he German press reported yesterday that the country’s Health Minister Karl Lauterbach plans to remove homeopathic treatments from the benefits catalog of statutory health insurance companies. “Services that have no medically verifiable benefit should not be financed from contribution funds,” states a recommendation paper by the minister. “For this reason, we will remove the option for health insurance companies to include homeopathic and anthroposophic services in their statutes, thereby avoiding unnecessary expenditure by health insurance companies.” However, private supplementary insurance should still be possible.
Lauterbach had already announced last year that he would review the funding of homeopathic treatments. “Although homeopathy is not significant in terms of expenditure, it has no place in a science-based healthcare policy,” the SPD politician told “Der Spiegel” last October. The measure would save merely a maximum of ten million Euros. This is because firstly not all health insurance companies offer the option to reimburse homeopathy, and secondly, because not that many Germans use homeopathy.
____________________________
Before I was joined about a decade ago by a group of excellent and effective skeptics, I seemed to be a lone, lost voice in Germany cautioning against the misunderstanding that homeopathy and anthroposophical medicine were backed by evidence. Thus, you probably think that I am rejoicing at this spectacular success. At first glance, it does indeed seem to be great news for those who support evidence-based medicine. But sadly, I also have second thoughts.
We should, I think, be concerned that Lauterbach intends to leave homeopathic and anthroposophical remedies reimbursible via private supplementary insurance. Most Germans have such insurance which means that, despite Lauterbach’s grand announcement, very little will probably change. Homeopathy and anthroposophic medicine, both pure placebo therapies, will still be able to pretend to be real medicine.
Moreover, we should be concerned about Lauterbach’s reasoning. It is, of course, laudable to point out that homeopathic and anthroposophic remedies are not demonstrably effective. But clearly, this is only half of the truth. The full truth is that they are based on totally ridiculous assumptions, that, in other words, they fly in the face of science. Only if we manage to get this message across, will we inform the public responsibly, in my view.
A total ban then? No, personally, I don’t want to ban homeopathic or anthroposophical remedies. If someone loves esoteric nonsense or placebos, he/she should, in my view, be able to buy them. But he/she should use their own money for the purchase. We should remember that wasting notoriously scarce public funds from either statutory or private health insurances is not just uneconomical but foremost unethical.
68 Responses to Germany will remove the option for health insurance companies to include homeopathic and anthroposophic services in their statutes
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Why so negative? Yes, Lauterbach´s public statement could have been even more explicit than it was, but overall I think it´s great news that public health insurance will not cover these unscientific SCAM treatments anymore.
Since undoubtedly, the continuous public education of organisation like the INH/GWUP as well as the outspoken criticism from individuals like Natalie Grams, Iris Hundertmark, Norbert Aust (just to name a few) and of course you played a big part in this success, you should celebrate it!
As you mention: if a person does insist on paying extra money for an add-on private insurance that covers these BS treatments, then this regrettable, but at their own expense. It´s not the job of the government to prevent people from spending their money to buy stupid stuff.
thanks!
I do celebrate!!!
but, as a skeptic, I also tend to see the limitations:
private insurance funds are still public money.
and reimbursement via private insurance is still public recognition.
@Edzard
Exactly. Health insurance organizations, regardless whether private or public, should distance themselves from any and all treatments that have no objectively proven efficacy, if only because even just mentioning these as options (even when surcharged) is perceived as legitimization or at the very least evidence of efficacy.
After all, for instance car insurance companies also don’t reimburse the cost of priests blessing cars.
Even the longest journey begins with a single first step. It may take some time to reach the destination, but we will in the end.
After just seeing how the main German TV-news program, the “ARD Tagesschau” reported about the issue, I agree that there is still a lot of work to do. The atrocious TV clip was very one-sided negative, starting with a homeopathic “doctor” reporting how great homeopathy works, over to a politician of the green party giving some negative remarks, and ending with a reporter insinuating that this was only a political move of Lauterbach to hide the real problems of the German health system. No positive comment. Simply abysmal.
“It´s not the job of the government to prevent people from spending their money to buy stupid stuff.”
Well, I think it kind-of is. At least, to stop people buying counterfeit, fake, unsafe stuff.
That’s why most countries have Trading Standards departments. The public needs to be protected from consumer fraud.
In the UK some years ago, there was a scandal when it emerged that some cheap meat products contained undisclosed horse meat instead of all beef or pork. And there have been skin creams branded as ‘herbal’ which contained undisclosed potent topical corticosteroids. Those have their place in managing some skin conditions, but have to be used appropriately.
And back in the 1980s there was the Bai Lin tea affair – advertised as a weight loss product “Bye bye fat – buy Bai Lin!” but with no ability whatever to promote weight loss in the way advertised.
David, that´s a different issue. Of course, the government should protect people from fraud and false health claims. To my knowledge, many laws in this respect are already in place in Germany and the EU.
As an adult living in a free country, however, I think it should be my own choice if I buy stuff or do activities that maybe are not the best choice for my health (as long as they mainly effect myself) e.g. drink alcohol, do dangerous sport activities like diving or climbing, or even (in an extreme situation) determine how long I want to continue living.
There is a difference between statutory health insurance and private supplementary insurance. Both of course only pay out the money they have collected from their members before. In this regard homeopathy is payed by the members’ own money. But with statutory health insurance I have to pay for homeopathic treatment, if I wanted to or not, because almost all major health insurance companies have homeopathy included in their catalogue.
With supplementary insurance however I can decide what I want to have reimbursed in case I use it – and here I can select a package that contains homeopathy, Heilpraktiker and the like.
So in the end,I consider this a very important step in the right direction. Lets see how he is going to realise this. By an amendment to the ‘Arzneimittelgesetz’?
Agreed, Mr Aust.
I (maybe naively?) expect that private insurance contracts which include SCAM treatments will be more expensive than private insurance that does not include this nonsense, and therefore the former will be chosen by people who indeed want to support these stupid SCAM treatments.
Sorry, I do not know anything about pricing of private insurance companies.
But it tsands to reason: these are organisations to earn money and they operate in a competitive market. So it would be reasonable that an offer, that excludes some items must be available at a lower price.
Long live Homoeopathy, it is the medicine of the future.
FINALLY!
Finally, we have a convincing argument for homeopathy!
THANKS
@Mutus Bellator
… as it has been for the past 228 years. And it will still be the medicine of the future a thousand years from now.
all fine by me… as long as it´s not supported at present 😀
This is good news. I remember in about 2005 complaining to my medical insurer here in Germany about their support for homeopathy. The person I spoke to started shouting at me when I described it as Wunderheilung. I said we’ll all being paying the price of this when the next pandemic sweeps through and masses of people try to protect themselves with homeopathy, which has been given credibility health insurers….
….And many thanks to Dr Ernst and all the others who have put so much work into this for so many decades!
Just as a reminder: The work is not done yet!
Some background:
In Germany public health insurance is controlled by law. What these companies can reimburse is set down in a kind of a catalogue in the ‘Sozialgesetzbuch’. And in 2012 there was one amendment to this regulation, that public health insurers may offer ‘Satzungsleistungen’ on a voluntary basis, and that these may include OTC-remedies and services by ‘third parties’. And it is – for all I know – this small piece of legislature that Lauterbach may be able to amend.
But the big issue about homeopatrhy is in the general drug regulation (“Arzneimittelgesetz”) where it is determined that homeopathic preparations may acquire the status of active drug to be sold in pharmacies only.
But as I said: Even the longest journey starts with a first step.
@Norbert
There must be more regulatory steps for HP.
The European Pharmacopoiea contains monographs how to manufacture a medicinal product and how to test its quality.
and there are many expert groups ( Vaccines, blood products,phytochemistry, all together > 16 expert groups.
One group evaluates homeopathic medicinal products- and there it is questionable when medicinal products without any potency are discussed in expert groups on an international level and in the edqm.eu (european departement of quality in medicine ) . What can homeopathy ad to european health care?
Wolfgang
declaration of interest: I was a member of the expert group for vaccines and sera= blood products.
Now named European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & Health Care within the Council of Europe.
https://www.edqm.eu/en/-/what-s-new-for-homoeopathic-preparations-at-european-level-
I agree completely.
Haven’t we already learned that forcing medical views on the public is a bad idea ?
We listened to “the Science” … but the science proved the conspiracy theorists correct.
https://truthpress.com/news/anthony-fauci-finally-admits-the-truth-about-evidence-behind-covid-guidelines/
impressive how you find all this BS on the Internet!
There’s a large bit of irony to Ernst’s reporting on the “ineffectiveness” of homeopathic medicines during the same week that one of the most respected scientific journals in the world published an important study that shows how one homeopathic medicine, ARSENICUM ALBUM 30C, has been shown to have effects on gene expression and how it catalyzes a powerful immune response.
It is no longer implausible HOW homeopathic medicines work…it cannot be said that there is “no evidence” that homeopathic “high potencies” have an effect on gene expression…and it cannot be said that nanoparticles are “contaminants” in homeopathic medicines (heck, who are you going to believe…your own old theories OR your own EYES?…enjoy the photos posted in the article).
And so, NATURE magazine’s publication, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, published this article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-51319-w
Macrophages are associated with innate immune response and M1-polarized macrophages exhibit pro-inflammatory functions. Nanoparticles of natural or synthetic compounds are potential triggers of innate immunity. As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug, Arsenic album 30C.This has been claimed to have immune-boosting activities, however, has not been validated experimentally. Here we elucidated the underlying mechanism of Ars. alb 30C-mediated immune priming in murine macrophage cell line. Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) used for the structural analysis of the drug reveals the presence of crystalline As2O3 nanoparticles of cubic structure. Similarly, signatures of M1-macrophage polarization were observed by surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) in RAW 264.7 cells with concomitant over expression of M1 cell surface marker, CD80 and transcription factor, NF-κB, respectively. We also observed a significant increase in pro-inflammatory cytokines like iNOS, TNF-α, IL-6, and COX-2 expression with unaltered ROS and apoptosis in drug-treated cells. Enhanced expression of Toll-like receptors 3 and 7 were observed both in transcriptional and translational levels after the drug treatment. In sum, our findings for the first time indicated the presence of crystalline As2O3 cubic nanostructure in Ars. alb 30C which facilitates modulation of innate immunity by activating macrophage polarization.
And while Edzard allows IMMEDIATELY publishes announcements of articles that have negative results, it is typical for him to ignore the many articles published in high impact journals that show positive results.
Oh, Dana!
I hardly ever report about in vitro experiments, haven’t you noticed?
perhaps you can explain to us what this new study proves in terms of clinical medicine?
@Edzard
This study proves that homeopaths are not even capable of properly diluting their stuff, and thus should be allowed nowhere near real patients or real pharmaceuticals.
As RPGNo1 already mentioned as well, a 30C (10^⁻60) dilution of arsenic trioxide should by definition contain ZERO molecules of the original substance. However, these people say that they found lots of 15 nm crystals, each of which contains at least thousands of molecules of arsenic trioxide(*). So their dilution most likely contains millions of molecules, equating to not 30C, but something in the order of 6C or 7C at best. Yet these stupid clowns keep talking about 30C (no less than 88 times) as if it has any meaning …
*: Depending on the source, the arsenic may also have been present in the water used to dilute the stuff in the first place — India and neighbouring countries are notorious for arsenic-contaminated ground water. If this water is the source of the arsenic found, then it would only serve to make those homeopaths look even more like total fools. And oh, would this turn the local drinking water into a ‘homeopathic’ ‘remedy’?
Another potential source of arsenic is glassware, which contains trace amounts of arsenic, some of which may leach out, although I haven’t been able to find a quantitative analysis of this so far.
For me, however many fancy graphs and photographs and biological terms there are, the whole study is invalidated near the start of the Abstract, by the meaningless sentence “As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug, Arsenic album 30C”. What can that possibly mean. How can it be defined?
Professor Ernst has previously illustrated this difficulty humorously with reference to Merc sol 30C. Is, or is not, mercury a component of that remedy? If yes, what about laws relating to buying mercury over the counter? If no, what about false advertising?
“As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug Arsenic album 30C.”
A false claim: A homeopathic drug at 30C contains only H2O and perhaps, sugar.
That’s the whole point of homeopathic dilution.
“This has been claimed to have immune-boosting activities, however, has not been validated experimentally. Here we elucidated the underlying mechanism of Ars. alb 30C-mediated immune priming in murine macrophage cell line.”
Fine – the mechanism was validated.
“Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) used for the structural analysis of the drug reveals the presence of crystalline As2O3 nanoparticles of cubic structure.”
Which proves the samples were not a 30C dilution – and not ‘homeopathic’!
The major ingredient in the Arsenic album 30C used in the ‘study’ was ethanol:
So much for their peer review: one of the first errors I noticed was Dr. Reckeweg.co, which is supposed to be the company Dr. Reckeweg & Co. GmbH.
As to finding traces of arsenic trioxide: this is always present in water; and it is used in the manufacture of many types of glass (to help remove bubbles).
Thank you for highlighting that extract from the Materials and Methods section, Pete; I had missed it.
Arsenic album 30C, huh? I doubt that there was even ONE single molecule of As2O3 in the solution. This is what Avogadro’s law tells us.
It is far more likely that the macrophage cell line was contaminated by the environment. Or the test instruments and chemicals that were used for the investigation.
Trust me, I have a diploma in chemistry. 😉
I am interested in this comment near the start of the Abstract for the study. It says: “As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug, Arsenic album 30C”.
Really? The major component? So when a customer buys homeopathic Arsenic album 30C, Arsenic trioxide is the MAJOR part of what’s in the bottle they hold in their hand? Really?
Is that legal? I didn’t think in this day and age you could buy arsenic so easily…..
I think there will be semantical quibbles about the meaning of “major”. It surely cannot be by volume? But in a scientific study, language matters…..
I can’t make out from the study what form the Arsenic album 30C took. If I order it from Nelsons, it will be a little bottle of lactose pills onto which a couple of drops of serially diluted tincture have been dropped. Is that what they used? Or was it a liquid, and if so, water or alcohol? And how can arsenic trioxide be the major component?
Oh, I’m sorry. I guess that you cannot believe your own eyes (if you didn’t notice, there are PHOTOS published in this article)…but heck, who am I to encourage the impossible…that you would actually open your eyes. Sorry for asking too much of you…my bad.
Which photo do you think would answer my question Mr Ullman?
And what do you understand by the claim in the abstract that Arsenic trioxide “is the major component of the homeopathic drug Arsenic album 30C”?
And which laboratory can distinguish between homeopathic water and other water (76th time of asking)?
And why did you lie outrageously in this Blog, saying that you had “Many times” named such a laboratory, when you hadn’t done so once?
Do you really imagine this bumptiousness, this hapless belligerence, this unreasoned contumely, impresses anyone, Mr. Ullman?
THIS study verifies what you’re looking for…but because you are obviously blind, i cannot help you anymore.
If Nature.com isn’t adequate for you, my personal condolences…for the 77th time (but who’s counting?)!
And it IS correct in saying that arsenic (As2O3) is the “primary” ingredient of Arsenicum album because it is dispensed in either water, alcohol, sucrose, or lactose. The details for THIS study are clearly elucidated…but not for people who are deaf, dumb (very), and blind like yourself (who refused to see, hear, or think). Once again, my sympathies.
No it doesn’t. What do you think the photos show, Dana? You believe the claims? Of course you do. You believe any bumwash which you think confirms your belief in the magic powers of shaken water.
We, because we’re people who understand how science works, are highly sceptical of the claims made. We will want the findings to be replicated by independent researchers.
Which won’t happen.
This, like every other piece of specious twaddle you’ve waved in front of us, is of no consequence. It will be ignored, like you are. You are not a scientist, Dana. You’re a stupid, blinded zealot.
And a liar.
Name the laboratory, Dana. Put up or shut up.
It doesn’t say primary ingredient, it says ‘major component’. The ordinary reader would take that to mean what there is most of, in quantity. Are you saying there is more Arsenic trioxide in a bottle of Arsen alb. 30C than anything else?
Oh yes…and that is why NATURE uses you as a reviewer…whooops, my error. They don’t know who you are.
Does this mean that you actually believe that Nature has reviewers who have no knowledge of chemistry. Please say what you really mean…or perhaps wake up and smell the coffee!
Without meaning to, you have hit the nail on the head. Any decent reviewer with a little basic knowledge of chemistry would have rejected this article. But these reviewers did not reject the article, which says a lot about them. Nothing good, by the way.
And one more thing: The article was not published in Nature, but in Scientific Reports. Several papers have been withdrawn from the journal in the past. As this did not happen in time in one case (plagiarism), members of the editorial board have also resigned. That does not sound very reassuring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Reports#Controversial_articles
a copy of Danas link to nature:
“As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug, Arsenic album 30C.”
major component? There is not any component in C30 dilutions, and major components in C30? What are the minor components? There are no analytical methods available to find zero atoms in a C30 preparation.
Gad…well, thanx for verifying that you didn’t read the article (no surprise!). Ignorance is not bliss. There are now compelling bodies of evidence, with PHOTOS, that verify the nanoparticles from 30C and 200C potencies.
What’s even more strange is that you seem to wallow in your blindness. My sympathies…really.
Your “compellling evidence” is of little value. Please google “photoshop” and then hide away in a corner to cry.
@Dana Ullman
If those water-shaking clowns had any scientific sense at all, they would not be messing about with macrophage cells, but instead focus on a couple of far more fundamental phenomena they claim to have observed – phenomena that run counter to what we know about chemistry and physics:
– Why does there still appear to be plenty of arsenic trioxide in the solution at 30C dilution? The last molecule of the original As2O3 should already have been diluted away around the 13th dilution step.
– How can it be that this arsenic trioxide, which is quite soluble in water (20 g/l), appears to form nanoparticles?
The general answer to both of these questions is of course that homeopaths are rather stupid people, who will ignore even the most fundamental scientific questions in order to keep believing in magic (i.e. the magic that shaking water turns it into a medicine).
More specifically, the answer to the first question is most likely that homeopaths are sloppy workers, who fail to take into account the many ways in which their dilutions can get contaminated.
The second question is even easier to answer: those pictures of As2O3 crystalline nanoparticles were made using transmission electron microscopy (TEM), which requires any samples to be extensively preprocessed and placed in a vacuum. This means that there were no nanoparticles in the original solution at all; those crystals only formed when the water in the sample evaporated.
These two simple issues alone completely invalidate this, for want of a better word, ‘research’.
Which means that instead of contributing groundbreaking insights, you have just shown us once again that homeopaths – you included – are scientifically incompetent fools whose belief in magic makes them blind to even the most glaring errors and questions.
Maybe I was wrong for all of my life: paranormal abilities suddenly seem very real to me! When I look into the future, I have a strong vision of the retraction of a flawed article dealing with shaken water, that was published after a sloppy review in the journal Scientific Reports… and a certain Mr. Ullman never mentioning this.
Let’s see if I will be right!
You do understand how health insurance works?
You do have health insurance?
There’s a large bit of irony to Ernst’s reporting on the “ineffectiveness” of homeopathic medicines during the same week that one of the most respected scientific journals in the world published an important study that shows how one homeopathic medicine, ARSENICUM ALBUM 30C, has been shown to have effects on gene expression and how it catalyzes a powerful immune response.
It is no longer implausible HOW homeopathic medicines work…it cannot be said that there is “no evidence” that homeopathic “high potencies” have an effect on gene expression…and it cannot be said that nanoparticles are “contaminants” in homeopathic medicines (heck, who are you going to believe…your own old theories OR your own EYES?…enjoy the photos posted in the article).
And so, NATURE magazine’s publication, SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, published this article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-51319-w
Macrophages are associated with innate immune response and M1-polarized macrophages exhibit pro-inflammatory functions. Nanoparticles of natural or synthetic compounds are potential triggers of innate immunity. As2O3 is the major component of the homeopathic drug, Arsenic album 30C.This has been claimed to have immune-boosting activities, however, has not been validated experimentally. Here we elucidated the underlying mechanism of Ars. alb 30C-mediated immune priming in murine macrophage cell line. Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) used for the structural analysis of the drug reveals the presence of crystalline As2O3 nanoparticles of cubic structure. Similarly, signatures of M1-macrophage polarization were observed by surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) in RAW 264.7 cells with concomitant over expression of M1 cell surface marker, CD80 and transcription factor, NF-κB, respectively. We also observed a significant increase in pro-inflammatory cytokines like iNOS, TNF-α, IL-6, and COX-2 expression with unaltered ROS and apoptosis in drug-treated cells. Enhanced expression of Toll-like receptors 3 and 7 were observed both in transcriptional and translational levels after the drug treatment. In sum, our findings for the first time indicated the presence of crystalline As2O3 cubic nanostructure in Ars. alb 30C which facilitates modulation of innate immunity by activating macrophage polarization.
And while Edzard always IMMEDIATELY publishes announcements of articles that have negative results, it is typical for him to ignore the many articles published in high impact journals that show positive results.
Ah, Mr Ullman, thank you for looking in. Can you now take the time please – 75th time of asking – to name a laboratory that can distinguish between homeopathic water and other water, which you said in this Blog “only fools or liars” doubted can be done?
You said you had done so “many times”, but I am afraid you were terribly mistaken – you haven’t done so once. I would have noticed.
Thank you.
Piss and wind Dana. Misappropriation of the scientific method. The ship sailed years ago but you’re still stood on the dockside claiming otherwise.
That risible bit of tripe is as inconsequential as any bit of muckraking performed by your fellow loons in a desperate attempt to validate their quackery. It’s the same as every bit of nonsense you wave about so proudly. Have any of them changed anything?
Nope.
They are like you. Of no consequence.
Yep…nanopharmacology is on the cutting edge of medicine today…but for you, please continue to use your rotary phone (Princess style). You and other dinosaurs yell and scream the loudest when they are falling. Bye bye.
Pigeon Chess again…..
well observed!
Yes Dana
Nanopharmacology is on the cutting edge of medicine today.
But homeopathy isn’t nanopharmacology.
As has been explained to you.
Repeatedly.
Of course you can prove me wrong, as I’ve said previously, by linking to a piece about homeopathy in a nanomedicine journal.
I’ll wait.
You’re a pathetic busted flush, Ullman. Genuinely pathetic.
Shucks…and thanx for asking. Here’s one such article:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15593258211022983
Plus, you will benefit from looking at the references in the above article.
Dana
We know you don’t read things very well so, once again, for the hard of thinking..
I asked for a nanomedicine journal. Dose-Response isn’t a nanomedicine journal. It’s a low-impact open-access journal which is happy to publish any old shit. Which is why you can get your ignorant and inconsequential yammerings in print.
The references are amusing. Pointless abuses of science by your fellow loons and a couple of bits of decent science which make no mention of homeopathy but you choose to think that they support your belief in the magic powers of shaken water.
When is it going to dawn on you that nobody is taking any notice of you and your claims?
Three of Mr Ullman’s previous postings of his article, to which LENNY REPLIED EACH TIME:
The body of evidence on homeopathy is rotten to the core
Published Thursday 17 March 2022
Dana Ullman on Friday 25 March 2022 at 04:40
Why homeopathy is pseudoscience
Published Thursday 15 September 2022
Dana Ullman on Thursday 15 September 2022 at 22:29
Trials of homeopathy: a new database
Published Monday 31 October 2022
Dana Ullman on Thursday 03 November 2022 at 14:34
I am willing to bet that in the next few days the homeopathic lobby associations (such as the German Central Association of Homeopathic Physicians (DZVhÄ)) will speak out loudly to defend the effectiveness of homeopathy.
And it probably will not be long before Dana Ullmann or Heinrich Hümmler post their “expert” comments on the subject here on the blog.
Addendum: Dana was quicker than my comment. I won. Hip hip hooray! 😀
And of course you were right, regarding the DZVhÄ.
German: https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/deutschland/homoeopathie-lauterbach-krankenkassen-leistung-kritik-100.html
Michaela Geiger, Chairwoman of the German Central Association of Homeopathic Physicians, apparently said to the German Press Agency in Berlin, that the decision would restrict the range of therapies available in medical care, would lead to a monoculture in medicine (btw. Why is that bad?).
According to her the statutory benefit is important, because it is the only way for patients to receive homeopathy on a chip card or in other words because it is the only way for some patients to pay for it.
…
…
…
Sure. I have to pay for what is essentially fraud, because otherwise others can’t afford said fraud….
That being said, I’ll postpone celebrating until the moment the option is actually removed. So far the only thing we have are words.
—
Btw. Are they really called Homeopathic Physicians in english? I mean, if homeopathic “medicine” is another kind of medicine, essentially something shaken so often, it is no longer there … Then what happened to the poor homeopathic physicians?
Seriously, I am not a physician, but the fact, there is a group of those advocating the use of a specific kind of (proposed) remedy seems to be irrating in itself. And would, even if we’d discussing an actual remedy.
I mean wouldn’t a group like “Central Association of Bypassing Surgeons” sound strange?
Nice. I will toast the DZVhÄ with a beer tonight. 😀
Well, DeepL offered me this translation. And I will not discuss with a KI-program. 😉
What? How dare thou, Deepl! To me, you offered ‘Homeopathic Doctors’. I will submit my complaint by use of your Input form, which you’ll translate into binary code to feel all the shame a KI can feel. Ha!
I changed it to physicians, because when I hear the word “doctor” I also think of other professions, like physicists, biologists, time travellers etc. Well, mostly time travellers.
—
I also deliberately used the word ‘fraud’ instead of scam, which DeepL had suggested, because that is the title of Section 263 German Criminal Code. To be honest, I have a really hard time believing, that the producers of homeopathic products are able to successfully lead a business, pay taxes, partly in germany (sic!), and don’t seem to show the slightest bit of doubt, although reading the respective section on wikipedia should be enough.
And when someone lies to someone else to get them to give them money, that is usually called fraud.
Oh boy! The shit is really gonna hit the fan!!!
Oh really, IF Avogadro’s law has ANY meaning here, how would you quantify into this equation the fact that 6 ppm of silica fragments fall off the glass wall of the testtube in which a homeopathic medicine is made, PLUS the creation of nanobubbles that are created by the vigorous succussion of the vial, and the froth that is created from the turbulence, PLUS the increase water pressure that is created by the vigorous shaking of the vial.
Please provide accurate computation…or simply STFU because you’re an ignorant ignoramus. It is that simple.
@Dana Ullman
ANY liquid will generally get contaminated with trace amounts of particles from the container material. And oh. it’s homeopathic dilution NOT ‘medicine’. Homeopathic dilutions have no medicinal properties.
Ah, nanobabble again …
The proper English word is ‘shaking’. Anyway, those bubbles don’t do anything special. They’re just air bubbles, and disappear out of the solution again in a couple of hours.
What froth? Froth does not form from water and air alone, it generally requires the presence of organic materials such as proteins and the likes. It cannot form in water with dissolved arsenic trioxide or most other inorganic substances.
That water pressure is perhaps doubled or tripled compared to normal atmospheric pressure – temporarily of course. It does not do anything special to the homeopathic dilution. But as this time you correctly used the word ‘shaking’, I’ll award you one point for that.
Of what? Of those air bubbles that get temporarily dissolved into the water together with trace amounts of silica and other unavoidable contaminants?
By all accounts, you appear to be the ignoramus. You still believe that shaking water from which arbitrary substances have been diluted into oblivion will magically turn it into a medicine – all without being able to point out even ONE homeopathic dilution that has clear, consistent and repeatable effect, medicinal or otherwise.
And no, of course we will not shut up. Homeopaths are not just very stupid, they scam people out of their hard-earned money and endanger their health by convincing them that their shaken water and their sugar crumbs are effective medicines. They are not.
Wave those hands, Dana. Shout and stamp. Sputter incoherencies. Nobody pays you any attention.
Homeopathy is a busted flush. Science knows this. Medicine knows this. And you just HATE it.
Tough tit. Suck it up.
You do not have a clue about natural science. Your inaccurate answer makes it abundantly clear. Every high school student laughs at you for your obvious ignorance. 😆
I wonder, really, if you have ANY idea of how nasty a person you come across as in here, Mr. Ullman.
It is now being rumored that homeopathy for kids will remain reimbursable:
https://www.businessinsider.de/politik/doch-kein-homoeopathie-aus-die-globuli-bleiben-erstattungsfaehig/
How very strange! Why protect adults but not children from quackery?
effective lobbying?