Article: The End of Homeopathy? A British Medical Journal has high hopes

[Guest guest]

http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,1114166,00.html

The End of Homeopathy?

A British Medical Journal has high hopes

 

Posted Tuesday, Oct. 04, 2005

Millions of people around the world swear by the alternative medicine

homeopathy. In Britain, the Royal Family endorses and uses it. But that

hasn't deterred the editors of The Lancet, the prestigious British

medical journal, which has launched an all-out attack on homeopathy. In

its current issue, The Lancet published a massive study that compared

the results of 110 trials of homeopathy with the same number of trials

of conventional medicine. The conclusion: benefits attributed to

homeopathy were, at best, placebo effects.

 

The study is accompanied by an article featuring criticism of a World

Health Organization (WHO) draft report that, as currently written, gives

homeopathy some leeway, as well as a commentary on bias in research and

The Lancet's no-holds-barred editorial comment.

 

Homeopathy was invented by an 18th Century German physician named Samuel

Hahnemann, who argued that diseases could be cured by administering

substances, mostly herbs or minerals, that produce the same symptoms as

the disease. And, he claimed, the effects of these substances could be

enhanced by diluting them. How much? The greater the dilution, it seems,

the greater the benefit.

 

That theory, for which there is not a shred of evidence, is evident in

the homeopathic sections of health food stores and major drugstore

chains. There, consumers can see, on the homeopathic containers, such

notations as 10X, or 80X or even 30C. Each X signifies that the active

substance has undergone a ten-to-one dilution, each C a hundred-to-one

dilution. Between each dilution, the solution is shaken vigorously, an

action that proponents claim transfers the properties of the substance

to the surrounding water.

 

But by the laws of chemistry, at 24 X there is just a 50 percent chance

that s single molecule of the active substance remains. And at 200C, the

dilution of a popular homeopathic flu remedy, the active ingredient is

long gone. What nonsense!

 

Chances are that The Lancet is somewhat premature in announcing the

" death " of homeopathy, which involves a large and very profitable

industry and the loyalty of many of the consumers it has duped. In fact,

The Lancet notes, " " the debate continues, despite 150 years of

unfavourable findings. The more dilute the evidence for homoeopathy

becomes, the greater seems its popularity. "

 

But there are encouraging signs. The Swiss Government, after a five-year

trial, has withdrawn insurance coverage for homeopathy. Even the U.S.

National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, which has

been criticized for being too open to spurious alternative medicine

claims, has little good to say abut homeopathy. Its website states,

" Systematic reviews have not found homeopathy to be a definitively

proven treatment of any medical condition. "

 

Now, The Lancet concludes, it's up to the doctors, who " need to be bold

and honest with their patients about homeopathy's lack of benefit. " For

scientifically-literate physicians, that shouldn't be so difficult to

do.

 

 

------

--------

 

 

 

 

The Lancet 2005; 366:726-732

 

DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2

 

Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative

study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy

 

 

Summary

Background

Homoeopathy is widely used, but specific effects of homoeopathic

remedies seem implausible. Bias in the conduct and reporting of trials

is a possible explanation for positive findings of trials of both

homoeopathy and conventional medicine. We analysed trials of homoeopathy

and conventional medicine and estimated treatment effects in trials

least likely to be affected by bias.

 

Methods

Placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy were identified by a

comprehensive literature search, which covered 19 electronic databases,

reference lists of relevant papers, and contacts with experts. Trials in

conventional medicine matched to homoeopathy trials for disorder and

type of outcome were randomly selected from the Cochrane Controlled

Trials Register (issue 1, 2003). Data were extracted in duplicate and

outcomes coded so that odds ratios below 1 indicated benefit. Trials

described as double-blind, with adequate randomisation, were assumed to

be of higher methodological quality. Bias effects were examined in

funnel plots and meta-regression models.

 

Findings

110 homoeopathy trials and 110 matched conventional-medicine trials were

analysed. The median study size was 65 participants (range ten to 1573).

21 homoeopathy trials (19%) and nine (8%) conventional-medicine trials

were of higher quality. In both groups, smaller trials and those of

lower quality showed more beneficial treatment effects than larger and

higher-quality trials. When the analysis was restricted to large trials

of higher quality, the odds ratio was 0·88 (95% CI 0·65-1·19) for

homoeopathy (eight trials) and 0·58 (0·39-0·85) for conventional

medicine (six trials).

 

Interpretation

Biases are present in placebo-controlled trials of both homoeopathy and

conventional medicine. When account was taken for these biases in the

analysis, there was weak evidence for a specific effect of homoeopathic

remedies, but strong evidence for specific effects of conventional

interventions. This finding is compatible with the notion that the

clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects.

 

Affiliations

 

a Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Berne,

Berne, Switzerland

b Medical Research Council Health Services Research Collaboration,

Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

c Department of Pharmacology, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland

d Practice Brückfeld, MediX General Practice Network, Berne, Switzerland

 

Correspondence to: Prof Matthias Egger, Department of Social and

Preventive Medicine, University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Christine,

 

Rather than subdue the cause of homeopathy this report has come as a

shot in the arm for homeopaths all over the world. Newspapers have been

flooded by protests from doctors and patients alike and today the

term " homeopathy " is more popular than what was before this article was

published.

 

The Govt of India issued such a scathing comment that Lancet has tried

to pacify the Indian Health Minister, Dr Anbumani Ramadoss, by giving

him space, though in an unrelated issue, in the current edition of its

magazine.

 

The Independant too has published an article which casts aspersions on

the articles being published in the Lancet and has observed that the

Lancet may be suppressing a lot of information that would be

detrimental to the profits of multinational drug companies. " The end of

homeopathy " ?, looks likes the " end of Lancet " to me.

 

Regards,

Jagannath.

 

Ps: You can search the web for the reactions to the Lancet Report.

, " Christine Ziegler "

<chrisziggy@e...> wrote:

>

>

>

http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,1114166,00.html

> The End of Homeopathy?

> A British Medical Journal has high hopes

[Guest guest]

I really do not know all this action against Homeopathy,it seems to me that

Doctors are on the war Path,against,like against Herbal

Medicine,Vitamins,Reiki,Hypnosis,and everything that cut their profits,since the

Population is getting more Healthier due to better Foods and medical care. My

husband cure his Epilepsy with Homeopathy,the Doctors wanted to open his brain

to play around,to see if they could find the problem,in India hundred of people

use Homeopathy per day and they get cure,REMEMBER YOUR BODY CURES YOU, GIVEN THE

PROPER ELEMENTS<NOT THE DOCTOR.

 

Christine Ziegler <chrisziggy wrote:

 

http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,1114166,00.html

The End of Homeopathy?

A British Medical Journal has high hopes

 

Posted Tuesday, Oct. 04, 2005

Millions of people around the world swear by the alternative medicine

homeopathy. In Britain, the Royal Family endorses and uses it. But that

hasn't deterred the editors of The Lancet, the prestigious British

medical journal, which has launched an all-out attack on homeopathy. In

its current issue, The Lancet published a massive study that compared

the results of 110 trials of homeopathy with the same number of trials

of conventional medicine. The conclusion: benefits attributed to

homeopathy were, at best, placebo effects.

 

The study is accompanied by an article featuring criticism of a World

Health Organization (WHO) draft report that, as currently written, gives

homeopathy some leeway, as well as a commentary on bias in research and

The Lancet's no-holds-barred editorial comment.

 

Homeopathy was invented by an 18th Century German physician named Samuel

Hahnemann, who argued that diseases could be cured by administering

substances, mostly herbs or minerals, that produce the same symptoms as

the disease. And, he claimed, the effects of these substances could be

enhanced by diluting them. How much? The greater the dilution, it seems,

the greater the benefit.

 

That theory, for which there is not a shred of evidence, is evident in

the homeopathic sections of health food stores and major drugstore

chains. There, consumers can see, on the homeopathic containers, such

notations as 10X, or 80X or even 30C. Each X signifies that the active

substance has undergone a ten-to-one dilution, each C a hundred-to-one

dilution. Between each dilution, the solution is shaken vigorously, an

action that proponents claim transfers the properties of the substance

to the surrounding water.

 

But by the laws of chemistry, at 24 X there is just a 50 percent chance

that s single molecule of the active substance remains. And at 200C, the

dilution of a popular homeopathic flu remedy, the active ingredient is

long gone. What nonsense!

 

Chances are that The Lancet is somewhat premature in announcing the

" death " of homeopathy, which involves a large and very profitable

industry and the loyalty of many of the consumers it has duped. In fact,

The Lancet notes, " " the debate continues, despite 150 years of

unfavourable findings. The more dilute the evidence for homoeopathy

becomes, the greater seems its popularity. "

 

But there are encouraging signs. The Swiss Government, after a five-year

trial, has withdrawn insurance coverage for homeopathy. Even the U.S.

National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, which has

been criticized for being too open to spurious alternative medicine

claims, has little good to say abut homeopathy. Its website states,

" Systematic reviews have not found homeopathy to be a definitively

proven treatment of any medical condition. "

 

Now, The Lancet concludes, it's up to the doctors, who " need to be bold

and honest with their patients about homeopathy's lack of benefit. " For

scientifically-literate physicians, that shouldn't be so difficult to

do.

 

 

------