The world of homeopathy is getting very excited: HOMEOPATHY AWARENESS WEEK is approaching (it’s starting 10 April). An ideal occasion, I think, for making a celebratory offer to all homeopaths:
I am suggesting to give a free lecture on any homeopathy-related subject of your choosing. This, I hope, might increase homeopaths’ awareness of the science, research and evidence for or against homeopathy.
Which professional organisation could possibly say no to such a generous offer?
None with an interest in evidence, surely!
Homeopathy has been the number one subject on this blog from its very beginnings. It regularly attracts lively discussions, and I am confident that I could generate an even better dialogue, if you let me present the evidence. I think I am almost uniquely qualified to give such a lecture, not least because I have the following types of expertise:
- I have given about 800 lectures on alternative medicine and therefore know what to do,
- I have a sound knowledge of evidence-based medicine,
- I possess the ability to tell good from poor science,
- I have experience as a patient treated by a homeopath,
- I have research experience in homeopathy (clinical trials, systematic reviews, etc.),
- I have published many scientific papers on the subject,
- I possess many years of clinical experience,
- I have been trained in homeopathy and used it as a clinician,
- I can think critically,
- I regularly review the emerging literature,
- finally, I have recently published a book entitled HOMEOPATHY, THE UNDILUTED FACTS.
The specifics of my offer are as follows:
- I will give a 45-min lecture to your organisation.
- I will then answer questions for up to 30 min.
- This can be scheduled at a location and a time of day that suits you.
- I will not charge a lecture fee.
- You will cover my travel cost from my home in Suffolk to your venue.
- Depending on the location of the venue and timing of the lecture, I might need to stay overnight and would hope you can foot the bill for that.
- There will be no other costs involved.
- My offer is limited to a time-window during which I plan to be in the UK. The best time for me would be July and August.
I am convinced that we all might profit from such lectures:
- You might learn about science, the evidence, the need for thinking critically, etc.
- And I might learn a bit more about the views and concerns of homeopaths.
Therefore, I hope that my offer will find plenty of takers. If you are interested, please contact me via this blog.
A very generous offer! It will be very interesting to see if you get any interest – it has been suggested that homeopaths have been discouraged from engaging with “skeptics” by their trade associations as part of their PR initiatives organised by 4Homeopathy. Not that it stops some of them.
I agree with the 1st comment; it is a generous offer and should be taken up.
Although I profoundly disagree with Edzard’s view on homeopathy, due to what I consider his misunderstanding of it, scientific discussion is essential to the process of weeding out the nonsense that has infiltrated homeopathy over the past two hundred years.
I would suggest sense (aka science) has infiltrated homeopathy over the past 200 years.
Not with ‘Calendonium’, ‘Berlin Wall’, remedy machines etc. ‘aka science’ did not infiltrate it; it is lost in it.
Greg, Approximately when did homeopathy become so hopelessly lost that Natrum muriaticum [sodium chloride] was added to its list of remedies?
See: Natrum muriaticum by David Lilley, The British Homeopathic Association.
The British Homeopathic Association is a registered charity founded in 1902. The principal objects of the charity are to promote and develop the study and practice of homeopathy and to advance education and research in the theory and practice of homeopathy provided that the useful results of such research shall be published.
Thank you for your comment Pete; it is a prime example of taking something in homeopathy from the level of sublime to the ridiculous.
Natrum Muriaticum is an extraordinary remedy, one of the finest on this planet, that I can tell you.
Can you elaborate on that, How is this remedy produced, tested and used?
I suspect Greg will say, “This topic is too complex to discuss on this (sceptics) website.”
I have often wondered if there is a remedy that homeopaths have rejected as ineffective? I’ve never heard of one. Even such imbecile ideas as making remedies from Aqua Marina (sea water) Hekla Lava (rock from Iceland) and Light of Saturn have shown remarkable effects (according to homeopaths).
Everything seems to be able to form a basis for homeopathic remedies ,even such essentials of life as chocolate and condoms.
Indeed, what is the specific treatment failure rates for different homeopathic remedies? I suspect they are 100% effective for 100% of the 30 000 odd medical conditions out there.
And “vacuum”, and “distilled water”. “Cell phone radiation” (at two different frequencies). By performing such “null tests” and obtaining only positives, homeopaths have shown quite conclusively that the “proving” process has no value as a means of discerning effect. If only they were able to see this fact.
I’ve tried to point this out, and have met with “you don’t understand the point of proving”. It seems that the point is, silly me, to establish *what* effect the particular nothing has; and it is taken as a given that of course it has one. As if one were to design a process to determine what mineral a dowsing stick would detect, and never consider the possibility that the answer is “none”.
If you look at the design of homeopathy the answer is obvious. Homeopathy assumes “like cures like” (based on a faulty experiment conducted by a bad scientist). Consequently, *everything* cures something, namely the diseases displaying the symptoms that the substance in question induces in healthy individuals – this in turn leads to the perverse situation that one should be able to cure cyanide poisoning by minute doses of kaliumcyanide – which of course does not happen.
To see how homeopathic research works, you just have to look at the abstract books of their congresses, for instance available here: http://www.lmhi-congress-2017.de/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/AHZ0217_Onlineversion1.pdf
Still think they are a bunch of criminals, some individual homeopaths etc may be unaware of this- though I am not always sure if this is the case. Having said that, what laws do you break, and this will be country dependant, when you know that the stuff you sell does not work?
No Frank people in the UK belive it works.
1.3% used homeopathy in the previous year according to a European social survey referenced on here.
As 26% in the previous year used their GP it might be fair to assume that the 1.3% is a little low in assessing supporters of homeopathic medicine otherwise I could say that 74% dont use GPs which is not true.
So we have a few % believing in homeopathy (even if they havent used in the previous year) which amounts to around a million or so of the adult population. All criminals of course according to Frank.
Regular users and quite a few occasional users think it does work and few could have avoided all the negative media attention that homeopathy has had in recent years. They dont believe Edzard from all of his widely available writings so why would anyone want to hear him in person?
because they might want to hear and challenge the evidence?
The evidence against ‘allopathic’ homeopathy is almost ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Homeopathy is not efficacious for the treatment of ‘diseases’ considered as an abstract entity.
If Edzard wants to talk with medical homeopaths about the lack of evidence for the efficacy of clinical homeopathy, that is fine. Let them get on with it.
If he wants to give a talk to classical homeopaths then there is no point bringing along this topic because many will agree with his view.
If he has a critique of homeopathy, I would like to hear it.
Im talking about homeopaths- the people dishing it out. Not the users aka the the hoodwinked users.
Users are not hoodwinked Frank. They have all made a choice. That is their right and they have heard all about ‘the evidence’ and they would all think you are wrong calling them hoodwinked.
Although I am sure Edzard’s presentation would be very interesting users just would not believe the evidence he would present. You cannot live in the UK without being bombarded with advice from certain experts that homeopathy doesnt work. However we are all cynics who form our own opinions and listen to experts of our choice. So there is nothing to challenge Edzard. Sorry.
I am not offering to give a talk to users but to homeopathic clinicians, i. e. clinicians who are either non-medical or medical homeopaths.
I am more than happy to film your lecture should it happen. An alternative would be for you to make the presentation to a small group which again could be filmed and turned into an interesting programme. I will not charge a fee either!
thanks for the offer; where are you based?
Mid Kent but l often go into London
I will be sure to leave this note with he AHVMA (American Holistic Veterinary Medical Society) .
Edzard, my subscription veterinary (Veterinary Information Network) service represents one of the largest online communities of veterinarians (see VIN.com).
The website offers a variety of diagnostic aids, formularies, message boards, journals, specialty centers and continuing education.
I invite you to look at the site and consider giving a “rounds session”. I am sure it would be viewed by hundreds if not thousands of veterinarians worldwide.
Thank you for your consideration.
thanks – very kind.
what would this involve?
I must say that I have not been keen in the past to post lectures. I always thought that the interesting bit about the lecture is the discussion that follows.
Sticking to the topic. Who would go into Al Capone’s hideout to give a talk about why criminal activity is wrong? I would suggest a neutral public audience as a prerequisite?
ideally yes, but I don’t mind stepping into the ‘lion’s den’ – I have survived it often enough.
Can I quote you on this as being your “famous last words” 🙂
I’ll make sure they put it on my tombstone
Rounds typically involve a 30 – 60 minute live session which you can do from the comfort of your office. Presenters often use slides like a power point presentation and topics range the spectrum of medicine from clinical procedures to the mental health of practitioners . The Dr. giving the rounds typically takes questions for 15 -20 minutes afterwards and the transcript is permanently posted as part of the VIN collection.
I am sure your contribution would be a valuable part of the collection.
Thank you for considering this. If you are interested I will contact the administrator of the site, give him your contact information and hopefully put you two together. Vin represents over 40,000 veterinarians worldwide and has a deep impact on practitioners , academics , and scientists in the veterinary field.
I will think about it
I would not say the veterinary community or VIN represents the “Lions Den” .
The site has a dedicated alternative medicine board represented by “experts” in many CAM disciplines.
I would also say there are a growing number of “alternative” schools of veterinary medicine (ie the Xie institute) representing herbalism, acupuncture, low level laser therapy and homeopathy.
The profession also includes the AVH (academy of veterinary homeopathy) http://theavh.org/
You will not be talking to the choir here as a recent poll on vin suggested that over 65 percent of veterinarian surveyed are ok with the application of CAM modalities in their practice.
This is not a group of novices either. Almost all members are
doctors of veterinary medicine with extensive education and life experience
Not sure if you or your readers have seen my blog but it specialises in the regulation of homeopathic medicines and practice. I’ve done public speaking on the subject. Might it make a good companion piece for your talk?
always happy to do a double act
Would have to practice jokes though although most of my homeopathy jokes revolve around J.T. Kent and his aphorisms and modern homeopaths pretending he said something other than he did.. Germ theory” denial is a rich vein of fun. Might have to get an elephant into the talk…
I’ve checked out this site, (UK Homeopathy Regulation) – and it provides most helpful reviews, but…
The ‘Profile’ includes a picture of the author which is a joke – and this suggests he is a joker, which is a shame.
Please could we learn more about the unnamed blogger, and the authority by which he comments?
We all know who Edzard is!
I’m deliberately anonymous. Various reasons but it makes ad hominem attacks much more difficult. I don’t claim any authority other than being able to read legislation and regulations. That the MHRA have responded to the few complaints I’ve made suggests that my reading of the law is correct. I’m reluctant to talk about “successes” or to claim credit for anything.
It’s also worth pointing out that in the past I received threats of violence from a “homeopath” with a criminal record including GHB. Most online threats of violence from random trolls I ignore but not threats from a known felon.
A generous offer indeed.. At this rate, what with Trump”s valiant efforts to ‘drain the swamp’, we’ll have the world sorted out in no time.
One major stumbling block is he inability of many people to understand basic logical argument, and their belief in the ‘appeal to numbers’ argument, or indeed the claim that homeopathy has been taken over by foolishness in the past 200 years.
What was ‘sensible homeopathy’ like prior to this usurpation? Is it similar to the way in which the noble science of alchemy was brought into disrepute by charlatans?
And what editing rights would Colin want on his film? Bearing in mind that as a confessed believer in homeopathy, he’s offered to act as a neutral referee in any conference on the subject.
Who knows? Perhaps such a lecture, with is accompanying Q and A session, would bring the entire audience to IS senses, much as a presentation to EU ‘Leave’ voters would have convinced them that all the stories about bendy buses, bendy cucumbers, bendy bananas, bendy immigrants etc were Daily Mail lies. In fact, I wouldn’t mind making a film about Colin making his film.
any film or video would need to be totally unedited and just cover the 45 min lecture. otherwise I would not do it.
I see no problem with that
“I’d be more than happy to have him do a rounds.
Chris, do you want to communicate the offer. We can accommodate a time that will work UK time.
Paul D. Pion, DVM, DACVIM (Cardiology)
Davis, CA "
Dr. Ernst, Dr. Pion has acquiesced and graciously allowed me to continue to ask you to have a simple "rounds" on the vin site (VIN.com) .
Would it be alright to have the VIN organization contact you to set up a date for the rounds? Vin uses a very simply interfacing software for livestreaming rounds. You might have to download a bit of software as I did to "go live" so hopefully their technical staff would make it very easy (they did for me).
I can see many different areas of Homeopathy and in particular veterinary homeopathy that are interesting… examples of nosode vaccines for parvo virus etc….
Becker, Karen, DVM. “The ABCs of Homeopathic Nosodes." Healthy Pets. Mercola.com, 22 May 2016. Web. 10 July 2016. http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2016/05/22/homeopathic-nosodes.aspx.
Burns, Katie. " To Titer or to Revaccinate." To Titer or to Revaccinate. American Veterinary Medical Association, 15 June 2016. Web. 10 July 2016. https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/160701a.aspx.
Day, Christopher. "Canine Tracheobronchitis (Kennel Cough).” (2007): n. pag. Web. http://www.alternativevet.org/Clinical%20Trial%20-%20Dogs%20K-C%20WS009-07.pdf.
Dodds, W. Jean, DVM. “Myths About Thyroid Disorders, Vaccines in Pets.” Veterinary Practice News, 23 June 2016. Web. 10 July 2016. http://www.veterinarypracticenews.com/myths-about-thyroid-disorders-vaccines-in-pets/.
Gross, Cary P., MD, and Kent A. Septkowitz, MD. “The Myth of the Medical Breakthrough: Smallpox, Vaccination, and Jenner Reconsidered.” International Journal of Infectious Diseases 3.1 (1998): 54-60. Web.
Rieder, Michael J., and Joan L. Robinson. “‘Nosodes’ Are No Substitute for Vaccines." Paediatrics & Child Health 20.4 (2015): 219-20. May 2015. Web. 10 July 2016. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4443832/.
Veterinary Product Licences Granted Under Part II of the Medicines Acts 1968 And 1971." The London Gazette; 9 Mar. 1990. Web. 10 July 2016. https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/52133/page/8879/data.pdf
Wynn, Susan G., DVM. "Animal Studies of Homeopathy." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 212.5 (1998): 719-24. Print.
Wynn, Susan G., DVM. "Vaccination Decisions.” Louise’s Pet Connection, n.d. Web. 10 July 2016. http://louisespetconnection.com/Articles/VacinationDecisions.html
And vaccination is just the tip of the iceberg.
I do hope you will consider the offer to communicate to so many practitioners and students of medicine to let us learn from your perspective.
The Indian New Year started on 29th March. This is connected to the day sun enters the Aries constellation. We like to start the year with lots of smiles and laughs. Thank you for the joke.
“I possess the ability to tell good from poor science,”
Albert Einstein defined Quantum theory as poor science.
“I have experience as a patient treated by a homeopath,”
How old were you as a patient?
“I have research experience in homeopathy (clinical trials, systematic reviews, etc.),”
The research was paid by?
“I possess many years of clinical experience,”
Have you ever tried to treat a patient with homeopathic remedy?
“I have been trained in homeopathy and used it as a clinician,”
Training lasted for how many days?
Your link to Clarke makes me wonder: do you think that the people that read this blog are able to understand it?
They are real* scientists* and doctors, and let me tell you they study and ‘treat diseases’.
Lovely to see a proponent seek to undermine a scientist with posturing, Iqbal.
This “I know what I’m talking about because I’m a professional” stance encourages the inference you’re income-dependant on homeopathy and it’s sibling CAM.
However a scientist will seek to form opinion from the data, rather than select data to support opinion.
Come on Rich: have a go and comment on Iqbal’s link above.
I think Iqbal is just trying to demonstrate that he has not read any of the previous posts where I answered these questions, nor my memoir https://www.amazon.co.uk/Scientist-Wonderland-Searching-Finding-Trouble/dp/1845407776 where these topics are dealt with in full detail.
“I think Iqbal is just trying to demonstrate that he has not read any of the previous posts where I answered these questions, nor my memoir..”
Valid references are always from neutral sources.
you are surpassing yourself!
you want independent references answering these questions:
How old were you as a patient?
The research was paid by?
Have you ever tried to treat a patient with homeopathic remedy?
Training lasted for how many days?
YOU ARE A STAR! A SUPER-STAR!!!
That rules out all of your references, and invalidates all of your comments!
You wouldn’t like me to waste my hard earned money on a book written by YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How sad! The homeopathy business must be really poor in India. The cost of water and lactose cannot be such burden? Too many homeopaths maybe?
They send the professor’s memoirs worldwide, $18,88. But hurry, there are only 14 left in stock.
If you are in a hurry it takes only seconds to purchase a
Kindle-copy of the book from Amazon. It costs only $10,69 and if one does not own a Kindle tablet, the software to enjoy it can be downloaded for free on any computer, iPad or other tablet or even a smartphone.
Maybe we should start a collection for hard-up homeopaths and give them copies of professor Ernst’s memoirs and his “Homeopathy – the undiluted facts”. One only needs the email address to send a Kindle copy as a gift from the amazon webshop.
@Iqbal wrote on Thursday 06 April 2017 at 05:37:
These are 119 years old stories!!!
I am not sure if “Iqbal” is trying to make fun of us by submitting this link, or if he/she is simply unable to assimilate information and see beyond his/her faith in homeopathy?
“Greg” even seems to chime in and consider this to be an important piece of evidence??
These people never cease to astonish.
I am not sure if it is worth trying to explain to Iqbal and his/her homeopathic ilk why this is not evidence of anything other than the gullibility and lack of medical education and experience of the author, who BTW is entitled “MD” but seems to have no (or lost) insight into abdominal surgical problems?
But I will try – if not for “Iqbal” and “Greg”, then for our random audience who may not be familiar with the subject.
The link is to an extract of a book whose author died about a century after homeopathy was invented by Hahnemann.
It describes a number of people, all with symptoms of intestinal obstruction who luckily were relieved spontaneously. The original author of the case histories, Robert Thomas Cooper (1844-1903), seems to have assumed they had cancer and assumed that the ‘cure’ was effected by the homeopathic remedy given. It is clear from the case stories that this assumption was not at all proven.
How do you suppose they diagnosed cancer back in the end of the nineteenth century? Did they have endoscopy or ultrasound or CT-scanners? NO! Cancer was never diagnosed until at operation, or before the cancer grew to became fully obvious on clinical examination.
In the cases described, the author (Cooper) simply assumed the cause was cancer. They all survived, at least long enough for the author to write them up as a success.
He may of course also have hapened to be right in some cases. Malignant obstruction can have temporary relief of symptoms – the last case described there may be one of those. It had a prolonged, agonising course that ended in relief but there is no mention of what happened later. A malignant stricture of the colon for example may have caused such symptoms with temporary relief. Inflamation and infection of many different kinds, parasites, and many other causes can also have been at play.
Here is a video from an operation (Warning: do not watch shortly after lunch) on a rather extraordinary case of intestinal obstruction, which might have been more common 120 years ago and could well have caused such symptoms with a palpable tumorous resistance on examination and subsequent relief when the lump of parasitic worms dispersed.
In the first case they had tried to operate but gave up due to intestinal adhesions. Adhesions is of course the obvious cause of the obstruction in that case. Food got impacted in adherent bowel. This is the most common cause of intestinal obstruction and often resolves without intervention. Luckily the obstruction resolved in the cases described, which happens at times when the bolus of food that was obstructing, breaks down and dissolves and passage can resume.
From the text:
They are describing palpable distended bowel loop that disappeared when passage resumed.
I have operated on countless such cases and I have also had many, with bowel adhesions and repetitive cases of obstruction, whom I observed while giving supportive therapy (intravenous fluids and pain killers) and the situation resolved without yet another operation.
There is no mention of intravenous fluid replacement, which greatly enhances the survival of such cases and it is unlikely they had access to such techniques in 1898, even if it was first discovered around 1830.
No, this is not proof of homeopathic therapy success – These are 119 year old stories of some lucky cases that survived on their own, assuming the cause to be cancer and omitting all those who succumbed.
“These are 119 year old stories of some lucky cases that survived on their own, assuming the cause to be cancer and omitting all those who succumbed.”
Because allopaths were stupid and did not know cancer when they saw one, why would they cut open a patient on the pretext of cancer and then leave him to die? (Homeopaths don’t do surgeries.)
“the case of George M., 40, who was suffering from cancer of the stomach, and was operated on in the Cancer Hospital. The operation was abandoned on account of the numerous adhesions, and because it was impossible to remove all the diseased tissue. ”
What were allopathic cancer hospitals doing if they could not even recognize cancer in the first place?
And who gave you a medical degree? Your bias is so very apparent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Iqbal, if one looks back in history: it is apparent that the barbarity of the experimentation on human beings that took place in physical and psychiatric medicine exceeds imagination.
It takes a special type of person to do this kind of experimentation on human beings.
I can start with one example, that fortunately led to saving millions of lives, but this is one drop in the ocean of the countless experiments with drugs and surgery.
‘He submitted a paper to the Royal Society in 1797 describing his experiment, but was told that his ideas were too revolutionary and that he needed more proof. Undaunted, Jenner experimented on several other children, including his own 11-month-old son. In 1798, the results were finally published and Jenner coined the word vaccine from the Latin ‘vacca’ for cow.
Jenner was widely ridiculed. Critics, especially the clergy, claimed it was repulsive and ungodly to inocculate someone with material from a diseased animal.’
Iqbal arrogantly shouting and cursing does not make his point 119 year fables any more dependable as evidence that it was drops of water that saved the lives of cancer patients. Just ask yourself, if this was possible 119 years ago, why is it not being used in hospitals all over the world today? (And please spare us the conspracy theories). (S)he obviously has no edperience of surgery or medicine an does not understand medical history.
As expected, (s)he has not understood a word of my explanations that are based on decades of actual, modern medical experience of such cases as are described in his silly homeofable.
If (s)he wants to rant on about this, let’s hope it will be in a coherent, courteous and rational tone and addresses the salient questions such as why homeopaths need to go 119 years back in time for a few anecdotes to prove their case.
I seem to have missed erasing the words “his point” in the first sentence.
You did not answer the simple question:
Did the allopaths recognize cancer or not 119 years ago?
What was the purpose of Cancer hospitals 119 years ago?
“The original author of the case histories, Robert Thomas Cooper (1844-1903), seems to have assumed they had cancer and assumed that the ‘cure’ was effected by the homeopathic remedy given. It is clear from the case stories that this assumption was not at all proven.”
He did not assume it.
““the case of George M., 40, who was suffering from cancer of the stomach, and was operated on in the Cancer Hospital. The operation was abandoned on account of the numerous adhesions, and because it was IMPOSSIBLE TO REMOVE ALL THE DISEASED TISSUES. ”
He is reconfirming the assessment of the allopaths.
“How do you suppose they diagnosed cancer back in the end of the nineteenth century? Did they have endoscopy or ultrasound or CT-scanners? NO! Cancer was never diagnosed until at operation, or before the cancer grew to became fully obvious on clinical examination.”
“With the widespread use of the microscope in the 18th century, it was discovered that the ‘cancer poison’ eventually spreads from the primary tumor through the lymph nodes to other sites (“metastasis”). This view of the disease was first formulated by the English surgeon Campbell De Morgan between 1871 and 1874.”
“This is the most common cause of intestinal obstruction and often resolves without intervention. Luckily the obstruction resolved …… and passage can resume.”
“Almost immediately after the patient began bringing up a black jelly-like substance with great relief to pain and general improvement.” “Another dose was given, and the effect confirmed Cooper’s view that the swelling resulted from “the high pressure put upon the emunctories owing to the setting free of poison in the system.” “In a few days,” says Cooper, “he came to me in a great fright, and, pulling up his trousers, showed me the terrible condition, as he thought, of his legs. They were swollen, and great red streaks and patches could be seen coursing down the limbs.”
iS THIS WHAT YOU SEE FOR ADHESION CASES?
“He may of course also have happened to be right in some cases. Malignant obstruction can have temporary relief of symptoms – the last case described there may be one of those. It had a prolonged, agonizing course that ended in relief but there is no mention of what happened later.”
What did you expect to happen later? If the patient gets well during treatment from a doctor, especially if the case has been described as cancer, at the least medical provocation he will visit that doctor again. So the option is either the patient dropped dead and had no time to visit the doctor, or did not have a reason to visit the doctor. Which in your opinion is the right assumption?
There is no need to get on the pedestal. You still know nothing about the WHY of cancer. The WHAT and HOW was known 120 years ago. Now you know that cancer is not one specific problem: and the treatment?
A protocol of:
not necessarily in that order. No doctor with 100% surety can say for the patient in front of him/her: will he/she survive after the protocol? At best a reference to statistics would be made.
And the success?
If you read carefully, you will note that Gorksy knows that it is a lost battle and may be the war.
“….the salient questions such as why homeopaths need to go 119 years back in time for a few anecdotes to prove their case.”
Homeopaths were curing cancer 119 years ago. And recently:
This doctor can recognize cancer. He is an allopath first.
How many more cases would you want?
Iqbal, let me explain something to you. In your country you have a ministery for homoepathy and other “interesting” cures (AYUSH). There is quite a lot of funding behind that. Yet there is NO study, not even a small one. All you present is case descriptions. I can present case descriptions to you where people “cured” cancer by drinking petrol.
As for your “case study”: The value of it may be demonstrated by a case within my own family. One of grand-aunts had stomach cancer in her youth. She had surgery, but was allowed to eat anything post surgery with the expressed reason that she will die within a short time anyway. This is exactly what the doctor said. Well, she died. 70 years later.
“She had surgery, but was allowed to eat anything post surgery with the expressed reason that she will die within a short time anyway. This is exactly what the doctor said. Well, she died. 70 years later.”
The name of the doctor was Björn Geir?
” Yet there is NO study, not even a small one.”
Don’t go by what Ernst says: You continue to forget that homeopathy treats EACH patient separately.
Banerji P, Campbell DR, Banerji P. Cancer patients treated with the Banerji protocols utilising homoeopathic medicine: a Best Case Series Program of the National Cancer Institute USA. Oncol Rep. 2008 Jul;20(1):69-74.
Towards standard setting for patient-reported outcomes in the NHS homeopathic hospitals. Homeopathy. 2008 Jul;97(3):114-21.
Banerji P, Banerji P. The Banerji Protocol — A New Horizon In Medicine. The PBH Research Foundation. India. May 2007
Hahnemann S Organon of Medicine. Aphorisms 174-175; 205(a). Hahnemann, Christian Friedrich Samuel. Organon der Heilkunst. Textkritische Ausgabe der von Samuel Hahnemann fürdie sechste Auflage vorgesehene Fassung. Bearbeitet, herausgegeben und mit einem Vorwort versehen von Joseph Schmidt.Karl Haug Verlag, Heidelberg. 1992
Pathak S, Multani A, Banerji P, Banerji P. Ruta 6 selectively indices cell death in brain cancer cells that proliferation in normal peripheral blood lymphocytes: A novel treatment for human brain cancer. Int J Onc. 2003; 23:975-982
Chikramane PS, Suresh AK, Bellare JR, Kane SG. Extreme homeopathic dilutions retain starting materials: A nanoparticulate perspective. Homeopathy. 2010 Oct;99(4):231-42.
Satti J, The emerging low-dose therapy for advanced cancers. Dose-Response 2009;7:208–220.
Kumar KB, Sunila ES, Kuttan G, Preethi KC, Venugopal CN, Kuttan R. Inhibition of chemically induced carcinogenesis by drugs used in homeopathic medicine. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2007 Jan-Mar;8(1):98-102.
Preethi KC, Girija Kuttan , Ramadasan Kuttan. Antitumor activity of Ruta graveolens extract. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2006 7, 439-43.
Sur RK, Samajdar K, Mitra S, Gole MK, Chakrabarthy BN. Hepatoprotective action of potentized Lycopodium clavatum L. Br Homeopath J 1990;79:152–6.
Biswas SJ, Pathak S, Bhattacharjee N, Das JK, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Efficacy of the potentized homeopathic drug, Carcinosin 200, fed alone and in combination with another drug, Chelidonium 200, in amelioration of p-dimethylaminoazobenzene-induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice. J Altern Complement Med. 2005 Oct; 11(5): 839-54.
Pathak S, Das JK, Biswas SJ, et al. Protective potentials of a potentized homeopathic drug Lycopodium-30, in ameliorating azo dye induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice. Mol Cell Biochem 2006 285:121-31.
Sunila ES, Kuttan G, Preethi KC, Kuttan R. Effect of homeopathic medicines on transplanted tumors in mice. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2007 Jul-Sep;8(3):390-4.
Sunila ES, Kuttan R, Preethi KC, Kuttan G. Dynamized preparations in cell culture. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2009 Jun;6(2):257-63. Epub 2007 Oct 3.
Preethi KC, Nair CK, Kuttan R. Clastogenic potential of Ruta graveolens extract and a homeopathic preparation in mouse bone marrow cells. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2008 Oct-Dec;9(4):763-9.
Preethi K, Ellanghiyil S, Kuttan G, Kuttan R. Induction of Apoptosis of Tumor Cells by Some Potentiated Homeopathic Drugs: Implications on Mechanism of Action. Integr Cancer Ther. 2011 Jul 19. [Epub ahead of print]
Banerjee A, Pathak S, Biswas SJ, Roy-Karmakar S, Boujedaini N, Belon P, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Chelidonium majus 30C and 200C in induced hepato-toxicity in rats. Homeopathy. 2010 Jul;99(3):167-76.
Bhattacharyya SS, Paul S, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Encapsulated plant extract (Gelsemium sempervirens) poly (lactide-co-glycolide) nanoparticles enhance cellular uptake and increase bioactivity in vitro. Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2010 Jun;235(6):678-88.
Bhattacharjee N, Banerjee P, Anisur RK. Homeopathic drugs Natrum sulphuricum and Carcinosin prevent azo dye-induced hepatocarcinogenesis in mice. Indian J Biochem Biophys. 2009 Aug;46(4):307-18.
Pathak S, Bhattacharjee N,Das JK, Choudhury SC, Roy-Karmakar S,Banerjee P, Paul S, Banerjee A, Khuda-Bukhsh A.R. Supportive evidences for anti-cancerous potential of an alternative medicine in hepatocarcinogenesis of mice, Forsch Komplementärmed 2007 14;3:148-156.
Biswas R, Mandal SK, Dutta S, Bhattacharyya SS, Boujedaini N, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Thujone-Rich Fraction of Thuja occidentalis Demonstrates Major Anti-Cancer Potentials: Evidences from In Vitro Studies on A375 Cells. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:568148. Epub 2011 Feb 20.
Khuda-Bukhsh AR, Bhattacharyya SS, Paul S, Dutta S, Boujedaini N, Belon P. Modulation of Signal Proteins: A Plausible Mechanism to Explain How a Potentized Drug Secale Cor 30C Diluted beyond Avogadro’s Limit Combats Skin Papilloma in Mice. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2009 Jul 16. [Epub ahead of print]
Paul S, Mandal SK, Bhattacharyya SS, Boujedaini N, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. In vitro and in vivo studies demonstrate anticancer property of root extract of Polygala senega. J Acupunct Meridian Stud. 2010 Sep;3(3):188-96.
Bhattacharjee N, Khuda-Bukhsh AR. Can homeopathic Cholesterinum 200c used intermittently with Natrum sulphuricum 30c or 200c provide additional protective effects against hepatotoxicity induced by carcinogens in mice? An experimental probe. Prepublication manuscript sent by authors.
Chatterjee A, Biswas J, Chatterjee A, Bhattacharya S, Mukhopadhyay B, Mandal S. Psorinum therapy in treating stomach, gall bladder, pancreatic, and liver cancers: a prospective clinical study. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:724743. Epub 2010 Dec 8.
Frenkel M, Mishra BM, Sen S, Yang P, Pawlus A, Vence L, Leblanc A, Cohen L, Banerji P, Banerji P. Cytotoxic effects of ultra-diluted remedies on breast cancer cells. Int J Oncol. 2010 Feb;36(2):395-403.
Frenkel M, Homeopathy in cancer care. Altern Ther Health Med. 2010 May-Jun;16(3):12-6.
Khuda-Bukhsh AR, Mice as a model for homeopathy research. Homeopathy. 2009 Oct;98(4):267-79.
Kassab S, Cummings M, Berkovitz S, van Haselen R, Fisher P. Homeopathic medicines for adverse effects of cancer treatments. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Apr 15;(2):CD004845.
Sunila ES, Kuttan G. Protective Effect of Thuja occidentalis Against Radiation-Induced Toxicity in Mice Integr Cancer Ther 2005; 4; 322
This is silly, or rather it is absurd. I am arguing with an incognito, ignorant Indian homeopath who thinks shaken water is a cancer cure and thinks that 119 year old anecdotes are evidence. And pulls out fantasy fables from other homeopaths! 🙂 I really should be spending time on something else but now the lamb is slowly cooking sous-vide, I am tempted to play along for one more round…
Let’s disect one of Iqbal’s rants:
The name is ‘Björn’ , Full name ‘Börn Geir’ and I am Leifsson. You see, we use a patronymic naming system here in Iceland. You can look the term up on wikipedia if you do not know it. What is your real name, where do you live and tell us something about yourself? It is no fun talking to a non-entity. Like having a conversation with someone through a wall.
I AM on a pedestal compared to you. I know a lot more about medicine and surgery and I have decades of experience in it. This is necessary to understand and analyse the stories you have been dragging in to substantiate your fantasy of shaken water curing cancer. I am also much better at chemistry and physics than you and therefore able to understand why homeopathy is nothing.
So, I do not have to go on the pedestal, I am on it.
Now, you will probably call this arrogance but I am only stating the obvious. Arrogance is something fools have problems with because they do not understand the obvious.
Wrong. I know much more than I would like about cancer and its known causes.
I’ve known it all along. I have operated hundreds and taken part in multidisciplinary treatment of cancer victims. I have frineds and loved one’s with cancer. My father died of cancer. You should not dare tell me about cancer!
Er… yes. And?
I recommend the book ‘Emperor of all maladies: a biography of cancer’ by Siddharta Mykherjee, if you want to learn the real truth about cancer.
Ah, you’re right, for once. I would know. I have had this conversation with patients and their relatives more often than I would like to remember. I help them understand that life is what happens now, and they may have less time than they would like. Then I follow up on them and help them live with the diagnosis and through the difficult treatments.
And you? Tell us about your therapies using remedies and…?
I think you picked the wrong reference. This one supports my arguments from the high pedestal.
Can it really be you misunderstand the whole thing? Try reading it again.
And his name is ‘Gorsky’,’David Grosky’ not ‘Gorksy’. And he is a real cancer surgeon and scientist and very smart.
Nope, and they still aren’t. If you think you know betterand can prove me wrong then please do, but you will have to produce something better and more recent evidence.
eh, medical students are taught to recognise cancers. But this one seems to have forgotten what he was taught after that.
What do you mean? You can produce as many positive anecdotes as you like. You are not getting anywhere with that unless you divide it by the number of unsuccessful attempts and eliminate the effect of bias by setting up the study properly.
Come on Iqbal. You are in a hole so stop digging.
Now to cooking the Saturday dinner…
“You continue to forget that homeopathy treats EACH patient separately.”
As does burglary.
You know what Iqbal… (I’ll do you the honour of addressing you in first person, even if you are hiding cowardly and have been rude)
Your list of references posted on Saturday 08 April 2017 at 10:59 only proves you have not yet understood the meaning of the word evidence.
Hehe… I see that in my hurry to tease Iqbal, for misspelling my name before having to cook dinner, I made a spelling error myself. 😀
Well, that’s life. I hope Iqbal will be able to thoroughly enjoy the ‘schadenfreude’ 😀
I am not a homeopath. I know a lot about homeopathy a I have interacted with family homeopaths for nearly 50 years.
“I AM on a pedestal compared to you.”
Let us check the height of the pedestal. I hope it does not turn out to be a soapbox.
I know a lot more about medicine and surgery and I have decades of experience in it. This is necessary to understand and analyse the stories you have been dragging in to substantiate your fantasy of shaken water curing cancer. I am also much better at chemistry and physics than you and therefore able to understand why homeopathy is nothing.”
Can you be a little specific to differentiate between pure chemistry and pure medicine.
“Now, you will probably call this arrogance but I am only stating the obvious. Arrogance is something fools have problems with because they do not understand the obvious.”
Arrogance is linked to fools. They believe they know every thing and therefore are arrogant. The fact is “:……is to pierce the fog that envelops the practice of medicine — a state of ignorance for which doctors cannot really be blamed. “The limitation is the human mind,” Eddy says. Without extensive information on the outcomes of treatments, it’s fiendishly difficult to know the best approach for care.”
How are you different?
“I know much more than I would like about cancer and its known causes.”
The “WHY” of Throat and lung cancer is mostly ascribed to smoking tobacco. Can you define the Why of stomach cancer? My knowledge is limited to Dr. Martin Blaser’s hypothesis: Antibiotics are strongly responsible.
You continue to amaze. Are you trying to make a point in support of homeopathy by recounting a piece of history of medical progress? What is your point? That medical progress has always been criticized and ridiculed by ignorant people with an alternative agenda? Of course Jenner had to fight for his ideas, one would have been surprised if people of his time accepted this oof the bat. Nothing remarkable about that. But he was right (as opposed to Hahnemann) and vaccination is now probably the most effective life saving intervention in public health. But vaccinations are still being criticised by ignorami. Many homeopaths among them, who are making money by pretending to vaccinate with shaken water.
Criticising modern medicine with ignorant, alterantive-agenda driven fallacies is exactly what you yourself are doing right now.
Now have a look at your own beliefs. Where is the progress in homeopathy? The development of apparatus to shake the water? Or the provings of new remedies, like the one made by shaking serial dilutions of table salt. I believe it is your favourite, called “Natrum Muriaticum”, right? Why are there never any remedies that do not work? To me this text seems to be the epitome of homeopathic absurdity. Can you explain to us how these seemingly incoherent and psychotic ramblings about Natrum Muriaticum’s effects make sense?
I have followed your dialogue with Iqbal regarding Cancer Cure with some interest and suggest that you take just 8 minutes to watch the following clip that was extracted from a two day seminar.
Surely if the content of the video is true, more research effort should be undertaken to prove it!
but IS IT TRUE???
in medicine, we had to learn the hard way what amounts to evidence wand what is BS. you should try to learn as well.
Your proof that it is BS?
“How do you suppose they diagnosed cancer back in the end of the nineteenth century? Did they have endoscopy or ultrasound or CT-scanners? NO! Cancer was never diagnosed until at operation, or before the cancer grew to became fully obvious on clinical examination.”
For heaven’s sake, Iqbal! Your link merely confirms what Bjorn wrote. Are you ever capable of reading something dispassionately?!
“For heaven’s sake”
And you guys accuse homeopathy to be a religion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Merely an English expression of irritation, Iqbal. Like ‘casting pearls before swine’ – the English equivalent of your Hindi flute and buffalo saying.
could it be that homeopaths are not interested in evidence?
but, so far, nobody from the world of homeopathy has me approached for my offer of a free lecture.
“but, so far, nobody from the world of homeopathy has me approached for my offer of a free lecture.”
Just shows what they think about you and don’t want to waste their time with you.
YOU MEAN TO SAY THAT A CULT CANNOT TOLERATE CRITICISM?
Your resume is very weak for homeopaths to pay attention to you.
In the 20 years, as Head of Complementary medicine; what did you do for complementary medicine?
I question I asked was
“What you did FOR alternative medicine”? NOT what you did against alternative medicine.
This I have seen many times:
“Since about 20 years, I am regularly pointing out that the most important research questions in my field relate to the risks of alternative medicine. I have continually published articles about these issues in the medical literature and, more recently, I have also made a conscious effort to step out of the ivory towers of academia and started writing for a much wider lay-audience (hence also this blog). Important landmarks on this journey include”
And you have the gall to write:
If I am honest (no way)– and I know this will sound strange to many(it does), particularly to those who are convinced that I merely rejoice in being alarmist (???????????)– I am still inspired by this hope to save lives (one life).
Sure, the youthful naivety of the early days has all but disappeared,(correct) yet the core motivation has remained unchanged.(making money by hook or crook).
“making money by hook or crook”
any evidence or are you just fantasizing again?
“any evidence or are you just fantasizing again?”
It does not require a Sherlock Holmes. Or may be, he will say; :”it is but elementary Dr. Watson”
The “Chair in Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter” using all the time and resources provided to him by his position to undermine the same very discipline, in place of taking steps to improve it.
Need anyone say anymore.
Well, I suppose someone could try to explain to you the difference between an academic studying something and a salesman shilling for it, but I doubt it would do any good.
What do you think professors of criminology do?
Iqbal’s lack of analytical prowess continues to amaze the audience.
Before you can improve something, there must be something to improve. Prof. Ernst spent enormous effort in trying to find things to improve.
You cannot improve something that does not exist.
Efficacy of homeopathic remedies, for example, cannot be found. (Probably because there is nothing in them in the first place other than inert carriers like water or sugar)
No one has been able to find it. Many think they have, but this has never proven independently reproducible. Efficacy of homeopathic remedies simply is not detectable, it does not exist. Therefore it cannot be improved. What some observers/researchers perceive as efficacy of homeopathic remedies can always be explained as an effect of other factors.
Therefore it is impossible to improve the remedies, there is nothing to improve.
Professor Ernst worked hard at searching for items of value and utility in the collection of phenomena called “alternative medicine”. He found abysmally little despite an enormous effort.
The few items that he found to show genuine, detectable efficacy such as St John´s wort for major depression, have not (if I am not mistaken) proven better than other available medical measures.
Although I do not identify myself as a homeopath I did take you up on your offer for a free lecture which I am sure will be attended by a great number of veterinary homeopaths. How about making good on the offer. I had to pull some strings and put myself on the line to get the green light to have you as a guest rounds lecturer on VIN. The owner/and staff gave me the green light, you will be addressing students of medicine and science as well as representatives of the homeopathic and cam veterinary community. I see no compelling reason why you are not jumping at this offer.
thanks for reminding me. please ask them to send me an email via this blog.
I don’t see a way to email you. Did you mean to post a message here?
Please email me and I’ll work with you and our rounds coordinator to set up a time and date that works for you.
I don’t see your email
but you can go to the ‘contact’ box and send me one
A humble and selfish suggestion Professor. I wish I could come and listen. Next time you offer a free lecture, why not add the requirement to have it videotaped and published?
easy enough, get a DVM !
I THINK THAT NOW IT IS FAIR TO CONCLUDE:
homeopathy colleges are not interested in having their students exposed to the evidence about homeopathy.
this post is now many months old; I am sad to report that no invitation by homeopaths has been received during this time.