Andrei Mihai Read online

  thy

  When Samuel Hahnemann proposed homeopathy in 1796[20], he

  based it on the idea that “Like cures like,” and that dilution increases

  potency of a treatment. Diseases are caused by miasms, he further

  alleged, -- predispositions to a particular disease. You’re likely not

  familiar with the term, as miasms long have been disproven.

  Not all homeopaths today believe in the so-called miasm theory, but

  all homeopathy is based on like-cures-like (also long disproven). At the

  core of the homeopathic beliefs is a fairly simple process:

  You take the active substance

  (whatever that may be) and usual y

  Dilution

  dilute it by putting one drop of it in

  1 liter of alcohol or distilled water.

  Then, you mix it well (according to some, keeping it aligned with the

  center of the Earth), take 1 drop of this newly obtained substance and

  put it in another fresh liter of alcohol or distilled water.

  And then you do it again.

  And again.

  And again.

  Many, many times.

  28

  Homeopathy

  This obviously takes the ‘medicine’ to point where none of the

  original molecules remain in a bottle of the finished product. That’s

  a-ok, however, if you ask a homeopath, because the more diluted the

  substance is, the more effective it becomes.

  The idea is that the alcohol or distilled water will somehow

  “remember”[21] the molecule and have an impact on your body. Right off the bat, this goes directly against all we know about science -- not

  something one pharma company or another might be saying, but against

  well-established, basic science. So the theory is fundamental y flawed.

  What about the practice? Absolutely

  implausible

  Study after study has tried to find evidence or even just a workable

  mechanism for homeopathy, but they’ve found the exact opposite.

  There’s nothing behind homeopathy, and there’s no healing effect past

  a placebo.

  If water did have a “memory,” we would have to rewrite all of science as

  we know it. Even ignoring the centuries of scientific research disproving

  homeopathy, a simple thought experiment can help us understand why

  it’s absurd.

  Just imagine: in its history, water will have contacted literal y millions

  of other substances, and by this thought process, it has a memory of

  all of them -- so just drinking a glass of regular water should make

  you immune to a swarm of diseases, right? So then, why even have

  homeopathy? Water is natural y diluting all sorts of things, so we should

  kind of be immune to everything, right?

  Lastly, even if there were any active substance, and even if water

  did have a memory, something that causes symptoms similar to the

  X disease doesn’t cure said disease. That’s just wishful thinking, and

  there is nothing to suggest that this works[22]. The scientific consensus is pretty strong in this case. Here are just a few studies.

  29

  Homeopathy

  If water did have a “memory,” we would

  have to rewrite all of science as we know

  Homeopathy it. Even ignoring the centuries of scientific

  studies

  research disproving homeopathy, a

  simple thought experiment can go a long

  way when it comes to the process.

  Unlike astrology, homeopathy studies abound. In just the past 5 years,

  several thorough studies have disproved homeopathy. A 2014 paper by

  Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council found that

  there are “no health conditions for which there was reliable evidence

  that homeopathy was effective[23]. ” Furthermore, they write, “no good-quality studies” report that homeopathy works better than a placebo.

  A year later, the same group combed through the results of 1,800

  studies, again with the same findings[24].

  Just one year later, Paul Glasziou, a leading academic in evidence based

  medicine at Bond University, verified 176 trials of homeopathy, finding

  “no discernible convincing effects beyond placebo.” He concluded[25]

  that “there was no reliable evidence from research” that homeopathy

  was effective for treating health conditions.

  These aren’t new findings -- for decades, researchers have been

  proving that homeopathy doesn’t work, and it’s dangerous to use it

  instead of reliable treatments.

  In 2005, Kevin Smith from the University of Abertay Dundee published

  a paper concluding that since homeopathy is completely implausible,

  it’s not only unscientific, it’s also unethical. In 2010, a British Medical

  Journal study found that homeopathy can be particularly dangerous for

  children, and is never recommended.

  But why then do so many people stick by it? You often hear things

  like “This worked for me” or “It’s the only thing that helped me.”

  30

  Homeopathy

  Why homeopahy seems to work

  a) unassisted natural healing - Your body is awesome at self-healing.

  Some people are more resilient than others, but generally speaking, your

  body heals itself all the time. It can handle even strong diseases on its

  own.

  b) the placebo effect - Simulated treatments are surprisingly effective

  many cases -- the placebo effect has been documented in a number of

  different situations. Combine this with your self-healing, and you get

  quite a powerful tool.

  c) the consultation effect - Modern research has shown that if you just

  go to the doctor and receive a consultation, the care, concern, and

  reassurance a patient experiences when opening up to a compassionate

  caregiver (read: homeopath) can have a positive effect.

  d) cessation of unpleasant treatment. Many times, homeopaths

  recommend ceasing of conventional treatments. This is extremely

  dangerous and should never be done without consulting an actual

  medical doctor. Oftentimes, the conventional treatment causes some

  unpleasant side effects, perhaps even more so than the disease’s

  symptoms. When you stop taking the treatment, the side effects may go

  away, but the disease stays and can get worse.

  e) regression towards the mean - Many diseases and conditions are

  cyclical -- the symptoms naturally get stronger then weaker over time.

  Since patients tend to seek care when discomfort is greatest, it’s pretty

  likely that the symptoms will naturally impove after the consultation (but

  not because of it).

  f) unrecognized treatments - An unrelated food, exercise, environmental

  agent, or treatment for a different ailment may have occurred. Maybe

  you drank a lot of green tea, or that trip to the ocean did wonders for

  your lungs.

  31

  Homeopathy

  What harm can homeopathy do,

  though?

  i mean... it’s plain water, right?

  (Yes)

  Cautionary Tales

  In 2002, one-year-old Isabel a Denley from Calgary was prescribed

  medications for her epilepsy[27]. Instead of taking the meds, her parents consulted an iridologist, an applied kinesiologist, a psychic, and an

  osteopath. They settle
d on a homeopathic treatment. She was still only

  taking this homeopathic treatment when she died.

  In 2009, another infant girl, Gloria Thomas, died of complications due

  to eczema which was treated only with homeopathy[28]. Eczema -- let that sink in for a while. An easily manageable disease. By the time she

  died, nine-month-old Gloria was the weight of an average three-month-

  old, her body was covered with angry blotches, and her once-black

  hair had turned completely white. Her parents were declared guilty of

  manslaughter, but they still stood by their support for homeopathy.

  These are not isolated cases. This is a serious issue. It may seem fun and

  hip to choose homeopathy instead of the “nasty” drugs from a pharmacy,

  but if you’re using homeopathy at the expense of medical treatments,

  you’re putting yourself and others at risk. Please, don’t do this to yourself

  or the ones you love. Consult a real doctor.

  32

  Homeopathy

  A note on natural remedies

  There is a lot of confusion with people mistaking homeopathy with

  naturopathic treatments. That’s a separate discussion in itself, but for

  now, let’s just say that the two things are very different. Natural reme-

  dies (herbs, teas, plants, etc.) are not homeopathy. You should always

  consult with your doctor or pharmacist before taking anything, and

  only follow treatments recommended by an authorized physician.

  33

  Homeopathy

  References (homeopathy)

  20. Irvine Loudon, (2006), “A brief history of homeopathy“, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

  21. John Langone, “The Water That Lost Its Memory“, Time Magazine 22. Edzard Ernst, “There is no scientific case for homeopathy: the

  debate is over“, The Guardian.

  23. BMJ, (2015), “Homeopathy is not an effective treatment for any

  health condition“, report concludes, BMJ.

  24. Erin Blakemore, “1,800 Studies Later, Scientists Conclude

  Homeopathy Doesn’t Work“, Smithsonian.

  25. Paul Glasziou, “Paul Glasziou: Still no evidence for homeopathy“,

  BMJ.

  26. Lucy Atkins, “When there’s no real alternative“, The Guardian.

  27. Harriet Alexander, “Parents guilty of manslaughter over daughter’s

  eczema death“, The Sydney Morning Herald.

  34

  Anti-Vaxxing

  Vaccines

  Don’t

  Cause

  Autism

  Never have, never wil .

  35

  Anti-Vaxxing

  Anti-Vaxxing

  While homeopathy has been discussed in one form or another for a

  long time, a more recent movement is sending ripples -- and causing a

  lot of damage -- through the world: anti-vaxxers.

  Talking about vaccines is almost always hyperbolic. They’ve single-

  handedly ushered in a new age of medicine and are widely regarded as

  one of the greatest medical breakthroughs of the modern era. While

  they may not be perfect, they have historical y been the most effective

  means to fight and eradicate infectious diseases, saving hundreds of

  millions of lives since they were first introduced.

  Smal pox, a disease caused by the variola virus, had existed for at

  least 3,000 years and was one of the world’s most feared diseases until it

  was eradicated by a col aborative global vaccination program led by the

  World Health Organization. The last known natural case was recorded

  in Somalia in 1977.

  . . .

  "[All] evidence favors rejection of a causal

  relationship between MMR vaccine and autism"

  -- The United States Institute of Medicine.

  . . .

  36

  Anti-Vaxxing

  All states in the U.S. require

  vaccinations for children to be

  Consequences of enrolled in school. However, 18

  the vaccine scare states allow parents to opt out

  of vaccinations for their children

  based on personal beliefs.

  According to a 2016 report[28] issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), vaccination prevented about 322 million illnesses

  among children born between 1994 and 2013. In the US, vaccine

  immunization campaigns against diseases like smal pox, diphtheria,

  measles, and mumps have reduced disease incidence by at least 90%

  -- even up to 99%. If you look elsewhere in the developed world, figures

  are similar. Diseases that were once widespread and life-threatening are

  now all but extinct.

  In addition to saving the lives of our children, vaccination has

  resulted in net economic benefits to society -- amounting to almost $69

  billion in the United States alone. A study published by health economist

  Sachiko Ozawa[29] reported that the $34 billion spent on immunization programs in the developing world resulted in savings of $586 billion

  by reducing costs of illness and $1.53 trillion when broader economic

  benefits were included.

  Opposition to vaccines has been around for as long as vaccines

  themselves, but this is something different. The anti-vaxxer movement

  is a recent one, sparked by one particular fraudulent, long-disproven

  paper which claimed that some vaccines can cause autism.

  Wait, do you mean the whole vaccines / autism thing is based on one

  paper?

  Yes, and it gets even better.

  37

  Anti-Vaxxing

  Anti-vaxxers and the infamous

  Wakefield paper

  This association first sprouted in 1998 when Andrew Wakefield,

  then a British surgeon, published a study in the prestigious medical

  journal, The Lancet, suggesting that the measles, mumps, rubel a

  (MMR) vaccine was increasing autism in British children. Although the

  paper itself did not demonstrate a causal relationship between MMR

  vaccination and autism, Wakefield released a video coinciding with the

  paper’s publication claiming that a causal relationship did, in fact, exist.

  The media loved Wakefield’s article because it struck an emotional

  chord with the public, sparking fear and outrage. But for scientists,

  it raised all sorts of red flags. For starters, no one could replicate his

  results -- essential for any scientific claim. Everything blew up after an

  investigation by journalist Brian Deer [30] in 2004.

  Deer’s investigation showed that Wakefield purposely manipulated

  medical histories to support his claims. Deer also showed that Wakefield

  wanted to use the MMR scare for his own financial profit.

  According to Fiona Godlee, the editor in chief of the BMJ[31], the article by Wakefield “was based not on bad science but on a deliberate

  fraud,” and Wakefield grossly and intentional y manipulated the data as

  he willed. Pseudoscience is often about power and profit.

  The paper was official y retracted by the Lancet, and Wakefield was

  stripped of his clinical and academic credentials. Several times, he

  was given the opportunity to try and replicate his research, which he

  refused. To this day, however, Wakefield makes a living perpetuating

  the false views that vaccines cause autism.

  . . .

  “The British Medical Journal concluded that

  Wakefield’s study linking vaccines to autism was a
<
br />   “deliberate fraud”.

  . . .

  38

  Anti-Vaxxing

  More Anti-vaxxers, more diseases

  The media loved Wakefield’s article because it rang an

  emotional chord with the public, sparking fear and outrage.

  Many major (and honest) studies[32] have been carried out since, demonstrating without any doubt that MMR vaccines do not engender

  a higher risk of autism or colitis. Not a single study found a connection

  between the two, but the damage has already been done.

  The number of parents who refuse to vaccinate their children has

  grown, surpassing 3%. Many parents feel like vaccines are no longer

  necessary because they haven’t heard of the diseases they’re vaccinating

  against. That’s right: vaccines have been so effective that people forget

  why we need them -- and the diseases are bouncing back. Talk about

  irony!

  A 2013 paper[33] linked falling immunization rates to the recent resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases. California, for instance --

  a hub for the anti-vaxxing movement -- saw 9,120 cases of whooping

  cough (pertussis) in 2010, which is more than any year since the

  whooping cough vaccine was introduced in the 1940s. During this

  particular outbreak, ten infants died of the disease.

  . . .

  The American Association of Pediatricians reports[28]

  that up to 87% of pediatricians have encountered a

  parent who refused to vaccinate their child, a figure

  which has been steadily increasing.

  . . .

  39

  Anti-Vaxxing

  In Europe, anti-vaxxing has led to a dramatic increase of measles

  cases, with over 40,000 cases in 2018 (so far), and 37 fatalities.

  Although vaccines have proven themselves as one of the greatest

  public-health achievements of the 20th century, people throughout

  history have found various reasons to distrust them. Some found it too

  counter-intuitive that exposure to a disease could provide protection,

  others believed vaccination violated God’s wil , or simply felt that

  mandatory vaccination violated personal liberty.

  In a sense, today’s vaccine-related “urban myths” are the manifestation

  of a longstanding distrust of inoculation: