Osteopath or homeopath?

[Adventure Racer]

However, homeopathy has worked very successfully on our children, even when they were probably too young for a placebo effect to be the explanation.

There is a reason why proper medical studies are "double blind". This means that not only the person receiving the treatment doesn't know whether it is active or a placebo, but also the person giving the treatment. Otherwise it is possible for the person giving the treatment to pass on vibes to the patient about whether or not they think it will work (I believe studies have been carried out to prove this, where everybody got a placebo, but some people administering treatment were told they were giving real medicine!) Is there not a possibility in this case that the parent thinks it will do some good and passes on positive vibes which actually help with treatment, even if the child is too young to understand?

[johnloguk]

I have also had cause to visit a dedicated sports injuires clinic from time to time, as well as the chiropractor who keeps my back sorted. The most useful session I ever had was in response to a very sore ankle, which had resulted from multiple strains, sprains and minor tears over the years. It used to make the most horrible grinding and clicking noises, and the clinician diagnosed "quite a lot of scar tissue in there young man" (I particularly liked the "young man" bit) .

She said she could give me ultrasound, but would try a deep massage first to try and break up the scar tissue. Over about 20 minutes there were times when I thought her thumbs were going to meet somewhere inside my ankle, a very strange sensation, but afterwards it was quite miraculous. The ankle was so much more mobile, no odd noises and no pain at all. I have had no recurrance of the soreness, and no more ankle twists either. The ankle is more flexible and stronger.

If there is a moral to this tale it would be always seek expert advice with an injury. We can't expect GPs or A&Es to know everything, and too often they just advise "rest", which is probably the worst thing with many injuries. But then that is my opinion and I'm not an expert just a punter.

[Suzy R Sopham]

To quote a GP friend & columnist:

According to Complementary Healthcare: A Guide for Patients, published by the Prince of Wales Foundation for Integrated Health, 'the basic principle of homoeopath is like cures like'. Perhaps any homoepaths out there needing treatment for gunshot wounds would like me to test that particular theory.

Hang on, though. The guide says homoeopathy is used to treat conditions like asthma, eczema, arthritis, ME, migraine, menstrual problems, IBS, allergies, depression and anxiety - so it must be good. The fact that it's so useful in managing pathologies characterised by spontaneous remission and a high placebo response is obviously just a coincidence.

Frankly, I'll only come over all integrated when it's shown to be effective for infarcts, cataracts or atrial fibrillation.

Original Recipe
For those who persist in claiming 'there must be something in it', I have some bad news. There isn't. It's just water. It might start as a tincture of gingko biloba, but it goes through so many dilutions that the final remedy has no active ingredients other than some mystical 'echo' of the original recipe.

I don't know what's more infuriating: the fact that apparently sentient beings can buy into this shamanism, or that homoeopaths have perfected the miracle of turning water in to money.

But the enthusiasts remain unmoved. They don't care that bandolier(the premier source of evidence based healthcare information in the UK and worldwide) says homoeopathy doesn't work. They're not bothered that the theory behind their therapy transgresses laws of science and puts homoeopathy alongside The Fairies At The Bottom Of Your Garden.

They continue to point to its popularity as a proxy measure of validity. Sure, but Celebrity Love Island was popular, too.

Commercial success simply means there will always be 'therapists' happy to pretend placebo, time and indulgence can be bottled and sold, punters desperate enough to try anything, and a media so open-minded that its brains fall out.


Really galling
But what's really galling is that the NHS supports this New Age nonsense. The aforementioned glossy 54-page Complementary Health Guide received Department of Health funding.

Scotland's only homoeopathic inpatient hospital was recently spared the axe despite an urgent need to trim budgets. And there are four other NHS homoeopathic hospitals in the UK offering outpatient services.

So, on the one hand, the Government exerts enormous pressure on the medical profession to practice evidence-based, cost-effective medicine. And, on the other, it subsidises a service of no proven benefit run by mystic medics - purely because pulling the plug on something as PC as an 'integrated health service' would be a vote loser.

Meanwhile, I have patients with real problems problems for whom real treatment is available yet their cataracts and hips have to wait while the NHS indulges this travesty of science.

It's time we poured cold water on the concept of homoeopathy. And kept pouring and pouring until it's undetectable.

[Harley]

What I find really apalling about this topic is the way all the different alternative and complimentary therapies get lumped together.

This results in proven therapies such as Herbalism (let us not forget that until comparatively recently almost all of our medecine was herbal based - and much still is) get the same 'rolling of the eyes' response as nutty ideas such as crystal therapy.
Consequently, it is almost impossible to have a sensible debate on any individual therapy.
Just look at this thread. It started off by asking about Homeopathy (I'm rolling my eyes here) and quickly diverted off into a discussion on amongst other things, Herbalism and Physiotherapy. Er... does someone out there really think that these therapies can be mentioned on the same page?
Is it just sloppy thinking which gets us into this mess, or is there real confusion amongst the medical profession too? Actually, if you look at what the NHS website has to say on the matter, then we find that it does not distinguish between alternative and complimentary therapies, and where it lists them (see below) it does not even attempt to describe them - clearly they are pretty confused too.

Acupuncture
Alexander Technique
Aromatherapy
Ayurveda
Bodywork
Bowen
Chiropractic
CHM
Counselling
Craniosacral Therapy
Crystal Therapy
Dowsing
Flower Therapy
Healing
Herbalism
Homeopathy
Hypnotherapy
Iridology
Kinesiology
Nutrition
Osteopathy
Radionics
Reflexology
Reiki
Retail Therapy
Shiatsu
TCM
Yoga Therapy

[AndyO]

Suzy R Sopham you must be really pissed that homeopathy actually works for people that your "evidence-based, cost-effective medicine" doesn't always actually help, and you don't know why.

Must be witchcraft! A bit like midwives in mediaeval times. Burn 'em at the stake, Suzy.

and Harley, this is a discussion forum. Things get lumped in together because people put them there, there are no rules broken.

[Adventure Racer]

AndyO, sounds like you're the one who's pissed (maybe in more senses then one ) that you can't convince those of us with a scientific training who understand what the placebo effect and double blind trials mean that homeopathy has any effect whatsoever (which couldn't be achieved by any other sugar pill given appropriate psychology). You can submit as many anecdotal examples as you like, but since the study of studies finds no evidence of efficacy, then there is none.

Oh, and Harley has a very valid point - whilst that is the way of forums, it is also the way for people to make posts like his attempting to correct the situation.

[Gross]

Ah... Adventure Racers how wrong can you be.... it obviously works well in cycling with all those people popping innocent sugar coated pills if we follow your line of thought....

[kedge]

Pardon me for repeating the old joke about the homeopath who died of an overdose after drinking a glass of water.

[Suzy R Sopham]

Read this article and you will see why I have concerns about homeopathy:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-2269389.html

Oh, and AndyO: I still believe that most midwives are witches!

[Adventure Racer]

Ah... Adventure Racers how wrong can you be.... it obviously works well in cycling with all those people popping innocent sugar coated pills if we follow your line of thought....

Wrong about what? About homeopathy not being effective? About the study of studies showing no evidence of it working? Or about ANdyO being pissed?

You're obviously more up on the latest performance enhancing drugs than me - didn't realise they were doing homeopathy now

[graeme]

The problem with even the most shamanistic homeopathy is that it makes people better, and there are plenty of studies to show that if you believe you'll get better, you will (cue Nick Barrable...).

Indeed, the whole notion of double-blind trials is based on this simple fact - if there were no placebo effect, you wouldn't need to do double blind trials.

Of course, imagined cures work best for imagined ailments, and there are plenty of them around. And for real diseases, like malaria, real cures are more effective still. Unfortunately, homeopathy doesnt seem to work for the cynical like me - who of course only have real ailments .

Graeme

> > 2000 B.C. - Here, eat this root.
> > 1000 A.D. - That root is heathen. Here, say this prayer.
> > 1850 A.D. - That prayer is superstition. Here, drink this potion.
> > 1940 A.D. - That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.
> > 1985 A.D. - That pill is ineffective. Here, take this antibiotic.
> > 2000 A.D. - That antibiotic is artificial. Here, eat this root.

[Harley]

and Harley, this is a discussion forum. Things get lumped in together because people put them there, there are no rules broken.

Andy-O, I'm well aware that this is a discussion forum, which is why I posted as I did. Thanks for the support AR.

However, I may be guilty of breaking a rule somewhere, as I altered the NHS list of therapies to add one of my own. It's a therapy which is probably more beneficial than many others on the list, it doesn't need a prescription, it's DIY so you don't need to consult an expert but it seems to work for many people I know.

[Stodgetta]

Retail therapy works for me, too (not sure my retail therapy has the same effect on Stodge, though - it definately doesn't make me feel good when he goes on a spending spree )

What I'd really be interested in is how many of your therapies, Harley, can be ticked off by Nopesport posters.

When I started this thread, I didn't intend it to be a homeopathy debate, or a homeopathy/chiropractic debate, more a complimentary/alternative therapy discussion, and what people have found helpful/not helpful themselves....

[Gross]

it doesn't need a prescription,

Who needs a prescription?? Tomorrow I can walk into almost any Apoteck & get anything I like My First (second) Aid kit is full of ...... ?????

[AndyO]

That's exactly what I took from your original post, Stodgetta, and replied in that spirit to relate my own experiences. I am by no means learned enough to be a spokeperson for homeopathy or any other branch of healing

Thanks to the medical mafia however, I know realise that my family was not helped in any way by these treatments and shall henceforth reject any "like cures like" medications. Now can someone explain how immunisation works so I can decide whether to ask for flu vaccinations this winter?