Why Homeopathy is getting more and more popular?

[stereologist]

Here is the abstract for (Br Homoeopath J 1996 Apr;85(2):66-70).

In a clinic in Tamale (Ghana, Northern Region) patients with malaria were treated with homoeopathic drugs in an open study (n=75), of whom 90.7% (n=68) showed clinical improvement.

Subsequently in a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial, one group (n=30) received homoeopathic drugs, of which 83.3% improved clinically, whereas the other group (n=25) received chloroquine with improvement in 72% patients. This difference is not statistically significant due to the limited samples. The results do, however, suggest further research with larger groups.

Here is Malik said:

Most of them were randomised placebo controlled studies and statistically significant

I'd call you a liar, but I think you are more likely posting without reading. Do you take more time with your patients than you do here?

The count stands at: 1

 

[stereologist]

What's happening here right now is that we have someone claiming to a Homeopathy Doctor in India that is trying to convince us that there is ample scientific evidence for the efficacy of the work they do.

The arguments are the typical ones:
lots of people do it - that's proof NOT
lots of people believe in it - that's proof NOT
many scientific studies prove it - that proof NOT

In the latter case a number of studies and meta-studies have been presented which have been shown to be either bad studies or report no statistical significance. The funniest posting so far may be the count of 1. To be honest checking out all of these fraudulently posted claims I've lost track. Anyways, in this meta-study they found a small but statistically significant difference between homeopathy and a placebo. The funny part was that the meta-study stated they could not identify any specific treatments where homeopathy was effective, but overall it seemed to do something.

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

But you go on to say "Do you mean to say hundreds of millions of people using homeopathy for their ills are fools? "
A clear statement that clearly implies that the hundreds of millions who use it are proof of the efficacy of homeopathy.

You are making your own assumptions and your own conclusions. Good luck

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

The UK's Prince Charles, whose nutrition is perfect and always has been

It's not just Prince Charles. The following have also endorsed Homeopathic Medicine:

The entire British Royal family, including: Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles

Sports personalities: David Beckham

Famous People from the Past
Charles Dickens, W.B. Yeats, William Thackeray, Benjamin Disraeli, Pope Pius X, Louisa May Alcott, Susan B. Anthony, William Lloyd Garrison, Daniel Webster, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, William Seward, artist Jackson Pollock, W.C. Fields, and former American Presidents James Garfield and William McKinley.

ther modern-day famous people who have publically declared their interest in and support for homeopathic medicine include:
Catherine Zeta-Jones, Whoopi Goldberg, Pamela Anderson, Jane Fonda, Cher, Rosie O'Donnell, Martin Sheen, the Chili Peppers, Jane Seymour, Lesley Anne Warren, Axl Rose, Linda Gray, Susan Blakely, Michael Franks, Cybill Sheppard, Vidal Sassoon, Angelica Houston, Boris Becker, Martina Navratilova, Priscilla and Lisa Marie Presley, Cliff Robertson, Jerry Hall, Diane von Furstenberg, Ashley Judd, Naomi Judd, Olivia Newton-John, Julianna Margulies, JD Salinger, Blythe Danner, Pat Riley (coach of the Miami Heat), and England's Prime Minister Tony Blair

More details at http://www.homeopathicrevolution.com/pages/table_of_contents.jsp

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

Here is the abstract for (Br Homoeopath J 1996 Apr;85(2):66-70).



Here is Malik said:


I'd call you a liar, but I think you are more likely posting without reading. Do you take more time with your patients than you do here?

The count stands at: 1

You are yourself a liar. This one is a randomised trial

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

What's happening here right now is that we have someone claiming to a Homeopathy Doctor in India that is trying to convince us that there is ample scientific evidence for the efficacy of the work they do.

I am not here to convince you. You or the patient or for matter of fact anyone has the right to choose or discard homeopathy or any medical system for the matter of fact.

However loud the conventional pharmaceutical industry shouts, no one listens to their false propoganda against homeopathy. It is due to this only that in the last decade homeopathy have surpassed all other complementary and alternative treatments to reach at the top and is now the second largest mode of treatment in world after conventional

Why do you think hundreds of millions of people worldwide go for homeopathic medicines? Are they fool? I think they are wise. They knew they have been cured when they last time they took it. So the next time they again prefer homeopathic medicine. No one spends money on things which are not beneficial to them.

 

[stereologist]

You are yourself a liar. This one is a randomised trial

Once again you are the liar. I never said it wasn't randomized. Reading does count. I showed that you posted a study that is not statistically significant.

I suspect that you're not really as stupid as you come off. I'm suggesting that you are not checking on the rubbish you post.

 

[stereologist]

However loud the conventional pharmaceutical industry shouts, no one listens to their false propoganda against homeopathy. It is due to this only that in the last decade homeopathy have surpassed all other complementary and alternative treatments to reach at the top and is now the second largest mode of treatment in world after conventional

Why do you think hundreds of millions of people worldwide go for homeopathic medicines? Are they fool? I think they are wise. They knew they have been cured when they last time they took it. So the next time they again prefer homeopathic medicine. No one spends money on things which are not beneficial to them.

Again this is the false appeal to many believers.

The count stands at: 1

 

[stereologist]

Can you believe it. Here is a story in the regular news about alternative medicine.

From http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_he_me/med_unproven_remedies_placebo
Experts: Placebo power behind many natural cures

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years and $2.5 billion in research have found no cures from alternative medicine. Yet these mostly unproven treatments are now mainstream and used by more than a third of all Americans. This is one in an occasional Associated Press series on their use and potential risks.

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

Can you believe it. Here is a story in the regular news about alternative medicine.

From http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_he_me/med_unproven_remedies_placebo
Experts: Placebo power behind many natural cures

Conventional, alternative or complementary is as per see.

A person who prefers, let's say homeopathy, as a first line of treatment, conventional is an alternative/complimnetary medicine for him.

Likewise a person who took conventional as first line of treatment, other forms of treatment are complementary/alternative.

For your kind reference, alternative medicine has gone mainstream. Here have a look at the data

U.S. Census data reported that in the preceding three years, total spending for alternative care grew by 83%, from $10.3 billion in 1987 to $18.9 billion in 1990, while total expenditures paid to mainstream physicians increased by 56%, from $90 billion to $141 billion. Not since President Nixon brought acupuncture back from China has interest in alternative medicine been so great.

A follow-up study published in the November 11, 1998 issue of the Journal of the AMA reported a 47.3% increase in visits to alternative medicine practitioners, from 427 million in 1990 to 629 million in 1997 - a number that exceeded total visits to all US primary care physicians.

A federally funded survey in 2007 found that in the previous year nearly 5 million Americans used homeopathic remedies,

Annual revenues in Western Europe reached US$ 5 billion in 2003-2004. In China sales of products totaled US$ 14 billion in 2005.

In Australia alone, a study conducted in 2004 show that more than 1.9 million consultations of the alternative therapies including homeopathy take place with a turnover of 85 million AUD.

So here's a chance to be apart of history: Keep beating the same bush or be apart of growing movement which is creating ripples all around the world.

So it's time to think and ponder: What is there in alternative medicine which is not there in conventional medicine? Why are people looking towards nature and natural ways of cure which is not demanding on body but goes with the body?

 

[stereologist]

For your kind reference, alternative medicine has gone mainstream.

I am well aware that people use unproven remedies. The issue here is that homeopathy does not work. Oh, and you left this part out:

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ten years and $2.5 billion in research have found no cures from alternative medicine. Yet these mostly unproven treatments are now mainstream and used by more than a third of all Americans. This is one in an occasional Associated Press series on their use and potential risks.

Don't forget the count stands at: 1

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

I am well aware that people use unproven remedies.1[/B]

Let you keep on doing research then and people keep on flocking alternative medicine practitioners.

P.S.: Double blind studies come in 1960's only. People fall ill before and get cured also. Still homeopathy passed many double blind studies

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

my idea is not to tell that conventional medicine is bad but it is many times superficial mode of treatment, effective in first aids and acute problems mazinly or better remove and/or transplant the organ. It is more of organopathy where "correct the defective organ" is the first objective and " control the disease " is second objective.

It is also not pro-biotic. It does not think that immune can be triggered to handle the disease. Homeopathy triggers immune system so as to heal itself

Conventional medicine basically quickens the metabolic rate to get rid of the viruses. Not all patients survive this or they are trying to kill the germs through anti-biotics and do not provide any data as if what all have they killed.Or they expose men to the radiations

There is less of Chronic Conditions cured with conventional medicine.

This is shifting mechanism from one specialist to another while under treatment for chronic disease

e.g. from Arthritis treatment to Cardiac Ward,
from steroids treatment to transplantations,
Iritis treatment to lens replacements.
Intestinal inflamations by NSAIDs to apendex removals.
Ovaritis Inflamations to Surgury for removing the infected ovary.
Kidney dysfuntions to removal of kidney.

As far as that I have seen is that adult patients having chronic diseases, in a little span of 5 to 6 years would be seen shifting to specialists and finally reach Operation theatre

It's basically "Once on medicine - always on medicine " treatment. Of cource with an exception of Acute, seasonal and emergency complaints.

Courtesy/Source/Reference: Dr. SFA, NCH

 

[Crunchy Cat]

You're only deluding yourself nancy. Maybe if you go to a new age site and preach homeopathy youll get some believers willing to spend their $$$ on the placebo effect.

 

[stereologist]

P.S.: Double blind studies come in 1960's only. People fall ill before and get cured also. Still homeopathy passed many double blind studies

This is a lie. If this were true, then the count would be over 1.

 

[Dywyddyr]

U.S. Census data reported that in the preceding three years, total spending for alternative care grew by 83%, from $10.3 billion in 1987 to $18.9 billion in 1990, while total expenditures paid to mainstream physicians increased by 56%, from $90 billion to $141 billion. Not since President Nixon brought acupuncture back from China has interest in alternative medicine been so great.
A follow-up study published in the November 11, 1998 issue of the Journal of the AMA reported a 47.3% increase in visits to alternative medicine practitioners, from 427 million in 1990 to 629 million in 1997 - a number that exceeded total visits to all US primary care physicians.
A federally funded survey in 2007 found that in the previous year nearly 5 million Americans used homeopathic remedies,
Annual revenues in Western Europe reached US$ 5 billion in 2003-2004. In China sales of products totaled US$ 14 billion in 2005.
In Australia alone, a study conducted in 2004 show that more than 1.9 million consultations of the alternative therapies including homeopathy take place with a turnover of 85 million AUD.

All of which merely shows that gullibility is more prevalent than the common cold.
I wonder if anyone will ever come up with a cure for that?

 

[stereologist]

my idea is not to tell that conventional medicine is bad but it is many times superficial mode of treatment, effective in first aids and acute problems mazinly or better remove and/or transplant the organ. It is more of organopathy where "correct the defective organ" is the first objective and " control the disease " is second objective.

That's a complete misrepresentation of conventional medicine. Since all you have shown is that homeopathy is the placebo effect it shows that your trade is the superficial treatment.

It is also not pro-biotic. It does not think that immune can be triggered to handle the disease. Homeopathy triggers immune system so as to heal itself

One of the interesting lessons from cancer studies is that the immune system does not fight cancer. The efforts to boost the immune system to deal with cancer failed, because of that reason.

Conventional medicine basically quickens the metabolic rate to get rid of the viruses. Not all patients survive this or they are trying to kill the germs through anti-biotics and do not provide any data as if what all have they killed.Or they expose men to the radiations

This metabolic rate claim is more horse-pucky. Unlike the sham you proclaim, conventional medicine has successfully dealt with a number of diseases including smallpox, guinea worm disease, and polio. In India, where you practice, one of the more common diseases is leprosy which can be effectively dealt with using conventional antibiotics. It must that people are as you say swarming to your con game that has left these people in a diseased state.

There is less of Chronic Conditions cured with conventional medicine.
This is shifting mechanism from one specialist to another while under treatment for chronic disease

e.g. from Arthritis treatment to Cardiac Ward,
from steroids treatment to transplantations,
Iritis treatment to lens replacements.
Intestinal inflamations by NSAIDs to apendex removals.
Ovaritis Inflamations to Surgury for removing the infected ovary.
Kidney dysfuntions to removal of kidney.

This is a science site. Prove it. Where is the evidence?

As far as that I have seen is that adult patients having chronic diseases, in a little span of 5 to 6 years would be seen shifting to specialists and finally reach Operation theatre

These vacuous claims may con your patients into the dangers of using your placebos, but here you need to provide evidence.

It's basically "Once on medicine - always on medicine " treatment. Of cource with an exception of Acute, seasonal and emergency complaints.

Courtesy/Source/Reference: Dr. SFA, NCH

Another worthless anecdote.

The count stands at: 1

 

[stereologist]

Leprosy is a disease that has existed or at least been reported for 4000 years including being reported in India. My intent here is not to stigmatize India, but to point to a disease that has an effective treatment. Failure to eradicate this disease is due to a number of issues which include the use of worthless treatments such as homeopathy.

From the Wikipedia:

many leper colonies still remain around the world in countries such as India (where there are still more than 1,000 leper colonies)

Leprosy is in fact neither sexually transmitted nor is it highly infectious after treatment, as approximately 95% of people are naturally immune[16] and sufferers are no longer infectious after as little as 2 weeks of treatment. However, before treatment was developed, leprosy was certainly contagious.

The search for more effective anti-leprosy drugs than dapsone led to the use of clofazimine and rifampicin in the 1960s and 1970s.[56] Later, Indian scientist Shantaram Yawalkar and his colleagues formulated a combined therapy using rifampicin and dapsone, intended to mitigate bacterial resistance.[57] Multidrug therapy (MDT) and combining all three drugs was first recommended by a WHO Expert Committee in 1981. These three anti-leprosy drugs are still used in the standard MDT regimens.

From http://www.leprosy.ca/india

around 70% of all leprosy patients worldwide are in India.

From http://www.indiatogether.org/2006/aug/hlt-leprosy.htm

Till the seventies, the only drug available to treat leprosy was Dapsone. It took long to cure and had to be consumed for years. But, in 1982, the WHO whipped up a cocktail of three drugs that worked as a miracle destroying 99.2 per cent of the leprosy bacilli with the first dose. Most patients get cured within two months now.

This disease infected >50 people per 10000 before the introduction of modern conventional medicines, part of which was developed by conventional medicine researchers in India. Now conventional medicines are bringing the disease under control.

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

All of which merely shows that gullibility is more prevalent than the common cold.
I wonder if anyone will ever come up with a cure for that?

I don''t know of gullibility but homeopathy has cure for cold

http://www.simillimum.com/education/first-aid-room/contents/cold_and_acute_coryza.php
http://www.homeorizon.com/newpapers/common cold-ajit.asp

 

[Dr. Nancy Malik]

One of the interesting lessons from cancer studies is that the immune system does not fight cancer. The efforts to boost the immune system to deal with cancer failed, because of that reason.

In India, where you practice, one of the more common diseases is leprosy which can be effectively dealt with using conventional antibiotics.

Homeopathy for cancer

http://www.homeopatia.edu.pl/index.asp?idm=2&idp=13&ide=41
http://www.freewebs.com/homeopathy249/cancerremediespti.htm
http://www.homeorizon.com/mainpagegeneral.asp?t=86.htm
http://www.drramakrishnan.com/book.htm
http://excalibur.110mb.com/cancerstats.htm
http://homeoint.org/books/bogphilo/phicance.htm

Side effects of antibiotic (because they kill healthy bacteria as well)

http://www.chiro.org/ChiroZine/ABSTRACTS/antibiotics.shtml
http://www.physorg.com/news104754091.html