... and other stories.
Papers, listed by lead author: V-W
V
“In summary, it can be concluded that there has been a great deal of research on the effectiveness of homeopathy. Much of this research is methodologically weak and justifies no conclusion about the effectiveness of homeopathy. But there has also been good research, from which it is apparent that the effect of homeopathy is no greater than that of placebo.”
A useful summary by a Dutch veterinary surgeon of the state of veterinary homeopathy today.
Links: [original article]
Vickers, A. J., (1999) Independent replication of preclinical research in homeopathy: a systematic review. Forsch Komplementarmed Vol. 6 no. 6 pp. 311-20
“Conclusions:There is a lack of independent replication of any pre-clinical research in homoeopathy. In the few instances where a research team has set out to replicate the work of another, either the results were negative or the methodology was questionable.”
Links: [abstract, pubmed]:[abstract, unbound medline]
Vickers, A. J., Van Haselen, R., and Heger, M., (2001) Can homeopathically prepared mercury cause symptoms in healthy volunteers? A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial J. Altern. Complement. Med. Vol. 7 no. 2 pp. 141-8
“This pilot study failed to find evidence that mercury 12C causes significantly more symptoms in healthy volunteers than placebo... If drug proving phenomena exist, they appear to be rare.”
Links: [abstract - pub med ]
Vickers, A., and Smith, C., (2006) Homoeopathic Oscillococcinum for preventing and treating influenza and influenza-like syndromes Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009 Issue 3
The Cochrane database is one of the most respected resources of its kind in the world -
The call for large sample sizes is significant. Often the conditions where homeopathy publicly claims its best results (what they claim in private is another matter) are mild, self limiting ones where it is difficult to define a proper start and finish time and where the course of the disease is variable and difficult to quantify. "Influenza-like syndromes" fit the bill exactly. Conditions like his generate a lot of statistical "noise" and the more noise there is the more likely it is that error will creep in when the results are interpreted. The only way to overcome this noise and even out variation between individuals is to use larger and larger sample sizes. Until the massively rich homeopathic pharmacies are prepared to invest some of their billions in better research into their products we are stuck with trials which are effectively not fit for purpose.
Links: [pub med]:[full text, Wiley]
Vithoulkas, G., (2008) British media attacks on homeopathy; Are they justified? Homeopathy Vol. 97 no. 2 pp. 103-106
This is George Vithoulakis ticking homeopathic extremists off for believing you can make remedies out of far fetched stuff like moonlight and storms. Yeah, come on guys, what are you thinking; stick to good old dead bees, condoms and dinosaur bones like everyone else, you don’t want to make yourselves sound really stupid now, do you?
Links: [abstract, pubmed]:[full text, pdf, modernhomeopathy.com]
Responses: [rational veterinary medicine]
Responses: [rational veterinary medicine]
W
Walach, H., (1993) Does a highly diluted homeopathic drug act as a placebo in healthy volunteers? Experimental study of Belladonna 30C in a double blind crossover design - a pilot study J. Psychosomatic Res. Vol 37 no. 8 pp. 851-860
‘Is homeopathy a placebo?’ the authors ask, and the answer, in a word, is “Yes”! But that doesn’t stop them twisting the evidence in the abstract to make it sound like it doesn’t!
Links: [abstract pubmed]
Walach, H., Lowes, T., Mussbach, D., Schamell, U., Springer, W., Stritzl, G., Haag, G., (2001) The long-term effects of homeopathic treatment of chronic headaches: one year follow-up and single case time series analysis Br Homeopath J. Vol. 90 no. 2 pp. 63-72
“... There is no indication of a specific, or of a delayed effect of homeopathy.”
Links: [abstract - pub med ]
Walach, H., Koster, H., Hennig, T., Haag, G., (2001) The effects of homeopathic belladonna 30CH in healthy volunteers - a randomized, double-blind experiment Journal of Psychosomatic Research Vol. 50 no. 3, pp. 155-160
A randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled clinical trial with a good number of participants conducted by a prominent homeopath trying to find out whether it is possible to tell the difference between a homeopathic remedy and an inert sugar tablet, exactly the sort of trial that homeopaths are continually clamouring for. The conclusion: “... There is no indication that belladonna 30CH produces symptoms different from placebo or from no intervention. Symptoms of a homeopathic pathogenetic trial (HPT) are most likely chance fluctuations.”. Oops! No wonder this one never appears on homeopathic evidence lists.
Walach, H., (2000) Magic of signs: a non-local interpretation of homeopathy British Homeopathic Journal Vol. 89 pp.127-140. Also published (1999) in Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 291-315.
Homeopaths hate it when sceptics describe homeopathy as magic; they hate it even more when one of their leading proponents does the same. Starting with a discussion of the work of eminent scholar of Jewish mysticism Gershom Scholem who contends that simply telling stories about the achievements of ancient gods enables us to replicate those same achievements, the author goes on to claim about homeopathy, "Although the original substance is diluted, it is still in some way 'present' and effective. This presence, I will contend in this paper, is a magical, not a causal presence... Magical presence and effects are wrought by signs, not by causes. In this sense, homeopathy is effective in a non-
The author also confesses "The pillar of homeopathy, pathogenetic trials rests on shaky ground. The experiments conducted and published since World War II are not very persuasive from a scientific point of view. The ones conducted in the United Kingdom are... not very persuasive either. The experiments which I have conducted myself do not show a clear pattern of different or more symptoms with homeopathic substance than placebo. Modern homeopathic researchers like Jeremy Sherr or David Riley admit in personal discussions that very specific symptoms can be observed with placebo, however, these are rarely published. It seems to be an open secret that true homeopathic symptoms... can also be observed with placebo...". This paper is a real revelation about the true mind-set of the dyed-in-the-wool homeopath. This is homeopathy quietly casting off from reality and serenely sailing away in to the distant firmament; it is telling us, in a series of convoluted nods and winks, that homeopathy has nothing to do with science and everything to do with symbols and signs, ritual and belief. And actually, on that level it has a distinctly refreshing honesty about it.
Walach, H., Jonas, W., and Lewith, G., (2005) Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Lancet, Vol. 366, no. 9503, p. 2081 (this article is a response to Shang et al, 2005)
Walach, H., Jonas, W.B., Ives, J.,D., Van Wijk, R., and Weingartner, O., (2005) Research on Homeopathy: State of the Art, Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine Vol. 11 no. 5, pp. 813-829
Links: [abstract, pubmed]:[full text, pdf, homeopathy.org]
White, A., Slade, P., Hunt, C., Hart, A., Ernst, E., (2003) Individualised homeopathy as an adjunct in the treatment of childhood asthma: a randomised placebo controlled trial Thorax Vol. 58 pp. 317-321
This is a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial of individualised homeopathic treatments, prescribed by experienced homeopathic practitioners, looking at quality of life indices which provides no evidence whatsoever that homeopathic remedies are superior to placebo in children with mild to moderate asthma. So, this is everything a homeopath could possibly wish for in a trial and still it shows that it's about as effective as a fart in a hurricaine (no offence).
Links: [Abstract, BMJ]:[full text, html, BMJ]:[full text, pdf, BMJ]
Wolfensohn, S., (1991) BOOK REVIEW The Homoeopathic Treatment of Small Animals (Principles and Practice) [author Day, C.E.I.], Journal of Small Animal Practice Vol. 32 no. 6 p. 295
“If you must, borrow this book from a library. It will give you some insight into the homoeopath’s mind if you are curious but in this reviewer’s opinion, it has no place on the shelves of a veterinary practice.”
This is a review of arch veterinary homeopath Chris Day’s book, published in the prestigious Journal of Small Animal Practice. The reviewer pulls no punches, at one point stating “[Day] is very keen on what he calls the logic of homoeopathy but his attempts at logical argument are thin and woolly” and describing Day’s peculiar theories about the homeopathic treatment of dental disease as “utter rubbish”. No argument from the chaps at RationalVetMed there.
This is a review of arch veterinary homeopath Chris Day’s book, published in the prestigious Journal of Small Animal Practice. The reviewer pulls no punches, at one point stating “[Day] is very keen on what he calls the logic of homoeopathy but his attempts at logical argument are thin and woolly” and describing Day’s peculiar theories about the homeopathic treatment of dental disease as “utter rubbish”. No argument from the chaps at RationalVetMed there.
Links: [abstract, Wiley]:[full text, pdf JSAP(Wiley)]
| History of RVM |
| The Best They Can Do |
| The Usual Suspects |
| How to look at evidence |
| CAM journals and evidence |
| Scepticism about homeopathy |
| Arguments |
| Acupuncture references |