Assigning shelf life for homeopathic medicine is – according to the authors of this new, ground-breaking study – an important yet debatable issue. Therefore, the present article is aimed at investigating the problem from a Quantum Electrodynamics point of view and suggests ten years to be a moderate estimate of shelf life.
Data were obtained by the following methods:
- dynamic light scattering,
- atomic force microscopy,
- anomalous dielectric dispersion,
- UV,
- electron spin resonance spectrometry.
The results show the formation of nanosized molecular assemblies. These water clusters containing millions to billions of water molecules, which are created by repeated dilution of aqueous solutions, have been photographed.
The authors draw the following conclusions:
- Ultra-high dilutions (UHD) contain dissipative structures.
- These structures are solute specific
- These structures are tremendously persistent
- Therapeutic values of UHDs are found to continue for a very long time (20-25 years)
Summarizing, we can say that the solute, which in this case is the starting material of homeopathic medicine, leaves its highly stable foot prints in the dissipative structure formed in the UHD solution of polar solvent. Unfortunately, no targeted experiments are done yet to find the exact shelf life. Hence, we wish to suggest that as the shelf life (with proper precautionary measures) of the homeopathic medicine are theoretically expected to be very prolonged and supported by clinical experience, let it be accepted as ten years till future targeted experiments give the exact value, which is expected to be higher than this suggested value.
Were these sensational findings published in a journal like NATURE or SCIENCE? No, they emerged in ‘HPATHY‘ (“the World’s No. 1 Homeopathy Website: Since 2001”). That is a great shame, I think, because they might thus not be awarded the Noble Prize that they clearly deserve.
________________
Joking apart, the self life issue is evidently of some concern to homeopaths. Take this ‘study‘, for instance:
Background: Assignment of expiry date to homeopathic medicines is a subject of important concern to its pharmacists and practitioners. This study compares the regulatory framework for the expiry of homeopathic medicines in four countries: Brazil, Germany, India and the United States.
Findings: Different or no expiry periods are variously followed. Whereas Germany, with some exceptions, employs a maximum expiry of 5 years for both potencies and finished products, Brazil adopts a 5-year expiry for finished products only, potencies used in manufacture being exempted from an assigned expiry date. In India, all homeopathic medicines except dilutions and back potencies have a maximum of 5 years’ shelf-life, including those supplied to consumers. In the United States, homeopathic medicines are exempted from expiry dates.
Comments: There is neither a rational basis nor scientific evidence for assigning a short (3-5 years) expiry period for homeopathic medicines as followed in some of the countries, particularly in light of the fact that some studies have shown homeopathic medications to be effective even after 25 years. Homeopathic ultra-dilutions seem to contain non-material activity that is maintained over time and, since these exhibit different chemical properties compared to the original starting material, it is quite possible they possess properties of longer activity than conventional medicines. Regulators should acknowledge this feature and differentiate expiry of homeopathic medicinal products from that of conventional drugs.
____________________
For once, I almost agree with my homeopathic colleagues:
The activity of homeopathic ultra-dilutions is maintained over time.
However, we need to add just a little explanation to this statement:
This activity is zero.
55 Responses to The shelf life of homeopathic remedies
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Two words suffice: ‘pseudoscientific nonsense’.
“Homeopathic ultra-dilutions seem to contain non-material activity …”
Homeopathy is a business model that provides a service; not tangible products.
What is the meaning of the word “seem”, as used in the Comments section?
There is an old paper about half life in water. And was published in the top journal NATURE not in HPATHY.
And they measured a half life of about 50 femto sec. femto sec are 10-15 sec. That means that any activity has gone during the production. And this is the reason, that homeopathy is completely unable to be efficous.
Details
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature03383
Published: 10 March 2005
Ultrafast memory loss and energy redistribution in the hydrogen bond network of liquid H2O
M. L. Cowan, B. D. Bruner, N. Huse, J. R. Dwyer, B. Chugh, E. T. J. Nibbering, T. Elsaesser & R. J. D. Miller
Nature volume 434, pages 199–202 (2005)Cite this article
7278 Accesses
649 Citations
116 Altmetric
Metrics details
Abstract
Many of the unusual properties of liquid water are attributed to its unique structure, comprised of a random and fluctuating three-dimensional network of hydrogen bonds that link the highly polar water molecules1,2. One of the most direct probes of the dynamics of this network is the infrared spectrum of the OH stretching vibration3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, which reflects the distribution of hydrogen-bonded structures and the intermolecular forces controlling the structural dynamics of the liquid. Indeed, water dynamics has been studied in detail5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14, most recently using multi-dimensional nonlinear infrared spectroscopy15,16 for acquiring structural and dynamical information on femtosecond timescales. But owing to technical difficulties, only OH stretching vibrations in D2O or OD vibrations in H2O could be monitored. Here we show that using a specially designed, ultrathin sample cell allows us to observe OH stretching vibrations in H2O. Under these fully resonant conditions, we observe hydrogen bond network dynamics more than one order of magnitude faster than seen in earlier studies that include an extremely fast sweep in the OH frequencies on a 50-fs timescale and an equally fast disappearance of the initial inhomogeneous distribution of sites. Our results highlight the efficiency of energy redistribution within the hydrogen-bonded network, and that liquid water essentially loses the memory of persistent correlations in its structure within 50 fs
OMG. Much adoe about Nothing, Shakespeare wourld state.
What does all this have to do with the healing promise that homeopathy can specifically eliminate diseases in humans? Doesn’t anyone consider beforehand what relevance the lighting of sugar balls – regardless of the result – has at all?
There is no relevance for such research under any point of view.
https://netzwerk-homoeopathie.info/en/forschung-an-ultrahohen-verduennungen-relevant-oder-nicht/
And anyone believing their activity is zero can do a homeopathic proving, to confirm for themselves that they are very active. Protocols for doing a proving are available. Just a matter of taking the remedy repeatedly over several days and noting all the changes – mental, emotional and physical that occur – and then wear off. And one can compare their results experienced to those who have proven the same remedy previously to see the similarity.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17227742/
Background: The quality of information gathered from homeopathic pathogenetic trials (HPTs), also known as ‘provings’, is fundamental to homeopathy. We systematically reviewed HPTs published in six languages (English, German, Spanish, French, Portuguese and Dutch) from 1945 to 1995, to assess their quality in terms of the validity of the information they provide.
Methods: The literature was comprehensively searched, only published reports of HPTs were included. Information was extracted by two reviewers per trial using a form with 87 items. Information on: medicines, volunteers, ethical aspects, blinding, randomization, use of placebo, adverse effects, assessments, presentation of data and number of claimed findings were recorded. Methodological quality was assessed by an index including indicators of internal and external validity, personal judgement and comments of reviewers for each study.
Results: 156 HPTs on 143 medicines, involving 2815 volunteers, produced 20,538 pathogenetic effects (median 6.5 per volunteer). There was wide variation in methods and results. Sample size (median 15, range 1-103) and trial duration (mean 34 days) were very variable. Most studies had design flaws, particularly absence of proper randomization, blinding, placebo control and criteria for analysis of outcomes. Mean methodological score was 5.6 (range 4-16). More symptoms were reported from HPTs of poor quality than from better ones. In 56% of trials volunteers took placebo. Pathogenetic effects were claimed in 98% of publications. On average about 84% of volunteers receiving active treatment developed symptoms. The quality of reports was in general poor, and much important information was not available.
Conclusions: The HPTs were generally of low methodological quality. There is a high incidence of pathogenetic effects in publications and volunteers but this could be attributable to design flaws. Homeopathic medicines, tested in HPTs, appear safe. The central question of whether homeopathic medicines in high dilutions can provoke effects in healthy volunteers has not yet been definitively answered, because of methodological weaknesses of the reports. Improvement of the method and reporting of results of HPTs are required.
Why should this be an exception to be quoted here?
There are worse examples that go on to show the lack of understanding in medical science across pathy boards.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528826-000-is-medical-science-built-on-shaky-foundations/
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/cancer-biology-studies-research-replication-reproducibility
https://www.reuters.com/article/science-reproducibility-idUKL2N0KX18S20140127
In case you have not noticed: this blog is about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM)!
“this blog is about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM)!”
Is that the rationale why trials can’t be reproduced?
Among the most important requirement of medical science is reproducibility, other wise the required EVIDENCE is considered missing.
you don’t make sense to me.
Edzard
“No, most of the time you write utter bullshit”
Is that not what you want others to avoid writing here? Use of “Gutter language” is reserved for you only?
wrong again!
https://edzardernst.com/2021/08/on-bullshit/
@Krishna
Homeopathy is One Big Scam, ultimately based on the erroneous thinking and arrogance of one person. If homeopathy has one merit, it is that it has shown us several major flaws in human thinking.
Even the initial observation that patients treated with homeopathy fared rather better than patients treated by what was then conventional medicine was based on a big mistake: patients didn’t do better because homeopathy worked so well, but because conventional medicine of the day was so awful that it killed and hurt way more people than it cured. But even then, doctors and scientists noticed that homeopathy didn’t actually appear to do anything when under close scrutiny, and that proving was a useless ritual.
Real medicine and the science it is based on, still flawed though they may be, have progressed tremendously since then. They have become hugely successful in improving the human condition, preventing death and suffering of literally hundreds of millions of people. These days, infectious diseases are far less than a threat than they were a hundred years ago, overall cancer mortality is only half of what it was only half a century ago, and ever more conditions can be treated in an effective way.
Homeopathy, on the other hand, has not progressed at all. Its initial ‘success’ dwindled just as fast as real medicine progressed. Homeopathy is not a system of medicine, but a system of belief, a cult if you will. And like all cults, it is based on deception and dogma, on acceptance of its basic tenets without thinking. Proving is a point in case: anyone who thinks that proving is a good way to identify and test medicines is not using their brain at all. Please think about it: provings are done with maybe a dozen(!) healthy people, NOT hundreds or thousands of sick people. With this utterly flawed setup and these low numbers, a proving-style ‘test’ can’t even tell us is if the medicine under test is safe or not. and it certainly doesn’t say ANYTHING about any therapeutic effects for particular conditions.
If pharmaceutical companies would test their products this way, they would be forced to close down immediately. The only reason why homeopathy gets away with this is that in general, its products have no effects at all – and that includes harmful effects. So basically, it is allowed to keep the deception going because it doesn’t actively harm people (and apparently, paying for things that don’t work is considered harmless as soon as it involves our health).
Yet here you are, criticizing proven effective medicine, and ostensibly defending this utterly useless system of deception, thinking errors and unquestioning beliefs called homeopathy …
I totally agree with what you say but I’m afraid arguments like this have absolutely no effect on SCAM believers. They will use logic when it suits them, such as arguing that conventional medicine has harmful side effects while homeopathy doesn’t, but ultimately their belief isn’t based on logic. And so they can’t be reasoned out of it by logic.
Most users aren’t interested in studies supposedly showing positive results for homeopathy or may just dismiss the validity of studies all together. And if informed of negative studies just fall back on “well it worked for me” and think that settles the matter.
But still, we can’t help trying.
Personally, I have long given up persuading true believers in SCAM; it’s like telling the Pope that catholicism isn’t a good thing. I find it more productive to address the large group of people who have not yet made up their minds about SCAM and thus need factual, responsible information.
I know, even an overwhelming amount of the very best arguments and evidence against homeopathy will not sway any believers – quite the contrary, actually: they will try to turn any evidence that they’re wrong around, e.g. by claiming that the 1835 Nuremberg salt test was not good science, that it was not set up and carried out by critics instead of homeopaths(*) etcetera.
In the end, criticism will only serve to strengthen the belief of those believers, because it forces them to try and invent more reasons why they are in fact right. And as we all know, humans are very inventive when it comes to dreaming up arguments to prove themselves right.
There are however other people who have not yet invested emotionally or financially in this belief, and who are helped with this kind of information. Yet another reason is of course that the messages of believers in homeopathy must be countered to prevent their voice being the only one heard.
And last but not least I always find it a nice exercise in scientific thinking to try and find flaws in what believers claim (e.g. that homeopathic proving is a good way to test medicines) – although by now, most of those arguments are well-known and require little actual thinking any more.
*: Which, if anything, would only serve to improve the quality of this trial, as homeopaths are notoriously biased as well as bad in even basic science.
Correction:
One thing at a time.
“…..ultimately based on the erroneous thinking and arrogance of one person. ”
Who is this one arrogant person? Is there a name behind it?
@Krishna
Samuel Hahnemann of course. The man based all of homeopathy on just one personal experience that could not be reliably replicated in other persons (i.e. a reaction to cinchona bark – in undiluted form).
Yet he never doubted his ‘discovery’, and anyone criticizing homeopathy found themselves fighting a hugely dogmatic man who maintained that his system of medicine was hugely effective, even though even Hahnemann himself never delivered even the smallest shred of evidence for the viability of his ‘laws’ or the ritual of proving.
He simply maintained that he was right and that others who failed to replicate homeopathy’s beneficial effects (as in: virtually all non-homeopaths) must be doing things wrong.
Interestingly, many modern-day homeopaths appear to be not just believers in what Hahnemann dreamed up, but also incorporated his arrogance and rigidity in their demeanour.
Samuel Hahnemann.
I suspect with a site such as this most who visit will already be pro or anti homeopathy. The position is rather different with the letters page in a local newspaper so I do take the opportunity to respond to the mad claims that regularly appear, particularly in relation to Covid. Of course I don’t expect to persuade the writer but merely to show others that their position is not unchallenged.
In fact the writer is often provoked to reply with even madder claims and even personal abuse. Which is fine by me as it only weakens their position further.
@Richard Rasker
“Samuel Hahnemann of course.”
You could start by updating your knowledge about homeopathy if you wish to write about it.
There are over 1500 remedies in the Homeopathic Materia Medica. How many of these were proven and introduced by the arrogant Dr. Hahnemann? ALL?
Try this link for another arrogant Dr.
https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0040-1705145?device=desktop&innerWidth=412&offsetWidth=412
Some more of the same:
https://www.homeobook.com/a-brief-insight-into-dr-hahnemanns-provers-union/
@Krishna
I think I know more about homeopathy than most homeopaths. I know for instance that it doesn’t work, and that homeopaths are fooling themselves and their customers.
And NONE of those 1500 ‘remedies’ has any acceptable evidence of efficacy for even one condition. Not one remedy has ever been proven (haha) effective in properly carried out replicated RCTs. This is one the many areas where homeopaths appear to have a very serious blind spot.
No, of course not. Lots of other fools engaged in useless proving rituals in the firm belief that they were doing some sort of science. They weren’t. Here’s one of my favourite examples featuring one such fool:
https://hpathy.com/materia-medica/proving-cynomorium-coccineum-hidden-treasure-wanted-known-created/
Quote: “I experienced strong symptoms from the remedy even though I did not take it …”
This man says in so many words that any ‘symptoms’ involved in provings are in fact a product of the imagination, and have nothing to do with any special properties of homeopathic preparations. Yet he appears to believe that those preparations have special properties that even extend beyond the preparation itself – magic, in other words.
So what? It regularly happens that people start Believing in things through a revelation-type experience. From what I read, this man too based his beliefs on one or two singular experiences and very shoddy research – which is typical for homeopaths. Then again, the scientific method hadn’t fully developed in those days, so maybe my verdict on these people is a bit harsh.
But it is a fact that especially Hahnemann was not a very nice person, and did not handle criticism well, no matter how well-founded that criticism was.
@Richard Rasker
“Real medicine and the science it is based on, still flawed though they may be, have progressed tremendously since then. They have become hugely successful in improving the human condition, preventing death and suffering of literally hundreds of millions of people.
Really? It is actually the other way around. Look at the disaster created by antibiotics and the doctors prescribing these antibiotics. And this includes OBESITY: the mother of numerous diseases.
https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/beware-the-antibiotic-winter/
And starting the diabetes epidemics: check on YouTube
What really happens when you mix medications? | Russ Altman
@Richard Rasker
“These days, infectious diseases are far less than a threat than they were a hundred years ago, overall cancer mortality is only half of what it was only half a century ago, and ever more conditions can be treated in an effective way.”
The Spanish flu appeared about 100 years ago. Similar infectious flu appeared 2 years ago and we all know the out come. The number of deaths were so large, that the Governments had to LIE about the real death figures.
Some time ago, I tried looking for a cure for headache. Are you aware that there is no cure available? Patients are taking medication for over 30 years to manage headache! The cancer mortality is reduced because the bar is lowered: any cancer patient live for 5 years is cured. If this definition is changed to 3 years, the mortality would reduce by another 50%.
Cancer was supposed to be the disease of the old: because life span went up, so did cancer! Why are so many children seen with cancer now?
headache is not a disease but a symptom [which can often be treated effectively]
cancer mortality is unaffected by the definition of cure rates.
SEEMS THAT YOU ARE WRONG NOT JUST ABOUT HOMEOPATHY
@Krishna
One last answer, as your comments are very rapidly descending into complete madness.
Do you actuall want to argue that people nowadays live shorter, less healthy lives and suffer more than, say, 150 years ago? AND that for instance our current obesity problem is caused by modern medicine?
Sorry, but this level of stupidity merits no attention, much less answers. Goodbye.
@Richard Rasker
Do you actuall want to argue that people nowadays live ….. less healthy lives and suffer more than, say, 150 years ago?
This is not me but a doctor/researcher Dr.Martin Blaser.
AND that for instance our current obesity problem is caused by modern medicine?
That is true and this analysis is made by Dr. Blaser in his book “Missing Microbes”. This is ONLY for Antibiotics. There are numerous other drugs that are causing problems that audits will show.
“Sorry, but this level of stupidity merits no attention, much less answers. Goodbye.”
If this is your understanding about the medical system that you champion, your stupidity can be understood. Keep away from Homeopathy. You know NOTHING.
the one who repeats/promotes claims of a charlatan is probably a charlatan.
May I suggest a small modification to Ernst’s Razor: the one who repeats/promotes claims of a charlatan is probably a charlatan and/or a troll.
@Edzard
“headache is not a disease but a symptom [which can often be treated effectively]” Why do doctors continue with different drugs that do not cure. Want names?
Like Hypertension? Still one sees people popping pills every day for lifetime.
“cancer mortality is unaffected by the definition of cure rates.”
If the definition of cure for cancer is lowered to 3 years, any death beyond that is because of multi organ failure.
SEEMS THAT YOU ARE WRONG NOT JUST ABOUT HOMEOPATHY
Most times you refuse to understand me or go on a tangent:
“Among the most important requirement of medical science is reproducibility, other wise the required EVIDENCE is considered missing.”
If the trials cannot be reproduced, it is as good as the basis of the treatment being without evidence. So what was being done until then? Or the explanation for this failure?
This has been your routine tirade against other medical systems. When questioned the basis of comparison: “this blog is about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM)!”
Rather convenient.
“Most times you refuse to understand me”
No, most of the time you write utter bullshit
@Edzard
“the one who repeats/promotes claims of a charlatan is probably a charlatan.”
Dr.Martin Blaser a “charlatan”? Very impressive. The doctors/researchers educated in the present medical system pointing out failures are “charlatan.” The earlier explanation was “science is ever learning”. Now Medical science represented by Dr. Edzard knows everything?
Dr Blaser does not accept this.
“et recently, just within the past few decades, amid all of these medical advances, something has gone terribly wrong. In many different ways we appear to be getting sicker. You can see the headlines every day. We are suffering from a mysterious array of what I call “modern plagues”: obesity, childhood diabetes, asthma, hay fever, food allergies, esophageal reflux and cancer, celiac disease, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, autism, eczema. In all likelihood you or someone in your family or someone you know is afflicted. Unlike most lethal plagues of the past that struck relatively fast and hard, these are chronic conditions that diminish and degrade their victims’ quality of life for decades.
The most visible of these plagues is obesity, defined in terms of the body mass index (BMI), which expresses the relationship between a person’s height and weight.
In 1990, about 12 percent of Americans were obese. By 2010, the national average was above 30 percent. Next time you go to an airport terminal, supermarket, or mall, look around and see for yourself. The obesity epidemic is not just a U.S. problem; it’s global. As of 2008, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), 1.5 billion adults were overweight; of these, over 200 million men and nearly 300 million women qualified as obese. Many of these people live in developing countries that we associate more with famine than with overeating.”
The man you label a “CHARLATAN”:
https://cabm.rutgers.edu/person/martin-j-blaser
Martin J. Blaser, MD
Director of CABM
Henry Rutgers Chair of the Human Microbiome
Professor
Departments of Medicine and Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
RBHS, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School
Education
B.A. Economics, University of Pennsylvania, 1969
M.D. New York University School of Medicine, 1973
And YOU?
learn to read!
I did not label him a charlatan.
And YOU?
https://edzardernst.com/about/
12 occurrences of commentator Iqbal Krishna going on about Dr Martin Blaser:
https://edzardernst.com/2015/09/how-much-did-big-pharma-pay-for-my-soul/#comment-81696
https://edzardernst.com/2016/07/the-lack-of-ethics-in-alternative-medicine/#comment-79931
https://edzardernst.com/2016/09/lets-be-blunt-homeopathy-is-bogus-but-homeoprophylaxis-is-worse-much-worse/#comment-81632
https://edzardernst.com/2016/09/another-death-by-quackery/#comment-81191
https://edzardernst.com/2017/04/my-special-offer-to-homeopaths-a-free-lecture/#comment-88766
https://edzardernst.com/2017/04/official-verdicts-on-homeopathy/#comment-89636
https://edzardernst.com/2017/06/trying-to-understand-a-doctor-homeopath-homeopathy-is-helpful-for-any-condition/#comment-92585
https://edzardernst.com/2017/08/gmc-registered-medical-practitioners-should-not-prescribe-homeopathically-prepared-remedies/#comment-94299
https://edzardernst.com/2018/04/its-hahnemanns-birthday-today-so-lets-honour-him-by-quoting-his-words/#comment-100824
https://edzardernst.com/2018/04/sixteen-case-reports-of-homeopathic-arnica-never-trust-what-you-think/#comment-100626
https://edzardernst.com/2018/08/peter-fisher-1950-2018/#comment-105187
https://edzardernst.com/2021/02/has-homeopathy-caused-the-dramatic-decline-of-covid-19-cases-in-india/#comment-130620
Edzard
“learn to read!
I did not label him a charlatan.”
Tell this to Rasker.
@Pete Attkins
“12 occurrences of commentator Iqbal Krishna going on about Dr Martin Blaser:”
What do you believe is wrong about this reference?
You should be happy that I am not quoting a homeopath (you refuse to understand) but a genuine researcher who is pointing out a glaring failure of the “scientific medicine” in a language that you all have no option but to accept. To not accept means your lack of knowledge or question Dr. Blaser’s education and his present position as
Martin J. Blaser, MD
Director of CABM
Henry Rutgers Chair of the Human Microbiome
Professor
Departments of Medicine and Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
RBHS, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School
This is ONLY antibiotics. What do you believe is next incoming? OPIATES?
Krishna wrote: “What do you believe is wrong about this reference?”
I didn’t offer a belief about this reference, I simply pointed out 12 occasions it had been posted during the last seven years. This blog is about so‑called alternative medicine (SCAM); and this particular blog post on which you are commenting is about: The shelf life of homeopathic remedies.
Here’s one of my favourite comments by Iqbal Krishna (the reply to it by Frank Odds is splendid):
@Pete Attkins
Krishna is a very good example of the Quackery Believer’s mindset: he intensely focuses on one legitimate bit of science – Martin Blaser’s work – and extrapolates this way beyond the sanity horizon, declaring that modern medicine is the One True Cause of every modern-day health problem under the sun. In the process, he completely loses track of reality, declaring that humans today are far worse off health-wise than 150 years ago.
And of course he also loses track of the topic at hand, i.e. a piece of horrible pseudoscientific junk from some fellow Quackery Believers.
I’m also pretty certain that Dr. Blaser would not be amused, should he read the nonsense blurted out in his name by our Krishna.
@Rasker
“……..and extrapolates this way beyond the sanity horizon, declaring that modern medicine is the One True Cause of every modern-day health problem under the sun. In the process, he completely loses track of reality, declaring that humans today are far worse off health-wise than 150 years ago.”
If you read carefully, what I wrote, you will notice that I have quoted Dr. Blaser verbatim. The above conclusion has been drawn by YOU and I an totally in agreement..
@Pete Attkins
“I simply pointed out 12 occasions it had been posted during the last seven years.”
Thanks for the effort. I had no such recall.
What is wrong in posting an interesting research to remind the proponents of the supposedly “scientific medicine” (like you?) how destructive the approach of the present “Scientific medicine” has been? The discovery of Antibiotics ushered in the Golden period of medical science about 70 years ago. The caveat listed few temporary adverse possibilities (nausea, diarrhea…). Some time down the line, the antibiotic resistant bacteria was the reason to increase/decrease usages of antibiotics, postponing critical operations, closing down OT’s….
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/overprescribing-antibiotics/
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-popular-class-of-antibiotics-may-increase-risk-of-birth-defects/
Antibiotics are no more considered the drugs from the “golden period” as the costs far out weighed the benefits. Now, antibiotics are being linked to most modern plagues (term used by Dr. Blaser) and negatively impacting the lives of “FUTURE GENERATIONS” of humans, as analyzed by Dr. Blaser in his book “Missing Microbes”.
“This blog is about so called alternative medicine (SCAM); and this particular blog post..”
There never is a topic, discussed in vacuum. Every subject has links to a standard reference. When Edzard writes – “Conclusions: The HPTs were generally of low methodological quality. There is a high incidence of pathogenetic effects in publications and volunteers but this could be attributable to design flaws. Homeopathic medicines, tested in HPTs, appear safe. The central question of whether homeopathic medicines in high dilutions can provoke effects in healthy volunteers has not yet been definitively answered, because of methodological weaknesses of the reports.”
He is looking for the same statistical design and outcome as defined for drugs, like antibiotics. Antibiotics meet every statistical evaluation required by Edzard. Then what is the rationale that the same antibiotics have been shown to be extremely unsafe drugs now? The “researchers like Edzard” going wrong, or the basics of “scientific medicine” itself being illogical. The difference between trial results and actual outcome has increasingly diverged overtime making “Randomized double blind placebo control studies, the “Gold Standard” in intervention based studies, irrelevant to assess safety of drugs.
Extrapolating the research outcome of antibiotics vs reality, can one expect chemotherapy to be equally disastrous? Killing 50 to save one?
Or the rampant prescription of steroids to children?
” While the adverse consequences of long-term use are widely recognized, there appears to be a perception in the medical community that short courses of SCS are safe. Limited but growing evidence in the literature suggests that even very brief dosing periods (3–7 days) of SCS are enough to cause significantly negative outcomes for patients. Short courses of SCS are associated with increased risk of adverse events including loss of bone density, hypertension and gastrointestinal ulcers/bleeds, in addition to serious impacts on mental health. ”
https://err.ersjournals.com/content/29/155/190151
Krishna wrote: “Thanks for the effort. I had no such recall.”
You’re welcome. I’m sure some of the readers have also forgotten this:
@Pete Attkins on Sunday 14 May 2023 at 19:50
“You’re welcome. I’m sure some of the readers have also forgotten this:”
Thanks again. Who likes heat burning the feet? One either moves the heat or the feet!
I would move the heat like Edzard did. YOU?
Irreproducible, non replicable studies happen all the time that doesnt mean entire research is nonreplicable. That’s why we look for consistent, replicable valid research as body of evidence.
If you are saying modern medicine is causing diseases, antibiotics are causing more diseases or vaccines are causing deaths and obesity is caused by modern medicine you have just landed from an alien spaceship.
Life expectancy in the beginning of 20th century in developed countries and developing countries was less than half of what it is now. How it was accomplished? Better Read some hsitory. And if you can understand biomedical sciences or other natural sciences read that. You are blabbering utter nonsense.
@Bobby Shaw
In my best Edith Bunker voice…. “correlation is not causation.”
I’ll give you antibiotics and some vaccines, after that, not that much evidence to prove you point.
Yes, science-based medicine has killed quite a few people, and has led to much chronic disease.
Vioxx alone killed between 59K and 120K patients…. and injured countless thousands.
RG,
Not too long ago, weren’t you gloating about how much money you made investing in big pharma?
If we are to follow your logic, shouldn’t “invested in pharma…and in a big way, and have been for a long time” makes you complicit in mass murder?
Just saying…in my own voice.
@Talker
No absoultely not.
The buck stops at the corporation management.
There are investors that will not invest in “sin stocks”…. tobacco, alcohol, firearms, pornography… etc.
That is a moral choice they make, but investors do not hold responsibility for sins. Investors merely take on risk/reward ratios that they are comfortable with holding.
Everybody makes their own choices to accept what meds they will consume; nobody is forcing anyone to medicate. In fact, in many states and countries not even the insane can be forced to medicate against their will.
However, when pharmaceuticals like Merck (Vioxx) present medication as safe, when all along knew that it was potentially dangerous to many patients, this is a tragic crime against humanity.
Am I responsible? …. no. I was lied to also, I was a victim.
you seem to ba a victim of your own ignorance.
ROFL @RG
You never cease to surprise me with your ignorance. Your ideas are hilarious, keep entertaining us. Who would have thought that our failed American education system would create a lot of entertainment for us.
@Bobby Shaw
“If you are saying modern medicine is causing diseases, antibiotics are causing more diseases or vaccines are causing deaths and obesity is caused by modern medicine you have just landed from an alien spaceship.”
What is your knowledge level in medicine? Read the contents of the link below and compare your credentials with the writer.
https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/beware-the-antibiotic-winter/
Come back and write a rebuttal here.
A need to make typo correction.
“In fact, in many states and countries not even the mentally insane can (NOT) be forced to medicate against their will.
Import missing word was “NOT”….. my bad.
This reminds me of the mineral water which was advertised as ‘crystal clear water filtered through the Alps over 10,000 years – consume within 12 months of bottling’.
I thought that the expiry date of homeopathy was called years ago? Campaigns brought the end of NHS homeopathy and prescriptions. We saw the end of associations with the PSA. For many years from the mid 2000s there were media and research articles all telling everyone in no uncertain terms that homeopathy is placebo. When was the last time a homeopathic research paper was published in a high impact journal?
The public should have realised years ago that homeopathy is placebo according to current Science.
However, far from being the end of homeopathy the evidence in terms of turnover indicates that homeopathy has in fact been increasing in popularity among the public at grass roots level for years. Maybe some bright spark on here can advise why this is the case.
So the expiry date of homeopathy is at this point in time maybe endless rather like the expiry date for the remedies!