Rational Veterinary Medicine:
Papers, listed by lead author: N-
Homeopaths often complain that their ideas aren’t accepted simply for reasons of prejudice. Here’s an example of the real thing -
Oberbaum, M., Yaniv, I., Ben-
An underpowered study testing whether the homeopathic brand “TRAUMEEL S” (manufactured by homeopathic giant HEEL) can help relieve the suffering of children suffering from cancer undergoing chemotherapy.
Only 30 patients were tested and it is questionable whether such a small sample can conclusively prove an unscientific tratment can make any difference in an already heart-
Ostermann, J.K., Reinhold, T., and Witt C.M., (2015) Can Additional Homeopathic Treatment Save Costs? A Retrospective Cost-
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the health care costs for patients using additional homeopathic treatment (homeopathy group) with the costs for those receiving usual care (control group)...
CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, additional homeopathic treatment was associated with significantly higher costs. These analyses did not confirm previously observed cost savings resulting from the use of homeopathy in the health care system.
So it’s correct what they say: if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. It’s ridiculously simplistic to claim that just because homeopathic sugar tablets are cheaper than real drugs it would therefore be much cheaper if everyone used homeopathy. Once the indirect costs are taken into account -
Responses: [Edzard Ernst]
Ovelgonne, J.H., Bol, A.W., Hop, W.C. and Van Wijk, R., (1992) Mechanical agitation of very dilute antiserum against IgE has no effect on basophil staining properties Experientia Vol. 48 no. 5 pp. 504-
An attempt to replicate the paper by Davenas et al (a team led by homeopathic apologist, Jaques Benveniste). The original paper had claimed that ultra-
Well, here’s the quote anyway:
“We found no evidence for a different effect of strongly agitated dilutions, compared to dilutions made with minimal physical agitation. In fact, in our hands no effect of extreme dilutions was shown at all. We conclude that the effect of extreme dilutions of anti-
Links: [absract, pubmed]
Overall, K.L. and Dunham, A.E., (2009) Homeopathy and the curse of the scientific method Veterinary Journal Vol. 180 pp141-
A meticulous and painstaking critique of Cracknell and Mills (2008) and the scientific study of canine behaviour in general.
Of the 15 signs of interest in the firework study by Cracknell and Mills (2008), only two or three (‘destructiveness’, ‘elimination’, and possibly ‘self-
The final conclusion of the authors is:
“The ultimate findings of Cracknell and Mills (2008) could, we suggest, be restated as follows:
1. There is no evidence of any effect of the homeopathic 'treatment';
2. There was no effect of treatment using the homeopathic 'treatment';
3. Dogs suffering from fear associated with the noise of fireworks will not benefit from 'treatment' with the homeopathic preparation;
4. The homeopathic preparation will not help fearful dogs who worry about the noise of fireworks.”
Well, who would have thought it?