The Incredible Shrinking Homeopathy Side Effects

[Skeptic]

In two other threads ("Suicide Attempt Failed" and "Memory of Water Proven") I have challanged homeopaths to overdose me.

At first the side effect of overdose -- on the warning label of the medicine (though admittedly not on the specific "homepathic sleeping drops" I took) -- was death: if I take too many of them I must call the poison control center lest I drop dead.

I didn't care, and took the whole bottle. Nothing happened.

Then, a homeopath in those threads told me that of course homeopathic medicine won't kill me, but, if I take a whole series of homeopathic medicines for a month of so per her instructions, it will mess me up pretty bad. "Dare I do it?" she asked.

I said that I don't care, and will do it, and asked her to provide me with the exact details of the homeopathic medicine I need to "mess me up pretty bad".

I then was recommended Sulphur 200C, but warned once more -- I might get sensitive teeth. Oh the horror.

Well, I'm still waiting for her to give me the exact brand, but obviosly once homeopaths find out you just don't care about their dire warnings and will overdose on their powerful nostrums no matter what they say, suddenly the "side effects" begin to magically shrink.

I think this is proof they, deep down, know their stuff doesn't work and actually doesn't cause anything, don't you?

In homeopathy, the wages of overdosing is death -- but after you take taxes out of it all that's left is a bit of a tired feeling, really.

[lauwersw]

I would think some do indeed know it doesn't really work, but don't underestimate the power of self-delusion.

That's what they do all the time in the face of other evidence. The best example I think is if one "remedy" doesn't give immediate results, it's not because it actually doesn't work, they just try some other things until they find something that gives the desired results (or at least that's what they think).

[skyhand]

I wonder if a mass suicide might be a good way to go? You should be able to get some good press coverage, if enough people take part in it.

[blutoski]

Think about whether the homeopaths willing to engage you might not be representative of the profession. Most homeopaths I've discussed this with don't understand why anybody thinks an 'overdose' of homeopathic remedy would be harmful.

I hear it all the time: "Homeopathy is completely safe: no harmful side effects; no risk of overdose."

[geni]

Think about whether the homeopaths willing to engage you might not be representative of the profession. Most homeopaths I've discussed this with don't understand why anybody thinks an 'overdose' of homeopathic remedy would be harmful.

I hear it all the time: "Homeopathy is completely safe: no harmful side effects; no risk of overdose."

There are various aproaches. For example some will start playing with the lack of a solid definition of a homeopathic dose.

[not daSkeptic]

... "no risk of overdose."

This is a telling statement, isn't it? An overdose is defined as being subjected to a higher quantity of a medication than recommended. If there's no risk of an overdose, that suggests either 1) the patient is incapable of consuming more than recommended, or 2) there is no dose to begin with. Unless a giant hand is going to pop out of the bottle and slap the patient for taking too many pills, I don't think #1 is an option.

[JimBenArm]

Please, Skeptic, if you go, I want to go with you!

I couldn't face life here without you! Even if it means sensitive teeth!

Oh, the huge manatee!

[rjh01]

The main dangers is that the medicine is not 100% homeopathic. It may contain a real dose of something. Suggest first taking two or three pills to see if there are any effects. If not then the risk is small.

Of course who are you trying to convince? Most human beings will know that homeopathic medicine is worthless once it is explained what it is. The rest will never be convinced no matter what.

[PixyMisa]

It's all backwards anyway. Not taking a homeopathic remedy should be a fatal overdose.

[Steve Knight]

If you should go ahead with this then remember to follow the correct dosage regime and posology recommended by homeopaths, as some here already have, rather than just downing the whole bottle in one go. As noted, most modern homeopaths follow Kent's idea that taking 50 pills at once is the same as taking just one. (Hahnemann might have thought differently, certainly where the sick were concerned he advised against overdosing). Oddly however the recommended amount is often two pills taken together, for reasons I have yet to see explained, given the apparent lack of difference.

ETA: I've just found Rolfe's post where homeopaths give their response to this last point:
http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-28371.html

[lauwersw]

I wonder if a mass suicide might be a good way to go? You should be able to get some good press coverage, if enough people take part in it.

Done before in Belgium by SKEPP:

http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-05/belgium.html

With very little results, in any way... (meaning nobody got killed, very little got converted). Maybe good for a little awareness.

[Mojo]

I hear it all the time: "Homeopathy is completely safe: no harmful side effects; no risk of overdose."


The thing is, since homoeopathy relies entirely on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy for its reports of cures, in order to be consistent they should also attribute any adverse events (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15532700) to the homoeopathy. ;)

Thirty-one patients described new symptoms (27%)

[blutoski]

This is a telling statement, isn't it? An overdose is defined as being subjected to a higher quantity of a medication than recommended. If there's no risk of an overdose, that suggests either 1) the patient is incapable of consuming more than recommended, or 2) there is no dose to begin with. Unless a giant hand is going to pop out of the bottle and slap the patient for taking too many pills, I don't think #1 is an option.

That's partly true. It's really hard to get an overdose of many substances, so there's little fear of overdose for some modalities, including many conventional medicines. That's pretty much the reason for the distinction between over-the-counter versus prescription.

But I detect more quibbling with terminology than anything else. Most people who say they are worried about an overdose pretty clearly mean they are worried about the harm from an overdose.

In a peculiar way, since homeopathic remedies become more powerful with dilution, taking too much implies less risk, and taking a more diluted amount would be closer to what we call an overdose.

To the point of there being two jokes:

* "New! Now with even less active ingredient!"

and:

* "He forgot to take his remedy yesterday. Since his body was not used to getting such a small amount, he died of an overdose."

[blutoski]

The thing is, since homoeopathy relies entirely on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy for its reports of cures, in order to be consistent they should also attribute any adverse events (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15532700) to the homoeopathy. ;)

You'd think.

[blutoski]

The main dangers is that the medicine is not 100% homeopathic. It may contain a real dose of something. Suggest first taking two or three pills to see if there are any effects. If not then the risk is small.

Of course who are you trying to convince? Most human beings will know that homeopathic medicine is worthless once it is explained what it is. The rest will never be convinced no matter what.

Yes, this is important. Consumerlab and the FDA have found that adulteration of homeopathic remedies with prescription drugs is too common.

Also: many homeopathic remedies may be non-prescription, but also not serial diluted. Just because somebody's a registered homeopath doesn't mean the particular treatment he's selected for you is traditionally homeopathic in the law of opposites/dilution/succussion sense.

[Rolfe]

.... the recommended amount is often two pills taken together, for reasons I have yet to see explained, given the apparent lack of difference.

ETA: I've just found Rolfe's post where homeopaths give their response to this last point:
http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-28371.html


That archive format can be hard to navigate, so here's the actual post.

When I was trying that stupid Belladonna proving, I noticed that the bottle (bought in Boots) said on it that two pills should be taken twice daily. I asked at H'pathy what the point of the two-pill instruction was, because most of the posters there were taking the line that a dose was a dose was a dose, irrespective of the number of pills. (Apart from anything else, it's part of the stock homoeopath answer to the "I just scarfed this entire bottle of homoeopathic sleeping pills" stunt.) So, were Boots just trying to double their sales?

I was quite stunned by the reply, that maybe not all the pills in the bottle had been medicated, so taking two doubled your chance of getting a dose. This of course implies diabolical working practices and worse quality control, and frankly I simply don't believe it. Making sure that the entire batch does get medicated is so childishly simple that no manufacturer could possibly be allowing such poor practice. Then of course we got into the argument about how can you quality control a manufacturing process where you can't in any way whatsoever distinguish the finished product from the raw material, and relationships rather deteriorated from that point.

I just pegged the "unmedicated pills" excuse as yet another one from the lexicon of what we blame it on when for some reason the remedy doesn't appear to have done anything. Along with someone having touched the pill, airport security scanners, exposure to the close approach of Mars and drinking a cup of coffee (not to mention taking the contraceptive pill). I never did get an answer to why the twice-daily repetition of the remedy when Hahnemannian practice would seem to prohibit this, but that's a constant battle with these people anyway.

However, the excuse would seem to be completely blown out of the water by this "grafting" stunt. In fact, all Boots would have to do would be to ensure that there were one or two medicated pills in the bottle, and fill up with blanks. Hey, maybe they do that! The more I hear of the range of legitimate ways of producing homoeopathic products, the more of a money-spinner it seems to be.

So, either pills in the same bottle all take on the properties of the medicated ones, and so the grafting stunt is valid, or this doesn't happen, in which case precautions to avoid taking an inadvertently unmedicated pill may be advisable. They can't have it both ways. So which is it?

And they get all huffy when you complain that they themselves are full of internal contradictions!


Rolfe.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

That archive format can be hard to navigate, so here's the actual post.




Rolfe.


It really, really, really can't get more funny stupid that this. Can it?

Oh. Wait. Of course it can. Homeopaths are involved.

:boggled:100

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

The thing is, since homoeopathy relies entirely on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy for its reports of cures, in order to be consistent they should also attribute any adverse events (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15532700) to the homoeopathy. ;)



Can't search for myself with my edge of civilisation phone reception, but you must remember the lunatic provings (Trisha Norland?) where the author comments on the spooky occurrences of car crashes and ship sinkings caused by some stupid middle class idiots swallowing sugar pills in England. One must never under-estimate the depths of superstitious befuddlement to which they have descended.

[Rolfe]

Misha Norland (http://www.hominf.org/proving.htm).

Rolfe.

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Misha Norland (http://www.hominf.org/proving.htm).

Rolfe.

Thanks. Any passing member of a higher civilisation should be obliged to sterilise this planet on the evidence of that alone.

[Toke]

I am surprised, would have throught the homeopathic condom would be used to treat infertility.:confused:

[cow_cat]

I've never knowingly taken a homeopathic remedy. Does that mean I've actually taken a fatal overdose of everything?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I've never knowingly taken a homeopathic remedy. Does that mean I've actually taken a fatal overdose of everything?

Yes! And you WILL DIE! Eventually. ;)

[Mojo]

Can't search for myself with my edge of civilisation phone reception, but you must remember the lunatic provings (Trisha Norland?) where the author comments on the spooky occurrences of car crashes and ship sinkings caused by some stupid middle class idiots swallowing sugar pills in England. One must never under-estimate the depths of superstitious befuddlement to which they have descended.


Wasn't that the "shipwreck" proving? I seem to remember it mentioning that there were a number of maritime calamities even before the proving started.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Wasn't that the "shipwreck" proving? I seem to remember it mentioning that there were a number of maritime calamities even before the proving started.

Ah. Precog Homeopathy. This the Ultimate Homeopathy - effects from not only infinitely dilute dilutions but from delusions dilutions to be made in the future!
:jaw-dropp

[Rolfe]

Lionel Milgrom quotes a report where the patient got better when the homoeopath thought of the correct remedy, before it had even been prescribed.

They'll be able to cure death next.

Rolfe.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Misha Norland.

The radiation produced in the annihilation of Positronium atoms.
Now they are making up elements?


Buckyballs or Carbon 60
What in hell does this cure? Pentakis dedocahedronitis?


Newly Formed Water
Yeah! Another homeopathic cure for dehydration. Just add water.


Lionel Milgrom quotes a report where the patient got better when the homoeopath thought of the correct remedy, before it had even been prescribed.
That's metahomeopathy.

~~ Paul

[Here_to_learn]

Lionel Milgrom quotes a report where the patient got better when the homoeopath thought of the correct remedy, before it had even been prescribed.
That's metahomeopathy.

~~ PaulWith the clear benefit that the less you think, the better...

[Mojo]

Lionel Milgrom quotes a report where the patient got better when the homoeopath thought of the correct remedy, before it had even been prescribed.


He's also claimed (http://www.galahomeopathy.com/ArticleView.aspx?name=an%20interview%20with%20Lion el%20Milgrom%20from%20Rowena%20Ronson%E2%80%99s%20 book%20Looking%20Back%20Moving%20Forward&hidden=y) that there is a vet somewhere in the South-West of England who treats animals by giving the remedies to the owner.

[Klimax]

With the clear benefit that the less you think, the better...

And if there is no thinking,you are cured of all,including money.

[Toke]

He's also claimed (http://www.galahomeopathy.com/ArticleView.aspx?name=an%20interview%20with%20Lion el%20Milgrom%20from%20Rowena%20Ronson%E2%80%99s%20 book%20Looking%20Back%20Moving%20Forward&hidden=y) that there is a vet somewhere in the South-West of England who treats animals by giving the remedies to the owner.

Sounds like a good idea, easier and just as effective.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Sounds like a good idea, easier and just as effective.

The next advancement in homeopathic science: Write the prescription on a piece of paper and hold it up to the phone. :scared:

[Here_to_learn]

The next advancement in homeopathic science: Write the prescription on a piece of paper and hold it up to the phone. :scared:Would that be something like this (http://www.digibio.com/cgi-bin/node.pl?lg=us&nd=n4_3)?

ETA: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3921669&postcount=44
http://improbable.com/2004/10/12/the-passing-of-benveniste/

[Toke]

Amacing, what will they think off next?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Would that be something like this (http://www.digibio.com/cgi-bin/node.pl?lg=us&nd=n4_3)?

ETA: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3921669&postcount=44
http://improbable.com/2004/10/12/the-passing-of-benveniste/

I did not believe that my imagination was so good as to invent this idea. I do now remember reading about it -- but my mind must have blocked it.

So. I wonder when the technique will move from the lab into practice. Maybe it is being tested right now? :D

[Here_to_learn]

So. I wonder when the technique will move from the lab into practice. Maybe it is being tested right now? :DOf course it is! I'm sure they have that testing running in parallel with all the other research where they actually take into account the criticism from our beloved Anti-homeopathy Illuminati members on this site!

Or maybe they actually have taken that into account, and that's why there's no new research being published and we only get to se the same old stuff over and over again!:boggled:

[HansMustermann]

Now they are making up elements?

Positronium actually exists... for an infinitesimally short time. It's the very lightweight atom made of an electron and a positron (anti-electron, if you will).

But the half-life of it is really infinitesimal, so I don't think you can do much more with it than measure stuff in a lab. The most stable version of it barely lasts about a microsecond.

It also decays into gamma-ray photons, so I'm not sure what would make that radiation more special than any other photons of that wavelength.

On the whole, it sounds to me like just about on par with using "quantum" in various scams. It just picks some words from a domain that most people are guaranteed not to understand, so it would make the scam easier.

[Mojo]

Positronium actually exists... for an infinitesimally short time. It's the very lightweight atom made of an electron and a positron (anti-electron, if you will).

But the half-life of it is really infinitesimal, so I don't think you can do much more with it than measure stuff in a lab. The most stable version of it barely lasts about a microsecond.


That's OK, memories preserved in the structure of liquid water last for less than 50 femtoseconds, and homoeopaths have no trouble using that.