Your claim is millions of deaths. You offer evidence that makes no support for millions of deaths. I did not bother to look under anecdotal claims. It is quite clear that your claim was an unsubstantiated claim.
Last edited:
Why Homeopathy is getting more and more popular?
- Thread starter Dr. Nancy Malik
- Start date
- Status
I checked. That is not a quote from 1 which is another misrepresentation of the Roses statement. The quote is not from link 2.
Not only do you knowingly claim a falsehood with the quote, but you also do not want to substantiate your claims of efficacy. Somehow that is no surprise.
Someone uses Dr Malik and the same image to sign into several science forums.
Millions of deaths by conventional medicine
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080317/full/news.2008.676.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN1450916820080215 //
http://www.detoxmetals.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=54
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8109091/Death-By...rs-Of-Allopathy
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/11856.php
http://www.pharmweb.net/pwmirror/pwy/paracetamol/pharmwebpicodm.html //deaths by paracetamol
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sep...s_leading_cause_of_death_and_injury_in_us.htm
http://www.articlesbase.com/videos/5min/87994232 //ADHD causing heart failure
http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30
http://www.nhs-conmed.co.uk/Drugs/withdrawn_or_banned_drugs.htm //list of banned/withdrawn drugs
http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/ //annual deaths in US
http://www.advancedhealthplan.com/leadingcauseofdeath.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_iXApBeT5s //Drug manufacturer Eli Lilly settles $1.42 billion in Zyprexa suit. Pleads guilty to criminal conduct for pushing lethal psychiatric drug Zyprexa on children and the elderly; pays largest fine in Department of Justice history."
http://www.hpathy.com/homeopathyforums/forum_posts.asp?TID=8786
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...at-are-harming-people-at-exploding-rates.aspx //
http://www.wellnessresources.com/freedom/articles/avandia_linked_to_heart_failure_fda_to_blame
http://www.sickpills.com/ //deaths by vioxx
http://search.mercola.com/Results.aspx?k=vioxx //deaths by vioxx
A study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that conventional drugs kill about 106,000 Americans a year, and this figure is limited to patients that die in the hospital, so the actual figure is unquestionably much higher. That makes prescription drugs the fourth leading cause of death in the United States (after heart attack, cancer and stroke).
Ref: Journal of the American Medical Association 4/15/98.
____________________________________________________
Just one single drug, Vioxx, killed more than 55,000 people. That comes from the sworn testimony of Dr. David Graham, a senior scientist at the FDA.
Ref: Testimony of Dr David Graham at Senate Finance Comittee Hearings
http://www.senate.gov/~finance/hearings/testimony/2004test/111804dgtest.pdf
_________________________________________________________________
the JAMA says that drugs kill over 100,000 patients a year and this is with prescribed and directed use. Another one and a half million are hospitalized for the side effects.
In just the last five years there have been ten times more patients affected by iatrogenic diseases than the number of Americans killed in the Vietnam War! This is a statistic that comes straight from the Journal of the American Medical Association after a study of drug side-effects.
"Ralph Nader, the nation's foremost consumer advocate, thinks that the medical profession kills nearly 300,000 Americans each year. Even if Nader exaggerates by an extremely improbable 95%, that's a horrible number of funerals caused by physicians."---Dr Saul
"Most of the everyday practices of modern medicine are unproven if we go by the government's own standards. In 1978, the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), an arm of the United States Congress, issued a major research report that concluded "only 10 to 20 percent of all procedures currently used in medical practices have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial." In other words, 80 to 90 percent of what doctors do to you is scientifically unproven guesswork. By this government-supported definition, most of modern medicine is quackery."---Richard Walters (Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Medical Technologies," U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, PB 286-929, 1978).
"Each year nearly 300,000 bypass surgeries and 250,000 angioplasties are performed in the United States. Furthermore, nearly twenty thousand deaths occur each year as a result of these procedures. In 1992, Nortin Hadler, MD, professor of Medicine at North Carolina School of Medicine, wrote that none of the 250,000 angioplasties performed the previous year could be justified and that only 3-5% of the 300,000 coronary artery bypass surgeries done the same year were actually indicated."---Gary Null.
"If you add up the in-hospital death rates from bypass surgery and angioplasty....... you're looking at 33,000 deaths per year. These patients did not die from heart disease. They did not die in the throes of heroic measures to save their lives. They died from a surgical procedure. And, even more tragic, many of them were quite healthy, and did not even need the procedure to begin with. The 33,000 deaths brought about by these procedures are roughly equal to the annual number of deaths attributed to AIDS."---Dr Whitaker, M.D.
NEWS REPORT: 1998 Bad reactions to prescription and over-the-counter medicines kill more than 100,000 Americans and seriously injure an additional 2.1 million every year -- far more than most people realize, researchers say. Such reactions, which do not include prescribing errors or drug abuse, rank at least sixth among U.S. causes of death -- behind heart disease, cancer, lung disease, strokes and accidents, says areport based on an analysis of existing studies. (University of Toronto study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association by Dr. Bruce Pomeranz )
Nigerians can sue US drugs firm: A sign outside Pfizer headquarters in New York (26/01/2009)
Nigerian families can sue the Pfizer drugs giant in the US over its alleged role in the deaths of children, a US appeals court has ruled.
The decision overturns ruling by a lower court that the case must be heard in Nigeria.
Pfizer is accused of killing 11 children and injuring 181 others when an antibiotic was tested on them during a meningitis epidemic in 1996.
Pfizer denies the claims, saying they were victims of the outbreak.
The epidemic killed 12,000 children in Nigerian in six months.
The families say that Pfizer tested out an oral antibiotic called Trovan on some 200 ill children in hospital in Kano, without first getting the consent of their parents.
They say the drug killed 11 children and caused blindness, deformities and brain damage in others.
Their original law suit had been dismissed on the grounds that it could not be pursued under the Alien Tort Statute, an old law allowing foreigners to sue in the US courts.
But the Second Curcuit US Court of Appeals in New York ruled that the statute could be used.
Peter Safirstein, a lawyer for the Nigerians, said the ruling was "very, very important".
Pfizer has always maintained that the tests were carried out with the approval of the Nigerian government and that the children's parents were fully informed.
In a statement, the company said it had great sympathy for those affected by the epidemic but that "all clinical evidence points to the fact that any deaths or injuries were the direct result of the illness, and not the treatment provided to patients in the Pfizer study".
.________________________________________________________________
During the 1960s and 70s, an entire epidemic was caused by Clioquinol, a widely used prescription medicine for diarrhoea. For 15 years, doctors and scientists blamed a virus for the sudden outbreak of a new intestinal disorder and gave suffer-ing patients the very drug that was the cause of their illness. By the time a minority view was considered and the drug responsible for the epidemic was finally banned, thousands had died and many victims were left blind or paralyzed.
http://www.naturalnews.com/025499_cancer_chemotherapy_health.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/026565_drugs_acetaminophen_liver_failure.html //FDA admits
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...al-journal-corrects-fatal-vioxx-findings.aspx //vioxx resulting in heart failures
http://www.whale.to/a/null9.html#Ta...ity_and_Economic_Cost_of_Medical_Intervention
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10967153?dopt=Abstract
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10967153?dopt=Abstract
You know Nancy, you are missing another point. While drugs in the right quantities can save peoples lives, in the wrong quantities they can kill. In almost every case of a drug being administered and a patient dieing, it's due to negligence on the part of the practitioner, they fail to identify a reaction or overdose the patient etc.
So this means it's "Human Error" that kills the patients more than the drugs.
Here's some links that prove Homoeopathy can kill for the exact same reason, because while your magic witches brew does little or nothing, it can stop a person from continuing real medications.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/11/a_real_death_by_homeopathy.php
http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html (Nice list of dead people thanks to homeopathy)
http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2007/06/homeopathy-dont-kill-people-homeopaths.html (Pseudoscience forum residents might take a look at this site alone)
(You know most of the Pro camp for Homoeopathy tends to sound like Nigerian 4-1-9ers, Perhaps there cures would work better if they came from a princess or were secrets passed out of the country by their rich uncle general that had to move abroad etc)
So this means it's "Human Error" that kills the patients more than the drugs.
Here's some links that prove Homoeopathy can kill for the exact same reason, because while your magic witches brew does little or nothing, it can stop a person from continuing real medications.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/11/a_real_death_by_homeopathy.php
http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html (Nice list of dead people thanks to homeopathy)
http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2007/06/homeopathy-dont-kill-people-homeopaths.html (Pseudoscience forum residents might take a look at this site alone)
(You know most of the Pro camp for Homoeopathy tends to sound like Nigerian 4-1-9ers, Perhaps there cures would work better if they came from a princess or were secrets passed out of the country by their rich uncle general that had to move abroad etc)
Perhaps, you're now displaying your motives for supporting water-based solutions? Conspiracy theorist?
What diploma mill did you use for your credentials?
The issue I protested was the claims of millions a year. Even if the figures do suggest death due to to prescriptions the numbers do not add up to millions a year. Dr Nancy has figures across a decade. Here numbers may add up to a large number, but not close to a million a year.
Let's take a closer look at these numbers. Take for instance the Vioxx claim. To attain a number of 55,000 Dr Nancy had to multiply the highest estimate with the highest mortality rate. That is 139,000 times 40% or 55.6K. The low claim would be 26K. The actual deaths lie within that limit. Clearly Dr Nancy is misrepresenting the data yet again. I hope her patients get better treatment than the way Dr Nancy mistreats grade school math.
Drugs have changed the health arena by making the common causes of death 100 years ago relatively small compared to the causes of death today.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4829a1.htm
Many deaths today are caused by self medication of patients taking so-called natural medicines that interfere with prescription drugs. Often the victims of the interactions have no idea that they are dealing with death when they mix the so-called safe herbals and whatever with effective modern medicines.
From http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/38978
From http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/781/Lin06.html
From http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/781/Lin06.html
[100] Judith Garrand, Variations in Product Choices of Frequently Purchased Herbs, 2003 ARCH. INT. MED. 2290, 2290-2295 (2003)
[101] Robert B. Saper, et. al., Heavy Metal Content of Ayurvedic Herbal Medicine Products, 292 JAMA 2868, 2868-72 (2004)
[102] See Edzard Ernst, Harmless Herbs? A Review of the Recent Literature, 104 AM. J. MED. 170, 170-74 (1998)
[103] See Johannes Schulze et. al., Toxicity of Kava a Case Study, 10 PHYTOMEDICINE, SUPPLEMENT IV 68, 68-73 (2003)
[104] See Adriane Fugh-Berman, Herb-Drug Interactions, 355 LANCET 134, 134-36 (2000)
[105] See Frederick W. Fraunfelder, The Science and Marketing of Dietary Supplements, 140 AM. J. OPHTHAL. 302, 303 (2005)
Dr Nancy may want to pretend safety and use exaggerated claims, but in science forums people are not taking her at her word. In fact, it is clear that you cannot.
Let's take a closer look at these numbers. Take for instance the Vioxx claim. To attain a number of 55,000 Dr Nancy had to multiply the highest estimate with the highest mortality rate. That is 139,000 times 40% or 55.6K. The low claim would be 26K. The actual deaths lie within that limit. Clearly Dr Nancy is misrepresenting the data yet again. I hope her patients get better treatment than the way Dr Nancy mistreats grade school math.
Drugs have changed the health arena by making the common causes of death 100 years ago relatively small compared to the causes of death today.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4829a1.htm
Many deaths today are caused by self medication of patients taking so-called natural medicines that interfere with prescription drugs. Often the victims of the interactions have no idea that they are dealing with death when they mix the so-called safe herbals and whatever with effective modern medicines.
From http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/38978
From http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/781/Lin06.html
From http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/781/Lin06.html
[100] Judith Garrand, Variations in Product Choices of Frequently Purchased Herbs, 2003 ARCH. INT. MED. 2290, 2290-2295 (2003)
[101] Robert B. Saper, et. al., Heavy Metal Content of Ayurvedic Herbal Medicine Products, 292 JAMA 2868, 2868-72 (2004)
[102] See Edzard Ernst, Harmless Herbs? A Review of the Recent Literature, 104 AM. J. MED. 170, 170-74 (1998)
[103] See Johannes Schulze et. al., Toxicity of Kava a Case Study, 10 PHYTOMEDICINE, SUPPLEMENT IV 68, 68-73 (2003)
[104] See Adriane Fugh-Berman, Herb-Drug Interactions, 355 LANCET 134, 134-36 (2000)
[105] See Frederick W. Fraunfelder, The Science and Marketing of Dietary Supplements, 140 AM. J. OPHTHAL. 302, 303 (2005)
Dr Nancy may want to pretend safety and use exaggerated claims, but in science forums people are not taking her at her word. In fact, it is clear that you cannot.
Save life from high doses
This is exactly what I am saying. Human beings are not designed to tolerate such high crude doses of drugs which conventional medicine gives.
Most patients of Conventional medicine end to have been over-medicated (crude/strong/large material doses of drugs repeated frequently (because the primary action of the controlled doses lasts only a few hours) and for long term (making them dependent/addictive)) through out their lives.
And in the worst cases, the side effects may hasten or lead to death from toxicity. The fourth largest killer in the US is prescription drugs. Think about the number of people who survive these drugs and develop other diseases.
This is exactly what I am saying. Human beings are not designed to tolerate such high crude doses of drugs which conventional medicine gives.
Most patients of Conventional medicine end to have been over-medicated (crude/strong/large material doses of drugs repeated frequently (because the primary action of the controlled doses lasts only a few hours) and for long term (making them dependent/addictive)) through out their lives.
And in the worst cases, the side effects may hasten or lead to death from toxicity. The fourth largest killer in the US is prescription drugs. Think about the number of people who survive these drugs and develop other diseases.
Ah but the consensus here is that the human body makes it's own recovery. This just identifies that Prescription medicines and homoeopathic alternatives are truly quite worthless.
In fact it just goes back to longer living through leading a healthy lifestyle, eating a balanced diet, exercising, sleeping correctly and keeping clean. These sort of things aid building a stronger immune system which means less chance of getting ill. Of course we don't hear that from both the Prescription medicines or homoeopathic alternative camps because people living healthy won't be spending money on their placebo crap.
Dr Nancy I further challenge you on your claims that:
1. Conventional drugs are crude
2. most patients are over-medicated
Instead of providing support for homeopathic medicine you attack proven approaches with what amount to lies.
I provided clear evidence from the CDC that our lives have significantly better health-wise due to conventional medicine. Yet I fail to see any evidence from you that homeopathic medicine has done anything at all above what would be expected from the placebo effect.
Furthormore, I provided clear evidence on the dangers of so-called alternative medicines including reports of deaths due to the use of those medicines.
Well, yay for homeopathy!
Only when it was too late did they take her to a hospital. Poor little girl.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/pare...ver-daughters-eczema-death-20090605-bxvx.html
Only when it was too late did they take her to a hospital. Poor little girl.
I know this will come across as arrogant and dismissive, but it's the plain and simple truth. There's a damn good reason why western nations don't automatically accept the credentials of doctors coming out of places like China and India, we make them prove their qualifications here before we let them practice. There are lots of excellent conventional doctors coming out of India and China and I've had the privilege of receiving treatment from several of them, but the standards they're held to at home are nowhere near as rigorous as here. Far too much woo-woo is encouraged and tolerated in other parts of the world, because they're still holding on to ancient beliefs and superstitions instead of embracing and internalizing all the new knowledge.
My Canadian government for instance allows people to practice chiropractic and homeopathy, but by the same standards you can practice any form of sorcery you want here, unless the government can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the "treatment" is harmful or makes patently false promises. I can charge people $1000 a pop to wave my hands over their wounds promising I would help them get somewhat better, and unless the government can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that I'm full of BS or causing further harm to the "patient", it's legal. But believe me, if a government-licensed medical doctor fails to prescribe a standard conventional medical treatment and opts for an alternative treatment in its place, and they're then charged with malpractice in court, they will lose virtually 100% of the time.
My Canadian government for instance allows people to practice chiropractic and homeopathy, but by the same standards you can practice any form of sorcery you want here, unless the government can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the "treatment" is harmful or makes patently false promises. I can charge people $1000 a pop to wave my hands over their wounds promising I would help them get somewhat better, and unless the government can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that I'm full of BS or causing further harm to the "patient", it's legal. But believe me, if a government-licensed medical doctor fails to prescribe a standard conventional medical treatment and opts for an alternative treatment in its place, and they're then charged with malpractice in court, they will lose virtually 100% of the time.
philipthegreat
Registered Senior Member
Hello everyone... this is my first post on sci-forums and I'm quite gald to be here 
. I am especially glad that my first post is a reubttal to what every credible scientific organization has deemed quackery.
Homeopathy consists as I understand it of taking an substance and maing a solution of it with water then diluting it to the point were hardly a molecule of the original substance remains. This is its main problem in my opinion.
(Info taken from wikipedia for the most part)
As I see it most homeopathic solutions would not even contain a single molecule of the original substance. How is possible that basically a cup of water can cure diseases simply because once there was powder of ebola root in it?
By that logic drinking any water could probably cure a disease of sorts.
So what do you fellow skeptics think of my arguement? It's my feeble first attempt to debunk something.
. I am especially glad that my first post is a reubttal to what every credible scientific organization has deemed quackery.Homeopathy consists as I understand it of taking an substance and maing a solution of it with water then diluting it to the point were hardly a molecule of the original substance remains. This is its main problem in my opinion.
(Info taken from wikipedia for the most part)
As I see it most homeopathic solutions would not even contain a single molecule of the original substance. How is possible that basically a cup of water can cure diseases simply because once there was powder of ebola root in it?
By that logic drinking any water could probably cure a disease of sorts.
So what do you fellow skeptics think of my arguement?
It's my feeble first attempt to debunk something.I subscribe to some mailing lists. In one of them a company called VaVa water asked how they could scientifically prove their claim that their water is filled with 'positive frequencies'. It was a microscopy list serve! The company with its 'energized water systems' had no idea what their claims were and thought you could see these 'frequencies' as they called them with a microscope. The charlatans left after a few questions led into raucous laughter. Then the group turned to an interesting discussion of the properties of water.
So what do you fellow skeptics think of my arguement?
You make two of the most successful arguments against homeopathy, so are on the right page.
The concept that the efficacy of a substance increases as it's diluted is patently absurd, as you have noted, especially when it means statistically it's unlikely to have any substance in the solute. Homeopaths counter this by saying water has a 'memory' and retains an imprint of the active ingredient.
But that leads us to your second observation, that if a dilution cured ailments, the finite body of water on Earth would have touched all substances over time, and if the 'memory' theory was correct, would be the most potent cure for all ills. As people drink water and still get ill, there seems to be a hole in the homepath's bucket though.
Seems the cures aren't effective unless you pay a homeopath for your water.
Studies published in 'The Lancet' demonstrate that any benefit from homeopathic cures happens at the same percentage rate as placebos, confirming there is no tangible effect.
But because there is money involved, homeopaths still plead their case, even though that case is now shut.
Well said phlogistician.
Nice first post philip. You propose a statement and then ask for feedback. You will definitely get feedback here, but look for the feedback that makes you better at understanding the issues such as phlog's post.
Nice first post philip. You propose a statement and then ask for feedback. You will definitely get feedback here, but look for the feedback that makes you better at understanding the issues such as phlog's post.
- Status