Homeopathy is harmless – except when it kills you!
Death by homeopathy has been a theme that occurred with depressing regularity on my blog, e.g.:
- Death by homeopathy
- Another death by homeopathy
- Death by homeopathy?
- The case of a boy tortured to death with homeopathy
- Homeopathy is the death of the patient suffering from gangrene
Now, there is yet another sad fatality that must be added to the list. This case report presents a 61-year-old woman with metastatic breast cancer who opted for homeopathic treatments instead of standard oncological care. She presented to the Emergency Department with bilateral necrotic breasts, lymphedema, and widespread metastatic disease. Imaging revealed extensive lytic and sclerotic lesions, as well as pulmonary emboli. Laboratory results showed leukocytosis, lactic acidosis, and hypercalcemia of malignancy.
During hospitalization, patient was managed with anticoagulation and broad-spectrum antibiotics. Despite disease progression, patient declined systemic oncological treatments, leading to a complicated disease trajectory marked by frailty, sarcopenia, and functional quadriplegia, ultimately, a palliative care approach was initiated, and she was discharged to hospice and died.
This case highlights the complex challenges in managing advanced cancer when patients choose alternative therapies over evidence-based treatments. The role of homeopathy in cancer care is controversial, as it lacks robust clinical evidence for managing malignancies, especially metastatic disease.
Although respecting patient autonomy is essential, this case underscores the need for healthcare providers to ensure patients are fully informed about the limitations of alternative therapies. While homeopathy may offer emotional comfort, it is not a substitute for effective cancer treatments. Earlier intervention with conventional oncology might have altered the disease course and improved outcomes. The eventual transition to hospice care focused on maintaining the quality of life and dignity at the end-of-life, emphasizing the importance of integrating palliative care early in the management of advanced cancer to enhance patient and family satisfaction.
Even though such awful stories are far from rare, reports of this nature rarely get published. Clinicians are simply too busy to write up case histories that show merely what sadly must be expected, if a patient refuses effective therapy for a serious condition and prefers to use homeopathy as an “alternative”. Yet, the rather obvious truth is that homeopathy is no alternative. I have pointed it out many times before: if a treatment does not work, it is dangerously misleading to call it alternative medicine – one of the reasons why I nowadays prefer the term so-called alternative medicine (SCAM).
But what about homeopathy as an adjunctive cancer therapy?
In 2011, Walach et al published a prospective observational study with cancer patients in two differently treated cohorts: one cohort with patients under complementary homeopathic treatment (HG; n = 259), and one cohort with conventionally treated cancer patients (CG; n = 380). The authors observed an improvement of quality of life as well as a tendency of fatigue symptoms to decrease in cancer patients under complementary homeopathic treatment.
Walach and other equally deluded defenders of homeopathy (such as Wurster or Frass) tend to interpret these findings as being caused by homeopathy. Yet, this does not seem to be the case, as they regularly forget about the possibility of other, more plausible explanations for their results (e.g. placebo or selection bias). I am not aware of a rigorous trial showing that adjunctive homeopathy has specific effects when used by cancer patients (if a reader knows more, please let me know; I am always keen to learn).
So, is there a role for homeopathy in the fight against cancer?
My short answer:
No!
28 Responses to Homeopathy in the Fight Against Breast Cancer: ANOTHER DEATH BY HOMEOPATHY
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
It’s so sad. The culpability sure lies, not with a poorly-informed and desperate patient (after all, people can’t be expected to know everything about all SCAM), but with the ‘practioners’ offering such ‘treatments’……
I remember when Caron Keating, a great fan of AltMed, found a lump in her breast she asked the opinion of naturopath Jan de Vries. Who could see the lump and also wasn’t stupid. He told her to consult a doctor immediately. Others may not have been so sensible. The hubris of many quacks knows no bounds – we all know the stories of homeopaths Kaviraj and Tinus Smits who treated their own cancers with homeopathy and suffered the inevitable results.
RG, JK, Krishna, OldBob, Heinrich and DUllman disagree.
RPGNo1 on Tuesday 15 April 2025 at 12:16
“”JK, Krishna, OldBob, Heinrich and DUllman disagree……..”
Approximately 11,500 people die from breast cancer each year in the UK alone, equating to about 32 deaths per day. This figure includes around 11,400 women and about 85 men annually, based on data from 2017–2019.Cancer Research UK
Breast cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death in women in the UK, following lung cancer.
Nearly all breast cancer patients in the UK—over 99%—are treated with conventional (mainstream) medicine at some stage of their care.
🔬 Conventional treatments typically include:
Surgery (lumpectomy, mastectomy),
Radiotherapy, Chemotherapy, Hormonal therapy (e.g., Tamoxifen), Targeted therapy (e.g., Herceptin for HER2-positive cancers), Immunotherapy (in some advanced cases)
💡 Key Points:
The NHS (National Health Service) provides standardized cancer care, so nearly all diagnosed patients receive or are offered evidence-based treatments.
11500 breast cancer patients dying in UK alone?? From “evidence based treatment”??
What is the figure for USA? According to the American Cancer Society, an estimated 43,250 women died from breast cancer in the U.S. in 2022. This positions breast cancer as the second leading cause of cancer death among women, following lung cancer.
🧪 Utilization of Conventional Treatment
Nearly all breast cancer patients in the U.S. receive conventional medical treatments, which may include: same treatment . Same outcome.
Could be good idea to check for the reasons for women getting breast cancer.
First, fighting a disease does not mean that it will be cured, you moron.
Second, “breast cancer death rates have been decreasing steadily since 1989, for an overall decline of 44% through 2022.”
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/about/how-common-is-breast-cancer.html
Third, Homeopathy is useless in the treatment of cancer.
RPGNo1 on Monday 21 April 2025 at 12:00
“First, fighting a disease does not mean that it will be cured,..”
Dr Edzard could find only ONE death ascribed to homeopathy that he presented here. Would you accept that over hundreds of thousands of patients are dying every year of breast cancer while being treated with conventional drugs and process? How many of the so designated “treated patients” end up with a new form of cancer at a later date? Are these counted in patients successfully treated?
“https://www.cancercenter.com/community/blog/2024/05/breast-cancer-survivors-face-higher-secondary-cancer-risk”
“Past research on secondary cancer risk among people who survive breast cancer found that women were 27 percent more likely—and men 28 percent more likely—to develop another cancer compared with people with no history of breast cancer. But a new study published in The Lancet in April suggests the risk may be greater depending on the type of cancer.
For example, according to the study, women who survive breast cancer have an 87 percent greater risk for developing endometrial cancer than other women. And men who survive the disease are 62 percent more likely to develop pancreatic cancer than other men.”
The moot question: why are so many patients getting breast cancer? Root cause? All kinds of drugs pumped into patients in the guise of “scientific medicines” with zero understanding of the limit of their action or their interaction with other drugs. Overtime simple diseases, suppressed with crude chemicals , come back in more virulent form. Cancer is one such form. And the effects get transferred to the next generation!!!!!!
“Ten percent of children suffer from hay fever. Eczema, a chronic skin inflammation, affects more than 15 percent of children and 2 percent of adults in the United States. In industrialized nations, the number of kids with eczema has tripled in the past thirty years. The incidence of inflammatory bowel disease, including Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis, is rising, wherever we look.
Earlier esophageal reflux, which causes heartburn, was uncommon. But the ailment has exploded in these past forty years, and the cancer it leads to, adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, is the most rapidly increasing cancer in the United States and everywhere else it has been tracked.”
First create a disease. Then crow about fighting it and “fighting does not necessarily means cure.”
“Dr Edzard could find only ONE death ascribed to homeopathy”
1) my last name is ERNST
2) on this blog, we had to lament many death by homeopathy
Krishna, it would be nice if you would stop trolling.
If you know of any credible published clinical evidence proving efficacy superior to placebo of any homeopathic treatment for breast cancer, please share it here.
Edzard on Monday 21 April 2025 at 20:48
“on this blog, we had to lament many death by homeopathy”
Really? What not put a figure to this count? 1+1+1+…….
While your tunnel vision misses the mayhem around the allopathic system. For each 1 death in the alternate medical system, there are thousands in the “scientific medical system” where science seems to go wrong every 10 years.
“A Mayo Clinic Proceedings study found 40% of medical practices (e.g., treatments, guidelines) were reversed over a decade, including drugs and procedures initially backed by RCTs. ”
Very impressive EVIDENCE and the RCTs you continue to write about!!!!!!!! The mirage of Gold standard used to fool others. You included if you were unaware. Were you?
thank you for your tireless efforts to demonstrate the limitations of your intellect.
Edzard on Monday 21 April 2025 at 20:48
“…..on this blog, we had to lament many death by homeopathy”
Any number to support this or only lament, lament, lament………?
“Create a disease”?
You do know that cancers have existed for thousands of years? And are found in other species?
And you also know when certains diseases/disorders/whatever you want to call them where first defined and thus could be diagnosed?
And you must also know how assessment and diagnosis of many things has improved with greater knowledge, better tools and better technology?
Or did you have perfect knowledge of everything since forever?
@Krishna
You write walls of text but have no idea what you are writing because you are simply too intellectually challenged. 😛
Murmur on Tuesday 22 April 2025 at 18:48
“Create a disease”? Specifics???
Pemoline (Cylert)
• Approved: 1975
• Withdrawn: 2005
• Use: ADHD
• Issue: Linked to severe liver toxicity, even liver failure requiring transplants.
Troglitazone (Rezulin)
• Approved: 1997
• Withdrawn: 2000
• Use: Type 2 diabetes
• Issue: Liver failure and death; more than 60 cases of liver damage reported.
________________________________________
Cerivastatin (Baycol)
• Approved: 1997
• Withdrawn: 2001
• Use: Cholesterol-lowering statin
• Issue: High risk of rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), especially with gemfibrozil.
________________________________________
Efalizumab (Raptiva)
• Approved: 2003
• Withdrawn: 2009
• Use: Psoriasis
• Issue: Associated with progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) — a fatal brain infection.
________________________________________
Alosetron (Lotronex)
• Approved: 2000
• Withdrawn: 2000 (returned under restricted use in 2002)
• Use: IBS with diarrhea
• Issue: Ischemic colitis and serious gastrointestinal complications.
________________________________________
Diabetes?
https://www.ted.com/talks/russ_altman_what_really_happens_when_you_mix_medications
Cancers and many others? Take your pick. Observed by homeopaths 70 years ago and explained as “suppression of diseases”.
“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……..
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……
These figures are alarming, but the really shocking fact is that this accumulation of global human body fat has been accelerating not over the course of a few centuries but in a mere two decades……
The reasons for this disaster are all around you, including overuse of antibiotics in humans and animals, Cesarian sections, and the widespread use of sanitizers and antiseptics, to name just a few. While antibiotic resistance is a huge problem—old killers like tuberculosis are increasingly resistant and making a comeback—there now seem to be separate ones, affecting people with such scourges as Clostridium difficile (C. diff), bacteria of the digestive tract resistant to multiple antibiotics, a potential danger in the hospital, and a spreading pathogen, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), which can be acquired anywhere. The selective pressure of antibiotic use is clearly increasing their presence.
http://martinblaser.com/excerpt.html
RPGNo1 on Tuesday 22 April 2025 at 20:29
“You write walls of text but have no idea what you are writing..”
Intellectual challenge comes from your inability to read. Expletives is an easy way to express your lack of understanding. This you continue to do.
Read a concise version about treating breast cancer.
““Past research on secondary cancer risk among people who survive breast cancer found that women were 27 percent more likely—and men 28 percent more likely—to develop another cancer compared with people with no history of breast cancer. But a new study published in The Lancet in April suggests the risk may be greater depending on the type of cancer.
For example, according to the study, women who survive breast cancer have an 87 percent greater risk for developing endometrial cancer than other women. And men who survive the disease are 62 percent more likely to develop pancreatic cancer than other men.”
Treatment considered successful at which stage?
@KrishnaTroll
QED. 😛
You have no idea. You are nothing but a puffball. Lots of air, but nothing substantial behind it.
Krishna, please stop trolling, with these (or any other) “tu quoque” fallacies.
If you know of any credible evidence that any homeopathic treatment for breast cancer works better than placebo, share it.
DavidB on Wednesday 23 April 2025 at 08:17
Trolling??????? All information provided here by me is “verbatim” writing of a renowned doctor/researcher from the so called “scientific medical system”. For every one case being written here from alternative medicine, there are several hundred cases of deaths and maiming for exactly similar problem. If a comparison has to be made, it is worthwhile to look at the other side of the coin.
For breast cancer, those who create the mess, should be held responsible to clean it up and considering they are making a new mess, asked not to spread false information. Like being done here.
There is treatment for breast cancer in Homeopathy. It is as usual, individual treatment that you won’t understand. What is YOUR interest?
you just provided a good example fro trolling (to make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them)
Edzard on Wednesday 23 April 2025 at 12:43
DavidB is your disciple. He can only understand what you teach him. Homeopathy is out of this scope. Why waste time?
What do YOU mean when you write “your tireless efforts to demonstrate the limitations of your intellect.”???? Another way of “Not Trolling”?
You continue to write about “reproducibility” in science? What do you make off:
“The fact that a significant percentage of medical practices, even those initially supported by RCTs, are reversed within a decade raises serious concerns about patient safety and the reliability of medical knowledge over time. While the study doesn’t explicitly detail the reasons for these reversals, the implication is that accumulating real-world evidence often contradicts earlier findings, potentially leading to harm in patients who received the now-discredited treatments.
When patients are harmed by medical practices that are later reversed, the avenue for compensation is typically through medical malpractice claims. However, these cases can be complex, particularly when the treatment was considered the standard of care at the time it was administered.”
Here’s a breakdown of how compensation might be sought:
1. Establishing Negligence:
To succeed in a medical malpractice claim, a patient generally needs to prove that the healthcare provider deviated from the accepted standard of care at the time of treatment.
This can be challenging in cases of medical reversal because the treatment in question was often considered the standard of care based on the best available evidence at that time (e.g., RCTs)………
Explaining the meaning of Catch 22?
REPRODYCIBILITY? A joke at the expense of the dead patients?
BS!
Edzard on Wednesday 23 April 2025 at 14:52
BS!
That is exactly what you have continued to spread here for decades!!!!!!!
Oh, poor Krishna. You have lost your composure. Do you need valerian, little Bullshitter? 😀 😀
Stop all this nonsense verbiage Krishna and instead tell us of any credible evidence that any homeopathic treatment has helped any person with breast cancer to an extent greater than placebo.
DavidB on Thursday 24 April 2025 at 22:38
“There is a well-known homeopathic treatment approach for various conditions, including breast cancer, associated with Prashanta Banerjee and the Prasanta Banerji Homeopathic Research Foundation (PBHRC) in Kolkata, India. The Banerjis, including Prashanta Banerjee and his late son Pratip Banerjee, developed specific, standardized homeopathic protocols for treating various diseases based on their extensive clinical experience of treating thousands of patients over several decades.
The Banerji Protocols have garnered some attention and have been a subject of research, including a “Best Case Series Program” evaluation by the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) on cancer patients treated with their protocols. Some cases showed complete regression, prompting the NCI to suggest further investigation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5280046_Cancer_patients_treated_with_the_Banerji_protocols_utilising_homoeopathic_medicine_A_Best_Case_Series_Program_of_the_National_Cancer_Institute_USA
the Banerjees never did prove their treatment to cure any type of cancer.
to state otherwise is criminal, in my view.
Hi Prof. Ernst,
do you not fear that trolls like Krishna simply use AI to generate their comments and they target you in your blog to make you waste your time fighting windmills?
Generating these texts is so simple and quick… As an example, I put-in the last comment of Krishna into ChatGPT and asked the AI to generate a rejecting comment. Within few seconds, I got the reply copied below. In my opinion, arguing with trolls was never a great idea but with the text-generating AIs, it completely lost any purpose whatsoever because you can not even be certain to argue with a human.
___________________________________
“The claims about the Banerji Protocols as a treatment for conditions like breast cancer should be viewed with significant skepticism. Homeopathy, including these protocols, lacks credible scientific evidence supporting its efficacy in treating cancer or any other serious medical condition. The fundamental principles of homeopathy contradict well-established scientific laws, and extensive research has shown that homeopathic treatments perform no better than a placebo.
The mention of the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) evaluation does not constitute a validation or endorsement of these protocols. The NCI’s interest in investigating anecdotal cases does not replace the need for rigorous scientific trials. No reliable, peer-reviewed studies have demonstrated that homeopathy can effectively treat cancer, and relying on such unproven methods can be dangerous, diverting patients from evidence-based medical treatments that have been proven to work.
Patients dealing with cancer are strongly urged to seek evidence-based treatments and consult with licensed medical professionals to ensure they receive care that is grounded in scientific research and proven outcomes.”
Homeopathy, including these protocols, lacks credible scientific evidence supporting its efficacy in treating cancer or any other serious medical condition. The fundamental principles of homeopathy contradict well-established scientific laws, and extensive research has shown that homeopathic treatments perform no better than a placebo.
The mention of the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) evaluation does not constitute a validation or endorsement of these protocols. The NCI’s interest in investigating anecdotal cases does not replace the need for rigorous scientific trials. No reliable, peer-reviewed studies have demonstrated that homeopathy can effectively treat cancer, and relying on such unproven methods can be dangerous, diverting patients from evidence-based medical treatments that have been proven to work.
Patients dealing with cancer are strongly urged to seek evidence-based treatments and consult with licensed medical professionals to ensure they receive care that is grounded in scientific research and proven outcomes.