Competition puts homeopathy on trial

[Dynamique]

The Wikipedia article quoted below was flagged as "the neutrality of this article is disputed." That's important info that should be included when quoting from a Wikipedia article. Personally, I found the homeopathy article on Wikipedia to be derogatory and anything but neutral. It also seems like there are at least two contributors.

An article describing homeopathy that IMO was well-researched, credible and reasonable is available on the National Institutes of Health National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine web site at:
https://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopa...th/homeopathy/https://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy/

Perhaps it would be helpful if everyone who has been contributing to this thread read the article before making more commentary and/or statements.

From Wikipedia:
According to homeopaths, serial dilution, with shaking between each dilution, removes the toxic effects of the remedy while the qualities of the substance are retained by the diluent (water, sugar, or alcohol). The end product is often so diluted that it is indistinguishable from pure water, sugar or alcohol.^[2][3][4] Practitioners select treatments according to a patient consultation that explores the physical and psychological state^[5] of the patient, both of which are considered important to selecting the remedy.<sup>[6]

A couple of points. The end point is indistinguishable from pure water. The idea of shaking removing the toxic effects or that the water will 'remember' the substance....is ludicrous!

A vaccine definitely has a protein from a certain pathogen that our immune system learns to recognize. The volume is tiny, which might make one think of homeopathy in it's effects. However, if the homeopathic remedy has no molecules remaining, just 'qualities of the substance', the analogy to vaccines is lost.

The patient consultation, 'exploring the physical and psychological state', certainly makes the patient feel listened to and must be very satisfying. The patient then receives a bottle of something that looks very impressive, which is, in effect, a placebo. Placebos can be very effective, as they can unleash the healing power of our own bodies.

Other human beings in our life have profound influences on us, like Hummingbear's stepfather. Many people....(not to mention books, movies and nature) have left their mark on me. The myriad influences on our selves from the environment is not a good analogy to the influence of a homeopathy remedy on the body. We are able to figure out if homeopathy has an effect by conducting studies. I am not sure why people are so loyal to homeopathy, but perhaps they should do more research with an open mind.</sup>

[Sylph]

Perhaps it would be helpful if everyone who has been contributing to this thread read the article before making more commentary and/or statements

Thanks! I read the NCCAM piece on homeopathy and I must say I don't see anything convincing..."studies are contradictory" You have to wonder about the quality of the studies involved. This is not a ringing endorsement from the NIH:
This section summarizes results from (1) individual clinical trials (research studies in people) and (2) broad analyses of groups of clinical trials.
The results of individual, controlled clinical trials of homeopathy have been contradictory. In some trials, homeopathy appeared to be no more helpful than a placebo; in other studies, some benefits were seen that the researchers believed were greater than one would expect from a placebo.^f details findings from clinical trials.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses take a broader look at collections of a set of results from clinical trials.^g Recent examples of these types of analyses are detailed in. In sum, systematic reviews have not found homeopathy to be a definitively proven treatment for any medical condition. Two groups of authors listed in found some positive evidence in the groups of studies they examined, and they did not find this evidence to be explainable completely as placebo effects (a third group found 1 out of 16 trials to have some added effect relative to placebo). Each author or group of authors criticized the quality of evidence in the studies. Examples of problems they noted include weaknesses in design and/or reporting, choice of measuring techniques, small numbers of participants, and difficulties in replicating results. A common theme in the reviews of homeopathy trials is that because of these problems and others, it is difficult or impossible to draw firm conclusions about whether homeopathy is effective for any single clinical condition.
https://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy/

The Wikipedia Homeopathy article was hammered out word by word in a long give and take between skeptics and true believers. It was and still is a bitter, rancorous struggle by dozens of passionate Wiki editors. Check out the talk page! Any topic that is controversial will have a 'neutrality disputed' tag when one side or another is unhappy with it.