Both of those are arguments ad hominem. I stand by the assertion that homoeopathic practitioners are snake oil salesmen, but that's because I have a lot of evidence that what they are selling is snake oil. It would be wrong to say anything about the effectiveness of homoeopathy based on the practitioners being snake oil salesmen, though.

It will gain all the answers in time. That is the nature of science. ;)

I'm not really going to get involved, since there is already a coherent debate going on, but...

Scientific medicine, by itself, is automatically better than homeopathic methods because of the sheer amount of evidence that it does, indeed, work.

The problem with it is that it's been taken advantage of by large companies and corporations for the sake of monetary gain, and so the pure science of it has become muddled and corrupted, especially when it comes to more complicated treatments/medicine/diseases.

Exactly, yet that does not in itself affect the validity of the actual products, no matter how hard people may try with fallacies such as poisoning the well.

Ah, I seem to have made a colossal mistake... I had no idea homeopathy and holistic meant different things. IN that case, i'll have to read up a lot more on what homeopathy is, from different sources, but i'll reply shortly as it's currently almost 2am.

The "Law of Susceptibility" always reminded me of the placebo effect, that the quality of the state of mind can bring on or cure illnesses.

Fair enough; it takes a lot to admit a mistake like that, and I can say that such things may have an element of truth in some specific applications, they shouldn't just be applied on their own either. It's understandable to confuse the two since 'holistic' is thrown around a lot by pseudoscience, as something of a buzzword, but has an actual definition too, even if it is controversial. Having looked for a reference while writing this, I found this and this - while it seems somewhat contested, the idea itself isn't inherently antithetical to anything evidence-based.

I reply to the OP & skip all debating. This is my Own personal experience, I am not imposing my views on anybody. Take it or leave it, believe it, don't believe it...

I first heard the word "Homeopathy" in the translation context: 3 books on homepathic plant remedies totalling 1500+ pages. I had no idea what it was about, & my initial reaction was: "What the hell have you (Mr. Author) been smoking?"

However, half way thru the first book it started making sense. Not only because of very detailed interviews with the patients with a variety of illnesses /disorders, not only analysis, notes, follow ups, come backs, different remedies, different dosification... they were not told what the remedy was & what effect it was going to have - in order to avoid placebo effect. And yes, their arthritis, eczemas, ulcers etc. etc. were improving, in the end But! I found an even more important & interesting fact that a Wrongly chosen remedy can do damage. Pure water wouldn't be able to do it. No doctor would say: "Take these granules & you'll have a fever off the charts". In short, I realized that this is not a laughing matter. I can't say how exactly it works but "there is something about it".

But this is just a theory. Now samples (only mine, ok, call me a guinea pig).

One sample was a depression with obsessive thoughts about death; I seemed to "bump" into it anytime anywhere (newspaper headings, movies, songs, overheard conversations...) - it was so much that I started thinking: "What the bleep do I know, maybe it's my time? Really?" I goes to my homeopath ex-cardiologer (she sure knows something about medicine & human body), tell her my sad story, she gives me the "remedy", in two days the depre & dark thoughts disappear into thin air. Poof! Just like that.
But ok, this could have been a placebo case because in fact she told me that that remedy was for depression "as if the world is over". maybe I was expecting - therefore mentalizing myself - that, somehow, it will rid me of death thoughts (in two days after two months? hmm, nice placebo! :D)

The second sample had to do with a physical disorder (feeling Very cold, shivering at 30ºC summer, people on the beach & me shivering under a mountain of blankets). This time she didn't tell me what the "remedy" was - knowing that I could have easily check it in that translation & - yes - have a placebo effect.
Of course I expected that I would feel warmer. But what I couldn't expect was a sudden craving for raw veggies & fat-free yogurt with a Complete aversion to all other food! If anybody told me that I would live on That for 2 weeks (not even bread) I would have laughed outright. But it was true. I have witnesses if anybody interested. More than one person asked me for my doctor's phone number cos they wanted to lose weight this way: by simply Not Wanting to eat Anything except for rabbit's food. (I didn't ask for it btw, i am skinny enought - maybe a bit too much. I just wanted to get warmer). I laughed for a long time after this happening, but she never told me the name of the remedy or what it was supposed to do.

So here's the story morning glory. As i said everybody is welcome to have one's own opinion but one thing I would say:

"Don't play with this, you can go blind" (Grace to Jake when he was playing with his newly discovered tswin braid, & tsaheylu fibers in it).

That in itself doesn't mitigate the placebo effect. There are FAR more components than that, including that the person giving it must not know, neither must the person recording the results. It's very easy to publish a book, almost no effort if you're well-funded; it's next to impossible to get a badly researched or methodologically flawed study published in any reputable journal, even with money.

The placebo effect is well documented for negative effects, not just intended ones. If you tell someone that a real medicine has a chance of X side effect that has never been reported, they may develop it.

That is interesting, but I would point out that believing in the efficacy may include a belief in additional effects - that's why personal testimony is never considered in clinical trials.

If someone can make it work, even by the placebo effect, then it may be useful to them, but the problem comes when people die from not seeking real treatment for serious conditions.

oh, I am not offering my personal testimony for a clinical trial - altho if anybody is interested, questions are welcome - but since nobody is an eyewitness to this experiment apart from yours truly & my personal MD Mo'at+Dr.Grace, it's just my word :P
I was just sharing my "samples" with my friends on ToS - who have different opinions & preferences, but are still friends. Or so I hope.

in my case of "depression; persistent thoughts about death" (& also in "anti-freeze-rabbit-food" case) homeopathy happened to be a rather real treatment! Long live. What would the "real" treatment have been, trancs for several weeks (maybe months) till I became numb & had no emotional response to whatsoever? and then fight off unwanted side effects? for how long? Been there, done that, thanks but no thanks. I imagine a few people on this thread know the feeling. (I just wish my scientific tsahik was closer than 5000 miles away when I was hit by PAD :'( and then PSD :'( )

Seriously speaking, I agree that health is a Very delicate matter, & anybody who is dealing with it - a medical professional or a natural healer - should be Very responsible & pay all attention to the right diagnosis, right treatment & right dose. I know people diagnosed with cancer who were told by doctors after several months: "Oops, sorry, wrong diagnosis: it's not a cancer, it's a cyst". That was good news of course - but to hear it after a long time of heavy-duty treatments And the emotional ordeal they (& their families) had been thru was not very pleasant, to put it lightly.

I am not saying that this or thas type of treatment is Always right or Always wrong. If we deal with massive blood loss, heart attack, broken bones - then it's an emergency & it's an ICU. After these measures, homeopathy (or some other method) can help with the recovery - why not to look for a combination rather than a fight of the two approaches. I am saying "responsibility" & "watch your step when you deal with health" should be taken very seriously.

I think there has been a great misunderstanding here, one that is happening sadly all too often. People manage all the time to mix up homeopathy with all kinds of other approaches - holistic medicine, natural remedies, herbal medicine... These all have to be looked at separately. I often reply to people offering me homeopathy that I am not interested because I do not believe in them and then they get angry, because people have been using a herbal brew of XY for hundreds of years with success. That person then has mixed up two completely different things.
Homeopathy is based on a rather new theory (I think it is what -200 years old) of giving subtances that cause symptoms similar to those experienced as an illness but in a strong dilution. The numbers on the bottles are the exponential dilution factors. The theory further states that the more it is diluted the stronger it will have an effect. While low numbered ailments do contain small amounts of the substance and thus can even according to scientific explanations have some kind of effect (substances like LSD for example are haveing an effect with only a few molecules in a human body - and the effect appears after these molecules have left the body again), the higher number dosages are unlikely to contain any molecules of the original substance. Some theories then say that something happened to the water that retains the information, but that is not based on science of course.

Something different are holistic or traditional medicines, some of which have rather weird logic (like a rhino horn helping male fertility), others seem to have a scientifically significant effect (like acupuncture, which now is even paid for by german public health insurance).

And something different again is natural medicine. Many modern medicnes (Aspirin, Penecillin) is based on natural substances, willow bark, mycelium, snake poison, bugs beetles, plants, mushrooms, bacteria,... - so these can really have a strong effect that even science can accept.

Personally, I do not really think that relatively new homeopathy concept is working, but I put a lot of confidence in the effectiveness of truely traditional remedies like herbs and other natural medicines and I give some of the traditional medicines at least the chance to convince me, though personally I have to say that acupuncture did not help me when I tried it.

Something interesting about modern medicine is this library I found that is doing reviews of pharmaceuticals. It is fascinating - try browsing through it. The number of reviews (all based on publicized, peer reviewed material) that have as a summary "inconclusive" is staggering. So many pharmaceuticals that are in use are not really effective according to science but they have adverse side effects.
Home - The Cochrane Library

My personal opinion is, that modern medicine is mainly good in one area - emergency medicine. Things like trauma surgery, using antibiotics to prevent infections of massive injuries. It also is acceptable at treating diseases caused by civilization like diabetes, heart disease and to a degree cancer. It is failing in many cases of mental diseases or general health problems like migraine, tinnitus, stress related issues, autoimmune illnesses. In the latter cases, alternative treatments seem to be more helpful than the attempts of pharmaceutical medicine.

Scientism :rolleyes:
I like science - but to take it almost as a religion is really too much for me.

You are being pretty melodramatic here.
And unless you have discovered something that people have been looking for centuries, namely the meaning of our existence, I would not be so quick as to judge about anything being meaningless.

...Of course we are.


:(
Yes, people do know the feeling, but the point is that there's no one solution to such things, and psychology is very different from biochemistry - all that such drugs do is on the neurochemical level, so the effects do vary in a way that doesn't happen with most things. If it's a person who makes you feel so much better, I'd postulate that that's a part of the effect - a lot of people have such a person or people :)

Improper diagnosis != flawed methodology. For someone who believes in the efficacy of homeopathy and says it can also have negative effects, wouldn't there logically be negative effects from having the wrong treatment there too?

Now that's arguably the right way if people want to get involved with it, but of course, prevents determining what had the effect ;) - although if people think something will be good, no matter what it is, it's going to work for them to a degree..

I am an engineer and I've just read what Homeopathy is and I'm scared that people consider it a medical solution for disease.

oh yes, definitely. As I said, if we deal with broken bones - it's clear for a traumatologist, but emotions are a very subtle matter. I'd even say if you & me, both on PAD, went to my "tsahik" she would probably prescribe different medicines - based on the persons that we are, not only on symptoms, taking into account a whole load of different factors - one being that you experience PAD differently from me. And yes this person makes me feel very good :) she offered a lot of excellent counsel over years (mostly counsel, homeopathy only on 3-4 occasions 2 of which are described above). But I called her from Spain when I was low on PAD & we had a long chat, & she offered a good advice - things we usually recommend each other on PAD threads, & also said that I must find people who are in the same "Avatar wave" (after that I found the forums :rolleyes:) - but I guess if she gave me some of them granules that would make PAD evaporate & just leave me with my love & fascination for Avatar, that would have been awesome. But unfortunately the friendly chat did not suffice :( PAD lasted for about a year, & still comes back :(

absolutely! that's why I say "this is not a laughing matter". If instead of brushing it away as nonsense a proper study could be made, with sufficient funds, checking & rechecking & everything a proper study involves, to determine when it works, & is recommended, and when it doesn't work & can actually cause damage - I guess many people could benefit. Wrong treatment is dangerous, whatever the method, but the benefits of homeopathic treatment - applied with care, responsibility & knowledge - could be many.

this is true, but here, I'd say "use what you've got - & get some results". For me, it worked :)

Interestingly, taking massive overdoses of homoeopathic medicine has no noticeable effect.

Basically, any homeopathic solution derived from a "mother tincture" containing less than one mole of whatever their were trying to prepare, has, virtually, zero molecules/atoms/particles of the original substance. Basically, no remedy at all.
A better comprehension of what order of magnitude represents, as it was mentioned before in the thread.