That sounds like an excellent idea, although I think drug interactions should be studied, also. It's the effectiveness testing that's the biggest part of it, and furthermore, since they are in widespread use, it should be possible to go straight to human testing without an animal phase first.I read your article criticizing homeopathy with interest. It is also ironic that just one month ago, The Duval County Medical Society (Jacksonville Medicine, January 2000) devoted its entire issue to Integrative Medicine. As a physician who has studied homeopathy for more than 5 years, your assumptions are not entirely correct. The majority of physicists and chemists understand the physical properties of solvents, and how the molecules of a solvent (including water) can take a particular orientation (polarity) depending on a substance that they have been placed in contact with, despite the fact that the original substance is no longer in contact with the solvent. The theory is that
the polarity of the solvent can interact with some receptor sites or energetic systems (yes there are some that have been measured-all
cellular communication is energetic).
Very reasonable studies in the effect of homeopathic remedies on animals and plants have been performed which totally discount the excuse that the homeopathic effect is merely placebo.
There are more than 100 scientific articles on homeopathy that have been reviewed in a meta-analysis by an independent group of epidemiologists and their conclusion was that the studies were well done, and that homeopathic remedies seemed to work on an effect other than placebo.
The Lancet, an extremely respected British Medical Journal, printed an article by a physician in Glasgow a few years ago showing the effect of homeopathic remedies on allergy. The editor was so impressed with the
quality of the study, that in his comments, he stated 'either we have to finally admit that homeopathic remedies work, or we have to question the validity of the double-blind randomized trial that has been held up as
the gold standard of medical research.
I had the pleasure of contributing the article on homeopathy to the Jacksonville Medicine. I am enclosing a link for you to look at the article.
Thomas M. Bozzuto, D.O.
Medical Director, Mind/Body Institute of Florida
[Note: This message has been edited by TubaDiva]
your quote:
No, the FDA puts every drug that it approves under strict scrutiny, something that homeopathy manages to avoid.
Again, you are mistaken. Homeopathic remedies are regulated by the FDA as well as the Homeopathic Pharmacopea!
How many FDA approved drugs have been withdrawn from the market in recent years? I can think of at least 4. There has never been reported a death from taking a homeopathic remedy. Each year, billions of health care dollars are spent taking care of reactions/deaths from “appropriately administered” pharmaceuticals which result in hundreds of thousands of deaths annually.
Magnetic resonance imaging can tell the difference not only between homeopathic remedies, but also betewen homeopathic remedies and the solution without remedy?
Nothing there, HUH?
Concerning the posts of our latest homeopathic advocate.
Well, yes, medicines which do something will certainly cause more deaths then pure water will.
On the other hand, how many lives have been shown to have been saved by use of homeopathics (gonna need statistics here, there is the placebo affect)?
As for this claim that MRI can distinguish between the two, do you have a source for this claim?
From what I know of MRI, it aligns the protons in your body with a powerful magnetic field.
When an EM pulse is applied, the protons are knocked off their axis along the magnetic field. As they realign they emit back energy, which is then used to detect their positions. (I have no idea of the precision of this, atomic level detection?)
Would you mind telling us in what fashion a homeopathic medicine will alter an MRI scan?
Perhaps by performing alchemy on the water to transmute it to something with more or less protons? Was the homeopathic medicine gadolinium? 
If a medical examiner autopsies a man who took nothing but homeopathic “medicine” before he died, the M.E. will find no trace of allopathic medicine in any organ or tissue. Therefore, the M.E. will conclude the victim had not been taking any kind of medication and attribute the cause of death to lack of treatment and may even recommend a charge of criminal neglect.
That is, I think that’s what would happen. And it’s what I think should happen.
When all else fails, ask Cecil.
The oft-repeated mantra of alt-meds (mostly herbalists) is that companies do not invest money in testing natural products because they cannot be patented.
That got me thinking. First, what about aspirin? It’s a natural product, yet it was tested and refined and is now sold commercially by a big company (Bayer).
Second, just because the resulting product is not patentable does not mean the process used to achieve it is not patentable. I’m thinking that a company could spell out a specific refinement process, starting from the raw materials and ending with the final product in chemical form. Someone out there know more about patents that can help here?
The oft-repeated mantra of alt-meds (mostly herbalists) is that companies do not invest money in testing natural products because they cannot be patented.
That got me thinking. First, what about aspirin? It’s a natural product, yet it was tested and refined and is now sold commercially by a big company (Bayer).
Second, just because the resulting product is not patentable does not mean the process used to achieve it is not patentable. I’m thinking that a company could spell out a specific refinement process, starting from the raw materials and ending with the final product in chemical form. Someone out there know more about patents that can help here?
The oft-repeated mantra of alt-meds (mostly herbalists) is that companies do not invest money in testing natural products because they cannot be patented.
That got me thinking. First, what about aspirin? It’s a natural product, yet it was tested and refined and is now sold commercially by a big company (Bayer).
Second, just because the resulting product is not patentable does not mean the process used to achieve it is not patentable. I’m thinking that a company could spell out a specific refinement process, starting from the raw materials and ending with the final product in chemical form. Someone out there know more about patents that can help here?
I take it you haven’t studied a lot of chemistry and physics.
As for the MRI stuff, in chemistry we call it NMR. The NMR studies that are often used as a defense for homeopathy really don’t say what the proponents think they say. Most of the studies I have seen cited are those that are looking at defects in the “crystal” structure of frozen water.
As neat as it may sound, I doubt that NMR (or MRI) has ever (or will ever) corroborate the claims of homeopathy.
J Keller
You are comparing the market conditions of long ago with the current market conditions. The FDA didn't exist back then!
Sure, you could patent the process. It wouldn't do you any good--your competition would simply figure out another way to get the same end result. (That even happens with drugs--one that comes to mind is the original birth control pill. Another company came along and made another chemical that the body metabolized into it. They did have to test, though.)Tom Bozzuto posts:
Kyberneticist responds:
jkeller answers:
NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance), which has been used in chemistry to determine protein & other molecular structure for ages, requires that atoms be in a fixed array, or crystalized. MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) uses the same principles as NMR, but has been adapted to not require the same kind of fixed array, and so can image the human body.
NMR can use spin characteristics to identify several different nuclei; MRI only looks at hydrogen atoms, and uses different concentrations of hydrogen atoms in liquid, muscle, fat, & other tissues (as well as differences between normal tissues & tumors) to create images of different tissues.
Homeopathic treatment will not affect an individual’s MRI appearance, Kyber. I am not personally familiar with the use of NMR or MRI to examine homeopathic potions, but suspect Tom confused NMR (which could be used) and MRI (which I don’t see how it could be used).
If you are interested in reading more about NMR, I brushed up some very ancient memories with this informative site:
http://www.cis.rit.edu/htbooks/nmr/nmr-main.htm
- Sue
Tom Bozzuto needs to do a lot of homework. A good place to start would be “Homeopathy: The Ultimate Fake” - http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html .
After reading that, he might be able to contribute something more intelligent to the discussion.
Homeopathic solutions are very…very dilute (see below for the numbers). If there is nothing there, MRI, genies, witches, elves, and any other form of deity can’t find it.
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/homeo.html
Homeopathic products are made from minerals, botanical substances, and
several other sources. If the original substance is soluble, one part is
diluted with either nine or ninety-nine parts of distilled water and/or
alcohol and shaken vigorously (succussed); if insoluble, it is finely ground
and pulverized in similar proportions with powdered lactose (milk sugar).
One part of the diluted medicine is then further diluted, and the process is
repeated until the desired concentration is reached. Dilutions of 1 to 10
are designated by the Roman numeral X (1X = 1/10, 3X = 1/1,000, 6X =
1/1,000,000). Similarly, dilutions of 1 to 100 are designated by the Roman
numeral C (1C = 1/100, 3C = 1/1,000,000, and so on). Most remedies today
range from 6X to 30X, but products of 30C or more are marketed.
A 30X dilution means that the original substance has been diluted
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times. Assuming that a cubic
centimeter of water contains 15 drops, this number is greater than the
number of drops of water that would fill a container more than 50 times the
size of the Earth. Imagine placing a drop of red dye into such a container
so that it disperses evenly. Homeopathy’s “law of infinitesimals” is the
equivalent of saying that any drop of water subsequently removed from that
container will possess an essence of redness. Robert L. Park, Ph.D., a
prominent physicist who is executive director of The American Physical
Society, has noted that since the least amount of a substance in a solution
is one molecule, a 30C solution would have to have at least one molecule of
the original substance dissolved in a minimum of
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000 molecules of water. This would require a container more than 30
billion times the size of the Earth.
Oscillococcinum, a 200C product “for the relief of colds and flu-like
symptoms,” involves “dilutions” that are even more far-fetched. Its “active
ingredient” is prepared by incubating small amounts of a freshly killed
duck’s liver and heart for 40 days. The resultant solution is then filtered,
freeze-dried, rehydrated, repeatedly diluted, and impregnated into sugar
granules. If a single molecule of the duck’s heart or liver were to survive
the dilution, its concentration would be 1 in 100200. This huge number,
which has 400 zeroes, is vastly greater than the estimated number of
molecules in the universe (about one googol, which is a 1 followed by 100
zeroes). In its February 17, 1997, issue, U.S. News & World Report noted
that only one duck per year is needed to manufacture the product, which had
total sales of $20 million in 1996. The magazine dubbed that unlucky bird
“the $20-million duck.”
Actually, the laws of chemistry state that there is a limit to the dilution
that can be made without losing the original substance altogether. This
limit, called Avogadro’s number, corresponds to homeopathic potencies of 12C
or 24X (1 part in 1024). Hahnemann himself realized that there is virtually
no chance that even one molecule of original substance would remain after
extreme dilutions. But he believed that the vigorous shaking or pulverizing
with each step of dilution leaves behind a “spirit-like” essence – “no
longer perceptible to the senses” – which cures by reviving the body’s
“vital force.” Modern proponents assert that even when the last molecule is
gone, a “memory” of the substance is retained. This notion is
unsubstantiated. Moreover, if it were true, every substance encountered by a
molecule of water might imprint an “essence” that could exert powerful (and
unpredictable) medicinal effects when ingested by a person.
Paul Lee, PT
Denmark
E-mail: healthbase@post.tele.dk
HF List Intro: http://www.hcrc.org/wwwboard/messages/197.shtml
The Quack-Files: http://www.geocities.com/healthbase
Magnetic resonance imaging measures the spin of electrons of different substances. I do have a reference for this, but at home, not here at the office. I’ll quote the reference tonight.
but suspect Tom confused NMR (which could be used) and MRI (which I don’t see how it could be used).
- Sue**
[/QUOTE]
Sue,
I did mean to write NMR instead of MRI. Thanks for the correction.
Tom
March 13,2000 Issue
Week in Healthcare
Clinton gives boost to alternative care
By: Elizabeth Thompson
Catching the wave that began in the private sector, President Clinton last week ordered the establishment of the
White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy.
The move marks a major turning point in the way complementary and alternative therapies are viewed, shifting from a passive observation of the growing use of alternative treatments to an active attempt to direct the
integration of the movement into traditional medicine.
The 15-member advisory commission, part of HHS, will make legislative and administrative recommendations for alternative-care policy, including:
-
Education and training for healthcare providers.
-
Coordinated research into alternative-care practices and products.
-
Guidance for appropriate alternative-care access and delivery.
-
The provision of alternative-care information to both healthcare professionals and the general public.
The National Institutes of Health will administer the commission, whose members and chair will be appointed by
the president. The secretary of HHS will appoint the commission’s executive director. The commission will be
dissolved in two years unless the president extends it.
NIH spokeswoman Anne Thomas said the size of the commission’s budget and administrative staff are undetermined.
John Weeks, publisher and editor of The Integrator, a Seattle-based newsletter for the alternative-medicine business, said the commission could tie some of the loose ends regarding payment and delivery of complementary and alternative medicine.
He is concerned about a possible disconnect between the NIH’s “gold standard” of looking at research study-by-study and a market that is bounding ahead to meet consumer demand.
“The hope among the alternative- medicine community is that the commission will be able to break out of the chains of NIH’s relatively reductive thinking,” Weeks said.
It may be perhaps because many of the critics of homeopathy rely on attacks on the supporter (or repetative boring quotations from quackwatch) rather than discuss the scientific studies that exist (of which there are some in homeopathy).
To make the discussion more interesting, there are some extremely interesting studies that suggest that the intent of the researcher significantly affects the outcome of the study.
Many reputable scientists are debating what the word “evidence” really means, and whether the placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind study which has been the gold standard of medical research for so long is really the best benchmark of study as medicine goes in to the 21st century.
Tom
The Reality Check website is run by the National Council Against Health Fraud (the quackwatchers by another name). Same sky, same chicken little.
Tom Bozzuto wrote:
We don’t need a reference for NMR, several of us know what that is (by the way, MRI does imaging, while NMR plots the resonance of a sample versus frequency). If you’re going to post references about how NMR can show that water remembers, that would be informative, but please note that anything showing crystal defects in ice does not at all apply to liquid water.
Also:
This reminds me of that old saying that goes something like “There they go again. I must hurry after them, for I am their leader.”
And this isn’t an endorsement of homeopathy anyway. There’s a big difference between saying that “there might be something to some forms of treatment outside the medical mainstream, such as herbs” and “all our scientific knowledge needs to be thrown out and replaced with the 200 year old misunderstandings of homeopathy.”
If you’re going to post references about how NMR can show that water remembers, that would be informative, but please note that anything showing crystal defects in ice does not at all apply to liquid water.
The article actually looks at NMR of homeopathic remedy in solution vs. solution absent homeopathic remedy.
Tom