Homeopathic results
Homeopathy leads to less dependency on drugs.
It is always good to hear of a therapy that has been given the sanction from a serious body with comments, research and results which quantify how positive the use of homeopathy can be.
Back in 2005, the Swiss government produced a scathing report about an analysis by Shang et al, which was published in the Lancet and widely publicised by sceptics of alternative medicine as signalling the “end of homeopathy”.
This Shang study had a scientific team which evaluated 110 clinical trials of homeopathy and then compared them with the same number of trials of conventional medicine.
The Swiss authors noted that Shang and his colleagues had neglected to follow the basic accepted QUOROM (quality of reporting of meta-analyses) guidelines on best practices for scientific reporting (Forsch Komplementmed., 2006).
The Swiss report also quoted the views of David Sackett, a Canadian who is considered one of the leading experts in ‘evidence based medicine’. He argued that the ‘gold standard’ study, otherwise known as the randomised, placebo-controlled trial, may not be the only means of judging the safety and effectiveness of a treatment. For example, it could not be used to evaluate surgery – what a joy to hear this comment.
The sceptics disregard the results from homeopathy mainly because they don’t understand it and because they can’t allocate any reasoning to the above mentioned controlled trials. Homeopathic high potency remedies induce regulative and specific changes in cells or living organisms. Switzerland is a good example of belief in this treatment.
Nearly two-thirds of all medical practitioners in Switzerland rate alternative medicine, 40 per cent use it and 85 per cent would like their country’s national health to include this therapy.
In 1998, a decision by the Swiss government expanded its national insurance to include a number of alternative treatments, such as homeopathy, traditional Chinese medicine and herbal medicine.
However, government reimbursement was provisional, pending the outcome of an extensive government-commissioned study of the various treatments.
The most comprehensive assessment ever conducted by any government body into homeopathy has concluded that not only does it work, but that it is far more cost-effective than conventional medicine. In fact, it works so well that patients should be reimbursed for it on the National Health Service.
The Swiss government conducted this detailed inquiry in a very rare departure from its history of neutrality on many issues.
Interestingly, Switzerland is the home of two pharmaceutical giants, but despite this they have still conducted the assessment, which has resulted in their endorsement of homeopathy.
The book-length report Homeopathy in healthcare: Effectiveness, appropriateness, safety, costs was edited by Gudrun Bronhoft and Peter Matthiessen from the University of Witten and Herdecke in Germany and Pan-Medion Foundation in Zurich.
This report reviewed all the major evidence for homeo-pathy from major preclinical research and the ‘gold standard’ trials in humans to systematic reviews, meta-analyses and epidemiological studies.
The methodology used in this report was used by the UK’s National Institute for Health Research as a means of assessing true effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of the treatments available from the National Health Service. It has also been widely adopted by many other international agencies.
In previous studies, often, the researchers use the wrong remedy or use it inappropriately. Some homeopathy studies have attempted to use a ‘one size fits all’ remedy for a condition, when it is widely understood that many conditions require individualised remedies.
I can attest to the type of diagnosis of a homeopath is very much based on an understand-ing of the patient, their background, lifestyle, individuality and personal knowledge.
After assessing all the available data, the Swiss team concluded that the high quality investigations of pre-clinical basic research proved that homeopathic high-potency remedies induce “regulative and specific changes in cells or living organisms”.
The report also found that homeopathy treatment costs at least 15 per cent less than conventional medicine, even though those seeking homeopathy tended to have more chronic or serious ill health.
Homeopathy also led to less dependency on drugs. For example, in more than 500 patients with rheumatic disease, nearly one third were able to stop taking conventional medication, and another third reduced their use of drugs.
Homeopathic fertility treatment for women offered one of the largest cost savings of all, compared with standard medical treatments. It also saved on hospital bills, as well as indirect cost savings such as fewer days off sick when patients opted for homeopathy.
Importantly, homeopathy users reported fewer side-effects and better doctor-patient relationships.
When comparing patient satisfaction with homeopathic vs. conventional therapies in more than 3,000 subjects, significantly more homeopathic patients were “completely satisfied” with their results and treatment in comparison. (BMC Complement Altern. Med., 2008).
This has occurred at the point where EU initiatives funded by the pharmaceutical industry are industriously banning or drastically curtailing the availability of nutritional supplements and many alternative treatments despite their long history of success.
The Swiss are sending a firm message to the pharmaceutical giants in their continued attempts to discredit alternative medicine (in the words of Mark Twain) “that reports of its death are greatly exaggerated”.
15 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mike Hunt
Jun 2nd 2012, 16:24
Dear Kathryn,
I would like to also refer you to a very eloquent analysis of the Swiss report that has just been posted on the Swiss Medical Weekly, aptly called:
"The Swiss report on homeopathy: a case study of research misconduct"
http://www.smw.ch/content/smw-2012-13594/
Alan Henness
May 23rd 2012, 13:28
Denis MacEoin said:
"To Mike and other skeptics. Will you please criticize homeopathy when you have 1. read a dozen or more serious texts on the subject; 2. when you have sat in with a homeopath for, let's say, six months and 3. when you have read the dozens of papers and full-length studies on the science of high dilutions? These scientific studies are more in line with quantum mechanics and nanopharmacology than the highly inaccurate studies by Ernst and others. If you want to be scientific, then be scientific, not just a prejudiced know-nothing."
1. I have read dozens of serious texts on the subject; I've also read dozens of nonsense ones written by homeopathy believers - they show no good evidence that homeopathy is any more than placebo.
2. I am more than aware of quite a few of the possible biases that make what you suggest completely unreliable as a source of evidence for homeopathy. Are you aware of these biases? Many homeopaths aren't.
3. I have read many studies on homeopathic dilutions and none of them have been at all convincing, usually with rather obvious methodological flaws.
4. Please explain what you mean by quantum mechanics and nanopharmacology and how you believe they might explain homeopathy.
5. Please give details of what you believe is inaccurate in the studies by Enrst and others.
6. Please explain what you believe the scientific method to be.
7. Please explain what your comment has to do with the inaccuracies in this article about the Swiss homeopathy report.
Thanks.
Mike Hunt
May 23rd 2012, 01:18
http://www.youtube.com./watch?v=BWE1tH93G9U
Denis MacEoin
May 22nd 2012, 17:05
To Mike and other skeptics. Will you please criticize homeopathy when you have 1. read a dozen or more serious texts on the subject; 2. when you have sat in with a homeopath for, let's say, six months and 3. when you have read the dozens of papers and full-length studies on the science of high dilutions? These scientific studies are more in line with quantum mechanics and nanopharmacology than the highly inaccurate studies by Ernst and others. If you want to be scientific, then be scientific, not just a prejudiced know-nothing.
Mike Hunt
May 23rd 2012, 00:22
Can you please refer us to peer reviewed scientific data that shows that homeopathy has a measurable effect on a living or inanimate object?
Should we go back to the founding principles of homeopathy, like cures like, so if arsenic is a poison, by the law of similars, a homeopathic remedy of arsenic should help cure me of poisoning (???). This in itself already sounds absurd, but concocted at a time when the cause of an influenza was suspected to be an unbalance of some internal balance rather than a viral infection, it could have possibly made sense.
But ... let's take the arsenic preparation. In a homeopathic preparation there is likely to be no single atom of arsenic in the bottle of magic pills you'd be taking. Actually in the case of arsenic there probably will be a few here and there from contamination. I had no idea that homepathy had tried to retrofit quantum mechanics by adding some physics woo to medical quackery. I couldn't find anything in any physics textbook so I turned to google and this interesting piece of reading came up:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/02/its_not_just_homeopathy_its_quantum_home.php
Mike Hunt
May 23rd 2012, 00:26
Oh my ... for an accurate and lighthearted summary of what homeopathy is all about:
http://www.youtube.com./watch?v=8KbLHii8M2A
http://www.youtube.com./watch?v=RstwLzikmvA
http://www.youtube.com./watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0
Maria MacLachlan
May 23rd 2012, 19:08
Sit in with a homeopath for six months? Are you serious? Listen, all I need to know there is anything in homeopathy is some robust scientific evidence that it works. In 200 years, no such evidence has been produced. Therefore we are entitled to criticise it.
Addie Davison
May 22nd 2012, 13:13
Hmm thanks for sharing this wonderful post, I really like to your info.It is quite helpful post, thank you so much for the impressive post......
http://www.medhealthreports.com/plexus-slim.html
http://www.healthnewsminute.com/plexus-slim.html
http://www.consumerhealthanswers.com/safslim-reviewed.html
Maria MacLachlan
May 21st 2012, 16:30
Another article telling the truth about the report has just been published. Enjoy!
http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2012/05/the-swizz-report-on-homeopathy.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-swizz-report-on-homeopathy
Mike Hunt
May 21st 2012, 15:43
Awesome. Did you just copy and paste from this article:
http://www.wddty.com/neutral-switzerland-is-partial-to-homeopathy.html
There's a word for such behaviour ... plagiarism .
Mike Hunt
May 21st 2012, 14:42
"...EU initiatives funded by the pharmaceutical industry are industriously banning or drastically curtailing the availability of nutritional supplements and many alternative treatments despite their long history of success."
Care to qualify this statement? Because otherwise it comes across as promotion of anti medicine hysteria.
I did a couple of google searches, and this is what I found:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/510&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
http://ec.europa.eu/health/human-use/herbal-medicines/index_en.htm
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/11/71&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
Now I'm no expert on health matters but I read the papers from time to time and I hope that If I see an article under health and fitness I hope it has been written by somebody who is qualified and has carried out thorough and unbiased research.
Maria MacLachlan
May 21st 2012, 10:48
"The most comprehensive assessment ever conducted by any government body into homeopathy has concluded that not only does it work, but that it is far more cost-effective than conventional medicine."
Wrong. The final report did NOT conclude that homeopathy works and the Swiss Government initially decided NOT to allow statutory reimbursement for homeopathy (and other alternative therapies) as a result of it. However, because a public referendum has come out in favour of alternative therapies, the Swiss Government has given them temporary reprieve. Homeopathy and various other therapies now have until 2015 to come up with evidence of efficacy and cost effectiveness.
The link Mike Hunt has provided to Zeno's blog gives the truth in more detail.
Dave Alan Caruana
May 21st 2012, 03:13
bring in the faith healers,
the scientific establishment have been wrong all the while,
the vast increase in life expectancy is just an artefact.
Mike Hunt
May 21st 2012, 14:44
Indeed.
Science has brought us nothing but unhappiness pain and misery. In fact, I need an extension to my house. Instead of going to an architect I am thinking of going down to the organic farmer down the road and seek his help as his family have been successfully and safely building traditional straw huts for the past 500 years!!
Mike Hunt
May 20th 2012, 13:17
"The sceptics disregard the results from homeopathy mainly because they don’t understand it and because they can’t allocate any reasoning to the above mentioned controlled trials."
The benefits of homeopathy disappear the moment it is put to the test. It's been repeatedly proven to be nothing better than placebo . I suggest you read:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4507.htm
For a dose higher than a homeopathic dilution on research just type homeopathy in:
http://scholar.google.co.uk/
A lot of my feelings on the subject matter are resounded in above. To emphasise though, if placebo works, shouldn't it be promoted? Here's the problem. If my doctor knows I just have the sniffles and a sugar pill will make me feel better, should he prescribe 'oscillococcinum'? Well, I turn to my doctor as a person of trust. If he's taking me for a ride, then when should I stop trusting him? In addition I'd be paying £30 for a box of sugar pills that the manufacturer themselves claim they're safe because there's nothing in them.
On the other hand, suppose i go to an 'alternative' practitioner (aka quack). This person would be either taking me a ride because he's after my money, or actually believes in this stuff which is even more dangerous as same person will probably be an evidence based medicine denialist and promote staying away from seeking the right treatment ... which can be far more dangerous than a sugar pill.
Some leisure reading:
http://www.zenosblog.com/2012/05/that-neutral-swiss-homeopathy-report/
Please choose the reason of your report below: