"Homeopathy conference ends in chaos after delegates take hallucinogenic drug"

[SuckySurgeon7]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...egates-take-hallucinogenic-drug-10491114.html

From the article:

An alternative medicine conference has ended in chaos in Germany after dozens of delegates took a LSD-like drug and started suffering from hallucinations.

Broadcaster NDR described the 29 men and women “staggering around, rolling in a meadow, talking gibberish and suffering severe cramps”.

The group of "Heilpraktikers" was discovered at the hotel where they held their conference in the town of Handeloh, south of Hamburg, on Friday.

More than 150 medical staff, ambulances and police descended on the scene and took the raving delegates to hospital.

The patients, aged between 24 and 56, were found suffering from delusions, breathing problems, racing hearts and cramps, with some in a serious condition, Deutsche Welle reported.

No one recovered sufficiently to be interviewed by police until Monday, a spokesperson said.

Torsten Passie, a member of the German government’s expert commission for narcotics, told NDR: “It must have been a multiple overdose. That does not support the view that the people concerned took the hallucinogen knowingly.

“One has to assume that people were not told about the substance, its effects and risks before taking it.”

Police are reportedly looking into possibilities including the drug being taken as a joint experiment, or it being furtively given to conference participants as a prank.

No arrests have yet been made as the investigation continues into a possible violation of Germany’s Narcotics Act.

The Association of German Healing Practitioners (VDH), which represents homeopaths as well as other naturopaths, quickly distanced itself from the embarrassment.

In a statement, it said none of its representatives took hallucinogens during the “incident” in Handeloh.

“The organisers of this obscure conference are unknown to us and such events will not be tolerated by our Association,” a spokesperson said.

“Unfortunately, the conference in Handeloh has severely damaged the image of the alternative medicine profession…and we have clarified that such acts are not in the spirit of natural therapy, and contradict our values both morally and legally.

“The Association of German Healing Practitioners (Heilpraktikers) detests such misdemeanours.”

Tests on their blood and urine revealed they had all taken hallucinogenic drug 2C-E, which is known as Aquarust in Germany and has been illegal there since the end of last year.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Psai]

That's what happens when you dilute it too much

 

[jqueb29]

And this is why alternative "medicine" will always be for idiots

 

[Oo Cipher oO]

Torsten Passie, a member of the German government’s expert commission for narcotics, told NDR: “It must have been a multiple overdose. That does not support the view that the people concerned took the hallucinogen knowingly.

“One has to assume that people were not told about the substance, its effects and risks before taking it.”

Yeah...that sounds pretty frightening and not at all humorous.

 

[TheShaker]

I gotta say, I expected Gomer Blog.

 

[MatCauthon]

And this is why alternative "medicine" will always be for idiots

How many established medical procedures were once considered alternative medicine and were once ridiculed by the medical profession? I think your view is a little too close-minded

 

[Nasrudin]

I think the obvious take home message here is medical conferences need to step up there game. We're like a lame office party. Their whole conference devolved into mass psychosis. Like hunter s thsompson inspired chaos.

 

[chipwhitley]

How many established medical procedures were once considered alternative medicine and were once ridiculed by the medical profession? I think your view is a little too close-minded

Homeopathy is ridiculed for good reason.

 

[Dave89]

Anyone know the time and place of the next one?

 

[DokterMom]

I was sure this would be from The Onion!

 

[MetalloBetalactamase]

How many established medical procedures were once considered alternative medicine and were once ridiculed by the medical profession? I think your view is a little too close-minded

As a stand alone statement your argument begs the question. Let just make that a two by two shall we? Your statement is 1.....

2. How many alternative medical procedures were once and are still considered alternative medicine and are still ridiculed by the medical profession?

3. How many established medical procedures were never considered alternative medicine and were never ridiculed by the medical profession?

4. How many alternative medical procedures were once considered established medicine and are now ridiculed by the medical profession?

 

[SuckySurgeon7]

I think the obvious take home message here is medical conferences need to step up there game.

I almost titled the thread as "What Medical Conferences in Europe Are Like", but the actual title of the article was too good to pass up.

 

[wjs010]

But, but it's a plant...

 

[Siggy]

But, but it's a plant...

I had a patient in 3rd degree heart block (relatively asymptomatic too) that was convinced that he only needed B-vitamins. He was admitted late int he day to the ICU because he was HR was in the 30s with cardiology to see him the next day. However he was refusing any treatments in the meantime. I convinced him, if he becomes symptomatic, to at least let us try atropine. "After all, it's from a plant called nightshade."

 

[wjs010]

I had a patient in 3rd degree heart block (relatively asymptomatic too) that was convinced that he only needed B-vitamins. He was admitted late int he day to the ICU because he was HR was in the 30s with cardiology to see him the next day. However he was refusing any treatments in the meantime. I convinced him, if he becomes symptomatic, to at least let us try atropine. "After all, it's from a plant called nightshade."

Drugs are evil! Plants have no biochemical/pharmacological properties. Should have just told the patient you were gonna give them the belladonna nightshade plant from the far reaches of Nepal. They would have eaten it up!

 

[Law2Doc]

How many established medical procedures were once considered alternative medicine and were once ridiculed by the medical profession? I think your view is a little too close-minded

I think you are making your opponents arguments for them. It's not "medicine" until it's empirically shown to be safe and effective. Until that point it's totally appropriate to ridicule, your mind should stay closed, and it is not at all appropriate to administer unproven substances to patients under the guise of "medicine", alternative or otherwise. If you want to help people you only give them meds that are shown to be safe and effective. If you don't want to bother with empiric evidence or want to treat people well in advance of it, you are pretty much a snake oil salesman, promising results you can't defend. Medicine is grounded in science -- we dont just give patients random substances and hope they do something.

The public doesn't know better -- they are looking for a person in a white coat to cure them, give them hope. But the folks pitching themselves as practicing "alternative medicine" generally do know that there's not much evidence behind their treatments, and that makes things ethically pretty questionable. And these substances aren't always benign -- many are neither safe nor effective. But the homeopath will never know because he doesn't give a crap about doing a study first.

 

[Cytarabine]

I had a patient in 3rd degree heart block (relatively asymptomatic too) that was convinced that he only needed B-vitamins. He was admitted late int he day to the ICU because he was HR was in the 30s with cardiology to see him the next day. However he was refusing any treatments in the meantime. I convinced him, if he becomes symptomatic, to at least let us try atropine. "After all, it's from a plant called nightshade."

Okay, small thread detour. I thought we didn't give atropine for 3rd degree heart blocks as the rhythm is av dissociated, so I looked it up and uptodate says give atropine. How's atropine supposed to increase rate with a complete block?

 

[Siggy]

Okay, small thread detour. I thought we didn't give atropine for 3rd degree heart blocks as the rhythm is av dissociated, so I looked it up and uptodate says give atropine. How's atropine supposed to increase rate with a complete block?

There are some cases that will respond to atropine.

I think we (again, I was an MS3 at the time) just going through all of the various bradycardic drugs to see what he would and would not take... since he was refusing pacing in the event that we would have needed to pace. The patient ended up signing AMA in the ICU the next morning.

 

[Goro]

I think "When Medical Conferences Go Bad" might be more realistic!

I almost titled the thread as "What Medical Conferences in Europe Are Like", but the actual title of the article was too good to pass up.

 

[MatCauthon]

I think you are making your opponents arguments for them. It's not "medicine" until it's empirically shown to be safe and effective. Until that point it's totally appropriate to ridicule, your mind should stay closed, and it is not at all appropriate to administer unproven substances to patients under the guise of "medicine", alternative or otherwise. If you want to help people you only give them meds that are shown to be safe and effective. If you don't want to bother with empiric evidence or want to treat people well in advance of it, you are pretty much a snake oil salesman, promising results you can't defend. Medicine is grounded in science -- we dont just give patients random substances and hope they do something.

The public doesn't know better -- they are looking for a person in a white coat to cure them, give them hope. But the folks pitching themselves as practicing "alternative medicine" generally do know that there's not much evidence behind their treatments, and that makes things ethically pretty questionable. And these substances aren't always benign -- many are neither safe nor effective. But the homeopath will never know because he doesn't give a crap about doing a study first.

Do you know how many medications and medical procedures are in use today that were never studied properly? A sizeable number of drugs on the market never had clinical trials performed on them and they have been grandfathered in. Don't assume everything in medicine has a study behind it. Alternative medicine has many small trials that can be used as guideposts.

It is not good to be too close-minded in the real world of medicine. Many patients have nothing else that can help them and would otherwise be on chronic pain meds/NSAIDs if not for alternative medicine techniques with limited evidence like acupuncture, chiropractic, nutritional supplements, homeopathic gels, etc. I run into these patients all the time. I am n=1, but medicine has failed me on my own health conditions. I relied on alternative medicine to maintain my health. Are you going to be one of the close-minded doctors that ridicules me and won't listen to my own personal experience during an office visit? If so, you will lose many patients. Patients are using alternative medicine in record numbers and you guys need to learn how to be accepting of the patients that use it. They are just not going to tell you about it otherwise, and is that what you really want?

Also, how could homeopathic be harmful? If it has less molecules than Avogadro's number then it should have no different side effects than sugar-pills or water. It is probably the safest alternative medicine in the world. Sure, it has nothing in it, but don't try to argue that that could be harmful purely an ingredient risk profile.

 

[Law2Doc]

Do you know how many medications and medical procedures are in use today that were never studied properly? A sizeable number of drugs on the market never had clinical trials performed on them and they have been grandfathered in. Don't assume everything in medicine has a study behind it. Alternative medicine has many small trials that can be used as guideposts.

It is not good to be too close-minded in the real world of medicine. Many patients have nothing else that can help them and would otherwise be on chronic pain meds/NSAIDs if not for alternative medicine techniques with limited evidence like acupuncture, chiropractic, nutritional supplements, homeopathic gels, etc. I run into these patients all the time. I am n=1, but medicine has failed me on my own health conditions. I relied on alternative medicine to maintain my health. Are you going to be one of the close-minded doctors that ridicules me and won't listen to my own personal experience during an office visit? If so, you will lose many patients. Patients are using alternative medicine in record numbers and you guys need to learn how to be accepting of the patients that use it. They are just not going to tell you about it otherwise, and is that what you really want?

Also, how could homeopathic be harmful? If it has less molecules than Avogadro's number then it should have no different side effects than sugar-pills or water. It is probably the safest alternative medicine in the world. Sure, it has nothing in it, but don't try to argue that that could be harmful purely an ingredient risk profile.

Every prescription medication has at a minimum passed the FDA hurdles of safety and efficacy. Virtually none of the supplements naturopaths/homeopaths use (ie "alternative medicine") have. I don't really understand your point in your last paragraph (I think you are digging back to the days of Hahnemnn and not talking about "alternative medicine" as it exists today) -- we aren't suggesting "alternative medicine" products are merely placebos, but in fact something far far worse -- indeterminate substances with potential side effects and drug interactions that nobody has demonstrated are safe or effective for that which they are being administered. This is what YOU have to open your mind to -- not only are these "alternative" meds not curing cancer, but when taken blindly can cause real injury. I agree patients are using "alternative" meds in droves, and we as physicians are seeing a LOT of bad consequences. The answer isn't to be accepting of it, but to counsel patients strongly against this. There is no magic pill that cures cancer but there are plenty of magic pills that can put them into hepatic or renal failure.

 

[Terry Toma]

Do you know how many medications and medical procedures are in use today that were never studied properly? A sizeable number of drugs on the market never had clinical trials performed on them and they have been grandfathered in. Don't assume everything in medicine has a study behind it. Alternative medicine has many small trials that can be used as guideposts.

I'm not too familiar with homeopathy/naturopathy. Can you tell me a little bit about how these "many small trials" are formally used to guide standards for prescription of treatments?

 

[MatCauthon]

Every prescription medication has at a minimum passed the FDA hurdles of safety and efficacy. Virtually none of the supplements naturopaths/homeopaths use have. I don't really understand your point in your last paragraph -- we aren't suggesting homeopathic meds are merely placebos, but in fact something far far worse -- indeterminate substances with potential side effects and drug interactions that nobody has demonstrated are safe or effective for that which they are being administered. This is what YOU have to open your mind to -- not only are these alternative meds not curing cancer, but when taken blindly can cause real injury. I agree patients are using alternative meds in droves, and we as physicians are seeing a LOT of bad consequences. The answer isn't to be accepting of it, but to counsel patients against this.

If you are saying that homeopathy could hurt patients then you are saying that homeopathy could have an effect in the first place. This should all be impossible based on basic chemistry principles. If you are saying that homeopathic drugs are tainted with adulterants that is a different argument entirely. I am talking purely about homeopathic remedies that have been diluted past the post of Avogadro's number. There should be no cause for concern for those types of medications

There is far more concern with herbal medicine than homeopathic medicine in terms of side effects so I think your crusade could be directed to more important areas.

By the way, there are still many drugs on the market that were never FDA approved. Here is the list: http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/medicine/prescription-drugs-unapproved.htm
The FDA is working on pulling them off, but many still continue to be prescribed.

 

[deleted158872]

That's what happens when you dilute it too much

 

[MetalloBetalactamase]

Okay, small thread detour. I thought we didn't give atropine for 3rd degree heart blocks as the rhythm is av dissociated, so I looked it up and uptodate says give atropine. How's atropine supposed to increase rate with a complete block?

Atropine is chronotropic?

 

[Cytarabine]

There are some cases that will respond to atropine.

I think we (again, I was an MS3 at the time) just going through all of the various bradycardic drugs to see what he would and would not take... since he was refusing pacing in the event that we would have needed to pace. The patient ended up signing AMA in the ICU the next morning.

Interesting, thanks, guess it depends on the exact mechanism of the block

Atropine is chronotropic?

Are you asking? Or are you giving a snarky answer? Atropine is clearly a chronotrope, but with a complete AV block how is it supposed to exert it's effect? This is why pacing is helpful

 

[Psai]

I think "When Medical Conferences Go Bad" might be more realistic!

It wasn't a medical conference

 

[Goro]

Let's make that "When pseudoscientists go bad!"

It wasn't a medical conference

 

[Terry Toma]

Let's make that "When pseudoscientists go bad!"

"Homeopaths Gone Wild"

 

[Law2Doc]

If you are saying that homeopathy could hurt patients then you are saying that homeopathy could have an effect in the first place. This should all be impossible based on basic chemistry principles. If you are saying that homeopathic drugs are tainted with adulterants that is a different argument entirely. I am talking purely about homeopathic remedies that have been diluted past the post of Avogadro's number. There should be no cause for concern for those types of medications

There is far more concern with herbal medicine than homeopathic medicine in terms of side effects so I think your crusade could be directed to more important areas.

By the way, there are still many drugs on the market that were never FDA approved. Here is the list: http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/medicine/prescription-drugs-unapproved.htm
The FDA is working on pulling them off, but many still continue to be prescribed.

Again you are resorting to an antiquated definition of homeopathy rather than the notion of "alternative medicine" as its used today, which, yes can be quite harmful.

 

[amichel]

If you are saying that homeopathy could hurt patients then you are saying that homeopathy could have an effect in the first place. This should all be impossible based on basic chemistry principles. If you are saying that homeopathic drugs are tainted with adulterants that is a different argument entirely. I am talking purely about homeopathic remedies that have been diluted past the post of Avogadro's number. There should be no cause for concern for those types of medications

There is far more concern with herbal medicine than homeopathic medicine in terms of side effects so I think your crusade could be directed to more important areas.

By the way, there are still many drugs on the market that were never FDA approved. Here is the list: http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/medicine/prescription-drugs-unapproved.htm
The FDA is working on pulling them off, but many still continue to be prescribed.

Um no. It can be harmful when people take it instead of real medicine. Nobody is suggesting that homeopathic pills have actual physiological negative side effects.

 

[MetalloBetalactamase]

 

[MatCauthon]

Again you are resorting to an antiquated definition of homeopathy rather than the notion of "alternative medicine" as its used today, which, yes can be quite harmful.

citation? I have never seen any concern for safety of homeopathy in the literature other than perhaps a few odd case reports.

 

[amichel]

citation? I have never seen any concern for safety of homeopathy in the literature other than perhaps a few odd case reports.

I and multiple others have pointed out how it can be indirectly dangerous. Once again no one is asserting that sugar pills are dangerous in and of themselves.

Other alternative therapies can of course be directly dangerous.

 

[Law2Doc]

citation? I have never seen any concern for safety of homeopathy in the literature other than perhaps a few odd case reports.

The Physicians Desk Reference, Merck Manual and Epocrates all list drug interactions. MANY of the supplements used in "alternative medicine" are referenced in there as things that can interact dangerously with conventional treatments.

 

[Law2Doc]

Um no. It can be harmful when people take it instead of real medicine. Nobody is suggesting that homeopathic pills have actual physiological negative side effects.

I'm actually suggestion that the 19th century definition of homeopathy the prior poster is using isn't what "alternative medicine" has evolved into today. They now use very real "supplements" and herbs, not diluted, and do, in fact have "actual physioligical negative side effects" and make people sick. The days of diluted sugar pills haven't been what "alternative medicine" has been about for over a century. Some of these substances used might someday be the early forerunners to new allopathic drugs, once tested, but prior to that point they are neither safe nor effective nor adequately understood and quite unethical for anyone to put on a white coat and administer. I assume that's the point the person who drugged the above-referenced conference was trying to make by poisoning them. There are, of course, better ways of getting your point across but as you can see from this thread there will always be people who are entrenched in the idea that alternative medicine is legit simply because because numerous members of the public will line up for a magic cure-all pill.

 

[MatCauthon]

The Physicians Desk Reference, Merck Manual and Epocrates all list drug interactions. MANY of the supplements used in "alternative medicine" are referenced in there as things that can interact dangerously with conventional treatments.

I'm referring to homeopathy, not the broad umbrella of alternative medicine. We are well aware that herbs and nutritional supplements have interactions and side effects. After all, they have legitimate mechanisms of action. Homeopathy is a separate discussion.

 

[amichel]

I'm actually suggestion that the 19th century definition of homeopathy the prior poster is using isn't what "alternative medicine" has evolved into today. They now use very real "supplements" and herbs, not diluted, and do, in fact have "actual physioligical negative side effects" and make people sick. The days of diluted sugar pills haven't been what "alternative medicine" has been about for over a century. Some of these substances used might someday be the early forerunners to new allopathic drugs, once tested, but prior to that point they are neither safe nor effective nor adequately understood and quite unethical for anyone to put on a white coat and administer. I assume that's the point the person who drugged the above-referenced conference was trying to make by poisoning them. There are, of course, better ways of getting your point across but as you can see from this thread there will always be people who are entrenched in the idea that alternative medicine is legit simply because because numerous members of the public will line up for a magic cure-all pill.

Oh yah, I know. But we're specifically talking about homeopathy. Not alternative medicine as a whole.

I see what you mean though. I was just trying to point out that no one said truly homeopathic pills are inherently dangerous.

 

[Law2Doc]

I'm referring to homeopathy, not the broad umbrella of alternative medicine. We are well aware that herbs and nutritional supplements have interactions and side effects. After all, they have legitimate mechanisms of action. Homeopathy is a separate discussion.

homeopathy as you are describing it really doesn't happen anymore -- it's all now under the larger umbrella "alternative medicine". So no it's not a separate discussion unless you are talking about pretty ancient history. I've been trying to convey that point to you in the last several posts, to no avail.

 

[Mad Jack]

I'm actually suggestion that the 19th century definition of homeopathy the prior poster is using isn't what "alternative medicine" has evolved into today. They now use very real "supplements" and herbs, not diluted, and do, in fact have "actual physioligical negative side effects" and make people sick. The days of diluted sugar pills haven't been what "alternative medicine" has been about for over a century. Some of these substances used might someday be the early forerunners to new allopathic drugs, once tested, but prior to that point they are neither safe nor effective nor adequately understood and quite unethical for anyone to put on a white coat and administer. I assume that's the point the person who drugged the above-referenced conference was trying to make by poisoning them. There are, of course, better ways of getting your point across but as you can see from this thread there will always be people who are entrenched in the idea that alternative medicine is legit simply because because numerous members of the public will line up for a magic cure-all pill.

Alternative medicine might have a few tricks up its sleeves. But homeopathy, by definition, is the use of homeopathic medicine, which, by definition, is useless because it relies on serial dilutions that leave no active ingredient.

 

[Law2Doc]

Alternative medicine might have a few tricks up its sleeves. But homeopathy, by definition, is the use of homeopathic medicine, which, by definition, is useless because it relies on serial dilutions that leave no active ingredient.

See my post above. This isn't what is practiced anymore -- went out of vogue a century ago. The people who call themselves practitioners of alternative medicine use other ingredients now. The argument here is focusing on a historic definition of homeopathy rather than today's incarnation.

 

[Mad Jack]

See my post above. This isn't what is practiced anymore -- went out of vogue a century ago. The people who call themselves practitioners of alternative medicine use other ingredients now,

Homeopathic medicine is still practiced very much to this day. He'll, you can go to CVS and pick up homeopathic treatments that list the number of dilutions. Alternative medicine practitioners and naturopaths sometimes use homeopathic medicine, depending on their level of comfort with it. One of my friends and former co-workers got her ND at University of Bridgeport, and swears by homeopathic treatments of the traditional variety, with dilutions and frequencies and all that nonsense. It's a big part of their curriculum.

 

[Law2Doc]

See my post above. This isn't what is practiced anymore -- went out of vogue a century ago. The people who call themselves practitioners of alternative medicine use other ingredients now. The argument here is focusing on a historic definition of homeopathy rather than today's incarnation.

its perplexing that people keep falling back onto an antiquated definition. sort of like telling someone that driving a certain route is dangerous, and them replying that their horse drawn carriage doesnt go that fast.

 

[Law2Doc]

Homeopathic medicine is still practiced very much to this day. He'll, you can go to CVS and pick up homeopathic treatments that list the number of dilutions. Alternative medicine practitioners and naturopaths sometimes use homeopathic medicine, depending on their level of comfort with it. One of my friends and former co-workers got her ND at University of Bridgeport, and swears by homeopathic treatments of the traditional variety, with dilutions and frequencies and all that nonsense. It's a big part of their curriculum.

Nobody sticks with this as their only arrow in their alternative medicine quiver. If they did it would perhaps be a non issue. But in fact it's subsumed into the broader category of alternative medicine.

 

[Mad Jack]

Nobody sticks with this as their only arrow in their alternative medicine quiver. If they did it would perhaps be a non issue. But in fact it's subsumed into the broader category of alternative medicine.

There actually are still pure homeopaths out there, and many people still use homeopathy as their primary prescription in the naturopathic world.

http://www.homeopathyworksnyc.com/services_con.html

Perfect example. This particular practitioner sticks entirely to the Materia Medica, basically the bible of homeopathy.

http://www.ndhomeopathy.com/Index.aspx

Here's another guy that uses homeopathy as his primary mode of treatment for everything from comas to cancer.

http://health.cvs.com/GetContent.aspx?token=f75979d3-9c7c-4b16-af56-3e122a3f19e3&chunkiid=38314
http://health.cvs.com/GetContent.aspx?token=f75979d3-9c7c-4b16-af56-3e122a3f19e3&chunkiid=38449

CVS has some rather exhaustive material on homeopathy on their website, including a list of homeopathic treatments for basically every ailment, most of which require 30x dilutions, pretty much guaranteeing there is zero of the original material in the final product. The number of NDs out there that use homeopathy, a truly worthless modality, as a mainstay of treatment is startling. Sure, the ones that focus on nutrition and natural remedies might have some utility, as they can improve people's health via diet, exercise, and proven herbal remedies like St. John's Wort, but homeopathy- which is different than alternative medicine or naturopathy- is bull**** in ever way.

 

[Kaustikos]

There actually are still pure homeopaths out there, and many people still use homeopathy as their primary prescription in the naturopathic world.

http://www.homeopathyworksnyc.com/services_con.html

Perfect example. This particular practitioner sticks entirely to the Materia Medica, basically the bible of homeopathy.

http://www.ndhomeopathy.com/Index.aspx

Here's another guy that uses homeopathy as his primary mode of treatment for everything from comas to cancer.

http://health.cvs.com/GetContent.aspx?token=f75979d3-9c7c-4b16-af56-3e122a3f19e3&chunkiid=38314
http://health.cvs.com/GetContent.aspx?token=f75979d3-9c7c-4b16-af56-3e122a3f19e3&chunkiid=38449

CVS has some rather exhaustive material on homeopathy on their website, including a list of homeopathic treatments for basically every ailment, most of which require 30x dilutions, pretty much guaranteeing there is zero of the original material in the final product. The number of NDs out there that use homeopathy, a truly worthless modality, as a mainstay of treatment is startling. Sure, the ones that focus on nutrition and natural remedies might have some utility, as they can improve people's health via diet, exercise, and proven herbal remedies like St. John's Wort, but homeopathy- which is different than alternative medicine or naturopathy- is bull**** in ever way.

You're enjoying this, aren't you? lol

Sent from my One using Tapatalk

 

[MatCauthon]

There actually are still pure homeopaths out there, and many people still use homeopathy as their primary prescription in the naturopathic world.

http://www.homeopathyworksnyc.com/services_con.html

Perfect example. This particular practitioner sticks entirely to the Materia Medica, basically the bible of homeopathy.

http://www.ndhomeopathy.com/Index.aspx

Here's another guy that uses homeopathy as his primary mode of treatment for everything from comas to cancer.

http://health.cvs.com/GetContent.aspx?token=f75979d3-9c7c-4b16-af56-3e122a3f19e3&chunkiid=38314
http://health.cvs.com/GetContent.aspx?token=f75979d3-9c7c-4b16-af56-3e122a3f19e3&chunkiid=38449

CVS has some rather exhaustive material on homeopathy on their website, including a list of homeopathic treatments for basically every ailment, most of which require 30x dilutions, pretty much guaranteeing there is zero of the original material in the final product. The number of NDs out there that use homeopathy, a truly worthless modality, as a mainstay of treatment is startling. Sure, the ones that focus on nutrition and natural remedies might have some utility, as they can improve people's health via diet, exercise, and proven herbal remedies like St. John's Wort, but homeopathy- which is different than alternative medicine or naturopathy- is bull**** in ever way.

Yes, homeopathy is still, especially in Europe and India. These are 30x + dilutions that follow the old homeopathic principles that Law2doc keeps trying to say aren't being used anymore. There are more modern forms of homeopathy that have been utilized, especially from Germany, but they still utilize dilutions.

Hahnemann's teachings are still being used and applied to this day. There are many naturopaths and even MDs that use them. Some of the alternative medicine journals, such as the Townsend Letter, have dedicated columns to classical homeopathy. It certainly isn't dead.

 

[Bryan O’Blivion]

No, homeopathy is not dead, it is a lucrative/low risk industry, is actively practiced exclusively by said homeopaths, naturopaths, and the occasional "holistic" MD. Dr. Bill Gray comes to mind. He promoted a homeopathic remedy for Ebola recently: http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/08/doctor-claims-to-have-a-homeopathic-electronic-treatement-for-ebola/

It is popularly employed by practitioners, and fervently endorsed by believers, even in the face of large scale investigations demonstrating no meaningful effect beyond placebo: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/cam02a_information_paper.pdf

What is surprising is that anyone endorses homeopathy as a physiological mechanism in the treatment of disease any more than attributing the thermodynamics of an internal combustion engine to the theory of phlogiston. Who knows, maybe that is marketable, too. I could see it sold as a fuel additive at NAPA.

It will be interesting to see if a dilute remedy for 2,5-dimethoxy-4-ethylphenethylamine intoxication ever comes of this.

In all fairness, it does sound like it was an interesting and memorable conference.