My post last week on homeopathy got a lot of attention and  I was surprised by the number of people that commented and a few people even suggested that Homeopathy works.  One of these people was “Dr.” Nancy Malik.

Here is her definition of Dr.

A BHMS degree (a regular full-time 5.5 years of medical degree course recognised by Central Council of Homoeopathy, Deptt. of AYUSH, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of India) from prestigious ‘Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital’, Chandigarh affiliated to Punjab University (accredited), Chandigarh, India

Oh, you have got to be kidding me!  BHMS = Bachelor of Homeopathy Medical Science.  Let me point out that the degree is called “Bachelor”.  So at best you have a degree and are not a Doctor!  Additionally, Homeopathy is a scam so you have a worthless “degree”.

Nancy, made some big claims….

…there have been 245 human studies published in 98 peer-reviewed international medical journals (80 integrative, 9 homeopathy and 9 CAM) including 11 meta-analysis, 6 systematic reviews, 1 Cochrane Review and 100 DBRPCT in evidence of homeopathy.

A worthless degree and some studies published in non-medical journals.  Not a good start.  I asked Nancy to pick one study for me to look at…

I am not plowing through hundreds of BS citations just to have you claim another one is better. Please cite 1 or take your claims elsewhere.

Nancy actually picked one out.  Well done Nancy!

Cochrane Review - Homeopathic medicines for adverse effects of cancer treatments (2010).  Homeopathic medicines for the prevention or treatment of adverse effects of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and menopausal symptoms caused by hormonal therapies or oestrogen withdrawal.

Wow!  That sounds fancy.  Well, I was out camping for a couple of days and would have to review the claim later.  Thankfully, SkepticMoney has some really smart readers.  Savonarola stepped up and wrote this beauty….

[The Cochrane Review] requires a subscription to read the full text of the article. However, the abstract is available, so what do we see there? Of eight studies, four show negative results. Two of the remaining four “positive” students aren’t explained, one more had only 32 participants, and the last studied a 4% by mass ointment. Sorry, but 4% by mass isn’t homeopathic in terms of serial dilutions; in fact, 4% by mass is more than enough for the substance, calendula, itself to have an effect.
So no, nothing here supports the idea that water retains some imprint of molecules previously in contact with them. [emphasis added]

I could not have said it better myself.  Nancy’s citation turned out to NOT support her claims.  Savonarola did not stop there….

I went to Malik’s previously-linked site of over 100 allegedly pro-homeopathic peer-reviewed articles. I clicked the first one with the full text available. 404 error. So I tried the second, from the Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry. This 2004 paper specifically contains the following tidbit:
>> It’s worth noting that no work of this kind, concerning
>> the study of the physicochemical properties of these
>> ‘anomalous solutions’, namely the ‘extremely diluted
>> solutions’, with significative results, is known in
>> current literature.
So as of 2004, there was no published evidence for a basis for homeopathy. Not that this article changed anything.

Oh, SNAP!  But wait there’s more….

The experimenters neglected to use deionized water when determining effects of ions in water.
The experimenters tested “extremely diluted solutions,” the most dilute of which were as much as 36 orders of magnitude more concentrated than many homeopathic products (claim to be).
The authors continued testing only on samples that happened to be “active”; no homeopathic-friendly explanation for why any sample could be “inactive” exists.
Samples showing anomalous results did so at a rate of no more than 50%. No homeopathic-friendly explanation for why any of these samples would show non-positive results exists.
Samples showing anomalous results were found, by-and-large, to have measurable levels of contaminants. Making matters worse, I have already pointed out that the authors chose a source solvent expected to contain contaminants, and they did not test for anionic contaminants to account for additional variance.

Finally, *nothing* here supports the idea that water has memory of solutes previously dissolved in it, which is the foundation of modern homeopathy. So going to Dr. Malik’s own site and starting with those citations she lists first, we see nothing that supports her point.

Hey, Nancy!  Not actually a Doctor – strike one.  A bogus degree – strike two.  Your own citations show NO support for homeopathy – strike three.

I think it went fairly well.  I was worried about talking too long and the talk ended up being a little short of the target time.

Sadly, you cannot hear the questions from the audience.  I will have to make sure I repeat them next time.

Homeopathy: The Power of 10! from Chicago Skeptics on Vimeo.

via Bulk Homeopathy.com 

Traditionally, the tedious process involves taking a substance, diluting it with distilled water, pouring most of it out, and diluting it again many times until the substance has been completely washed away. Why bother with such an expensive and unnecessary process when the end product is the same. And to any naysayers, I challenge you to tell the difference in a double-blind test.

That is hysterical.

This is from the FAQ section!

Is there a risk of overdose? Yes, there is a very low risk of hyponatremia;and in very rare cases, drowning can occur.

Since there is some danger, do you have the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet)? Yes, see MSDS: Dihydrogen Monoxide.

Where can I buy bulk homeopathy? Most any grocery sells jugs of distilled water.

Hey, homeopathy is just distilled water. Yes, ain’t that something.

But I have seen homeopathic remedies in the form of pills, not liquid. A drop is placed on each pill and evaporated.

That makes no sense. Yup.

Thursday September 15th at 7PM, I will be giving a talk to ISSA (Illini Secular Student Alliance) in 165 Noyes Lab.

I will give my presentation on Homeopathy.  The event is open to the public and you are welcome to join.

Hey….

If you need someone to give a talk to your group just let me know and we can work out a time.

via CFI.

CFI and CSI have filed three separate petitions with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asking that agency to address various aspects of the marketing of homeopathic drugs.

In its industry-wide petition, CFI and CSI request the FDA to initiate rulemaking that would require all over-the-counter homeopathic drugs to meet the same standards of effectiveness as non-homeopathic drugs. Although the FDA has the authority to require homeopathic drugs to undergo testing for effectiveness, it has to date declined to do so.

It’s not clear this hands-off attitude was ever justified, but given the FDA’s many responsibilities, its free pass to homeopathic drugs would at least be understandable were use of homeopathic products rare. But that is no longer true. Homeopathic drugs used to be marketed on a relatively small scale, but their sales have been burgeoning in the last couple of decades. In 2009, consumer sales of homeopathic treatments in the United States reached $870 million.

Homeopathic remedies were first developed in the late 1700’s, before the advent of modern medicine. Homeopathic drugs are produced by taking a substance that is believed to cause disease symptoms and then diluting the substance repeatedly until, according to accepted laws of chemistry, there are no molecules left of the original substance. But homeopaths insist that-by virtue of some scientifically inexplicable process-their drugs possess therapeutic value. Essentially, homeopathy is magic posing as science.

The fact that those consuming homeopathic drugs are effectively ingesting a sugar pill or its equivalent has, undoubtedly, also influenced the FDA’s policy of non-enforcement. Some might characterize the drugs as “safe” since they usually do nothing. But the FDA has an obligation to protect the health of Americans by requiring that all drugs that are marketed be shown to be safe and effective. For sick Americans who need treatment, a useless drug is a harmful drug

The CFI/CSI petition also asks the FDA to place warning labels on homeopathic drugs until such time as they are shown to be effective. Undoubtedly, most consumers think the FDA regulates homeopathic drugs the same as real medicine. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

In separate petitions, CFI and CSI have specifically targeted homeopathic industry giant Boiron. These petitions ask the FDA to issue warning letters to Boiron regarding its marketing of Oscillococcinum, an alleged flu treatment. One petition complains that Boiron’s packaging for Oscillococcinum lists the alleged active ingredient-duck liver and heart-in Latin only. As Ronald A. Lindsay, president & CEO for CFI/CSI has observed, “If Boiron is going to sell snake oil, the least they can do is use English on their labels.”The other Boiron-directed petition complains that Boiron’s web ad for Oscillococcinum misleadingly implies the drug has received FDA approval.