On 1/5/07 11:32, in article ,
"Des Higgins" wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 30/4/07 22:49, in article , "Des
Higgins" wrote:

snip
If you give patients inert tablets and tell them that they contain active
drug; the patients will report an (placebo) effect. Most of them will
tell
you the tablets worked. To test if a drug works or not you have to give
half the test patients a placebo and half the drug and neither the
patients
nor the administers must know which are which. If there is then a
significant difference between the real and placebo drug groups, then the
treatment works. When Homeopathy has been tested in this way, no one has
found an effect. This says that the effects are imaginary. As it
happens,
the underlying theory that is used to explain homeopathy is daft
(scientifically) but if the double blind tests had worked then we would
have
to accept or explain them. They didn't so the daft explanations are then
especially silly.

Des


Perhaps you're right. You don't give me 'most patient' figures but you
expect me to believe you. ;-) Broadly speaking, I tell you that
homoeopathy
works and you talk of placebo effects on patients. But the patients were
cows and they had less mastitis. I just do not remember if the programme
showed a double blind test or not but the fact is that the cows with the
homoeopathic remedy had less mastitis than they'd had before and they
didn't
know they were being given anything at all.

I remember seeing that programme (maybe 10 years ago on BBC2). I was very
impressed at the time as well.

I think the one I'm thinking of was much longer ago than that, though of
course, it might have been a repeat. From what I recall, the makers of the
programme were asking how a tiny few drops of whatever-it-was in the
drinking trough, which was huge, could possibly have a beneficial effect on
anything.

Unfortunately, the placebo effect is even stronger with animal "owners" than
on human patients.
If this really worked then this would be a brilliant and simple cure for a
troublesome disease.
Homeopathy certainly seems to work until you test it properly. Then by
extraordinary co-incidence, it just stops working.
To be fair, there are worse ways of spending your money and most homeopaths
probablly do believe in it.
Some alternative therapies are so ludicrous it is sad. By comparison,
homeopathy is almost mainstream.

There's no doubt that the power of the mind is a greatly underestimated
thing and I certainly don't discount that in *any* form of medicine. In it
way, it's another useful tool.
I would never, for example, suggest that someone with a life-threatening
illness should be treated only with homoeopathy or hypnotherapy or hands on
healing but each of this *might* have a place somewhere in the overall
pattern of treatment.

You wanted figures for the placebo effect. It is the entire reason why all
clinical trials have to be done as double blind tests.
If they are not, then you see big effects, even with completely inactive
drugs. All clinical trials are done this way now.
They have to be. Google placebo effect and you get pages and pages (e.g.
http://skepdic.com/placebo.html by a guy from Dublin called Petr Skrabanek).

Thanks, Des. I'm saving this for proper reading later. I have to go away
tomorrow for a couple of nights and today is pretty full. I've snatched a
breather for ten minutes but it isn't going to last much longer!

snip

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove weeds from address)
Devon County Show 17-19 May
http://www.devoncountyshow.co.uk/