Apology: "Homeopathy is not witchcraft, it is nonsense on stilts"

[F. Sidebottom]

You'll have to supply more information for your anecdote to be taken seriously. What was the illness? If it was one that has a poor response to treatment, if there is any at all, and yet will usually go away in due time, then your anecdote is rather uninteresting I'm afraid. If it was a missing leg, then call the Daily Mail.

 

I can supply an anecdote of my own. I know a number of people who deliberately ignored the warnings on the packets of some homeopathy medicines, and took an overdose of 100 times, sometimes 1000 times, the recommended daily allowance ... and nothing happened.

 

Edit: Cyclone, thanks for clarification. Perhaps the validity of my question remains though.

 

She had an infection within her inner ear which was causing severe vertigo.

 

NHS say the infection is not treatable - they can only give you medication to ease the symptoms of dizziness and sickness. She tried many of those, none worked.

 

Just to clarify the point, my wife couldn't afford to make it up - it cost us dearly with her not being able to work. And if she could have gone back she would - straight away. Hence why I say she couln't make up being 'cured'.

 

A week after she took the homeopathic remedy the infection had gone, and the sickness and dizziness was reduced to minor bouts, which went after a further week.

 

Could have been a coincidence. could have been natural. Could have been the medicine. Who knows.

[F. Sidebottom]

It's neither. She got better because of something else, not homoeopathy and certainly not the laying on of healing hands.

 

 

Nah, there's still no proof that placebo effects cures that I've seen. Something else is going on, maybe a lifestyle change, maybe increased awareness, perhaps therapy or psychology. The only thing I'm aware of is that it wouldn't have been the placebo and that the effects could be reproduced without it.

 

 

That's a coincidence, not a cure.

 

How many cioncidences would it take to make a cure?

[onewheeldave]

If you really want a system like that - Go for it!

 

But don't stop half-way. The present system is a compromise. - We would all like to see every ailment afforded every treatment. There simply is not enough money.

 

Your preferred system is easy to implement! (but I, for one, would have moral objections.)

 

You cite the people who agree with you: The people who swear (perhaps) by homeopathy. You appear to suggest that those people are being shirt-changed.

 

Well, if you want everybody to receive value for money, that can be done. Everybody gets exactly what he or she pays for. No more - and no less.

 

Those who want homeopathic treatment buy it (out of their pockets) those who want 'conventional' treatment buy it (out of their pockets) and those who can't afford either do without.

 

Is that what you want? - I'm not a doctor. I'm a taxpayer. I pay doctors - and other medical experts - and I pay them to make decisions. When they make those decisions and present them to me (the taypayer) I feel remarkably inclined to listen to what they have to say ... I did after all, pay them to say it.

 

I have a dog. In fact, I have two dogs. I can bark - but I choose not to.

 

No, that's not what I want- you seem to be making this a lot more complicated that it needs to be

 

Currently, a limited amount of homeopathy is availabe on the NHS and has been for some time. It's resources it uses are more than compensated for by the taxes of those who support this option.

 

A group of people who consider themselves to be 'rationalists' find it intolerable that homeopathy is available on the NHS to those who want it- this group wishes to see the option removed.

 

What I want is for that option to remain.

 

I'm not talking about the major overall/restructuring of the NHS you seem to be talking about above- I simply want the current availablitity of homeopathy to remain.

[TimmyR]

She had an infection within her inner ear which was causing severe vertigo.

 

NHS say the infection is not treatable - they can only give you medication to ease the symptoms of dizziness and sickness. She tried many of those, none worked.

 

Just to clarify the point, my wife couldn't afford to make it up - it cost us dearly with her not being able to work. And if she could have gone back she would - straight away. Hence why I say she couln't make up being 'cured'.

 

A week after she took the homeopathic remedy the infection had gone, and the sickness and dizziness was reduced to minor bouts, which went after a further week.

 

Could have been a coincidence. could have been natural. Could have been the medicine. Who knows.

 

Indeed who knows. What we do know is it wasn't the homeopathic remedies!

[PC Brigade]

 

Could have been a coincidence. could have been natural. Could have been the medicine. Who knows.

 

 

It's called Regression Towards The Mean - in other words - she got better anyway.

Not BECAUSE of the sugar pills, but despite them.

They had no effect on the recovery.

[F. Sidebottom]

Indeed who knows. What we do know is it wasn't the homeopathic remedies!

 

I understand what you're saying - I was as skeptical as you are, because I had no experience of it or exposure to it.

 

Something inside me is still not 100% convinced, but after my wifes experience, I'm not as ignorant about it as I used to be.

[F. Sidebottom]

It's called Regression Towards The Mean - in other words - she got better anyway.

Not BECAUSE of the sugar pills, but despite them.

They had no effect on the recovery.

 

Again, someone who says it's a coincidence.

 

How many coincidences does it take to make a cure?

[Cyclone]

A set of coincidences under controlled conditions in a number of people that made it statistically relevant would help.

 

Regression to the mean can't really be applied to single data points, although the idea is the same. I suppose in a single person the 'mean' is being healthy and unhealthy is the unusual state. Strictly speaking it's a mathematical measurement though, it makes more sense if you consider an accident black spot, a large number of accidents has been identified, but probability suggests that if you continue to monitor that spot the number will trend back towards the average, hence you stick up a camera, the number of accidents per time period falls (regression to the mean) and you claim the camera has done it.

[Kthebean]

Ben Goldacre calls this 'regression to the mean' - basically a lot of conditions and illnesses have a natural cycle too - the symptoms appear, they get worse, they get really bad, then they start to improve (or you die).

By the time some people have got bad/desperate/acute enough to try homeopathy, they may be in the 'improving' stage of the cycle of the illness.

And wrongly attribute it to a sugar pill made with water that has been banged on a horsehair pad seven times...

I'll add my voice to those recommending Ben Goldacre and particularly his book 'Bad Science' for an interesting read on homeopathy (and a lot more besides...)

 

Very interesting Beckelina thanks. I will certainly pick up a copy of the book. Also if anyone who does believe in homeopathy would wish to reccomend me a book offering an alternative argument.

[Kthebean]

The 'amount of taxes raised by those who want it more than covers the cost' argument is spurious - that is not how public health works nor should it be.