South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

May 24, 2017, 21:30:45 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Please read the posting guidelines before posting.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

...and so homeopathy is a cure-all

 (Read 10716 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Faerie
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 2054



« Reply #15 on: March 11, 2013, 13:06:16 PM »

but Majin asked me for a kind of skin oil she's used in the past for blemishes.

What does she use and does it work???
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 2766



« Reply #16 on: March 11, 2013, 13:37:59 PM »

I have no idea, I'll ask her. I ended up grabbing a bottle of "Tissue Oil" spray without paying much attention to what was in it, for fear that I was probably going to leave empty handed if I did. She said it's the right stuff. That's all I know.  *shrug*
Logged
mdg
Sr. Member
****

Skeptical ability: +5/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 337



WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2013, 13:18:29 PM »

I never thought I'd see the day when a homeopathic association admits that their magic water doesn't work.

"The British Homeopathic Association and Faculty of Homeopathy said they would do so. "There is no evidence to suggest homeopathic vaccinations can protect against contagious diseases. We recommend people seek out the conventional treatments," a spokesman said."

Logged
DrT
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2013, 10:05:28 AM »

Hi all,

I am new to this forum, so please excuse any errors. I am a homeopath so i just wanted to 'state my case'.

I cant disagree with you on the lack of scientific evidence of homeopathic medicines, but to slate homeopaths into one bundle as being 'fraudsters' is just cruel. Often homeopathy gets good results (in my opinion) because of the way they are more patient focused, they listen for over an hour to peoples problems, and then manage their patients in terms of diet, nutrition, and natural meds. The patient has the right to not choose to go to a homeopath , but often do as 'the last resort' when conventional medicine has failed them. Homeopaths do not make close to enough money to survive and often they are extremely caring people who want the best for their patients.

In south Africa we study for 7 years and have to do a masters dissertation , it is the only country where homeopaths are trained in diagnostics, pathology (By Medical Doctors as lecturers) and do a premed, including 2 years of human dissection. It is thanks to some weirdos who use machines and pendulums that have given homeopaths a bad name, and regulations needs to be strict.

Homeopathy has a long way to go in proving itself scientifically, and i think it shouldn't make ridiculous claims until it can rightfully prove so, since, if science cant prove it, it doesn't work right?. The way in which homeopaths and naturopaths view diseases is important, they look at the entire picture not just a symptom, which is, for me, the healing factor itself, medical doctors can learn a thing a two from this.

I am currently looking at a post grad of epidemiology and research, as i feel, i myself ,would like to be effective with a researching career.

P.S. lets not forget the title 'Doctor' means 'To teach' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title) , therefore doctors should be teaching and educating their patients on medications, health and disease not just handing out prescriptions. So whether it be a homeopathic 'doctor' or a medical doctor, if they take the title it is their duty to effectively inform patients which unfortunately doctors just don't do enough because they think we are stupid.
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1482



« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2013, 10:30:56 AM »

In south Africa we study for 7 years and have to do a masters dissertation , it is the only country where homeopaths are trained in diagnostics, pathology (By Medical Doctors as lecturers) and do a premed, including 2 years of human dissection. It is thanks to some weirdos who use machines and pendulums that have given homeopaths a bad name, and regulations needs to be strict.

As the saying goes, the greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge. And much of what you learn in your studies is an elaborate illusion of knowledge, pretty much like what astrologers, shamans, chiropractors, postmodernist philosophers etc. learn in their own extended studies. The studies may well be very detailed, very elaborate and very demanding, but that in itself does not make them valuable or useful.

As for conventional medicine "merely treating the symptoms as opposed to the whole patient," you'll have to give us some examples of what you mean, and how homeopathy would do it differently.

For what it's worth, I am pretty skeptical about much of mainstream medical research - a lot of it has descended into the same postmodernist horse manure as "alternative" treatment.

Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 2766



« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2013, 10:45:03 AM »

I cant disagree with you on the lack of scientific evidence of homeopathic medicines, but to slate homeopaths into one bundle as being 'fraudsters' is just cruel. Often homeopathy gets good results (in my opinion) because of the way they are more patient focused, they listen for over an hour to peoples problems, and then manage their patients in terms of diet, nutrition, and natural meds.


None of this relates to homeopathy.

Quote
The patient has the right to not choose to go to a homeopath , but often do as 'the last resort' when conventional medicine has failed them.


Two wrongs don't make a right.

Quote
Homeopaths do not make close to enough money to survive and often they are extremely caring people who want the best for their patients.


The road to hell can be paved by good intentions. Homeopaths struggling to make a living does not give anyone a free pass to ignore scientific inquiry and scrutiny.

Quote
In south Africa we study for 7 years and have to do a masters dissertation , it is the only country where homeopaths are trained in diagnostics, pathology (By Medical Doctors as lecturers) and do a premed, including 2 years of human dissection. It is thanks to some weirdos who use machines and pendulums that have given homeopaths a bad name, and regulations needs to be strict.


Agreed, it needs to be so strict homeopathy is not allowed to be practised until it can deliver scientific evidence. Machines and pendulums have about the same amount of evidence going for them as homeopathy, so why hate on them?

Quote
Homeopathy has a long way to go in proving itself scientifically, and i think it shouldn't make ridiculous claims until it can rightfully prove so, since, if science cant prove it, it doesn't work right?.


So, how many more hundreds of years do you think homeopathy needs to deliver that evidence? Scientific fields of medicine can often deliver that evidence in a decade or two, why is homeopathy still found lacking? Even after all this inquiry is there no evidence for it?

Quote
The way in which homeopaths and naturopaths view diseases is important, they look at the entire picture not just a symptom, which is, for me, the healing factor itself, medical doctors can learn a thing a two from this.


What is preventing those folks from becoming fully-qualified MD's themselves then and transforming the medical profession from within? If they are so concerned about the wellbeing of patients why do they stick to non-evidence based medicine instead of choosing techniques that are proven to make their patients better? Don't they care enough to enquire? Don't they care enough to prove that their medicine works before applying it?

Quote
P.S. lets not forget the title 'Doctor' means 'To teach' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title) , therefore doctors should be teaching and educating their patients on medications, health and disease not just handing out prescriptions. So whether it be a homeopathic 'doctor' or a medical doctor, if they take the title it is their duty to effectively inform patients which unfortunately doctors just don't do enough because they think we are stupid.


This is true, but be careful not to paint the entire profession with the same brush. I've had MD's that I've abandoned because they wanted to write a script and escourt me out before explaining what was wrong with me. My current MD I've chosen specifically because he listens, tries to figure out causes instead of treating symptoms, and explains to me what is happening. It's folly to act like the entire medical profession doesn't do this.
Logged
DrT
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2013, 12:22:08 PM »

Basically as i said, i agree, homeopathic medicines need to be investigated further.

As a young homeopath i feel the bigger victim than the odd person who uses homeopathy, i feel homeopaths are bombarded by reps from neutraceutical companies, often started or owned by medical physicians themselves (Solal brands for example), spend alot of money on education and products they believe will allow them to help people and build a career and are actually really misguided.

I agree pharmacy vitamin/health section is a joke, waste of people's hard earned cash on most of those un-regluated products, enter MCC anytime soon. Part of the problem here is poor quality and lack of educating people on what is really needed and when. Working in pharmacies for over seven years, the difference made (in the dispensary) and in the health section and well as the clinic, was correctly informing people. I do use website (www.examine.com) which has an easy to read analysis on vitamins and minerals.

I do however think it cannot be ignored that disease is far more complex than any one truly understands, patients who do feel better with homeopaths respond possibly to their approach, such as actually listening to patients problems, and effective patient management. Homeopathy does support that there is a link between physical symptoms and previous emotional trauma. So the idea of getting to the root of the problem, whether it stems psychologically or something as simple as a magnesium deficiency, is vital to achieving a long term healing plan for patients, given a homeopathic remedy or not.

The other idea in homeopathy, is that people are treated as individuals,the idea that the same disease will effect our body chemistry the same way is not true and treatments need to be more individualized , than the 'one drug fits all' approach. I have heard oncologists say in twenty-thirty years they have had no two presentations of breast cancer alike but yet the treatment protocol remains the same for all, some effective some not.

I am not saying homeopathy shouldn't be criticized, i agree it should, but the strengths in the fact that it has been around for so long, need to be investigated further into the points mentioned above, and possibly medicine as a whole should adopt some of its positive principles, it will be difficult though since its easier to treat eczema with cortisone and doctors would make far less money having to spend longer than 15mins per patient.

The evolved doctors of this time should be medical trained physicians who accept the concepts of the PRO's of therapies such as homeopathy and nutrition.

 




Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 2766



« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2013, 13:35:39 PM »

As a young homeopath i feel the bigger victim than the odd person who uses homeopathy [...] spend alot of money on education and products they believe will allow them to help people and build a career and are actually really misguided.

Could you understand then why we're so vocal about it? I mean if the actual practitioners are misguided, how much moreso are the patients?

Quote
... do however think it cannot be ignored that disease is far more complex than any one truly understands,

This is exactly what medical researchers try to do each day. The only way we can uncover the puzzle is to keep at it with science.

Quote
Homeopathy does support that there is a link between physical symptoms and previous emotional trauma.

Science based medicine acknowledges this link as well.

Quote
So the idea of getting to the root of the problem, whether it stems psychologically or something as simple as a magnesium deficiency, is vital to achieving a long term healing plan for patients, given a homeopathic remedy or not.

So why call it homeopathy then? All the points you raise can be addressed within the medical profession without invoking the word "homeopathy" at all. Why do you assume the "h" word without really believing in the very core of what it means?

Quote
The other idea in homeopathy, is that people are treated as individuals,the idea that the same disease will effect our body chemistry the same way is not true and treatments need to be more individualized , than the 'one drug fits all' approach.

From what I can see this is already happening in the 1st world via genetics-based tests. I read an article recently where docs overseas are starting to find that patients with strange conditions can often be accurately diagnosed using a genetics test that, say, reveals an inability to digest/process/manufacture a certain compound. They then get given exactly what they need and get better. Something unfathomable just 10-15, heck maybe 5, years ago. This is just going to get better and better. Completely individualised medicine.

Quote
I am not saying homeopathy shouldn't be criticized, i agree it should, but the strengths in the fact that it has been around for so long, need to be investigated further into the points mentioned above,

My point is, "the points mentioned above" are not unique to homeopathy or even that much related to the core concept. There's nothing inherently about homeopathy that makes it the only source for this kind of information or implementation. Homeopathy is wrong, and you're trying to make it seem right based on certain common practices of it's adherents that have nothing to do with homeopathy itself.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +58/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3660


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2013, 14:24:17 PM »

… if science cant prove it, it doesn't work right?
Considering how long homoeopathy has had to prove itself, that’s certainly a much more reasonable inference than holding out the vague hope that it does.  In science, it is our duty always to behave as if an unproven hypothesis is false otherwise we’ll just fool ourselves more and more by straying further from what we do confidently know.  Note that this approach does not stifle research.

One of the major reasons homoeopathy has “succeeded” is that in Hahnemann’s day, “conventional” medicine was decidedly dangerous (mercury salts, bloodletting, bad hygiene, false causes, etc.), often doing considerably more harm than good.  In contrast, homoeopathy, by doing no more than exploiting the placebo effect, at least gave patients a chance to recover by themselves and so the false impression was created that “homoeopathy works”.

This illusion persists to this day and continues to be carried forward by sheer momentum.

The fact remains that compelling evidence for the efficacy of homoeopathy is scant-to-none, that positive results are almost always found only by those who have a vested interest in finding such, that homoeopathy’s tenets are wholly at odds with other well-established science, and that the ever-growing list of various mechanisms proposed for how homoeopathy could work carries a heavy shroud of contrivedness about it (not to mention a paucity of good reasons for believing any of them to be valid) and is hence unconvincing.

'Luthon64
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2413


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2013, 15:36:43 PM »

When the homeopath helps a patient with her emotional problems by listening and talking to her, then he's an analyst.  When the homeopath gives sound advice on eating habits, then he's a nutritionist. When  the homeopath prescribes useful exercise routines, then he's a human movement scientist. That's all fine. What I worry about is the homeopath  practicing homeopathy.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 18:24:35 PM by Rigil Kent » Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +58/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3660


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2013, 15:48:30 PM »

… postmodernist philosophers…
That’s an oxymoron.

Or an egregious misuse of the word “philosophers”.

Wink

'Luthon64
Logged
Lurkie
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2013, 16:46:55 PM »

DrT, you need to read 'Trick or treatment' by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Trick-Treatment-Alternative-Medicine-Trial/dp/0552157627]
[url]http://www.amazon.co.uk/Trick-Treatment-Alternative-Medicine-Trial/dp/0552157627

[/url]

Edzard Ernst is the world's first professor of complementary medicine, based at Exeter University. He started out as a GP with a homeopathy interest. Initially he thought he was having good results with his homeopathic treatments, so he decided to run double-blind placebo controlled trials. To his amazement, he found his results were not better than random. I use 'amazement' because he had convinced himself that he was getting positive results (this is human nature - we remember the positive results but not the negative ones, leading to selection bias). He also goes on to test all sorts of other alternative medicine.

It is a very worthwhile read and is also highly entertaining.
Logged
The Vulcan
Shipmate
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 230



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 19, 2014, 19:35:05 PM »

Don't know whether to post this here under homeopathy bull shit or under a thread to do with MLMs

Mannatech IMO is the worst when it comes to their sales tactics, they seemingly target the sick and desperate, especially cancer patients, happened to my friends and family twice now.

I was invited to my friend's home for this presentation by this Mannatech guy, needless to say I gave him hell. He went on and on about this Ambrotose supplements with "glyconutrients" the lady had terminal cancer and was put on morphine for pain management - he would have her throw that away and take this "miracle, cure-all" fucking Mannatech bullshit and pay the R4000 joining fee, scary part is that I'm almost sure they'd have fallen for this hook, line  and sinker if I weren't there, they're kinda... sheeple, good salt of the earth people, you know.. Then my sister got cancer and within 2 weeks she received a Mannatech pamphlet and dvd... Suffice it to say that I gave her a mouthful on these scumbags...
Logged
Lurkie
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2014, 19:53:58 PM »

These guys are liars and thieves. And psychopaths because they prey on desperation. Or idiots because they believe in their product.

Do they claim any HIV cure? If so, they can be shut down legally.
Logged
The Vulcan
Shipmate
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 230



WWW
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2014, 20:14:17 PM »

These guys are liars and thieves. And psychopaths because they prey on desperation.

Just that. Desperation can sometimes make idiots of anyone and especially on the more trusting good-folk.

I've googled them a little bit, mean I don't want to tob and turn about them or give them the light of day or anything, but I've read that they are sued for millions, and yet they're seemingly growing, it's weird how I run into these people, I mean first it was the guys with Golden Products, Herbalife and Amway, usually I make good friends with them, they're actually very good sales people sometimes (in a weird fundie way - they got that same glaze over their eyes when they're talking MLM churchfolk get)

And this is the really bad thing about Mannatech - once you buy into it, I guess it's like joining a cult, you need to believe it and you need to proselytize. When I asked the guy about what science journals I look up and what medical trials and what type of approval they got, he just went on about testimonies, hey it cures cancer and it cures diabities too don't you know, don't know about HIV though, got a feelin' there's a shower involved...
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 1.608 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page May 22, 2017, 02:47:57 AM
Privacy Policy