CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

We went to a visit to a homeopathy company and laboratory the other day for one of my subjects and I was wondering what everyone thought about it.

From Wikipedia:
Homeopathy is a form of alternative medicine. Homeopathic practitioners maintain that an ill person can be treated using a substance that can produce, in a healthy person, symptoms similar to those of the illness. According to homeopaths, serial dilution, with shaking between each dilution, removes the toxic effects of the "remedy" while the qualities of the substance are retained by the diluent (water, sugar, or alcohol). The end product is often so diluted that it is indistinguishable from pure water, sugar or alcohol.

My brother-in-law who is a pastor at my church isn’t a fan of homeopathy, due to the fact that it is apparently due to the “spiritâ€

I have a friend who was into all that. She's kinda chilled about it since it didn't really seem to have much more than a placebo effect... I'm no expert on the subject though.

It's fake, new age junk.

Here in the USA at least, "homeopathic remedies" are nothing but a single ingredient, dilluted with water several times. I know someone who swears by it, but then again, she also thinks vaccines are poisonous.

from my understanding I thought that homeopathic stuff was like natural ingrediants. I forget who it's by but my mom and I take an allergy med called sabydil (sp?) it's like an all natural thing. In all honesty....it works better than anything else I've ever tried. Not sure if that's what you're talking about.

It all depends on how you utilize the compounds put forth, and what your feeling on what God has provided for the earth is.

I'm one who believes in a combination of both. Homeopathic remedies to take on the everyday stuff like sore muscles, preventing or reducing the effects or longetivity of a cold, etc. And major doctor-type stuff for the more serious issues, from cat scratch fever to cancer.

GeneD (post: 1256302) wrote:The end product is often so diluted that it is indistinguishable from pure water, sugar or alcohol.

If it is indistinguishable from water, sugar or alcohol than it is water, sugar or alcohol. The only pure thing is the snake oil.

My brother-in-law who is a pastor at my church isn’]

Most of what I've head about isn't so much explicitly spiritual as it is rooted in a kind of "magical thinking" that reflects a very pre-scientific psychology (and also reflects natural ideas in very young children).

So does anyone have any opinions? Has anyone used homeopathic remedies? I haven’t myself so I wouldn’t know, but a lot of people this it’s just a “placebo effect”.

It's hokum, and dangerous hokum at that since it might prevent people from seeking real medical treatment. There have been a number of perfectly preventable deaths because of this stuff, a lot them of children whose parents got taken in by this.

Orac over at "Respectful Insolence" has written quite few articles on homeopathy e.g.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/03/the_frontier_science_of_homeopathy.php
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/10/homeopathy_deconstructed_in_the_faseb_jo.php
http://scienceblogs.com/terrasig/2007/11/lesson_1_homeopathy_is_not_her.php

Technomancer (post: 1256312) wrote:Orac over at "Respectful Insolence" has written quite few articles on homeopathy e.g.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/03/the_frontier_science_of_homeopathy.php
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/10/homeopathy_deconstructed_in_the_faseb_jo.php
http://scienceblogs.com/terrasig/2007/11/lesson_1_homeopathy_is_not_her.php

Orac is a great man. He is more or less an expert.

Seems like something Tom Cruise would make another propaganda video supporting...

Totally bogus. Sometimes it does work out, such as in the case of digitalis, but usually not (Note: NOBODY attempt to self medicate with digitalis unless dying sounds fun to you.)
Although there are plenty of natural remedies that work fine, remember all medicine was straight from nature to start with, homeopathic reasoning is illogical to say the least, it would never stand up to any actual scientific trial.

If homeopathy is according to the above-given definition, then no.

I do enjoy reading through a book on herbs that we have...basically, it talks about different herbs and what each does for the body, and for some odd reason I find it fascinating. o_o Don't ask, I just do. (Not to mention I found out green tea is good for more than just the cancer-preventing antioxidants). Anyways, I do believe that there are various plants out there that God gave us as all-natural cures. After all, people didn't pop Tylenol hundreds of years ago when they had a headache.

Homeopathy, I do not agree with. It is not logical--"let's introduce this harmful substance into your body so it will balance out what's bothering you".
But herbs and plants are proven to aid in health. The use of herbs and other plants for medicinal purposes is different from homeopathy. It is Herbalism.
Copied from Wikipedia:
"Herbalism is a traditional medicinal or folk medicine practice based on the use of plants and plant extracts. Herbalism is also known as botanical medicine, medical herbalism, herbal medicine, herbology, and phytotherapy. Sometimes the scope of herbal medicine is extended to include fungi and bee products, as well as minerals, shells and certain animal parts."
I learned about one medicinal plant in my Range Management class. It's commonly called the toothache plant --chewing its leaves causes numbness in your mouth and salivation --just like the numbing solution they put in your mouth at the dentist. It was used to treat toothache back in the day.

Way cool. It's awesome to see and learn about all these things God set up for us, you know?

Sheenar (post: 1256338) wrote:Homeopathy, I do not agree with. It is not logical--"let's introduce this harmful substance into your body so it will balance out what's bothering you".
But herbs and plants are proven to aid in health. The use of herbs and other plants for medicinal purposes is different from homeopathy. It is Herbalism.
Copied from Wikipedia:
"Herbalism is a traditional medicinal or folk medicine practice based on the use of plants and plant extracts. Herbalism is also known as botanical medicine, medical herbalism, herbal medicine, herbology, and phytotherapy. Sometimes the scope of herbal medicine is extended to include fungi and bee products, as well as minerals, shells and certain animal parts."
I learned about one medicinal plant in my Range Management class. It's commonly called the toothache plant --chewing its leaves causes numbness in your mouth and salivation --just like the numbing solution they put in your mouth at the dentist. It was used to treat toothache back in the day.

I was about to say something similar. Homeopathy != herbalism; they are often mixed up.

Herbalism sounds neat; homeopathy sounds like a crock.

THE EVOLUTION OF MEDICINE

"I have a sore throat."

2000 BC : Eat this root.
1200 AD : That root is heathen, say this prayer.
1500 AD : That prayer is superstition, drink this elixir.
1800 AD : That elixir is snake oil, take this pill.
1900 AD : That pill is ineffective, take this antibiotic.
2000 AD : That antibiotic is artificial, eat this root.

Nate (post: 1256565) wrote:THE EVOLUTION OF MEDICINE

"I have a sore throat."

2000 BC : Eat this root.
1200 AD : That root is heathen, say this prayer.
1500 AD : That prayer is superstition, drink this elixir.
1800 AD : That elixir is snake oil, take this pill.
1900 AD : That pill is ineffective, take this antibiotic.
2000 AD : That antibiotic is artificial, eat this root.

Nate for the win.

That's soooo true. XD

I would not quickly discount anything when it comes to the workings of the human body.

There's a bit of difference between a specific remedy having an effect and having a proven effect.

I, for one, love and swear by Airborne, but it isn't scientifically proven to do anything. Does that mean it doesn't?

Perhaps the effects of Airborne on me are psychosomatic. Perhaps they have a good effect on me, but not enough people to laboratory animals to be scientifically verified. I don’t know and I don’t care.

I will say this, I have no faith in homeopathy, but it did not develop out of thin air one day by some guy looking to sell books.

Nate (post: 1256565) wrote:THE EVOLUTION OF MEDICINE

"I have a sore throat."

2000 BC : Eat this root.
1200 AD : That root is heathen, say this prayer.
1500 AD : That prayer is superstition, drink this elixir.
1800 AD : That elixir is snake oil, take this pill.
1900 AD : That pill is ineffective, take this antibiotic.
2000 AD : That antibiotic is artificial, eat this root.

I saw this same "quote" in my notes for this subject today, after I read this post. That was weird.

Frankly I think there are a lot of things we don't know about medicine and the body, but the whole bottle shaking thing made me go lolwut? I mean, they had a machine to close the flap of the cardboard container the bottles go in, but can't have one shaking the bottle up and down a hundred times. Oh, and if they loose count, they have to discard that batch.

GeneD (post: 1256676) wrote: Oh, and if they loose count, they have to discard that batch.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Ok... That was really weird stuff. I felt really bad when your bro-in-law went all spiritual on us abt the stuff. I really respect what he says cuz I know he knows what he's talking about. I had unknowingly used a homeopathic remedy on my ratties as an immune booster cuz the one gets sick the whole time. It worked and I've got the stuff now so I'm not gonna just chuck it cuz it costed a hell of a lot. Although it is really ridiculous to think that shaking a bottle EXACTLY 100 times makes it more effective. But whatever...

Nate (post: 1256565) wrote:THE EVOLUTION OF MEDICINE

"I have a sore throat."

2000 BC : Eat this root.
1200 AD : That root is heathen, say this prayer.
1500 AD : That prayer is superstition, drink this elixir.
1800 AD : That elixir is snake oil, take this pill.
1900 AD : That pill is ineffective, take this antibiotic.
2000 AD : That antibiotic is artificial, eat this root.

XD Nailed it.

Ok. Hello everyone! Reading the aforementioned topic "homeopathy brings a diverse field of opinions from CAA! Whew! Perhaps one or two are for it. Most probably against it. Some are in the middle, many who probably want to stay out of it, who don't know what to think. Well, here's my take. Go read up on it and come to your own conclusions. But there is a topic to which I would like to address. I'm going to use Sheenar's statement at face value. No disrespect to Sheenar: It's not logical- "let's introduce this harmful substance into your body so it will balance out what's bothering you"

Polio vaccine as all vaccines available in the United States are made from and introduce from the original virus to which they are designed protect from. At http://www.hyimmunize.org http://www.whyimmunize.org/pdfs/vacmade.pdf, we find the history of how vaccines are made. In short, what has protected all of us adults and children alike in todays society from the polio virus was actually...the polio virus. What they did was they found a way to kill it, then introduced the "Dead" vaccine into our bodies so our immune systems would attack and fight the dude floating around in our veins. So now our body defense mechanism now "trains" the white blood cells how to kill polio. So when the real polio got to us that wasn't dead, our "soldier" cells said "Oh, you again! Get e'm boys!" and kills the live polio too, thus we aren't affected.

From what I read, homeopathy is not much different. At the website of The National Center of Complimentary and Alternative Medicines (http://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy/#q1), they provide everything you need to know about homeopathy. Personally would I try it? Yup! I would. I've been studying naturopathy medicine and have used myself as a test subject. Homeopathy ain't much different. You would be surprized at some of the results.

I would say, is it ok? Study to show yourself approved. In other words research it out for yourself and draw your own conclusions. Use common sense, and if you are dealing with an emergency, pray, then go see a doctor. But I don't have a problem with it. It's been around for a long, long time. And if it was dangerous, the Food and Drug administration would have done shut it down. That's my take.

Yeah... except that unlike Homeopathy, real medical treatment has a direct scientific basis behind it, or is at least studied to find correlations between "Treatment A" and "Effect B". A Polio vaccination is different. It's been widely studied and proven to be effective.

Homeopathy, in my understanding, has barely any scientific value.

But in vaccines, they usually used a killed or altered virus --so it's not the full-on virus that causes disease --instead, it is rendered not harmful so your body will create antibodies against it.
Homeopathy often involves introducing substances known to cause harmful effects to balance out various ailments based on whatever symptoms you are having.
Totally different from vaccination. Believe me, I know. I've researched the rabies vaccine extensively (was going to intern at a wildlife sanctuary). They do not introduce the live rabies virus into your system--that would kill you --rabies is 99.99999% fatal if post-exposure prophylaxis is not administered after exposure/infection. The virus in the vaccine has been killed so that it cannot cause rabies.From the CDC.
Completely different.

Paul (post: 1256827) wrote:Polio vaccine as all vaccines available in the United States are made from and introduce from the original virus to which they are designed protect from....

From what I read, homeopathy is not much different.

Except that it is extremely different. Your immune system is designed to learn how to recognize antigens. These antigens have a specific relationship to the cause to the disease being vaccinated against (i.e. the virus that causes said disease). The same can't be said for homeopathic treatments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy#Law_of_similars

In the above example, there is no relationship whatsoever between the disease and the treatment. Inducing similar sympthoms does nothing to protect the body against micro-organisms. These notions of "miasms" and "vital forces" and what have you are simply nonsense and don't even come close to replacing what is already known about the causes of disease.

Hell, look at their ideas on dilutions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy#Dilution_and_succussion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy#High_dilutions

Use common sense

I've heard this a lot. "Common sense" applied to science is very often wrong, misinformed or operating well outside the bounds of where it can be applicable.

Technomancer (post: 1256923) wrote:I've heard this a lot. "Common sense" applied to science is very often wrong, misinformed or operating well outside the bounds of where it can be applicable.

Just to flesh this out a bit even further. "Common Sense" when applied to sociology or psychology is also often wrong. Especially when it comes to Sociology.

MBlight (post: 1256806) wrote:I had unknowingly used a homeopathic remedy on my ratties as an immune booster cuz the one gets sick the whole time. It worked and I've got the stuff now so I'm not gonna just chuck it cuz it costed a hell of a lot. Although it is really ridiculous to think that shaking a bottle EXACTLY 100 times makes it more effective. But whatever...

The fact that you use it effectively on your rats might be an argument against the "it's just placebo" viewpoint, since rats won't know they're getting in meds so it shouldn't affect them if it actually doesn't work at all. But I don't know.

What gets me about this and different kinds of alternative meds we've been exposed to in my course, is when they claim that conventional medicine is rubbish and they can cure anything; from a cold to cancer and Aids. Um...I don't think so. No meds humans develop are ever going to be perfect and "all-healing" and if this is what they claim, why aren't we all immortal yet?

Paul wrote:And if it was dangerous, the Food and Drug administration would have done shut it down. That's my take.

Troglitazone is a diabetes drug that was also available abroad at the time the FDA approved it. Post-marketing safety data indicated that the drug had dangerous side-effects (in this case liver failure). The drug was pulled off that market in the UK in 1997, but was not withdrawn by the FDA until 2000, before which time it is claimed that thousands of Americans were injured or killed by the drug.

In the case of Vioxx, a pre-approval study indicated that a group taking the drug had four times the risk of heart attacks when compared to another group of patients taking another anti-inflammatory, naproxen. The FDA approval board accepted the manufacturer's argument that this was due to a previously unknown cardioprotective effect of naproxen, rather than a risk of Vioxx, and the drug was approved.

David Graham, a scientist in the Office of Drug Safety within the CDER, testified to Congress that he was pressured by his supervisors not to warn the public about dangers of drugs like Vioxx.

...tell me again that the FDA would protect us if this was dangerous. Go ahead. Tell me.

Paul (post: 1256827) wrote:It's been around for a long, long time. And if it was dangerous, the Food and Drug administration would have done shut it down. That's my take.

For one thing there are different kinds of dangers. In the case of homeopathic remedies, the danger lies more in ineffectiveness than in any intrinsic harm caused by the "medicine" itself. For another, homeopaths and other quacks are smart enough to know the loopholes, such as including a disclaimer. Unfortuantely, there is also a trend of jurisdictions yielding to political pressure and giving greater legal recognition to homeopathy as a discipline. Remember, government regulations that revolve around scientific and medical matters are ultimately decided upon by politicians and their appointees, and not by competent professionals.[/B]

Nate (post: 1257066) wrote:...tell me again that the FDA would protect us if this was dangerous. Go ahead. Tell me.

The FDA has shown us time and time again that they're pretty much useless.