Modern Medicine vs Homeopathy - Part 1

Well, well, modern medicine gets caught at its owna privileged position to finance detractive campaigns
game. Turns out, with financial pressures on the Britishagainst homeopathy by manipulating the media as well
health system and long delays in delivering care (whichas academic institutions and the medical establishment.
paradoxically has produced better health amongThe basic argument against homeopathy is that in
middle-age British than US males, i.e. less doctoring =some controlled clinical trials, comparison with
better health).conventional treatments shows that its effects are not
British docs are disparaging homeopathy (a system forsuperior to those of placebo. However, the placebo
treating disease based on the administration of diluteeffect is nevertheless a 'cure' and, as such, worthy of
doses of a chemical that in massive amountsfurther investigation and analysis.
produces symptoms in healthy individuals similar toIt is concluded that no arguments presently exist
those of the disease itself.)against homeopathy and that the recurrent campaigns
One British doctor told the London Times that theagainst it represent the specific interests of the
National Health Service is funding "bogus" therapiespharmaceutical industry which, in this way, strives to
while patients struggle to get drugs like Herceptin.protect its profits from the "threat" of a safer, more
The problem here is that Herceptin is a bogus drug,effective, and much less expensive treatment
foisted upon the world with marginal benefits (maybemodality." [Medical Science Monitor 11: SR27-31, 2005]
2-3 months added survival) for desperate cancerLest You Be Swayed
patients at unprecedented cost (~$50,000 per course).Lest you be swayed by the homeopathic physicians,
Meanwhile, Prince Charles has thrown the weight ofwho do have an argument against the harsh
Royalty towards unorthodox medicine. So it's themedicines used by conventional medicine, some of the
doctors versus the Prince, which would not makemost recent reports show that homeopathy is
much of a novel or movie.ineffective against anxiety disorders [Journal Clinical
The Homeopathic Debate RagesPsychiatry 64: 282-87, 2003], attention deficit
Dr. Michael Baum, emeritus professor of surgery athyperactivity disorders [Journal Alternative
University College London, says alternative medicineComplementary Medicine 11:799-806, 2005], or
was being promoted despite a lack of evidence andchildhood upper respiratory infections. [British Journal
"at a time when the NHS is under intense pressure."Clinical Pharmacology 59: 447-55, 2005] when
The doctors describe homeopathy as an "implausiblecompared against placebo.
treatment for which over a dozen systematic reviewsPlacebo Effect Versus Molecular Shadows
have failed to produce convincing evidence ofA British doctor aptly writes: "Homeopathy is a popular
effectiveness". [BBC News May 23, 2005]but implausible form of medicine. Contrary to many
A more favorable review from this side of the Atlanticclaims by homeopaths, there is no conclusive evidence
says:that highly dilute homeopathic remedies are different
"There is evidence from randomized, controlled trialsfrom placebos." [Trends Pharmacological Science 26:
that homeopathy may be effective for the treatment547-48, 2005]
of influenza, allergies, postoperative ileus, and childhoodAh, and now we get to the heart of the debate, the
diarrhea. Evidence suggests that homeopathy isclaim that homeopathy is no more effective than
ineffective for migraine, delayed-onset muscleplacebo, an assertion also made in the British Journal
soreness, and influenza prevention.Lancet in August of 2005. [Lancet 366: 726-32, 2005]
There is a lack of conclusive evidence on theThe Lancet report calls for an end to the practice of
effectiveness of homeopathy for most conditions.homeopathy. The Italian doctors call for an end to
Homeopathy deserves an open-minded opportunity toallopathy.
demonstrate its value by using evidence-basedHowever, conventional medicine maintains that the
principles, but it should not be substituted for provenplacebo effect is "real" and that this mysterious and
therapies." [Annals Internal Medicine 138: 393-99, 2003]unexplainable effect must be considered in clinical trials
Two doctors in Italy enter the debate by saying:of any therapy.
"Throughout its over 200-year history, homeopathyHomeopathists claim their ever-so dilute medicines
has been proven effective in treating diseases for(diluted to the point of being undetectable by the most
which conventional medicine has little to offer.sophisticated methods of chemical analysis) leave
However, given its low cost, homeopathy has alwaysbehind a molecular shadow that activates a healing
represented a serious challenge and a constant threatresponse. So each side of the argument has its own
to the profits of drug companies. Moreover, since drugOuija board.
companies represent the most relevant source ofThis article is continued in part 2.
funding for biomedical research worldwide, they are in