Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

skeptic.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 172 posts

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#91

Post by GuB-42 »

vog wrote: post #50
pizza234 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're even covered by some insurance plans. A friend of mine is an orthopedic surgeon, and they explained to me that for mild problems, which would normally heal on their own, it's cheaper to cover a placebo rather than real medication.

While I hear this argumentation a lot, I still struggle with this: If you have "mild problems, which would normally heal on their own", buying no medication at all would be even cheaper. And from an ethical point of view, the idea of financing a whole (homeopathic) industry that uses your money to produce fake science, even with a single cent, should make one shudder, shouldn't it?

There is a lot of over-the-counter and even some prescription medicine that don't do much at all for what people take them for, and homeopathy is cheaper and less harmful for the same placebo effect. Cold medicine in particular is known for its dubious efficiency.

No medication is even cheaper, but the placebo effect works, so if people were to take something, might as well have them take something cheap and harmless. In my opinion, it doesn't justify supporting homeopathy, but health insurances may see it differently.

Placebos are an interesting ethical issue. Doctors are not supposed to deceive you, they are people you trust with your life and very personal issues and they are therefore held to very high standards. But even if it is for your own good, the placebo effect is based on deception, so is it ethical for a doctor to give you a placebo? And is fake science that still help people ethical? The consensus seems to be "no" for both and I tend to agree, but I still think it is worth debating.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#92

Post by derbOac »

borbtactics wrote: post #17

I still don't understand why these can be sold in American pharmacies.

I might be downvoted for this, but I tend to have a kind of libertarian take on this. I absolutely do not believe in homeopathy beyond placebo effects, and I understand the harm they do by opportunity costs in pursuing other treatments.

But at the end of the day I feel like all medications should basically be handled like homeopathy products. They should be available to anyone, barring some kind of competency ruling or disagreement by the pharmacy over what they want to sell to whom, and the FDA should basically ensure that they are what they say they are on the label.

I'm glad there's skeptics out there calling BS on homeopathy but where I diverge from them is in somehow preventing it from being available. It's water, it's labeled accurately, so let people do what they're going to do. If they weren't doing this I doubt they'd be doing something more "mainstream" anyway, or complying with it. They might even be doing something even more actively harmful.

I guess I see it as a slippery slope from banning homeopathy to something much murkier where reasonable experts disagree. Real medical science can get very grey really fast and I'm not sure I trust regulatory authority figures to always make the best decisions about what to do. Better to leave it to the consumer and whichever provider they trust most.

Demand product purity, prevent health claims on the label, whatever, but I think my question is "why aren't more medications sold in American pharmacies?"

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#93

Post by blendergeek »

dymk wrote: post #87
blendergeek wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the homeopathic remedies don't harm anyone (I know that some have, this comment only references the remedies that don't), what is the problem with them being sold and used? Many cold medicines have side effects, some are even abused recreationaly. Given that human bodies tend to recover with or without cold medicine (and given the shaky legs that Phenylephrine stands on), what is the issue with people using "fake…

> what is the issue with people using "fake medicine"? Because people are being tricked into thinking they’re taking medicine, preventing them from seeking out medical care.

The choice is

over the counter cold medicine

vs

homeopathic "remedies".

Neither of these cure diseases. Neither of these prevent the seeking of medical care. Both of them may make people feel better (the placebo effect can be powerful). Only one of these is frequently abused by teenagers as a recreational drug.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#94

Post by evilduck »

blendergeek wrote: post #83
borbtactics wrote: post #17

I still don't understand why these can be sold in American pharmacies.

If the homeopathic remedies don't harm anyone (I know that some have, this comment only references the remedies that don't), what is the problem with them being sold and used? Many cold medicines have side effects, some are even abused recreationaly. Given that human bodies tend to recover with or without cold medicine (and given the shaky legs that Phenylephrine stands on), what is the issue with people using "fake…

Why not just prescribe a crystal and some essential oils instead? Maybe have them sacrifice a chicken tomorrow evening at dusk? Actually, if they send me $400 in Bitcoin I will simply cure them with the power of prayer. Nobody is making meth off of my well wishes either.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#95

Post by CoastalCoder »

gumby wrote: post #10

If homeopathy "theory" says that the water retains an "imprint" of other chemicals it encountered, clearly the tap water coming into your house is horribly contaminated with the fish pee, ozone (from UV purification treatment) and the pipes themselves. I briefly considered selling a device that would "reverse" those consequences so the water from your tap would be homeopathically neutralized. But it just seemed uneth…

> It's bad enough there are people selling ... bibles

I'd like to suggest that starting a thread based on "${specific_religion} is false" won't go well on HN.

Or was your point more about the selling of them? Sorry if I misunderstood.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#96

Post by jhawleypeters »

It’s comforting to think of medical professionals as competent and trustworthy, but it’s simply not universally true. Medical mistakes are the third leading cause of death in the U.S.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499956/

Homeopathy is basically mistake proof compared to real medicine, including a doctor visit. For a sufficiently minor ailment, avoiding risk of a potentially lethal mistake is just safer.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#97

Post by jfengel »

vikramkr wrote: post #88
jfengel wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a lot of those bottles also make claims that are in violation of the FDA rules. The label is not sufficient. They need to avoid making claims that they can treat or diagnose some condition. They do their best to hint at it without crossing the line, and frequently blatantly do cross it. The FDA does not have anywhere near the manpower to enforce it. And when they do finally get around to it, the brand vanishe…

It's not illegal and its not in violation of FDA rules. That disclaimer text is from a specific law that gives them exemption from those rules: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietary_Supplement_Health_and_... It's not a manpower issue, it's not a legal issue. It's not against the law because they wrote the law. There is no line they try to avoid crossing because that line was erased by lobbyists in 1994.

As I said, it's not the disclaimer. It's all of the other text that contradicts it.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#98

Post by blincoln »

blendergeek wrote: post #93
dymk wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what is the issue with people using "fake medicine"? Because people are being tricked into thinking they’re taking medicine, preventing them from seeking out medical care.

The choice is over the counter cold medicine vs homeopathic "remedies". Neither of these cure diseases. Neither of these prevent the seeking of medical care. Both of them may make people feel better (the placebo effect can be powerful). Only one of these is frequently abused by teenagers as a recreational drug.

There are plenty of people who take homeopathic and other alternative products instead of prescription products because they can't afford the prescription products, and fraudulent advertising makes them think the alternative is more or less equivalent.

I actually had someone at a pet store try to sell me homeopathic medication instead of dewormer because they were out of actual dewormer. Do you think that's harmless to someone who doesn't know the difference between giving their pet real medication vs. magic woo water?

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#99

Post by vikramkr »

derbOac wrote: post #92
borbtactics wrote: post #17

I still don't understand why these can be sold in American pharmacies.

I might be downvoted for this, but I tend to have a kind of libertarian take on this. I absolutely do not believe in homeopathy beyond placebo effects, and I understand the harm they do by opportunity costs in pursuing other treatments. But at the end of the day I feel like all medications should basically be handled like homeopathy products. They should be available to anyone, barring some kind of competency ruling…

its not about banning availability, its about making them required to prove the health claims theyre making. If you didn't have any requirements to prove your drug worked before selling it, youd take away a pretty huge market incentive to make drugs that work (health is about as far from a perfect full information free market as you can get -- homeopathy doesn't work at all and those companies are making plenty of money). These regulations also force research into and labeling of side effects, and skimping on that led to an opiod crisis.

Honestly don't really see the economic or societal argument for deregulating medicine. If you want a system where to get an fda stamp you have to prove it works but can sell whatever otherwise with no consequences until you kill someone or destroy their gallbladders (https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2024/05/fda-determines-that-t...) - well that's what we already have now so given it hasn't changed in decades, even with recent attempts to do so after all the strip mall stem cell clinics and GRAS issues and all, I don't think your opinion is that out of the mainstream.

And in terms of why aren't more sold in pharmacies - no clue what you're talking about there lol. Have you not seen the A-Z supplement whatever aisles full of all this unregulated crap? You can buy whatever you want unless the DEA has an issue with it.

Re: Research into homeopathy: data falsification, fabrication and manipulation

#100

Post by CoastalCoder »

nick__m wrote: post #47
ThinkBeat wrote: post #30

I had horrible pollen allergies. My mother took me to a homeopath (in addition to regular doctors) She prescribed some tablets / pills to dissolve under the tunge, that had some pollen in them. It worked pretty well for allergies but not the best for teeth. Just building up resistance I would think. I know you can get similar treatment now from regular doctors. So my one and only interaction was fairly successful. I…

Are you sure it was not a naturopath? Because the fundamental "principle" behind homeopathy is exponential dilution. An homeopathic pollen formulation would start with 1 mg of pollen in a litter of water, a milliliter of that solution would be diluted in a liter of water and this process would be repeated a few time. In the final solution, it would be impossible to detect even a trace of the original pollen.

I know a few people that think the term "homeopath" includes what we're calling "naturopath".

I'm not really sure how this confusion arose, but I don't like it. It muddies the waters (heh) in a few ways.

Post reply on HN