Video: James Randi Explains Homeopathy

[Queen Bee]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/BWE1tH93G9U&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/BWE1tH93G9U&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1</a>

An interesting and informative lecture on homeopathy.

[Andy]

Good description, James Randi is not a good joke teller. Sound advice to avoid being scammed and wasting money.

I guess the homeopaths use tap water? I used to know a homeopath, everything he did was against the norm.

[Menard]

At the time I tried to listen, I tried several times and could only get the first 5 seconds; of course, that was the moment that the remote server decided to go down for several hours and I couldn't connect to the internet anyway.

I don't want to bother again, but could someone capsulize Randi's explanation for me?

[Andy]

I don't want to bother again, but could someone capsulize Randi's explanation for me?

Basically, he says that the cure is based on finding what caused the problem, then getting hold of that substance and diluting it many times. Then he presents scientific explanations about how many molecules of the original substance will be left in the dilution.

Also he asked a prominent scientist for an analogy and he came up with a grain of rice in a sphere the size of our solar system.

So it was all about ridiculing the logic of the power of the cure being more powerful, the more the problem substance is diluted and then administered to the patient.

It was not about attacking all forms of alternative medicine but rather the logical absurdity of expecting a level of dilution beyond that where a molecule of the original substance to be present is likely. Avogadro's law was quoted where it is something like 25 dilutions before all traces of the original substance should be gone, but in Homeothapy they go as high as 1000 if I remember rightly.

To add my own input: the water used to dilute will be adding many extra substances to the mix beyond the original substance. Also, the cleanliness of the jars and bottles will come into play. Just try home-brewing wine and you will know what I mean.

[Menard]

Old story.

I've found the degree of dilution to be taken to extremes to the point, IMO, that it doesn't seem likely that the dilution would even contain one molecule of the original substance.

Really not certain why Randi would want to bother with an old argument like that, unless he's getting paid by some pharmaceutical company.

IMO, I think the dilutions go too far at a point, but Homeopathy has about the same success/fail ratio as Allopathy and any other field of medicine.

[Andy]

Really not certain why Randi would want to bother with an old argument like that,

I think he makes his living from disproving things in his eyes and to me comes across as a bit boring like a lecturer. I thought he was a magician, maybe he should go back to entertaining people more and take a pay cut?

[Queen Bee]

Between his books and entertainment career, I think Randi is successful enough to where he doesn't have to worry about money any more. (With the exception of lawsuits, that is. ) His main focus these days is exposing frauds. I think it is important to have individuals like Randi in our country, especially since many Americans are gullible and easily manipulated.

An interesting sidenote: He currently offers a $1,000,000 dollar prize to anyone who can reproduce purported psychic/spiritual abilities under proper testing conditions.

The Homeopathy lecture is 7 years old, but it still serves as a useful argument against current distribution of homeopathic substances. Much of what is still available in stores is homeopathic, including the annoyingly famous Head On.

Pet stores carry entire lines of homeopathic medicine. I was surprised recently to see anxiety medicine for canines that claimed to cure the dog's "fear of thunderstorms, fireworks, and loud noises."

Until consumers are properly informed, I would be hesitant to label the argument as outdated. Many people in the younger generations do not know what homeopathy is. I posted it here because I enjoyed the analogies. And also, I'm a fan of James Randi.

[Andy]

The placebo effect of homoeopathy should not be ignored. Us marketers need this kind of thing to stay alive in the minds of consumers.

Like the health benefits of breakfasting at Mac Doughnuts

[Menard]

I've always liked Randi, formerly the Amazing Randi, but I cannot see a reason outside of financial motivation from pharmaceutical companies for going after Homeopathy. Homeopathy is not a system that has come about in just the past few years; the system of medicine was named and essentially defined by Samuel Hahnemann in the late 1700s. Hahnemann was also the one who gave the name of Allopathy to traditional western slaughter...er...scuse me...medicine.

Many of the advances in so-called traditional medicine came from Homeopathy. Immunization is directly from Homeopathy: to deliver a like strain of the disease into the patient to cause their body to recognize and build defenses against the disease before it is subjected to it.

The AMA exists to support the pharmaceutical companies and will keep treatments out of this country that threaten less effective but more expensive treatments developed by the pharmaceutical companies. There have been cancer treatments developed using Homeopathic principles that, despite any effectiveness in treating the disease, will never make it to these shores because it is not profitable to the pharmaceutical companies.

Yes, any company can put out a bottle of water with food coloring and call it a Homeopathic medicine. Many of these are, or are based on, actual Homeopathic tinctures, but that doesn't mean much.

Homeopathic doctors, not quacks calling themselves such, will customize the treatment to the patient based on a lengthy interview process; an interview process that Allopathic doctors would do well to use, but their treatments are often carbon copied and don't take the individual into consideration.

There are Homeopathic preparations that will be effective, as well there are traditional medicines and herbs that work as well, depending on their use and if they are appropriate for the condition and the patient.

If Randi wants to do finger pointing at over the counter medicines, perhaps he should step away from the pharmaceutical companies and look at them with skepticism. I see all kinds of treatments for coughs and colds that are advertised as 'it soothes, quiets, and comforts' and have yet to find one that actually does that. If you want to consider Homeopathic treatments as quackery, have you considered how much of what is available and advertised from traditional medicine is simply not effective?

I am personally into herbalism and nutritional medicine, even some degrees into preventive medicine. Herbalism itself is not necessarily Allopathic or Homeopathic, as it depends on how one uses the herbs. Nutritional medicine is fortifying the body with the nutrients it needs, especially if it is taxed with illness. Many traditionalists will scoff at vitamins, herbs, and supplements and simply say that all one needs is a doctor, and a sizable bank account, to be well.

I frankly don't use Homeopathic tinctures, but they are no more or less valid or pipe dreams that traditional treatments.

[Queen Bee]

If Randi wants to do finger pointing at over the counter medicines, perhaps he should step away from the pharmaceutical companies and look at them with skepticism. I see all kinds of treatments for coughs and colds that are advertised as 'it soothes, quiets, and comforts' and have yet to find one that actually does that. If you want to consider Homeopathic treatments as quackery, have you considered how much of what is available and advertised from traditional medicine is simply not effective?

I have noticed that a lot of medication never works as promised. Cold/flu medicine never worked for me. It only made me feel intoxicated. Never once did I think, "Hey, I feel much better now. I'm so glad I took THIS stuff."

I find that simple things like home-made chicken soup, lots of fluids and rest are the best remedies for a cold.

I have also taken antidepressants and epilepsy medication that only exacerbated my symptoms. If the medication didn't work, my doctor would hand me something else. I was on one medication, Lamictal, that served as both an antiepileptic and treatment for bipolar disorder. The reason this medication was used to treat two completely separate disorders evades me. All I know is that, during the months that I took the medication, I had more seizures and I developed a sensitivity to milk that still haunts me.

Many traditionalists will scoff at vitamins, herbs, and supplements and simply say that all one needs is a doctor, and a sizable bank account, to be well.

I only "got better" after I stopped listening to doctors. I started consuming large amounts of fruits and vegetables, exercised more, and avoided known seizure triggers. I do not take supplements... I try my best to fulfill my nutritional needs with a healthy diet. I am especially fond of fresh carrots.

I frankly don't use Homeopathic tinctures, but they are no more or less valid or pipe dreams that traditional treatments.

I would agree with this.

I do not know why Randi has chosen to attack homeopathy rather than traditional medicines... he makes mention of them ocassionally, but he has not (to my knowledge) dedicated entire lectures to their usage.

I think perhaps he spreads himself too thin. One man is only capable of so much.

His more recent focus has been on people and religious organizations... you can read some of his rants here:
http://www.randi.org/joom/swift.html/index.php

[Andy]

Me and my family don't get ill.

We just eat good food, avoid stress and talk to each other etc.

When I used to work in the office, one of my colleagues found it hard to believe that I never got admitted to hospital with a disease or illness.

To stay healthy I eat any kind of food, drink alcohol daily, run, enjoy sensual pleasure as much as possible, look into the distance a lot to exercise my eyes and be positive in my thinking. Also, I tend to avoid the people that have a negative perspective on life. Some tips for you based on 45 years of life experience 

[Queen Bee]

The placebo effect of homoeopathy should not be ignored. Us marketers need this kind of thing to stay alive in the minds of consumers.

I am surprised by how much the mind has influence over an individual's symptoms. I am sure that medications like Head-On work for some people. If I have a headache, sometimes ignoring it works as well as aspirin. Not always, but sometimes.

I read something in Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World" (1995) recently that struck me:

"...Consider the nausea and vomiting that frequently accompany the chemotherapy given to cancer and AIDS patients. Nausea and vomiting can also be caused psychogenically—for instance by fear. The drug ondansetron hydrochloride greatly reduces the incidence of these symptoms; but is it actually the drug or the expectation of relief? In a double-blind study 96 percent of the patients rated the drug effective. So did 10 percent of the patients taking an identical looking placebo."

If the "placebo effect" could work for a few cancer patients, how much more for someone with a simple headache or stressed muscles?

To stay healthy I eat any kind of food, drink alcohol daily, run, enjoy sensual pleasure as much as possible, look into the distance a lot to exercise my eyes and be positive in my thinking. Also, I tend to avoid the people that have a negative perspective on life. Some tips for you based on 45 years of life experience

This is some good advice! I have been working towards making some sincere life improvements over the last several months. I have my negative moments (usually due to a succession of poorly timed and unseemly events), but in general I try to stay positive. I agree that negative individuals should be avoided. I recently ended several unhealthy "friendships" because of this. The sense of "freedom" and gratification accompanied by this decision has been overwhelming.

Some people simply love being unhappy, and it has little to do with bad circumstances or misfortune. I did my best to improve their lives, but much of my effort was rejected or ignored. And many times, whether intentional or not, I became the target of abuse.

...enough rants for today, I guess.

[Menard]

The reason this medication was used to treat two completely separate disorders evades me.

That would be because one of the disorders it treats is actually a side effect of the medication and not its intended purpose, originally.


One of my favorite authors, well before he became the 'Pop Doctor' he is today, is Andrew Weil. The first book I read by him was The Natural Mind which was along the lines of a reflection on psychedelics and drug use. Other books of his I have enjoyed and recommend include From Chocolate to Morphine, The Marriage of the Sun and Moon, and Health and Healing.

One of the stories he relates which led to his dissatisfaction and eventual withdraw from the medical community was about drug testing in a sanitarium where he was one of the doctors on hand and they were giving the patients a test drug intended as something along the lines of an anti-psychotic or anti-depressant (something like that). The drug produced no results for its intended purpose, at least not to any quantifiable use, but it cause an increase in the frequency of urination. The drug company took the side effects reported and re-marketed the drug as a diuretic.

There are a number of drugs that are marketed or simply used for their side effects rather than their intended purpose. Drugs that stimulate hair growth came from blood pressure medication that had a side effect of causing unwanted hair growth.

You can see a problem here that not only do these chemicals have side effects when used as intended, if used for its side effect, what kind of side effects are presented by the chemicals original nature?

The drug companies are often* more interested in selling their chemicals than whether it is actually beneficial to someone.

*I say often as they do make some drugs that do work very well for their intended purpose or at least provide some degree of relief for a patient.

[Menard]

I am surprised by how much the mind has influence over an individual's symptoms. I am sure that medications like Head-On work for some people. If I have a headache, sometimes ignoring it works as well as aspirin. Not always, but sometimes.


If the "placebo effect" could work for a few cancer patients, how much more for someone with a simple headache or stressed muscles?

The placebo effect works because we are neither mind nor body separate. We are organisms in which the mind and body work in chorus as an integrated whole.

A cure is not in a pill or a doctor, but is in the body. The body, mind included, can heal itself, and does.

When we have a fever, runny nose, coughing, etc. this is how the body deals with an invader and gets rid of the bad stuff. High temperatures kill off many invaders, so the body increases its temperature. Sinuses and other glands easily get infected and the body causes the nose to run, the eyes to tear, the skin to sweat; all to expel something that doesn't belong and rid the body of toxins.

Though the body does this, it needs help; either in getting rid of the bad stuff, or in recognizing it.

We use expectorants to improve the ability of expelling mucus from the lungs by causing flem to loosen. Some may use peppers or other treatments which increase sweating and thus expel toxins more rapidly.

During the Black Plague, a number of bad treatments were used to treat people. Primary among these was bleeding people as it was thought that the bad stuff was in the blood and therefore removing blood would get rid of the bad stuff; it got rid of people instead. The clue was in the boils that would form on the skin of those infected. The boils contained the infection that the body fought off, but the problem was it could not completely expel the infection without some help. The Arabs discovered that lancing the boils and allowing them to drain would assist in getting rid of the infection. The cure was not lancing the boils; the cure was in the body healing itself, but it needed the assistance of the lancings.


The body, though, doesn't always recognize what is attacking it. There are stories of tribes being near wiped out by a simple cold that a traveler brought with them simply because they had never had any such contact with that strain and their bodies were unprepared for it.

Quinine has been used and still is used for the treatment of Malaria. Because it is a chemical which attacks the disease? No. Because it, if used is enough quantity, will produce the same symptoms as Malaria. It was discovered that by using Quinine, the body would begin to fight the Malaria.

This is what Hahnemann and others had discovered and used to advance scientific research into medicine rather than savagery. Often the body needs help in fighting infection and organic disorders. This can be as simple as fortifying it with good nutritional practices to prevent such problems. This can also be in assisting it in getting rid of bad stuff so it can more effectively carry out the healing process. It can also be in getting the body to recognize what is going on with it and more properly fight it off.

It is entirely feasible, IMO, that the body can heal itself of cancer and other disorders. We know that there are recommended dietary habits which reduce the likelihood of certain diseases.

If the body can prevent something from happening under the right conditions, what's to prevent it from reversing something and curing itself under the right conditions?

That would be the lack of the right conditions.

People have effected cures using herbal treatments, diets, and improvements of lifestyles, even faith healing, but none of this was a cure, it was just something that provided the right conditions for the body to be able to do what it does...heal itself.

[Menard]

Some tips for you based on 45 years of life experience 

You might want to put some specs on old man; you accidentally typed a '4'.