losing weight, I guess.

As alties say, don’t go to doctors because they’ll only prescribe a bunch of pills for you…

I’m not surprised she was “buzzing” after taking all those sugar pills.

Is the Quantum QXCI scan available on the NHS? And if not, why not?

(I first typed “scam” for “scan” – my fingers were obviously ahead of my brain.)

FYI
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/69.html

The resident homoeopath, Katie Jermine, quizzed me about my diet, stress levels and lifestyle. She then strapped on a wristband and plugged me into an electronic device called the Quantum QXCI, which scanned my system for vitamins, minerals, food intolerances, toxicity, organ function, hormone balance, parasites, digestive disorders and stress levels.

I love to eat Marshmallows every day he he he.~-,

i love to roast marshmallows on open fire, they taste great`-: