So, who has swine flu?

[ThreeOhFour]

I have no problem with people taking sugar pills to cure their cancer but it's irresponsible to sell things under the banner of 'medicine' if it has no proven effects.

Yes, but wouldn't things such as acupuncture come under this as well? And 'normal' medicine often has negative side effects to consider. Something as simple as anesthetics can be life threatening - yes, patients are tested and checked but mishaps still occur. Honestly, I'd rather be sold ineffective medicine than medicine that leaves me worse off than before.

If you expect these 'authority' creatures to provide information about your drugs and your alternative medicines (whether or not they are actually 'medicines' or not is hardly for me to comment on) then remember that even the most mainstream medicinal treatments never seem to be 100% proven.

I don't usually enter these long and drawn out debates, as I am generally content to observe. So... yeah. That's my bit.

[Calin Leafshade]

Homeopathy is something very specific.

and acupuncture does have proven effects i believe beyond the placebo effect.

but homeopathy is just a sugar pill or water with an active ingredient so diluted that the chance of there even being 1 molecule of the active ingredient left is on the order of 1 in billions.

Selling it as a medicine is fraud.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSKxz1BNU6s

[ThreeOhFour]

A quick wikipedia search (I am not expert on this subject, of course) suggests that the placebo effect is sometimes effective. Not always effective, but it seems to me (from what I have read, which is little) that all medicines can be labeled as 'sometimes effective'.

It seems to me that the human brain may play an important role in medicine, and if tricking someone into thinking they are taking something that will make them well is what actually makes them well, then it seems to me to be an effective 'medicine'.

As for youtube videos, one can find youtube videos that will tell you anything you want to hear. I am not trying to pass your point off as being irrelevant, naturally. To me it seems that there is not enough conclusive evidence about any of this to go around banning things. I have no personal agenda here - I'm completely without any experience with alternative medicines, but I don't think the term 'fraud' is completely accurate if the placebo effect is known to be an effective treatment.

And if we're going to get people to stop lying to us about the things that they sell us, I'm quite certain that we've got a lot more things that would need to be placed under review besides sugary pills.

but homeopathy is just a sugar pill or water with an active ingredient so diluted that the chance of there even being 1 molecule of the active ingredient left is on the order of 1 in billions.

Heh, and if we're analyzing, acupuncture is just sticking little pins into your skin. I can do that at home!  

[Andail]

Homeopathy is inherently unscientific, since the very theory behind it goes against both chemistry and common sense. If it works, it's purely placebo, or by way of the supernatural.

With acupunctur you can at best question the benefits; even if you don't believe in energy meridians and the holistic approach to medicine, the immediate release of endorphines is well documented (albeit not very revolutionary or difficult to achieve in other ways).

[TerranRich]

I'm surprised the FDA allowed homeopathic remedies to be sold in the US.

[Tuomas]

I'm not afraid. It'll die in the cold. If it won't, I'll just keep away from it.

Though the only infections here seem to be centered at the army stations in the north. I can't even feel sad because of that. Those idiots deserve to get infected with brain flue and everything, just to show how great an idea it really is to have 10 people sleeping in the same room with minimal hygiene conditions, tired and hungry.

That, and I do use the desinfection liquid the have at the uni. Not because of the flue, but because I hate touching surfaces that have other people's snot and everything on them and afterwards digging my nose.

[Nacho]

Homeopathy is something very specific.

and acupuncture does have proven effects i believe beyond the placebo effect.

but homeopathy is just a sugar pill or water with an active ingredient so diluted that the chance of there even being 1 molecule of the active ingredient left is on the order of 1 in billions.

Selling it as a medicine is fraud.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSKxz1BNU6s

To clarify, acupunture is no better than homeopathy... Well, it has been proven that it *treats* the pains because the little nailings make the body produce endorphines, but that is almost equal to nothing.

It improves little pains, but it does not cure anything. It has a little analgesic value, no healing value at all.

Also, it has been proven that it doesn't matter if the acupunturist is an ancient asian master of the ki or the girl next door, it will cause the same effect.

So, yes, it should be banned as homeopathy if sold as a medicine.

[TerranRich]

Nacho, Advil has no healing value at all, it only masks symptoms (analgesic value). But that can be scientifically proven, thanks to the ibuprofen in the medicine.

[ThreeOhFour]

Homeopathy is inherently unscientific, since the very theory behind it goes against both chemistry and common sense.

Yeah, I can accept that. This Water memory concept seems more like flipping tarot cards to me than fermenting antibiotics.

My line of thought still stands, however: If the placebo effect works (again, I've only quickly skimmed Wikipedia, which I assume is as reliable a source of reference as any) then can it be dismissed as a form of medicine? Seems unlikely to me.

It seems highly trivial to be suggesting that governments should spend their efforts deciding whether or not to make something that might be a form of medicine illegal, instead of focusing on the great many other areas which seem much higher priority in my mind.

Apologies to Snarky for derailing his thread. And of course, Tuomas, please do make sure you don't dig your nose with other people's snot on your fingers. That's just asking for trouble.

Nacho, just read your post, but are you certain? Wikipedia says these WHO chaps published a report (if this holds any consequence or not) stating it as 'effective treatment' (whatever this entails) for a whole bunch of nasty things.

I'll try to stop posting in here now (as I'm clearly asking more questions than I am answering), but am interested to read other people's thoughts .

[Nacho]

Nacho, Advil has no healing value at all, it only masks symptoms (analgesic value). But that can be scientifically proven, thanks to the ibuprofen in the medicine.

And? I was just clarifying a point about acupunture.

[Lufia]

Homeopathy is inherently unscientific, since the very theory behind it goes against both chemistry and common sense. If it works, it's purely placebo, or by way of the supernatural.

Damn, I hope it's supernatural.

As I was saying, you can't do a thing against viruses save treat the symptoms. A placebo is as good as anything in this case. And way better than stuffing yourself with antibiotics that would allow unrelated germs to develop a resistance, for example.

I'm not saying homeopathy can cure anything, but then we don't have a "real" cure for the common cold. It's better to stick to the placebo in such cases.

[Calin Leafshade]

I feel i should clarify something about the placebo effect.

The placebo effect is not a positive effect. It is something that applies to clinical trials.

It does not heal you in any way it merely makes you FEEL better, and thus messes up any clinically results since alot of the results are based on how the patient feels.

the placebo effect does not rally your immune system to fight that virus. It simply makes you think you feel better because you have done something about it.. it is an entirely psychological effect not a medical one.

So even if homeopathy has some psychological effect (because it certainly doesnt have any medical ones) they do no good whatsoever for the affliction.

[ThreeOhFour]

From wikipedia:

Mechanism of the effect

The phenomenon of an inert substance resulting in a patient's medical improvement is called the placebo effect. The phenomenon is related to the perception and expectation which the patient has; if the substance is viewed as helpful, it can heal, but if it is viewed as harmful, it can cause negative effects, which is known as the nocebo effect. Placebo effects are a scientific mystery.[24] Their basic mechanism has been investigated since 1978, when it was found that the opioid antagonist naloxone could block placebo painkillers, suggesting that endogenous opioids are involved.

The terms 'medical improvement' and 'heal' are listed in here, making me think it is a positive effect. Perhaps I have interpreted this incorrectly, however.

[nihilyst]

the placebo effect does not rally your immune system to fight that virus. It simply makes you think you feel better because you have done something about it.. it is an entirely psychological effect not a medical one.

You're right when you say that positive vibes won't get rid of a virus, but keep in mind that many people suffer from psychosomatic illnesses. In these cases, placebos can have a real medical effect.

[Andail]

I feel i should clarify something about the placebo effect.

The placebo effect is not a positive effect. It is something that applies to clinical trials.

Oh, on the contrary; placebo is benign in the sense that it gives the patient positive mental energy to heal. It doesn't mean that a specific kind of medicine can be marketed solely for its placebo effect; anything can be a placebo as long as the patient believes it to have healing power.

Also, it should be noted that this mental energy is only one step on the path to getting well, and naturally a placebo pill can't cure more serious afflictions on its own. But it's nothing magic about the fact that in most cases, you need to believe that you can be well in order to get well.

The only negative aspect of placebo is that it can make medical tests tricky to carry out, if you don't know how to do it right.

[Wonkyth]

I'm not sure about this, but I'm pretty sure that mainstream doctors have been known to prescribe sugar pills.
And there have been many tests done to show the effects of placebo and nocebo, where the nocebos have made people suffer various symptoms of the effects that they were told the drug would give.

[TerranRich]

Mainstream doctors do NOT prescribe sugar pills. They use placebos in lab studies when testing medications and other similar procedures, as a control.

[ThreeOhFour]

Mainstream doctors do NOT prescribe sugar pills. They use placebos in lab studies when testing medications and other similar procedures, as a control.

Once again I return to Wikipedia and once again it suggests the contrary:

Doctor-patient relationship

A study of Danish general practitioners found that 48% had prescribed a placebo at least 10 times in the past year.[2] The most frequently prescribed placebos were antibiotics for viral infections, and vitamins for fatigue. Specialists and hospital-based physicians reported much lower rates of placebo use. A 2004 study in the British Medical Journal of physicians in Israel found that 60% used placebos in their medical practice, most commonly to "fend off" requests for unjustified medications or to calm a patient.[99] The accompanying editorial concluded, "We cannot afford to dispense with any treatment that works, even if we are not certain how it does."[100] Other researches have argued that open provision of placebos for treating ADHD in children can be effective in maintaining ADHD children on lower stimulant doses in the short term.[101]

[TerranRich]

Well, I've never heard of U.S. doctors doing that, at any rate.

[ThreeOhFour]

Well, I've never heard of U.S. doctors doing that, at any rate.

Seems to be more common than you might hope:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27342269/

Admittedly, only 2 percent of these listed admitted to using sugar pills, but they are not the only form of placebo.