No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
... According to Professor Edzard Ernst, the Nazis tested homeopathy and obtained results so 'wholly and disastrously negative' [1], German homeopaths have deliberately covered up these findings ever since. ...
... In the last part of his paper [1], Ernst mentions the Donner documents in support of his claim that the Nazi homeopathy trials failed [5-7]. Inspection of these documents shows they amount to no more than personal recollections, regurgitated many years after World War 2, liberally sprinkled with phrases such as 'as far as I recall' ,'if I remember rightly' and so on. ...
... There are more than 1000 websites on Google about this. Years ago, I even wrote an article specifically dedicated to this subject in the UK homeopaths' journal [1], and it was I who decided 18 years ago to publish Donner's detailed eye-witness account of the programme in my journal Perfusion [2][3][4][5]. 'Why now' is therefore a nonsensical question. ...
According to Professor Edzard Ernst, the Nazis tested homeopathy and obtained results so ‘wholly and disastrously negative’ [1], German homeopaths have deliberately covered up these findings ever since.
Why raise the issue of the Third Reich's interest in homeopathy now? It is not as if conventional medicine has not benefited from the results of Nazi research: for example, the tests on concentration camp inmates during the Luftwaffe's experiments on the treatment of hypothermia [2, 3]. So homeopathy is not the only cupboard rattling to the sound of the Third Reich's skeletons.
Claiming to expose ‘the truth about homeopathy’ [1] by calling upon and so appearing to condone acceptability for Nazi research methodology, ignores those in conventional medical circles who still struggle with the ethics of utilizing data obtained via the Third Reich's inhuman bestiality [4]. Therefore, uncritically invoking Nazi research to condemn homeopathy, is arguably unethical.
In the last part of his paper [1], Ernst mentions the Donner documents in support of his claim that the Nazi homeopathy trials failed [5–7]. Inspection of these documents shows they amount to no more than personal recollections, regurgitated many years after World War 2, liberally sprinkled with phrases such as ‘as far as I recall’, ‘if I remember rightly’ and so on. Donner is not only extremely vague, the ‘evidence’ Ernst thinks he has uncovered in these documents amounts to little more than hear-say. Therefore, Ernst's uncritical use of these documents is also unscientific.
Lastly, in asserting that ‘The vast majority of those (reviews) that are rigorous conclude that homeopathic medicines fail to generate clinical effects that are different from those of placebo’ [1] Ernst cites three references: two are to his own papers, while the third is to the 2005 Lancet meta-analysis by Shang et al.[8]. Scientists have criticised this Lancet review [9–14].
There is an important debate going on in the UK about the efficacy and safety of homeopathic remedies. In the balance are the freedom of choice of many patients who use homeopathic treatment, and the fate of five state funded homeopathic hospitals which provide it. Rightly or wrongly, much of this debate is beginning to centre round how much meaning and relevance should be assigned to clinical trial data [15–18]. Professor Ernst's paper does nothing to advance this debate one way or the other.
... Homoeopathy is one of the best-known but most controversial schools of complementary and alternative medicine [7]. Currently practiced in over 100 countries, its inclusion in healthcare delivery systems nonetheless varies greatly. ...
... There was one median (IQR, 1-2) sickness episode in the homoeopathic group during the study period, compared with a median of two (IQR, 2-4) episodes in the conventional group (p < 0.001). Correspondingly, there was a median of seven (IQR,(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14) respiratory sick days in the homoeopathy group during the study period, compared with a median of 14.5 (IQR, 11-21.5) days in the conventionally treated group (p < 0.001). ...
To compare the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life. One hundred eight Indian singleton newborns delivered at 37 to 42 weeks gestation were randomised at birth (1:1) to receive either homoeopathic or conventional primary care for any acute illness over the study period. In the homoeopathic group, conventional medical treatment was added when medically indicated. Clinicians and parents were unblinded. Children in the homoeopathic group experienced significantly fewer sick days than those in the conventional group (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24–0.58; p < 0.001), with correspondingly fewer sickness episodes (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32–0.87; p = .013), as well as fewer respiratory illnesses over the 24-month period. They were taller (F (1, 97) = 8.92, p = .004, partial eta squared = 0.84) but not heavier than their conventionally treated counterparts. They required fewer antibiotics, and their treatment cost was lower.
Conclusion: Homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illnesses in the first 24 months of life. It necessitated fewer antibiotics and its overall cost was lower. This study supports homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, as a safe and cost-effective primary care modality during the first 2 years of life.
Trial registration: Clinical Trial Registry-India (2018/09/015641). https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/login.phpWhat is Known:
• Due to their holistic nature, many Complementary and Alternative Medical (CAM) modalities are not readily amenable to assessment by head-to-head RCT for a given Indication.
• We propose a pragmatic, RCT comparing homoeopathic with conventional medicine as a system.
What is New:
• Homoeopathic was apparently superior to conventional primary care in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illness episodes and was significantly associated with growth in height but not weight and required fewer antibiotics in children from birth to 24 months of age.
... It is known that the placeboeffect is used in homeopathy [6]. It is however possible that some empirical knowledge is successfully used in homeopathy unrelated to its axioms -"Like can be cured with like," "less is more" [7] or the memory of water [8]. ...
... Low-dose impacts may be associated with a higher risk in a state of organ sub-compensation or failure especially in elderly patients. Accordingly, practical recommendations should be based neither on the hormesis as a default approach [55] nor on the "like cures like," "less is more" [7] or other postulates of homeopathy. All clinically relevant effects, including hormetic ones, should be tested by the methods of evidence-based medicine. ...
Related articles:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26712317/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25810501/
More details are in the book: https://novapublishers.com/shop/misconduct-in-medical-research-and-practice/
... For example, Ernst 16 stated that homeopathy is biologically implausible, that its predictions seem to be incorrect, and that clinical evidence is, in most cases, negative; moreover, medical doctors applying homeopathy were said to "prefer mystical thinking to science." 16 The findings of independent systematic reviews of placebo-controlled trials on homeopathy are contradictory; some report that its effects seem to be more than placebo, whereas one review found its effects consistent with placebo. 17 Wayne Jonas et al 17 concluded that "homeopathy deserves an open-minded opportunity to demonstrate its value by using evidence-based principles, but it should not be substituted for proven therapies." ...
... 17,32 Although a recent meta-analysis stated that the findings "are not compatible with the hypothesis that the clinical effects of homeopathy are completely due to placebo," 33 several critics ascribe the beneficial effects of homeopathy to subjective factors, including positive expectancy of patients and greater attention by the therapist. 16,34 In fact, we found that homeopathy users were much more fundamental in their views, as they strongly rejected trust in a scientific rationale of the treatment as important. They were also apparently strongly influenced by fear of the side effects of conventional medicine. ...
... For example, Ernst 16 stated that homeopathy is biologically implausible, that its predictions seem to be incorrect, and that clinical evidence is, in most cases, negative; moreover, medical doctors applying homeopathy were said to "prefer mystical thinking to science." 16 The findings of independent systematic reviews of placebo-controlled trials on homeopathy are contradictory; some report that its effects seem to be more than placebo, whereas one review found its effects consistent with placebo. 17 Wayne Jonas et al 17 concluded that "homeopathy deserves an open-minded opportunity to demonstrate its value by using evidence-based principles, but it should not be substituted for proven therapies." ...
... 17,32 Although a recent meta-analysis stated that the findings "are not compatible with the hypothesis that the clinical effects of homeopathy are completely due to placebo," 33 several critics ascribe the beneficial effects of homeopathy to subjective factors, including positive expectancy of patients and greater attention by the therapist. 16,34 In fact, we found that homeopathy users were much more fundamental in their views, as they strongly rejected trust in a scientific rationale of the treatment as important. They were also apparently strongly influenced by fear of the side effects of conventional medicine. ...
... For example, Ernst 16 stated that homeopathy is biologically implausible, that its predictions seem to be incorrect, and that clinical evidence is, in most cases, negative; moreover, medical doctors applying homeopathy were said to "prefer mystical thinking to science." 16 The findings of independent systematic reviews of placebo-controlled trials on homeopathy are contradictory; some report that its effects seem to be more than placebo, whereas one review found its effects consistent with placebo. 17 Wayne Jonas et al 17 concluded that "homeopathy deserves an open-minded opportunity to demonstrate its value by using evidence-based principles, but it should not be substituted for proven therapies." ...
... 17,32 Although a recent meta-analysis stated that the findings "are not compatible with the hypothesis that the clinical effects of homeopathy are completely due to placebo," 33 several critics ascribe the beneficial effects of homeopathy to subjective factors, including positive expectancy of patients and greater attention by the therapist. 16,34 In fact, we found that homeopathy users were much more fundamental in their views, as they strongly rejected trust in a scientific rationale of the treatment as important. They were also apparently strongly influenced by fear of the side effects of conventional medicine. ...
Although acupuncture and homeopathy both have a theoretical background that refers to immaterial forces difficult to verify, they are nevertheless used and accepted as effective treatments by many individuals.
We intended to investigate whether and how users of acupuncture and homeopathy differ with respect to sociodemographic data, adaptive coping strategies, and attitudes toward complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).
In an anonymous questionnaire survey among 5,830 elderly German health insurants, we identified individuals who used CAM within the last five years.
Acupuncture was used by 10% of the population, homeopathy by 7%, and both by 5%. More men than women used acupuncture, whereas homeopathy was used equally by women and men. Acupuncture users had a reduced physical health status compared to homeopathy users. In most cases, it was not a disappointment with conventional medicine that accounted for CAM usage. Stepwise regression analyses revealed that the best predictors of acupuncture and homeopathy usage were the conviction that CAM is more profound and expends more time, fear of the side effects of conventional medicine, and high scores in the measure of search for information and alternative help. Negative predictors were physical health, male gender, age, and trust in a scientific rationale of treatments.
We found that usage of distinct CAM approaches might depend on particular psychosocial profiles, attitudes, and convictions. In contrast to homeopathy users, acupuncture users seemed to be much more pragmatic and referred more often to an expected scientific background of chosen treatment. Our findings fill a gap of knowledge that needs further attention.
... (Ernst 2010) The article Homeopathy: What Does the 'Best' Evidence Tell Us? and said that discusses the challenges in homeopathy research, emphasizing that systematic reviews often reveal a lack of convincing evidence for its efficacy, highlighting the need for rigorous scientific evaluation. (Ernst 2008) In The Truth About Homeopathy and said that Ernst critically examines the claims of homeopathy, arguing that despite its popularity, there is a lack of robust evidence supporting its effectiveness, and it often performs no better than placebo in clinical trials. (Jonas et al. 2003) The review A Critical Overview of Homeopathy and said that provides an analysis of homeopathy's principles and clinical evidence, acknowledging its historical significance but highlighting the need for more rigorous scientific validation to substantiate its therapeutic claims. ...
Hypothyroidism, a prevalent endocrine disorder, is characterized by insufficient production of thyroid hormones, leading to clinical manifestations such as chronic fatigue, weight gain, cold intolerance, menstrual irregularities, and cognitive sluggishness. “Conventional medical treatment primarily includes lifelong administration of levothyroxine, which often lacks a personalized therapeutic approach and may not adequately address underlying constitutional imbalances. Homeopathy, on the other hand, offers a holistic and individualized treatment paradigm based on the principle of like cures like and the use of ultra-diluted remedies. This study investigates the clinical efficacy of Natrum Muriaticum, a commonly prescribed constitutional remedy in homeopathy, in the management of hypothyroidism. A prospective observational study was conducted on ten patients diagnosed with primary hypothyroidism who exhibited the characteristic mental, emotional, and physical traits aligned with the Natrum Muriaticum profile. These patients were assessed over a six-month period using thyroid function tests (TSH, T3, and T4), symptom score sheets, and subjective patient self-reports. The remedy was administered in individualized potencies with appropriate follow-ups. The findings indicated significant symptomatic relief, improvement in mental-emotional well-being, and favorable regulation of thyroid function parameters in a majority of cases, with no reported adverse effects. These outcomes highlight the potential of homeopathic constitutional treatment to positively influence endocrine balance and improve quality of life in hypothyroid patients.
... Not only should one be aware of the symptoms and indicators that are present, but also of the circumstances in which they worsen or improve ("modality"), the feelings they arouse, the time of day they occur, and other related elements. This phenomenon explains why different people with the same disease may need different homeopathic treatments (Ernst, 2008). The doctor carefully records the patient's medical history and looks at the patient as a whole, considering each person's unique traits, and is not primarily motivated by a strong moral stance. ...
Homeopathy, a significant element of healthcare in the 19th century, has recently experienced a worldwide resurgence. Following a period of gradual decrease, homeopathy is now gaining popularity worldwide, highlighting the pressing necessity for scientific validation of its mode of operation and efficacy. Homeopathy utilizes formulations of medicines that produce similar effects in healthy individuals as the symptoms, clinical signs, and pathological states observed in the sick. Homeopathic medications are manufactured by successive dilutions and shaking and are often administered in potentized forms. Currently, the practical use of homeopathic research in the field of high-altitude medicine for various dynamic and chronic diseases is still in its early stages. With increasing attention to alternative therapeutic approaches, several clinical investigations have been carried out in the field of homeopathy. This chapter provides a concise overview of scientific discoveries and identifies areas that require additional research to develop homeopathic treatments for dynamic and chronic diseases, as well as their underlying physiological circumstances. This chapter provides an evaluation of important homeopathic treatments, such as homeopathic coca, Aloe vera, and other possible options for treating several ailments.
... Soğanla temas edildiğinde göz yaşarması, burun ve göz çevresinde kaşınma ve irritasyon meydana gelir. Benzer belirtileri olan saman nezlesi geçiren hastalara da Allium cepa reçete edilebilir 82 . ...
In the treatment of low back pain, various methods such as physical therapy, drug therapy or surgical
intervention are used but effective treatment cannot always be achieved with these methods.
Complementary and alternative therapy has an important place in the treatment of low back pain.
Nowadays, complementary and alternative treatment for low back pain is becoming more common
practice. Complementary and alternative therapies such as hydrotherapy (balneotherapy), yoga, ozone,
massage, aromatherapy, meditation, prolotherapy, osteopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture, cupping,
homeopathy and reflexology are applied in low back pain and patients are getting positive results from
these therapies.
Key words:Low back pain, complementary therapy, alternative therapy.
Bel ağrısının tedavisinde de fizik tedavi, ilaç tedavisi ya da cerrahi girişim gibi çeşitli yöntemlere
başvurulmakta, fakat bu yöntemlerle her zaman etkin bir tedavi sağlanamamaktadır. Tamamlayıcı ve
alternatif tedavi; bel ağrısı tedavisinde önemli bir yere sahiptir. Bel ağrılarında hidroterapi
(balneoterapi), yoga, ozon, masaj, aromaterapi, meditasyon, proloterapi, osteopati, kayropraktik,
akupunktur, bardak çekme, homeopati, refleksoloji gibi tamamlayıcı ve alternatif tedavi yöntemleri
uygulanmakta ve bel ağrısına sahip kişiler bu tedavilerden olumlu sonuç alabilmektedirler. Günümüzde
bel ağrılarında tamamlayıcı ve alternatif tedavi yaygınlaşmakta ve bu da uygulanma oranını
arttırmaktadır.
Anahtar kelimeler: Bel Ağrısı, tamamlayıcı tedavi, alternatif tedavi.
... A proposal for a large trial information-what homeopaths term as the case history. Gathering a case history for an individual in homeopathy involves a lengthy interview process-patients are asked a series of broad-ranged questions that cover everything from relationships, to favorite animals, to political and religious leanings (Ernst, 2007 Rehydration Therapy, the number of overall afflicted days decreased by 0.8 for the children who received homeopathic treatment. The 15% decrease in length of affliction was noted as significant and the authors concluded with the assertion that larger, and lengthier studies were needed in order to corroborate the results. ...
This article represents a synthesis of current homeopathic research. I explore the rhetorical universe of homeopathy and juxtapose homeopathic research articles with articles critical of homeopathy. Furthermore, I regard the discourse community of homeopathy and the struggles it undergoes in seeking admission into mainstream medicine. Following my research is the conclusion that the aim of homeopathic research has drifted from an integrated model to a pluralistic one, thereby ignoring criticisms issued by mainstream medical researchers. The trend of homeopathic researchers publishing in specialized homeopathic or complementary and alternative medical (CAM) journals is also explored within my article.
... Similar positive results were inferred from various RCTs and other studies on homeopathy [24,25]. However, RCTs of individualized homeopathic treatment have to be of a much better quality in order to withstand the critics who equate homeopathy at best with placebo effect [26][27][28]. Conclusion and interpretation varies depending often on what one is willing to accept as scientific information [29] and further, as a result of bias in the scientific community against homeopathy, it is easier to publish negative results on homeopathy in the peer-reviewed literature than positive ones [30]. Lack of mechanistic insights has often plagued homeopathy studies, such as the unexplained findings that homeopathic dilutions of anti-IgE antibodies cause human basophil degranulation [31] and ultra-dilutions of histamine inhibit basophil activation [32]. ...
... Homeopatija se primjenjuje već više od 200 godina i privukla je veliki broj pristalica, ali i onih koji ju osporavaju, bilo iz znanstvene, bilo iz šire javnosti (9,11). Kao prednosti homeopatskih pripravaka ističu se izvanredno niske doze i sigurnost primjene, uz rijetku pojavu nuspojava i ovisnosti. ...
Homeopathy is an alternative medicine practice, which has been used for the past 200 years but, until now, scientific methods have not proven its effectiveness. The use of highly diluted natural substances based on the principal that similar heals similar is contrary to the scientific theories of the conventional medicine. In veterinary medicine homeopathic remedies are most frequently used for chronic conditions of small animals, but also their application in organic farming is increasing. Minimal number of clinical studies about the use of homeopathy in veterinary medicine has been published in scientific literature. The results of effectiveness are contradictory, which can be explained by being a consequence of different research methodologies. However, there is a significant inverse proportionality between the quality of research and results that approve of the use of homeopathy. In evidence based veterinary medicine scientific approach is fundamental for objective diagnostics and treatment prescription, and homeopathy is an excellent teaching model for possible methodological failures in scientific research.
... This term describes those remedies in which the original substance is unlikely to be present: the dilution is superior to Avogadro's number (6.002 9 10 23 ), in other words more than 23 DH or 12 CH. This paradox has always provoked heated debate about the efficacy of homeopathy, with detractors [20,21] and supporters [22,23]. Even today, 25 years after Poitevin's and Benveniste's publications [24,25] about the ''memory of water'', the controversy has not died down. ...
Homeopathy is a form of therapy based on the similarity (“similia similibus curantur”, like cures like), whose popularity is increasing but whose scientific basis is still under discussion. Starting from the premise that it is a “holistic” medicine, programmatically aimed at the whole person in its entirety and individuality, here we go through an overview of his history, basic concepts and scientific evidence. This therapy was founded by Samuel Hahnemann in the late 18th century, although similar concepts existed previously. It has spread around the world in the 19th century, in part because of its success in epidemics outbreaks, but declined during most of the 20th century. Its popularity was increased in the late 20th and early 21st century in many parts of the world and today stands the problem of its integration with conventional medicine. There are different schools of homeopathy. Homeopathy is controversial mainly because of its use of highly diluted medicines, but there is growing evidence that is not a mere placebo. There is a significant body of clinical research including randomized clinical trials suggesting that homeopathy has an effectiveness in curing many symptoms and in improving the quality of life of patients. Cohort studies, observational and economic have produced favorable results. Despite the long history of scientific controversy, homeopathy is an “anomaly” of modern medicine that deserves further investigation for its potential scientific and ethical merits.
... This is not a made-up example. What is being described is homeopathy, a 200-year-old system of medicine based on vitalism and prescientific ideas invented by Samuel Hahnemann [1] that has been tested in multiple RCTs. Indeed, a recent search of PubMed for 'homeopathy randomized clinical trial' turned up over 400 references. ...
Over the past two decades complementary and alternative medicine treatments relying on dubious science have been embraced by medical academia. Despite low to nonexistent prior probability that testing these treatments in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) will be successful, RCTs of these modalities have proliferated, consistent with the principles of evidence-based medicine, which underemphasize prior plausibility rooted in science. We examine this phenomenon and argue that what is needed is science-based medicine rather than evidence-based medicine.
... Se han descrito ya mecanismos de acción que podrían cumplir con el criterio mencionado anteriormente para la acu- Ayurveda vs. placebo, manejo de la osteoartritis. [44][45][46][47][48] . Los resultados reportados en esta revisión muestran algunos efectos benéficos modestos de algunas de las medicinas alternativas. ...
Introduction: Different series have found that rituximab is effective and safe in thrombocytopenia and autoimmune hemolytic anemia in children, however studies in early onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), juvenile dermatomyositis and vasculitis are scarce. Objective and Methods: Describe the clinical response to rituximab in patients ≤18 years with rheumatic disease, evaluated in a pediatric hospital in the city of Medellín, Colombia. Cross sectional study in which we reviewed the medical records of patients with SLE, antiphospholipid syndrome, vasculitis and juvenile dermatomyositis that receiving rituximab between january 2006 and july 2011. Results: 19 patients ≤18 years received rituximab. The most common indication was lupus nephritis (LN) (47.4%), followed by autoimmune thrombocytopenia (26.3%). In patients with LN steroids was reduced by 58% and control of proteinuria in most cases. In autoimmune hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia adequate response was observed in 83%. The case of vasculitis was found response to therapy and the patient with juvenile dermatomyositis was refractory. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: improvement was observed with rituximab in SLE-associated hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia associated with SLE and antiphospholipid syndrome, who had not responded to first-line therapy. Although LN showed favorable clinical effect and saving allowed dose steroids, prospective studies are required to evaluate utility in patients with LN ≤18.
... The second reason why interaction and the framing of 'talk' around the subject of conventional remedies in homoeopathy is particularly pertinent at the present time is a broader sociological one: although homoeopathy has always struggled against antagonism from sections of conventional medicine -not least because of debates over proof of its efficacy and the means of testing it (Ernst 2008;Barry 2005;weatherly-Jones et al. 2004) -there has recently been a vociferous backlash against homoeopathy by certain sections of the conventional medical community (Samarasekera 2007;whyte 2006;McCarthy 2005). This has been particularly evident in the UK, and the effect has been felt to the extent that even well-established national health Service (nhS) homoeopathic services are now losing their funding (house of Commons 2010; Randerson 2007). ...
Homoeopathy is one of the most widely used forms of complementary medicine in the West. However, its methods and philosophical underpinnings are basically polarized in relation to those of conventional medicine. Many homoeopathic patients choose to continue using conventional medicine while they receive homoeopathy, but from a homoeopathic perspective, these treatments are often regarded as undesirable or even damaging. This article will utilize the principles of conversation analysis (CA) to explore points in homoeopathic consultations where practitioners address their patients' use of conventional medications. It will be suggested that approaches which display a degree of incorporation are preferred to those which imply categorical rejection. By not emphasizing the underlying tensions between conventional and homoeopathic paradigms, and displaying an adaptive and inclusive approach, homoeopathy essentially sets itself up as a parallel (i.e. equal) system, rather than one that is purely in opposition to the dominant medical model.
... Perhaps because of the seemingly widespread acceptance of the merits of CAM within the general public and amongst many medical practitioners, these more controversial treatments have faced sustained opposition from those who advocate an evidence-based approach. Homeopathy, in particular, has been the source of sustained criticism from scientists on both evidential [12][13][14][15][16] and plausibility grounds [6,[17][18][19]. Such concerns relate not only to the quality and robustness of the underlying science but also to the consequences of patients relying on demonstrably inefficacious treatments when conventional medicines have, or should have been prescribed, with potentially fatal consequences [20]. ...
Proponents of controversial Complementary and Alternative Medicines, such as homeopathy, argue that these treatments can be used with great effect in addition to, and sometimes instead of, 'conventional' medicine. In doing so, they accept the idea that the scientific approach to the evaluation of treatment does not undermine use of and support for some of the more controversial CAM treatments. For those adhering to the scientific canon, however, such efficacy claims lack the requisite evidential basis from randomised controlled trials. It is not clear, however, whether such opposition characterises the views of the general public. In this paper we use data from the 2009 Wellcome Monitor survey to investigate public use of and beliefs about the efficacy of a prominent and controversial CAM within the United Kingdom, homeopathy. We proceed by using Latent Class Analysis to assess whether it is possible to identify a sub-group of the population who are at ease in combining support for science and conventional medicine with use of CAM treatments, and belief in the efficacy of homeopathy. Our results suggest that over 40% of the British public maintain positive evaluations of both homeopathy and conventional medicine simultaneously. Explanatory analyses reveal that simultaneous support for a controversial CAM treatment and conventional medicine is, in part, explained by a lack of scientific knowledge as well as concerns about the regulation of medical research.
... While millions of consumers and practitioners subscribe to it [1,2], homeopathy is held in considerable disrepute by much of the mainstream medical and scientific community. The differences of opinion run deep; each side is inclined to think that the other is close-minded, irrational, or both [3][4][5]. ...
Keywords:Evaluation;evidence;explanation;homeopathy;simplicity
... While millions of consumers and practitioners subscribe to it [1,2], homeopathy is held in considerable disrepute by much of the mainstream medical and scientific community. The differences of opinion run deep; each side is inclined to think that the other is close-minded, irrational, or both [3][4][5]. ...
Homeopathic medications are used by millions, and hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on these remedies in the USA alone. In the UK, the NHS covers homeopathic treatments. Nonetheless, homeopathy is held in considerable disrepute by much of the medical and scientific community. Many proponents of homeopathy are well aware of these criticisms but remain unimpressed. The differences of opinion run deep, and the debate seems deadlocked. We aim to shed some light on this situation. We briefly recap some of the major arguments on each side, but we try to go further by making explicit an underlying philosophical presupposition. In particular, we will claim that there is an important principle, which has ancient roots going back at least to Occam, some version of which constrains all empirical reasoning. We call this constraint the simplicity principle. We argue that this is not something specific to a scientific paradigm, but that, all of us, including proponents of homeopathy, are themselves deeply committed to the simplicity principle. However, once the simplicity principle is made explicit and applied to homeopathy, allegiance to homeopathy is clearly seen as irrational. The point is not merely the lack of clinical trials supporting homeopathy; rather, belief in the efficacy of homeopathy leaves a mountain of unexplained mysteries, and thereby flies in the face of the simplicity rule that guides the homeopaths' own reasoning and arguments. If nothing else, we hope that defenders of homeopathy will gain a greater understanding of why critics are so deeply reluctant to accept the efficacy of homeopathic interventions – and that this reluctance is not mere stubbornness or artificial allegiance to western medicine. Finally, we also hope thereby to illustrate the usefulness of philosophy in unearthing presuppositions in seemingly deadlocked debates.
... The debate continues about provision of homeopathy in the National Health Service (NHS). 1 The use of homeopathy and other complementary therapies is increasing, with a reported prevalence of 14.5% among asthma patients (adults and children) in a recent primary care survey. 2 Data from the UK homeopathic hospitals indicate that childhood asthma is one of the ten most common reasons for referral. 3,4 The prevalence of asthma in children has increased over the past ten years and it constitutes a significant burden to children, their families and Health Services. ...
To test the feasibility of a pragmatic trial design with economic evaluation and nested qualitative study, comparing usual care (UC) with UC plus individualised homeopathy, in children requiring secondary care for asthma. This included recruitment and retention, acceptability of outcome measures patients' and health professionals' views and experiences and a power calculation for a definitive trial.
In a pragmatic parallel group randomised controlled trial (RCT) design, children on step 2 or above of the British Thoracic Society Asthma Guidelines (BTG) were randomly allocated to UC or UC plus a five visit package of homeopathic care (HC). Outcome measures included the Juniper Asthma Control Questionnaire, Quality of Life Questionnaire and a resource use questionnaire. Qualitative interviews were used to gain families' and health professionals' views and experiences.
226 children were identified from hospital clinics and related patient databases. 67 showed an interest in participating, 39 children were randomised, 18 to HC and 21 to UC. Evidence in favour of adjunctive homeopathic treatment was lacking. Economic evaluation suggests that the cost of additional consultations was not offset by the reduced cost of homeopathic remedies and the lower use of primary care by children in the homeopathic group. Qualitative data gave insights into the differing perspectives of families and health care professionals within the research process.
A future study using this design is not feasible, further investigation of a potential role for homeopathy in asthma management might be better conducted in primary care with children with less severe asthma.
... For example, Ernst reported recently that trials of homeopathy performed by the Nazis (which had been considered "lost") were so "wholly and devastatingly negative," German homeopaths have covered it up ever since. 34,35 Apart from the ethical problems involved in quoting uncritically the results of Nazi research (especially because conventional medicine is well known to have benefited from the Nazis' medical "experiments"), [36][37][38] Ernst's source material has proved to be highly suspect. [39][40][41][42] At best, Ernst might be considered to be acting unethically and unscientifically by endorsing essentially 60-year-old hearsay as a condemnation of homeopathy. ...
Though in use for over 200 years, and still benefiting millions of people worldwide today, homeopathy is currently under continuous attacks for being "unscientific." The reasons for this can be understood in terms of what might be called a "New Fundamentalism," emanating particularly but not exclusively from within biomedicine, and supported in some sections of the media. Possible reasons for this are discussed. New Fundamentalism's hallmarks include the denial of evidence for the efficacy of any therapeutic modality that cannot be consistently "proven" using double-blind, randomized controlled trials. It excludes explanations of homeopathy's efficacy; ignores, excoriates, or considers current research data supporting those explanations incomprehensible, particularly from outside biomedicine: it is also not averse to using experimental bias, hearsay, and innuendo in order to discredit homeopathy. Thus, New Fundamentalism is itself unscientific. This may have consequences in the future for how practitioners, researchers, and patients of homeopathy/complementary and alternative medicine engage and negotiate with primary health care systems.
Homoeopathy is a widely used holistic system of medicine. Since its inception, it has faced dissension on scientific grounds. Further, a vast variety of the source materials including plants, animals, minerals, microorganisms and even body secretions from patients put forth the challenge of standardization and quality control for homeopathic medicines. The quality of the homeopathic medicines depends on the production and collection of raw materials. Homeopathic pharmacopoeias throughout the world prescribe microscopy, physicochemical, instrumental, chromatography and biological analysis for standardization of homeopathic medicines. These methods prescribed in pharmacopoeias do not narrate the quantification of any active ingredients which are responsible for biological activity. Different pharmacopoeias specify disparate methods of preparation and extents of dilutions for mother tinctures. Homeopathic medicines include ultrahigh dilutions which practically do not contain any active ingredients and there is a dearth of methods for their standardization. To assure the end users regarding quality, efficacy, and safety, current methods of standardization of homeopathic drugs need to be upgraded to include sensitive and relevant biological assays. It has become necessary to speculate standard parameters to ensure batch-to-batch uniformity and reproducibility in its therapeutic action. Hence, this review summarizes the challenges related to standardization of homeopathic drugs and emphasizes on their in vitro and in vivo biological testing for standardization. As a representative class of the most widely prescribed homeopathic drugs, here the anti-inflammatory homeopathic medicines have been highlighted.
Die Homöopathie ist eine Therapiemethode, die seit mehr als 200 Jahren praktiziert wird und eine beträchtliche Zahl an Heilungserfolgen vorzuweisen hat. Die Evidenzlage hinsichtlich der klinischen Forschung zur Homöopathie ist nach strengen Kriterien mindestens als ambivalent zu beurteilen und weist eine stark positive Tendenz auf, wenn im Rahmen von Meta-Analysen nicht nur einige wenige Studien berücksichtigt werden, sondern ein sinnvolles Gleichgewicht zwischen Selektionskriterien und Aussagekraft geschaffen wird. Die Gründe für die Verzerrungen bei der Beurteilung des Phänomens Homöopathie sind auf der wissenschaftlichen Paradigmenebene zu suchen und wurzeln letztlich in spezifischen erkenntnistheoretischen Vorannahmen, die in ihrer unreflektierten Form als Weltanschauung angesprochen werden können.
Diese Weltanschauung kann in als eine Form des reduktionistischen Materialismus identifiziert wer-den, welcher in Verbindung mit einem unkritischen Szientismus dafür genutzt wird, Erkenntnissi-cherheit und eine wissenschaftlich methodische Fundierung zu prätendieren. Dieser Komplex erweist sich im Rahmen einer epistemologischen Analyse als transzendentalphilosophisch haltloses metaphysisches Konstrukt, welches keinesfalls dazu geeignet ist, als Kriterium für Wissenschaftlichkeit zu fungieren, oder gar a priori über die Möglichkeit respektive Unmöglichkeit bestimmter Phänomene zu befinden. Der unkritische Umgang eines Teils der Homöopathiekritik mit den eigenen epistemologischen Voraussetzungen führt somit zu der paradoxen Situation, dass unter Berufung auf wissenschaftliche Grundsätze zentralen Postulaten der wissenschaftlichen Methode eine Absage erteilt wird.
Vor dem Hintergrund der Science Studies lässt sich konstatieren, dass die Homöopathie nicht nur mit epistemologischen Setzungen in Konflikt gerät, sondern dass naturwissenschaftliche Grundsätze und die Methodik der klinischen Forschung in ein soziales Gefüge eingebettet sind, in welchem neben statistisch auswertbaren Daten ebenso die Denkgewohnheiten und Erwartungshaltungen von Peer-Review-Gutachtern und die hiermit in Zusammenhang stehenden Publikationsmöglichkeiten eine Rolle spielen. Nicht zuletzt ist an dieser Stelle zu konstatieren, dass Wissenschaft als soziales System über mannigfaltige Überschneidungen und Verquickungen mit anderen Systemen verfügt, zu denen sicherlich auch die Ökonomie gehört. In dieser Hinsicht ist es durchaus denkbar, dass eine wissenschaftliche Ächtung der Homöopathie mit bestimmten wirtschaftlichen Interessen konform geht, wenn sie nicht sogar teilweise durch solche motiviert sein sollte.
Abschließend werden mit der Kategorienlehre, der Semiotik und den wissenschaftstheoretischen Überlegungen des amerikanischen Philosophen Charles Sanders Peirce Ansätze präsentiert, welche die aufgezeigten Aporien des reduktionistischen Materialismus vermeiden. Es wird ein begriffliches Instrumentarium eingeführt, mit dessen Hilfe sich die entsprechenden Verkürzungen bei der Interpretation des Phänomens Homöopathie klar benennen und auch umgehen lassen, ohne auf unzulässige metaphysisch aufgeladene Theoreme zu-rückgreifen zu müssen.
Die Homöopathie steht innerhalb der vorliegenden Analyse stellvertretend für sämtliche Gegen-standsbereiche, die sich einer einfachen Deutung durch materialistisch-reduktionistische Erklä-rungsmuster im dargestellten Sinne entziehen. Insgesamt lässt sich die Schlussfolgerung ziehen, dass die Grenzen gängiger Erklärungsmodelle und erkenntnistheoretischer Paradigmen häufig anhand von wissenschaftlichen Anomalien erkennbar werden und dann einer umfassenden Revision unterzogen werden sollten, um global neue Zugänge und Perspektiven für die Wissenschaft zu erschließen, die nicht den Beschränkungen einer dem Fortschritt hinderlichen Weltanschauung unterliegen.
This opinion deals critically with the so-called complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapy on the basis of current data. From the authors’ perspective, CAM prescriptions and most notably the extensive current endeavours to the “integration” of CAM into conventional patient care is problematic in several respects.
Thus, several CAM measures are used, although no specific effects of medicines can be proved in clinical studies. It is extensively explained that the methods used in this regard are those of evidence-based medicine, which is one of the indispensable pillars of science-oriented medicine. This standard of proof of efficacy is fundamentally independent of the requirement of being able to explain efficacy of a therapy in a manner compatible with the insights of the natural sciences, which is also essential for medical progress. Numerous CAM treatments can however never conceivably satisfy this requirement; rather they are justified with pre-scientific or unscientific paradigms.
The high attractiveness of CAM measures evidenced in patients and many doctors is based on a combination of positive expectations and experiences, among other things, which are at times unjustified, at times thoroughly justified, from a science-oriented view, but which are non-specific (context effects). With a view to the latter phenomenon, the authors consider the conscious use of CAM as unrevealed therapeutic placebos to be problematic. In addition, they advocate that academic medicine should again systematically endeavour to pay more attention to medical empathy and use context effects in the service of patients to the utmost.
The subsequent opinion discusses the following after an introduction to medical history: the definition of CAM; the efficacy of most common CAM procedures; CAM utilisation and costs in Germany; characteristics of science-oriented medicine; awareness of placebo research; pro and contra arguments about the use of CAM, not least of all in terms of aspects related to medical ethics.
The response of Rutten et al. to our recent article [1], in which we contend that it is unscientific and unethical to test highly implausible treatments such as homeopathy and reiki in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), represents a common and misguided complaint by advocates of alternative medicine against interpreting clinical trials through the lens of prior plausibility. It is a complaint that is, from a scientific viewpoint, unjustified and relies on a misunderstanding of the history of science, a straw man characterization of arguments for science-based medicine, and an incorrect interpretation of Bayes’ theorem applied to clinical trials of homeopathy.
Over the past two decades there has been a growing acceptance of 'integrative oncology', also known as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), in cancer care and research at academic medical centres and medical schools. Proponents of integrative oncology argue that it is based in science and provides the 'best of both worlds' by combining science-based treatments and 'holistic' medicine. However, a close examination of the methodologies indicates that, from a standpoint of basic science, the vast majority of 'integrative' treatments are supported by little, if any, scientific evidence. What are the consequences of this integration? Is there any harm? Are there any potential benefits?
Introduction
Different series have found that rituximab is effective and safe in thrombocytopenia and autoimmune hemolytic anemia in children, however studies in early onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), juvenile dermatomyositis and vasculitis are scarce.
Objective and Methods
Describe the clinical response to rituximab in patients ≤18 years with rheumatic disease, evaluated in a pediatric hospital in the city of Medellín, Colombia. Cross sectional study in which we reviewed the medical records of patients with SLE, antiphospholipid syndrome, vasculitis and juvenile dermatomyositis that receiving rituximab between january 2006 and july 2011.
Results
19 patients ≤18 years received rituximab. The most common indication was lupus nephritis (LN) (47.4%), followed by autoimmune thrombocytopenia (26.3%). In patients with LN steroids was reduced by 58% and control of proteinuria in most cases. In autoimmune hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia adequate response was observed in 83%. The case of vasculitis was found response to therapy and the patient with juvenile dermatomyositis was refractory. No adverse events were reported.
Conclusions
improvement was observed with rituximab in SLE-associated hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia associated with SLE and antiphospholipid syndrome, who had not responded to first-line therapy. Although LN showed favorable clinical effect and saving allowed dose steroids, prospective studies are required to evaluate utility in patients with LN ≤18.
Unlabelled:
Utilization of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among children/adolescents is popular. This review summarizes the international findings for prevalence and predictors of CAM use among children/adolescents. We therefore systematically searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED; last update in 07/2013) and reference lists of existing reviews and all included studies. Publications without language restriction reporting patterns of CAM utilization among children/adolescents without chronic conditions were selected for inclusion. The prevalence rates for overall CAM use, homeopathy, and herbal drug use were extracted with a focus on country and recall period (lifetime, 1 year, current use). As predictors, we extracted socioeconomic factors, child's age, and gender. The database search and citation tracking yielded 58 eligible studies from 19 countries. There was strong variation regarding study quality. Prevalence rates for overall CAM use ranged from 10.9-87.6 % for lifetime use and from 8-48.5 % for current use. The respective percentages for homeopathy (highest in Germany, United Kingdom, and Canada) ranged from 0.8-39 % (lifetime) and from 1-14.3 % (current). Herbal drug use (highest in Germany, Turkey, and Brazil) was reported for 0.8-85.5 % (lifetime) and 2.2-8.9 % (current) of the children/adolescents. Studies provided a relatively uniform picture of the predictors of overall CAM use (higher parental income and education, older children), but only a few studies analyzed predictors for single CAM modalities.
Conclusion:
CAM use is widespread among children/adolescents. Prevalence rates vary widely regarding CAM modality, country, and reported recall period.
Proponents of complementary and alternative medicine argue that these treatments can be used with great effect in addition to, and sometimes instead of, conventional medicine, a position which has drawn sustained opposition from those who advocate an evidence-based approach to the evaluation of treatment efficacy. Using recent survey data from the United Kingdom, this article seeks to establish a clearer understanding of the nature of the public's relationship with complementary and alternative medicine within the general population by focusing on beliefs about the perceived effectiveness of homeopathy, in addition to its reported use. Using recent data from the United Kingdom, we initially demonstrate that reported use and perceived effectiveness are far from coterminous and argue that for a proper understanding of the motivations underpinning public support of complementary and alternative medicine, consideration of both reported use and perceived effectiveness is necessary. We go on to demonstrate that although the profile of homeopathy users differs from those who support this form of medicine, neither outcome is dependent upon peoples' levels of knowledge about science. Instead, the results suggest a far greater explanatory role for need and concerns about conventional medicine.
To evaluate the evidence for and against the effectiveness of homeopathy.
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (generally considered to be the most reliable source of evidence) was searched in January 2010.
Cochrane reviews with the term "homeopathy" in the title, abstract or keywords were considered. Protocols of reviews were excluded. Six articles met the inclusion criteria.
Each of the six reviews was examined for specific subject matter; number of clinical trials reviewed; total number of patients involved; and authors' conclusions. The reviews covered the following conditions: cancer, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, asthma, dementia, influenza and induction of labour.
The findings of the reviews were discussed narratively (the reviews' clinical and statistical heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis).
The findings of currently available Cochrane reviews of studies of homeopathy do not show that homeopathic medicines have effects beyond placebo.
In recent months, numerous false statements have emerged about my attitude towards homoeopathy. This article is an attempt to set the record straight by describing my attitude during the last 15 years. This is carried out by citing from my own publications on the subject. It is concluded that my attitude changed because of the scientific evidence, which was published during this period.
The therapeutic effect of a medical intervention can be due to the specific effects of a therapy. In addition, there is a multitude of other determinants. The totality of their impact can be such that even a treatment causing no or negative specific effects can be followed by positive perceived therapeutic response.
Our prospective, multicentre cohort study consecutively enrolled first-time patients consulting a physician at one of 103 participating primary care practices in Germany or Switzerland. All of the practices offered services in classical homeopathy. We used differences in the outcome measure »patient assessment of disease severity« (numeric rating scales from 0 to 10) between baseline and 12 months to calculate effect sizes according to Cohen. A total of 3981 patients (2851 adults; 71 % women) were included in the study, 1130 of whom were children (48 % girls). 97 % of all diagnoses were classified as chronic. For all diagnoses, the average effect size of homeopathic treatment was 1.6 for adults and 2.0 for children. The effect sizes ranged from 1.5 to 2.7 and were largest for chronic infections (e. g. chronic otitis media) and smallest for cardiovascular diseases. By indicating which diagnoses can be expected to have the largest effect size, our data should be helpful for planning further studies on homeopathy.
Homeopathy remains one of the most controversial subjects in therapeutics. This article is an attempt to clarify its effectiveness based on recent systematic reviews. Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analysis on the subject. Seventeen articles fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Six of them related to re-analyses of one landmark meta-analysis. Collectively they implied that the overall positive result of this meta-analysis is not supported by a critical analysis of the data. Eleven independent systematic reviews were located. Collectively they failed to provide strong evidence in favour of homeopathy. In particular, there was no condition which responds convincingly better to homeopathic treatment than to placebo or other control interventions. Similarly, there was no homeopathic remedy that was demonstrated to yield clinical effects that are convincingly different from placebo. It is concluded that the best clinical evidence for homeopathy available to date does not warrant positive recommendations for its use in clinical practice.
Homeopathic aggravations have often been described anecdotally. However, few attempts have been made to scientifically verify their existence. This systematic review aimed at comparing the frequency of homeopathic aggravations in the placebo and verum groups of double-blind, randomised clinical trials. Eight independent literature searches were carried out to identify all such trials mentioning either adverse effects or aggravations. All studies thus found were validated and data were extracted by both authors. Twenty-four trials could be included. The average number of aggravations was low. In total, 50 aggravations were attributed to patients treated with placebo and 63 to patients treated with homoeopathically diluted remedies. We conclude that this systematic review does not provide clear evidence that the phenomenon of homeopathic aggravations exists.
Homoeopathy is widely used, but specific effects of homoeopathic remedies seem implausible. Bias in the conduct and reporting of trials is a possible explanation for positive findings of trials of both homoeopathy and conventional medicine. We analysed trials of homoeopathy and conventional medicine and estimated treatment effects in trials least likely to be affected by bias.
Placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy were identified by a comprehensive literature search, which covered 19 electronic databases, reference lists of relevant papers, and contacts with experts. Trials in conventional medicine matched to homoeopathy trials for disorder and type of outcome were randomly selected from the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (issue 1, 2003). Data were extracted in duplicate and outcomes coded so that odds ratios below 1 indicated benefit. Trials described as double-blind, with adequate randomisation, were assumed to be of higher methodological quality. Bias effects were examined in funnel plots and meta-regression models.
110 homoeopathy trials and 110 matched conventional-medicine trials were analysed. The median study size was 65 participants (range ten to 1573). 21 homoeopathy trials (19%) and nine (8%) conventional-medicine trials were of higher quality. In both groups, smaller trials and those of lower quality showed more beneficial treatment effects than larger and higher-quality trials. When the analysis was restricted to large trials of higher quality, the odds ratio was 0.88 (95% CI 0.65-1.19) for homoeopathy (eight trials) and 0.58 (0.39-0.85) for conventional medicine (six trials).
Biases are present in placebo-controlled trials of both homoeopathy and conventional medicine. When account was taken for these biases in the analysis, there was weak evidence for a specific effect of homoeopathic remedies, but strong evidence for specific effects of conventional interventions. This finding is compatible with the notion that the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects.
The quality of information gathered from homeopathic pathogenetic trials (HPTs), also known as 'provings', is fundamental to homeopathy. We systematically reviewed HPTs published in six languages (English, German, Spanish, French, Portuguese and Dutch) from 1945 to 1995, to assess their quality in terms of the validity of the information they provide.
The literature was comprehensively searched, only published reports of HPTs were included. Information was extracted by two reviewers per trial using a form with 87 items. Information on: medicines, volunteers, ethical aspects, blinding, randomization, use of placebo, adverse effects, assessments, presentation of data and number of claimed findings were recorded. Methodological quality was assessed by an index including indicators of internal and external validity, personal judgement and comments of reviewers for each study.
156 HPTs on 143 medicines, involving 2815 volunteers, produced 20,538 pathogenetic effects (median 6.5 per volunteer). There was wide variation in methods and results. Sample size (median 15, range 1-103) and trial duration (mean 34 days) were very variable. Most studies had design flaws, particularly absence of proper randomization, blinding, placebo control and criteria for analysis of outcomes. Mean methodological score was 5.6 (range 4-16). More symptoms were reported from HPTs of poor quality than from better ones. In 56% of trials volunteers took placebo. Pathogenetic effects were claimed in 98% of publications. On average about 84% of volunteers receiving active treatment developed symptoms. The quality of reports was in general poor, and much important information was not available.
The HPTs were generally of low methodological quality. There is a high incidence of pathogenetic effects in publications and volunteers but this could be attributable to design flaws. Homeopathic medicines, tested in HPTs, appear safe. The central question of whether homeopathic medicines in high dilutions can provoke effects in healthy volunteers has not yet been definitively answered, because of methodological weaknesses of the reports. Improvement of the method and reporting of results of HPTs are required. REFERENCES: References to all included RCTs are available on-line at.
To assess the evidence of any type of therapeutic or preventive intervention testing homeopathy for childhood and adolescence ailments.
Systematic literature searches were conducted through January 2006 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Central, British Homeopathic Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the UK National Research Register. Bibliographies were checked for further relevant publications. Studies were selected according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. All double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of any homeopathic intervention for preventing or treating childhood and adolescence ailments were included. According to the classification of the World Health Organization, the age range defined for inclusion was 0 to 19 years. Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of methodological quality were performed independently by 2 reviewers.
A total of 326 articles were identified, 91 of which were retrieved for detailed evaluation. Sixteen trials that assessed 9 different conditions were included in the study. With the exception of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and acute childhood diarrhea (each tested in 3 trials), no condition was assessed in more than 2 double-blind randomized clinical trials. The evidence for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and acute childhood diarrhea is mixed, showing both positive and negative results for their respective main outcome measures. For adenoid vegetation, asthma, and upper respiratory tract infection each, 2 trials are available that suggest no difference compared with placebo. For 4 conditions, only single trials are available.
The evidence from rigorous clinical trials of any type of therapeutic or preventive intervention testing homeopathy for childhood and adolescence ailments is not convincing enough for recommendations in any condition.
What is already known about this subject:
The efficacy of homeopathy is still under debate and a recent meta-analysis recommended further randomized double-blind clinical trials to identify any clinical situation in which homeopathy might be effective.
What this study adds:
The complex of homeopathy tested in this study (Arnica montana 5 CH, Bryonia alba 5 CH, Hypericum perforatum 5 CH and Ruta graveolens 3 DH) is not superior to placebo in reducing 24 h morphine consumption after knee ligament reconstruction.
Aims:
The efficacy of homeopathy is still under debate. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of homeopathic treatment (Arnica montana 5 CH, Bryonia alba 5 CH, Hypericum perforatum 5 CH and Ruta graveolens 3 DH) on cumulated morphine intake delivered by PCA over 24 h after knee ligament reconstruction.
Methods:
This was an add-on randomized controlled study with three parallel groups: a double-blind homeopathic or placebo arm and an open-label noninterventional control arm. Eligible patients were 18-60 years old candidates for surgery of the anterior cruciate ligament. Treatment was administered the evening before surgery and continued for 3 days. The primary end-point was cumulated morphine intake delivered by PCA during the first 24 h inferior or superior/equal to 10 mg day(-1).
Results:
One hundred and fifty-eight patients were randomized (66 in the placebo arm, 67 in the homeopathic arm and 25 in the noninterventional group). There was no difference between the treated and the placebo group for primary end-point (mean (95% CI) 48% (35.8, 56.3), and 56% (43.7, 68.3), required less than 10 mg day(-1) of morphine in each group, respectively). The homeopathy treatment had no effect on morphine intake between 24 and 72 h or on the visual analogue pain scale, or on quality of life assessed by the SF-36 questionnaire. In addition, these parameters were not different in patients enrolled in the open-label noninterventional control arm.
Conclusions:
The complex of homeopathy tested in this study was not superior to placebo in reducing 24 h morphine consumption after knee ligament reconstruction.
Bemerkungen zu der Überprüfung der Homöopathie durch das Reichsgesundheitsamt 1936–39. Teil I. Die Vorbereitungsphase
- Donner F
Bemerkungen zu der Überprüfung der Homöopathie durch das Reichsgesundheitsamt
- F Donner
Donner F. Bemerkungen zu der Überprüfung der
Homöopathie durch das Reichsgesundheitsamt 1936-39.
- I Die Teil
- Vorbereitungsphase
Teil I. Die Vorbereitungsphase. Perfusion 1995; 8: 3-7.
- I I Teil
- Das Kozept
Teil II. Das Kozept. Perfusion 1995; 8: 35-40.
- Iii Teil
- Probleme
Teil III. Probleme. Perfusion 1995; 8: 84-8.
- I V Teil
- Experimente Und Ergebnisse
Teil IV. Experimente und Ergebnisse. Perfusion 1995; 8:
124-9.
- Altunc U
Bemerkungen zu der Überprüfung der Homöopathie durch das Reichsgesundheitsamt 1936–39. Teil IV. Experimente und Ergebnisse
- Donner F
Bemerkungen zu der Überprüfung der Homöopathie durch das Reichsgesundheitsamt 1936–39. Teil III. Probleme
- Donner F
Bemerkungen zu der Überprüfung der Homöopathie durch das Reichsgesundheitsamt 1936–39. Teil II. Das Kozept
- Donner F