My friend was young and healthy, and although we were all dismayed to hear of her diagnosis, the cancer was discovered early, giving her a high probability of a successful cure and a long, healthy life.
Sadly, my friend believed in the medical religion called homeopathy. Rather than seeking proper medical treatments that could have (and likely would have) cured her completely, she went to Mexico to a clinic that offered homeopathic treatments. Six months later, quite predictably, she was dead. The homeopathic medicines had absolutely no effect on the cancer. She might as well have stayed home, resigned herself to an early death, and enjoyed a little more time with her husband and two small children.
Why do I call homeopathy a religion? Let's turn the question around and ask, "What is religion?" We'll will discover that homeopathy fits the definition of religion pretty well.
Based on faith. Advocates of homeopathic remedies turn to faith and anecdotes to justify their claims.
Magical forces. A religion claims there are "essences," magical beings (spirits or gods) or other magical forces that can't be measured by science. Homeopathic medicines are said to retain the "essence" of the curative compound, even though there is none of it left in the water.
Anti-science. When science shows that homeopathic remedies are useless, advocates dispute or belittle the scientific studies, or even claim that the scientific method itself is invalid. It's common to hear claims that science is incapable of measuring the spiritual forces that make homeopathy work.
Impossible claims. The fundamental claims of homeopathy violate fundamental rules of chemistry and physics.
Use Anecdotes. Although homeopath advocates deny evidence from large, double-blind scientific studies, they're not adverse to evidence, so long as it's not statistically significant. In other words, they rely on anecdotes (one datum), but reject meaningful statistical samples.
Appeal to desires, not logic. Going hand-in-hand with the anti-science attitudes, homeopathy appeals to what people want to believe, rather than reality. Homeopathy assures people that they can be cured without expensive visits to a doctor, without altering unhealthy lifestyle choices, without painful treatments, and without side effects. It also claims to be able to cure conditions that science-based medicine can't, such as allergies, cancers, arthritis, ageing, impotence, and many others. In fact, perusing a homeopathy web site, it appears that homeopathy can cure everything from broken bones to psychosis.
Unfortunately, the majority of Americans are raised in a religious home, where they are taught from an early age to accept faith, magical forces, impossible miracles, and anecdotal "evidence" without question. These beliefs are directed at Yahweh and Jesus, but more importantly, children are taught to reject the evidence of their senses and the techniques of rational thought.
It's no surprise, then, that this same system of faith-based beliefs is easily transferred to other false claims. Homeopathy isn't very different from any religion.
del.icio.us
reddit
StumbleUpon

6 comments:
First of all, I'm sorry for your loss. It's a tragedy, and it's pure evil that she was told she could be cured, while this was obviously nonsense.
My mother uses homeopathic treatment to help her with stomach problems. Problems that have never been solved with traditional medicine, and somehow, her homeopathic doctor has helped her with it. She now has visibly less problems. I'm sure you wanna call this a placebo effect, but I think that's easy sideline nonsense.
I'm not saying I believe in everything homeopathy is or claims to be. I'm a man of science. But I am observing here (scientific method, no?), that this treatment she gets certainly does have a good and very measurable effect. That doesn't make all homeopathy right, and it doesn't make the claims they make true. But the effect is there, and I can't argue with that.
Just because someone believes in miracles, and throws out normal treatment in favor of something untested, doesn't mean homeopathy in it's entirety is evil. My mother's homeopathic doctor has never told her to quit traditional treatment for anything (but unfortunately, the normal doctors are puzzled and told her: sure, give homeopathic treatment a shot).
I think a few statements you make can be bogus (I can only speak of my mother's case).
Based on faith:
Actually, there's visible and measurable results. No faith involved, in fact my mom is not religious at all (Europe.. you understand).
Use anecdotes:
Anyone's at liberty to do a double-blind test. Even Richard Dawkins had to admit that the patients were doing very very well. His hypothesis was that the homeopathic doctor was giving them time and listened to their problems better than "normal" doctors. That's as far as he's gone in his assertions I think.
Why doesn't anyone do a big huge scale test on this? You make claims it's all utter nonsense, and considering your background, I don't blame you one bit. But back it up with statistics please. If there are none, please push for more scientific experiments on homeopathy. And not just in America and not just with people who claim they can cure cancer with bottles of water (which I agree is utter nonsense).
Ron, thanks for your thoughtful comments.
A couple points. Homeopathy itself is not "evil", just useless. If homeopathy was used alongside real medicine, it would be harmless. But it's not, as illustrated by my friend's death. Homeopathic quacks (am I biased? You bet...) killed her by telling her to avoid scientifically-tested cures.
Second, the story of your mother illustrates the very point I'm trying ot make. Anecdotes make bad science. I'm happy that your mother feels better, but it's not due to the homeopathic remedies she's taking. Perhaps it's the placebo effect, perhaps its the doctor's attention, perhaps the positive outlook she gains has made her change other things in her life that are actually making the difference.
Your question about "Why not double-blind studies" is moot – carefully-controlled studies have been done, and have shown that homeopathic remedies are useless.
Part of the problem is that the theory behind homeopathy is so absurd that serious scientists aren't even interested. It's like if someone said, "Every morning, I go out for my exercise and I like to run on the lake. I walk on water, you know." The claims of homeopathy are no more or less absurd than that, yet if someone claimed to walk on water, we'd seriously consider sending him to a psychiatrist. No scientist would bother to do a "double blind" study on such a plainly false claim.
Science is about exploring the unknown. It's a waste of time and money to investigate claims that can't possibly be true. There are real diseases that need to be cured, environmental problems to solve, a thousand things a scientist can do that will actually advance our knowledge.
To someone not educated in basic chemistry and physics, the claims of homeopathy might seem stronger than a walk-on-water claim. Yet to anyone who has serious scientific credentials, the two claims are equivalent.
Now I'll just wait for the howls about scientific elitism ...
TELL IT LIKE IT IS BROTHER!
I can't stand the sight of homeopathic drugs.
I always tell myself, HOW IS THIS ALONG WITH THE TYLENOL!!!?!?!
"homeopathic drug" is a contradiction in terms.
Homeopathetic is the person who believes in such twaddle...
It's one thing to use them for arthritis or headaches, but cancer is such a time dependent disease that you can't delay the start of proper treatments at all.
I just wrote about this as well since Don Imus is on the radio pushing his Habanero pepper cure for his prostate cancer.
First, apologies for the zombie-thread...
I'm a medical doctor who is slightly bemused at this homoeopathy business. It seems that to accept homeopathy working requires us to ditch a hell of a lot of axioms about medicine, which I'm not comfortable to do. However, here in the UK we have a few homeopathic hospitals, one of which I've had the chance to visit. 3 things I feel I should point out:
1) All the homeopaths are qualified medics, and consultants are advised to be MRCP (members of the Royal College of Physicians - I know this isn't an easy task as I'm going through the MRCP exams myself!).
2) None, as far as I know, are religious, though the hospital promotes some Bhuddist-style meditation to help some patients relax (understandably, as many patients have issues with anxiety or stress).
3) All the practitioners are qualified in, and strongly promote, conventional medicine, and I've seen the dismay on their faces when a patient comes in having refused chemotherapy and asking for IV vitamin C instead.
Homoeopathy may be an elaborate placebo effect, but it seems that - in the tragic case you describe in your blog - the real cause of the woman's death was rejection of conventional medicine, rather than acceptance of an alternative, and it is there that you should perhaps focus your (understandable) frustration.
Post a Comment