Homeopaths

[johnofgwent]

Yes but even if that did happen you have not established a causal relationship and not demonstrated repeatability. This is why it is unscientific and inadvisable. Have you not thought that with all the world's medical research money over the last 100 years or more that old wives tales would have been tested as well? These medical men test millions of substances. They use robots to speed it up and often play the numbers game by testing everything for everything so that it is quicker than formulating theories about it. It's because there is big money in it, and if someone tells you there is a natural remedy for a cold which is unscientifically recognised, then they are ripping you off, or have been ripped off themselves and are parrots.

Well, against my better judgement I looked it up.



To reveal in full what I found, would lay me open to revealing personal medical details of someone related to a forum member. So I won't



I will simply say the Merck Index refers to a rather old copy of  the pharmacists Bible 'the british pharmacopoeia' in which the documented medical evidence for its efficacy against a particularly nasty terminal disease is noted. So no quackery here. What is also noted is the "LD50" which is the ratio of the dose required to kill half of the disease to the dose required to kill half the patients.



For almost anything used today those numbers are millions to one down to thousands or hundreds to one for some chemotherapies. Let's just say the LD50 for arsenic I just saw makes it pretty bloody clear why the doc wanted EVERYONE present to agree. Jeez, talk about "roll d6, 1,2 or 3 you lose"



But if it were me on that bed, I'd take those odds given the 100% certainty of what happens if I don't. Normality isn't normal in such situations

[johnofgwent]

What about allergies? These alternative types seem to have every allergy under the sun, and most I had never heard of as a child, e.g. lactose intolerance.

My specialist subject. Cell surface receptors.



Allergies are as I'm sure you know an overreaction of the cell to an external stimulus. The ONLY part of the snake oil sales pitch that is homeopathy that holds any scientific merit for further thinking is the concept postulated that triggering symptoms of a disease by an alternative process protects against that disease.



The homeopath then takes this to levels of absurdity by saying a solvent exposed to a physical structure remembers that and transports that memory to an active site in a chemical / enzymic reaction.



The grain of truth that they distort to their peverse quackery is the factual basis on which all vaccinations work. Triggering a mild reaction to a toxin prepares the cells to fight the full on 'hard bastard' that is trying to kill you



And It is a fact that almost any man over the age of 50 opened up on the slab by a pathologist presents evidence visible to the unaided eye of prostate cancer. They did not die of cancer in their nineties because the bus they failed to spot ran them down in their fifties.



I am convinced from my work at the molecular level on cell surface receptors that the massive rise in "allergies" that has been seen in my lifetime is due to one or more of the following



1) nobody dies of the nasty, nasty shite that killed people when I was a kid anymore.



2) the toxic content of the atmosphere has changed. We have diesel microparticulates. We used to have coal fire smog and pneumoconiosis spores thrown into the air from the hooves of the horses pulling the hansom cabs clip clopping through their own shit



3) Nobody dies of infections - apart from poor sods who develop them in those disease ridden hospitals..  



4) Death rates through war, and industrial injury are a fraction of what they were.



In a world where hardly anyone dies of the stuff that killed off our great grandfather's, allergic reactions are the new black death because life remains a terminal condition with 100% mortality (ok three blokes, jesus, Lazarus and some chap called Odin claim to have found an escape clause but ibdoubtball three)

[papasmurf]

 That doesn't mean the new stuff works all the time or the old stuff should be disregarded forever.  It's all a matter of balance...

Quite. It would surprise some people but leeches are still sometimes used by medical professionals.



https://www.guysandstthomas.nhs.uk/resources/patient-information/surgery/Plastic-surgery/leech-therapy.pdf">https://www.guysandstthomas.nhs.uk/reso ... herapy.pdf">https://www.guysandstthomas.nhs.uk/resources/patient-information/surgery/Plastic-surgery/leech-therapy.pdf

[Baron von Lotsov]

What about allergies? These alternative types seem to have every allergy under the sun, and most I had never heard of as a child, e.g. lactose intolerance.

[johnofgwent]

Yes but even if that did happen you have not established a causal relationship and not demonstrated repeatability. This is why it is unscientific and inadvisable. Have you not thought that with all the world's medical research money over the last 100 years or more that old wives tales would have been tested as well? These medical men test millions of substances. They use robots to speed it up and often play the numbers game by testing everything for everything so that it is quicker than formulating theories about it. It's because there is big money in it, and if someone tells you there is a natural remedy for a cold which is unscientifically recognised, then they are ripping you off, or have been ripped off themselves and are parrots.

Yet erythromycin which was the FIRST line of attack when I was a kid but which was abandoned because of its nasty, nasty LD50 rating compared to wider spectrum antibiotics such as ampicillin is now stockpiled in hospitals under lock and key needing two signatures and notification to our equivalent of CDC when used not because it is dangerous, bit because it still works wonderfully against stuff resistant to the newfangled johnny come lately's



But this is drifting somewhat from homeopathy, which would take some chili pepper because that gives you the same fever as septic shock, dilute it a thousandfold in 30% w/v alcohol, then take it down to 5% w/v with further dilution, administer that I/V and express extreme surprise when gangrene set in ...

[johnofgwent]

Well a female relative of mine was at deaths door, (literally) in hospital.  All conventional medicine had failed.

The consultant, who was old school, asked the relatives in attendance, that there was one last thing he could try but we would all have to agree to it,

We did agree, and he gave her a dose of arsenic that would in normal circumstances have killed an elephant.

My relative lived for another 15 years.

I've told this tale before, but when a few years ago I was rushed in to A&E in the middle of the stress related heart problems, the were not sure if I had, or had not, just had an infarction. And there was only one way t know for sure, and it meant two blood tests many hours apart, and you couldn't go anywhere for all that time



When I overheard an F1 talking to a nurse about his toxicology prof's seminar and the statement that a litre of vodka administered I/V would save a non-alcohol-abusing patint presenting in the early hours of lethal paracetamol overdose, which he found strange, I burst out laughing and rather loudly said "he's absolutely right" and then went on to hold what i can only refer to as a toxicology masterclass ... word must of got round because the consultant actually stuck his head round the corner at one point, and afterwards came over and said "you're not just an IT guy are you"



I have not looked it up, but I bet if I dragged my at least ten year old 13th ? edition hardcopy "Merck Index" down from the shelf behind me and looked up Arsenic, I'd find a dozen references to medical or pharmaceutical journals dating back maybe to the days when they used mercury to treat syphilis but certainly to a time when your grandparents were kids ... listing the clinical uses of arsenic. In fact, you swine, I bet i am going to sit bolt upright at 3am and remember it from my degree course 40 years ago ...



Fact is, many medical and pharmaceutical treatments from the dim past were abandoned not because they themselves failed to work but because something safer, less unpleasant, or with less terrifying side effects and risks came along. That doesn't mean the new stuff works all the time or the old stuff should be disregarded forever.  It's all a matter of balance...

[Baron von Lotsov]

Well a female relative of mine was at deaths door, (literally) in hospital.  All conventional medicine had failed.

The consultant, who was old school, asked the relatives in attendance, that there was one last thing he could try but we would all have to agree to it,

We did agree, and he gave her a dose of arsenic that would in normal circumstances have killed an elephant.

My relative lived for another 15 years.

Yes but even if that did happen you have not established a causal relationship and not demonstrated repeatability. This is why it is unscientific and inadvisable. Have you not thought that with all the world's medical research money over the last 100 years or more that old wives tales would have been tested as well? These medical men test millions of substances. They use robots to speed it up and often play the numbers game by testing everything for everything so that it is quicker than formulating theories about it. It's because there is big money in it, and if someone tells you there is a natural remedy for a cold which is unscientifically recognised, then they are ripping you off, or have been ripped off themselves and are parrots.

[papasmurf]

Some of these things are now known poisons,

Well a female relative of mine was at deaths door, (literally) in hospital.  All conventional medicine had failed.

The consultant, who was old school, asked the relatives in attendance, that there was one last thing he could try but we would all have to agree to it,

We did agree, and he gave her a dose of arsenic that would in normal circumstances have killed an elephant.

My relative lived for another 15 years.

[Baron von Lotsov]

The trouble is that homeopathy is really the tip of the iceberg. People are more advanced in our area in the trend of reverse evolution, and peddle all sorts of things that quacks throughout the ages were peddling. Some of these things are now known poisons, or even if not, the bogus cures can be really bad for you and make you throw up. Then there is the cost of these things and the cost is rising as people become more gullible. Two day's stay at a "retreat" near to me is priced around £700. That's not homeopathy, but more the "mind over matter" stuff where the victims feel really good that their bank accounts get charges thousands of pounds. The mystery to me is where do they get the money from in the first place? Are they rich, and if they are, how can someone so stupid earn so much, or if they are not then I guess that is worse, like thieving off the poor and desperate. You see if you went to a typical basic hotel you would pay about £100 for two days sharing a double room, but voodoo included multiplies the price sevenfold. Worse still is only the first few get a double room, the rest have to camp out in the garden (this is in December and January!!!)

[johnofgwent]

Well, as the regulars know, I trained as a molecular biologist.



I see two distinct threads here, unless I have missed something important. Key to this is a question I have regarding papasmurfs contribution. Were these alternative products truly homeopathic or were they simply "alternative". It's a terribly important point. Here's why...



To be frank, I view homeopathic medicine as quackery and so do "The Lancet" and the Library of the House of Commons to name two places where scientific evidence is deposited to that effect.



As a molecular biologist I worked at the coalface on cell membranes and receptor sites for material transport. I studied how cells work and how disease impacts them at the molecular level.



Homeopathic remedies take material that simulates the symptoms of a disease and dilutes it until there is nothing left of it and presents that as a "remedy" for the disease.



At best, a few molecules in the final preparation once came into contact with a molecule or two of a material that produces the same symptoms as the disease you seek relief from.



That these preparations have any effect is to ridicule physics, chemistry, medicine, pharmacy and every underlying science and engineering fundamental underpinning any of them. It is a total disgrace that such quackery was allowed in this country in the eighteenth century never mind the 21st.



BUT



There is a wealth of evidence going right back to the days of the witch finder general's that all sorts of herbal, natural, but also downright artificial compounds administered at levels where they have an impact on cell metabolism have the power to do something.



AND



I have seen for myself the utterly incredible power of mind over matter in fighting the most lethal of diseases.



My father found he was in possession of the largest cancerous mass in the prostate the radiologist had ever seen at the age of 66 in 1996. He went full throttle into the most aggressive treatments and lived for a further nine years,the last two in pain and the last three months in agonies that I animal liberation fuckwits firebombed me when they thought I was allowing in animals.



My father in law found he was in the exact same situation some nine months earlier. He had been in poor health as a child, had serious asthma issues and quickly found the cancer cure was killing him faster than the cancer.



So he went to see his GP and said he wanted of the treatment before it killed him. He began taking a variety of dietary and other supplements and set out on a programme of demanding his god to come and collect him by force.



He spent the next six years in a flurry of activity. He joined Amnesty International.and used his NTL Cabletel set top box to harang despots across the world, including Clinton, CaeuCescau, and Blair. He had a "red and black" A4 pad with the fax numbers of half the world's princes and presidents.



About a year after his death John Peel covered a story of a chap on death row who invited the woman who had campaigned for his commutation of sentence for a year but failed in that goal,  to come to his execution. I heard the story by chance but my ears pricked up big time when the woman told John Peel she took over the case from a Welsh Lay Preacher who had sadly died.....



Yup. The guy about to get the needle was the bloke Ralph had been writing to from his own death row......



As I said, dad died after two years of pain and three final months of living in conditions they would imprison people for keeping animals in such a state.



Ralph rang us at 4am one morning and left an answerphone message saying he was having trouble breathing so could I send Clinton his apologies he couldn't reply to his latest message as he was about to be taken to hospital. Two days later he was dead.



I know which of those paths I'd take.



And despite KNOWING Linus Pauling was a fool for thinking high dose vitamin C did anything other than make you capable of pissing for England, I STILL overload on it at the first sign of a runny nose because I know WHY it makes you piss for England and what you piss out while it's making you do that ...



And I drink cranberry juice like it was going out of fashion. Because there are factors that make me more susceptible to following in dad's footsteps....



SO



Sorry Toots I think you, like several others I know, are actually a beneficiary of the power of positive thinking far more than any drink of water that once saw a molecule of an adjudant did....



But while I am heavily sceptical of a number of the products offered at "clinical" as opposed to "homeopathic" levels as "cures" for all sorts of eye problems, I'm also a molecular biologist ..... And I'm quite prepared to believe some items so far "off piste" from the mainstream as to have no snow to ski on may have some clinical effect ...

[Baron von Lotsov]

It's all bogus.

Despite the claims by the practitioners, homeopathic preparations are not effective for treating any medical condition.[8][9][10] Besides the fact that the remedies have no active content and thus no plausible biophysical effect, the theory of disease that underlies homeopathy is inconsistent with all relevant scientific knowledge about physics, chemistry, biochemistry and biology,[9][11][12][13][14][15] and have been so since the mid 19th Century.[16] For example, the miasma theory which is used in homeopathy had long since been replaced by germ theory of disease in medicine. Clinical trials have generally [17][18] demonstrated no objective effect from homeopathic preparations.[19][20]:206[21][22]

-Wiki



Charging money for this stuff is fraud, and it exploits desperate people.

[papasmurf]

What substance?

As it is still in the research and evaluation stage so I would rather not say. Just because it is working for me does not mean it would universally have that effect.

[Scott777]

It occurs naturally in some fruit and veg and other natural products. It is still being researched. It is working for me thus far, but I would not extrapolate that to the general population. The effects of natural products vary greatly from person.

I use a number of supplements that have worked for me. But I don't proselytise about them and I take all of them under medical supervision.

As my GP stated "I can't argue with test results over time."

What substance?

[Scott777]

Suggested reading:-



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5256414/">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5256414/

Very interesting.  Indeed, more research is needed.

[T00ts]

Tell us more.  What proof?  What do you take?

I don't take anything regularly only when needed. I have a kit and select appropriate remedies as needed. I started out with a homeopath very sceptically many years ago and can now choose basic remedies for myself.

So for coughs, colds, soft tissue damage etc. I turn to my kit. I have for many years utilised complementary treatments alongside/instead of conventional medicine.