Featured

If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

May 6, 2012 by admin in Homeopathy with 474 Comments

Though we certainly must make determinations of what is and is not real, isn’t it best to do that based on experience and observation, rather than presumptions of what can and cannot be?

Homeopathy's Mystery: Not knowing how something works has nothing to do with whether it does. Photo by Luc Viatour. Creative Commons license.

by Heidi Stevenson

One of the most common arguments against homeopathy says: It can’t work, therefore it doesn’t. Another throws out the challenge to explain how it works. Neither is a fair argument, since they do not care about evidence showing its efficacy, but only attempt to demean both homeopathy and the person who believes it works.

These same people do not place the same burden on their own belief in allopathy. Let’s pose that question to an anesthesiologist, Michael Alkire of the University of California School of Medicine, who is recognized as an expert in his field. Surely he knows the answer. His response is in a quote from the Encyclopedia of Consciousness:

How anesthesia works has been a mystery since the discovery of anesthesia itself.

Do those who keep attacking homeopathy care that no one understands how anesthesia works, either? Oddly enough, that never seems to come up. Why do they hold homeopathy to a different standard? Not knowing the mechanism behind how something works is hardly a legitimate argument that it doesn’t.

Spiderweb by Mike Baird. Creative Commons license.

Electricity

Do we understand how electricity works? Outside of observations of its effects, we do not. It is a subatomic phenomenon, and that field is in extreme flux right. In a world in which things do not exist unless they are observed, as postulated by modern physics—and not having the slightest idea how this can possibly be—we cannot possibly claim to know how electricity works. So, is it legitimate to suggest that electricity cannot work because it consists of particles that, quite impossibly, exist only when they’re observed?

The real world is a very complex and mysterious place. Though we certainly must make determinations of what is and is not real, isn’t it best to do that based on experience and observation, rather than presumptions of what can and cannot be?

Did the sun suddenly come into being the day we humans were finally able to theorize a means by which it shines?

Must we give up anesthesia because we have no idea how it works?

How can rational people make the claim that homeopathy doesn’t work simply because we don’t know how?

The argument that it can’t work, therefore it doesn’t, is based solely on the idea that no one knows how it works, so it’s simply a corollary of the demand that how homeopathy works be explained—not a different argument.

The Allopathic View

What is going on here? If homeopathy simply didn’t work, why would the allopathic world attack it so strongly? Other alternative approaches to healthcare are accepted, and some even encouraged. How many doctors advise their patients to pray? Where’s the explanation of how that works?

Homeopathy’s concepts and holistic view of people and the human body are entirely counter to the allopathic approach. It requires a complete rethinking of the nature of health and medical care. Is it not, therefore, only reasonable to test it on its own terms?

Most trials of homeopathy have been done as if the remedies were equivalent to allopathic drugs. That most assuredly is not the case. In homeopathy, one cannot apply a single remedy on the simple basis of a single symptom or diagnosis. Each case must be taken on an individual basis. The remedies that are effective in different people with the same diagnosis may not be the same, especially in chronic illnesses. In fact, they most likely won’t be.

Rather than viewing symptoms as the problem and trying to suppress them, homeopaths see them as attempts to heal. Until recently, allopaths treated fever as if it were the problem, so they routinely advised taking drugs to bring it down. The reality is that fever is one of the body’s primary means of trying to attack infections, by creating a heated environment in which microorganisms cannot survive. Even with this awareness, allopaths still often tell worried parents to give drugs to bring down fevers that are not high enough to be dangerous.

Allopaths view symptoms as if they were the disease. Thus, the usual goal of mainstream medicine’s treatments is to suppress them. The long term view is generally not taken. The connections that homeopaths see between common drugs and disease are ignored and denied, until the evidence can no longer be suppressed.

Allopathy’s Suppression of Homeopathy

Spiderweb by France House Hunt. Creative Commons license.

Allopathy applies its method of suppression to homeopathy. The approach seems to start with the view that the existence of homeopathy is a problem, rather than a symptom of a medical system that’s gone awry. Therefore, much as all other symptoms are treated, the method of dealing with homeopathy is an attempt to suppress it.

What does mainstream medicine fear from homeopathy? If it truly can’t work, then why try to suppress it? Won’t it simply fade away if it’s ineffective? Clearly, people must experience benefits, especially when homeopathic treatment generally requires money out of pocket, as it’s rarely covered by either insurance or national health plans.

Rather than denying the truth of stories by people who claim they’ve been healed by homeopathy—especially those whose conditions are considered untreatable or irreversible in the allopathic world—why not do large population studies, rather than placebo and randomly controlled trials? Though such trials are currently called the gold standard of science, they are far from the only technique available—and there is only the claim of their effectiveness behind them, not any proof.

Spiderweb by Erik Schepers. Creative Commons license.

The only conclusive test is experience, the results of large numbers of people over a long period of time. Within modern medicine’s allopathy, we have only to look at the disasters of the drug Vioxx, which killed tens of thousands, and hormone replacement therapy, which has proven to cause the very diseases it had been purported to prevent. In spite of legions of placebo and randomly controlled trials trotted out by modern healthcare, the truth is that those allopathic treatments have failed miserably. If anything is responsible for the unnecessary iatrogenic deaths of thousands and millions, it is the reliance on placebo and random controlled trials, the so-called gold standard of modern evidence-based medicine.

Those people who wish to demand that homeopathy be explained should first get their own house in order. Even if an explanation for how anesthesia works is discovered, it won’t resolve this issue. The fact will remain that those who have demanded an explanation for homeopathy do not make the same demands of their own medical paradigm—and that says it all.

The real issue for those people isn’t that homeopathy makes no sense to them. The real issue is that its very existence is perceived as a threat. It’s either a challenge to their perception of how the world works or it’s seen as a risk to their profession.

Luc Viatour’s Photostream.
Mike Baird’s Photostream.
Website of France House Hunt.
Erik Scheper’s Photostream.

Tagged conventional medicine, Homeopathy, homeopathy anesthesia, homeopathy electricity, homeopathy sun, if homeopathy can’t work then neither can anesthesia, modern medicine

Jesus

Jesus wept.

http://twitter.com/pvandck Peter Vintner

A first class display of how to use one’s ignorance to justify one’s delusions.
Simply appalling.

Nkt

You have a very poor grasp of physics, and almost none of quantum mechanics. To say we don’t understand precisely how electricity will behave in a given situation is frankly insane, given that I am typing this on a device running on a state of the art battery that, you guessed it, supplies an EMF that pushes the electrons (backwards due to history) and then shows me what I type via state of the art optoelectronics that use quantum effects to turn that electrity into light of the required frequency. Further, the microprocessor uses knowledge of quantum physics to work! Further still, it vibrates electrons at the right frequency to generate the radio waves that link it to the rest of the world!
This is provable and repeatable, day-in, day-out!
I can find a billion examples of this world-wide.

Please point to one example of homeopathy on the shelf that works, day-in, day-out.
- Kuriousape
  
  I know what you’re saying, I’m just amused at the thought of a microprocessor taking a quantum mechanics class

http://twitter.com/JamieMurley Jamie Murley

b
- Johan H
  
  My my you do seem to believe all sorts of nonsense don’t you? As with many of the anti’s here you seem to be suffering from an extreme form of mono mania which makes you quite irrational as soon as the word homeopathy is mentioned.
  
  So in your strange Munchhausian world view there is only one cure for cancer, all drugs work, therefore any one straying from the one true path must be misguided. You truly are a pharmaceutical fundamentalist aren’t you? Which is a giant leap of faith and a rather silly one. This is of course before we come to consider that you have ignored the whole premise of the article and just spouted your wiffle.
  
  You seem to know best what someone else should do with their own body, quite a little coup on having sovereignty over one’s own body, eh?
  
  Finally if you were truly worried about spending on the monstrosity that is the NHS, if I were you I’d worry about: fraud, corruption, spending on proven useless pharmaceuticals and the travesty that is doctor’s pay, before even thinking about the minuscule amount that the NHS spends on homeopathy. The latter of course which isn’t even a rounding error in terms of budget. But of course either you can’t count or that isn’t your purpose.
  - John
    
    Oh dear Johan, you do seem to have lost the plot.
    
    Where in Jamie’s comments did he suggest that there is “one cure for cancer”?
    
    In fact there is extremely unlikely to be one catch all cure for cancer for the simple reason that there is not one type of cancer.
    
    And we are able to demonstrate beneficial effect for the “drugs” that you decry, through clinical trials, unlike homeopathy. In fact we are required to do this before they can be licensed for use, again unlike homeopathy.
    
    The only “leap of faith” on show is the belief in something without evidence, such as your apparent belief in homeopathy. There is simply no robust scientific evidence for homeopathy. No well designed clinical trials have ever demonstrated any effect beyond placebo and yet you still believe.
    
    In fact you go beyond a “leap of faith” in your belief in homeopathy as you not only believe without evidence, but you continue to believe despite all the contrary evidence. The very definition of close mindedness.
    
    And your comment about someone “knowing best what someone else should do with their own body” is an argument from ignorance. Just because you do not understand the science doesn’t mean that it is wrong. You might as well argue that because you do not understand how a car works a qualified professional mechanic is not in a position to tell you what is wrong and how to fix it when it goes wrong.
    
    And as for your comments about the NHS, any money wasted, through any means is a cause for concern, but spending any of the limited resources on any “treatment” with zero evidence base, to say nothing of no plausible mechanism is simply unjustifiable.
    
    Can I suggest that you open your mind, read the other comments on this article, research the science discussed and try and educate yourself beyond your blinkered, limited, ignorant and skewed world view.
- Jason
  
  Where’s the evidence that all those pharmaceuticals work?…Its not a “fact” that the gullible are being ripped off, its an opinion. Most of all conventional medicine is make-believe.
  - John
    
    And your evidence for these claims Jason is where exactly? They are pretty extraordinary claims, as are the claims made by homeopathy itself.
    
    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You offer none.The “fact” is that Homeopathy, when tested in a robust clinical trial, never shows any benefit beyond placebo.Therefore anyone who believes the unsubstantiated claims of homeopathy are either misinformed, uninformed or simply gullible.Any anyone who pays for something that has been proved time and time again in robust clinical trials not to work, is being ripped off. That is my “opinion”, care to offer your reasons why it is not a valid one?
  - JayK
    
    Perhaps you should learn how to read peer-reviewed literature and how validation science works before you attempt to make such a cynical statement from a position of ignorance.

Pete084

Using your ignorance of other subjects to excuse your ignorance of your subject isn’t particularly clever!

The Spoon

Next time your having that tooth filled, or a broken bone fixed, try using a homoeopathic pain killer, see what that does for you.
And regular medicine doesn’t condone the use of endangered wild animals as part of it’s cures unlike some aspects of homoeopathic medicine.
- Jonnybones
  
  I have used homeopathics in having a tooth removed and afterwards to promote healing and it worked very well thanks.

Kuriousape

Well designed, objectively produced, peer reviewed clinical trial data please. People don’t precisely know how asparaginases exert their anti-leukaemic effect, but quality comparative data shows they do. But what could you use as a placebo to a placebo?

The only people homeopathy and those who ‘practice’ it are a threat to are those unfortunate individuals who believe it will positively impact on their health state in any way other than in the amazing way placebo’s can. People have had spinal surgery done under placebo anaesthesia, it doesn’t mean that the real stuff doesn’t work. Just that it’s amazing what our bodies can do if we could learn to tap into the mechanism without resorting to chicanery.

P.s. does the water in my tap (that’s fawcet for our US friends) remember being somebody’s urine? Eewgh.

http://twitter.com/_TheGeoff Geoff Robbins

Quantum theory explained “how electricity works” in the first half of the 20th Century. It’s been well established for longer than the average human lifetime.

If homeopathy works all you need to do is design a repeatable, double blind experiment which shows it to have a greater effect than placebo. What will then happen (and I guarantee this) is you will win a Nobel prize for medicine, physics or chemistry. You can then use the substantial financial prize to open free homeopathic clinics and save millions of lives. Sounds good eh? Guess why nobody has done it? (Clue: science loves to be corrected with REPEATABLE experiments)

Xtaldave

See, what you’ve done here is confuse *implausibility* with *not-knowing-precisely-how-something-entirely-plausible-might-work.*

But well done for giving anyone with high school scientific knowledge a good chuckle.

Saharrison1970

Don’t confuse our rationality with your ignorance.

Jenna_bad

Leaving to one side the rest, if you don’t understand electricity may I recommend Shock & Awe on BBC4. Very informative & also entertaining, should clear the matter up for you.

Skepticat

Nice response to this stupidity from Orac on his Respectful Insolence blog today:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/05/plausibility_does_not_mean_knowing_mechanism.php#more

http://jitte.blog.com Jitte

With homeopathy, we know that it doesn’t work; the better the study, the more conclusively this can be stated. Any claim as to how it is supposed to work is therefore not important. With anaesthetics, we know that it most definitely works, and only then is it interesting to find out why. That we don’t know completely yet doesn’t diminish the fact that it does indeed work. And electricity? Damn, how ignorant is it possible to be? The fact that you (personally) don’t know doesn’t mean anything, we (our collective knowledge) know very well indeed how electricity works, and have done so for decades.

But I guess that making an effort into understandig electricity (or at least to understand mankind’s understanding of electricity) would imply that you would try to understand how science works, and since you are a firm believer in homeopathy, that is completely ruled out…

http://greaterthanlapsed.wordpress.com/ GreaterThanLapsed

How anesthesia works: http://science.howstuffworks.com/anesthesia.htm

I’ll let everyone else Google for how electricity works, although I’m pretty sure that my 9-year-old has already learned that at school.
- DrWho
  
  “It’s not completely clear exactly how general anesthetics work, but…” ~ quoted directly from the link you posted.
  - AnonyMLA
    
    “It’s not completely clear…” is not the same as “it is so confounding that for it to be true it literally has to do away with the last 200 years of scientific understanding.” And while exact mechanisms may not be known, the fact is that we can observe in double-blinded situations that general anaesthesia will knock a person unconscious. You cannot say the same thing about homeopathy, where the effects disappear when the trials are double blinded and where not only do we do not understand how it works we cannot understand how it could possibly work. Big difference.
    
    And generally when anaesthesiologists say we don’t understand how it works, what they mean is which specific nerve receptors are affected in what order (and thus why one person may react differently to another under the same regime). It’s not pure speculation such as what homeopaths present like “memory of water” or clathrates.

fwuzzi

Well, I have to admit that I am impressed that you are leaving dissenting opinions up. Kudos to you!

So, since water has memory and has been through various stages ad infinitum, does it remember when it was part of dinosaur poo? How exactly does that affect it as it is tapped soundly with a Bible between dilutions? Is the Bible the reason that it “forgets” what you don’t what it to remember, or is it just the amazing magical powers of the homeopathic practitioner? I understand wanting magic. I spent a lot of years wishing for a prince and a castle, and the power to levitate and maybe fly. It would be just amazing! If you progress to that stage of ability would you please contact me for training? I would love to know more.

RA

What is truly hilarious is those posting here claiming to “know how science works” prove not only do they NOT know how “science works”, but also their lack of understanding of how the English language works. Please do “google” the words THEORY and FLUX. If you’ve followed the science community at all, then you should know there are HUGE question marks (and discrepancies) by the THEORY of Quantum Physics… And knowing how to USE electricity is far different from understanding why it works (especially when the leading “theory” of why it works is, itself, in question). While electricity IS theorized in Quantum Physics, when Quantum Physics itself has whole branches of the scientific community dismissing Quantum Physics (http://scienceforums.com/topic/11645-7-reasons-to-abandon-quantum-mechanics-and-embrace-this-new-theory) ~ just one of ZILLIONS of sites on the topic… Anyway, in the effort to sound “smart” you are all proving yourselves to be a bunch of dumb asses! I’m not even a physicist and I can debunk the debunkers! Try not to “talk science” with real scientists ~ they’ll REALLY make you look as stupid as you all are! The study whether Homeopathy works or not is exactly as the author is asking: Let’s compare results! Does it perform better than conventional medicine? I don’t know. I am not an advocate of Homeopathy just yet, but I do know that conventional medicine gets way too much credit for what little, if any, results it produces. Don’t get me wrong: Conventional medicine is GREAT for trauma. For healing… I’d like to see the comparisons. It’s hard to imagine that anything could fail MORE than conventional medicine has.
- Science Mom
  
  Let’s compare results! Does it perform better than conventional medicine?
  
  Please take your own advice and “Google” the topic. Studies have been done; homeopathy is nothing more than a placebo effect at best. It boggles the mind that some can believe that a substance diluted to the point that few or no molecules of the original tincture is going to exert a biological effect yet can’t even explain what that biological effect is or even measure it.
- JayK
  
  I guess I’ll have to turn in all my degrees in engineering, physics and psychology, you’ve just told me I’m not a real scientist. I guess I’ll go just sit around and lie to people about things I really don’t know about. Thank you for helping me see the light, RA.
- fwuzzi
  
  Please tell me treatments where homeopathy is much better than conventional medicine. I have several issues that need treatment and would love to see if there are options out there for me.
  - http://www.facebook.com/brianpcurry Brian Curry
    
    Dehydration.
    - AnonyMLA
      
      First, I laughed. Very good response! I’m going to have to borrow that in the future
      
      Now the pendant in me: this is true only if we assume that the patient doesn’t need electrolytes as part of the solution for dehydration. Homeopathic dilutions, in that case, would result in water intoxification. So homeopathy isn’t even better than conventional medicine for something that literally requires nearly pure water.
  - Boza
    
    Almost everything. Except broken bones or something
    that requires surgery. You can read all the crap from John, who obviously is
    advocating his pharmacy industry. I am telling you this: all my family have
    been on homeopathic treatment, 100% (yes John, 100%) successful. My kids (now 6
    and 3) have never used conventional treatment – they have not suffered any
    serious illness, regardless that their classmates or friends have had. I am not
    a scientist, right. But I am an engineer. MSc. I have been studying a lot of
    math and physics. To test the effectiveness of a medicine, you use statistics.
    I can write you all the stat theory John, but I am too busy to do that. You can
    google. The point is that if you want to be ABSOLUTELY sure that you will have
    a 50.000% chance an event to happen (like flipping a coin) you need to make
    ENDLESS attempts. So is the testing of the drugs. They have usually been tested
    on a very small number of people, comparing to the number of potential
    patients. So guess how the industry gets the information about the side effects
    (yes John, you got it – you are a whiny pig… sorry). It is your choice how
    you are going to treat your body!
- John
  
  Well now RA, so you’re not a physicist, no shit Sherlock!
  
  I’d guess you’re no a scientist at all! But even if you were that would not make your opinions any more valid. It’s the FACT’s that matter. And whilst you have the right to your own opinions you do not have the right to your own facts.
  
  But tell me, what is stopping you being an advocate of homeopathy just yet? Because your comments sound just like those of a homeopathic supporter.
  
  Could it be a complete lack of evidence of effectiveness? Or just that you haven’t done enough research on Google yet?
  
  And speaking of evidence, where is your evidence for this statement?
  
  “It’s hard to imagine that anything could fail MORE than conventional medicine has ”
  
  In which particular fields are you suggesting that conventional medicine has failed so much? Because this just sounds like an argument from incredulity and ignorance. To say nothing of being a gross generalisation, and an example of you inventing your own “facts”.
  
  And as for comparisons! You’re kidding right! That is what clinical trials, randomized, double blinded clinical trials are about. To say nothing of systematic reviews such as those conducted by the Cochrane Collaboration. Go on, look them up, research their work, you know you want to!
  
  At the risk of over simplification…. the FACTS are that there is no reliable evidence for the effectiveness of homeopathy. In robust well designed clinical trials it has never demonstrated any benefit beyond placebo.
  
  Conventional medicine, including anaesthesia, that you decry so much, has a veritable mountain of supporting evidence for its effectiveness.
  
  So off you try Googling that!
  - RA
    
    Oh yes, you’re right John. I can’t find any examples of conventional medicine failing. It is always tested in controlled studies and then never fails in the real world. Let me ask you this ~ have you gotten a flu shot lately?
    - http://www.facebook.com/martin.bouckaert Martin Bouckaert
      
      I am absolutely certain that there are numerous examples in which our knowledge of science has not been substantial to accomplish favourable results. Medicine in particular continues to advance today, but there are clearly some areas in which it fails. Such as curing AIDS, or cancer. We just haven’t learned how, as a race, to do that.
      
      Likewise, science is as prone to human error as piloting a jet plane. Fortunately, just like the proper pilot training, the scientific method itself minimises this error so that when these errors do occur, very rarely, the human element can be eliminated very quickly if it was not a factor. Likewise, if it was a factor of the failure, then it will be detected very quickly.
      
      However, what you call conventional medicine has methods in place to detect and record where such errors, be they human or otherwise, take place, and every one of them is accounted for.
      Regarding homoeopathy, all the lives lost because of it have also been accounted for using modern science to demonstrate how homoeopathy has failed. So, RA, I am certain that you can, indeed, find examples where modern (what you call ‘conventional’) medicine has failed, but I challenge you to find one of those in which we haven’t learned something from the process and corrected our science to better understand the error, and prevent it from occurring again.
      
      I wonder, however, if homoeopathy is accountable to the same standards?
      
      http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html
      - John
        
        Martin, I agree with what you say and of course science doesn’t know all the answers, but RA’s comment was that he couldn’t imagine anything “failing” MORE than conventional medicine.
        
        I suppose it could depend on your definition of “failure”. Are we to classify the fact that no “cure for cancer” has yet been discovered as a failure?
        
        If so that seems a little harsh as to use the examples that you give the treatment of AIDS and Cancer has improved hugely in the last few decades.
        
        We may not have found “cures” for these conditions but antiretrovirals have stopped AIDS from being the death sentence that it once was and cancer is a much more treatable and survivable condition. Science doesn’t stop, it constantly moves on as our knowledge and understanding improves, unlike homeopathy which hasn’t progressed since Samuel Hahnemann first invented it over 200 years ago.
      - RA
        
        More failures of conventional medicine:
        
        Antibiotics prescribed annually for colds: Approx 20 million
        
        Info on false-positives in cancer screenings is as high as 45% ~ the question here is does the Cancer Industry take credit for that too?
        
        AZT ~ failed cancer drug now an HIV drug?
        
        Are you aware of Peter Duesberg ~ professor of molecular biology, Duesberg is one of the world’s leading experts on retroviruses
        ~http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/tbcould.htm
        Is he right? IDK ~ I won’t test it by purposely contracting HIV, but read the article. He WAS
        
        “Up to now we have said-and we still say-that HIV causes a majority of AIDS cases,” said Chuck Fallis, a press officer. “The jury is still out on the new virus-whether it actually causes the other AIDS cases.””Nothing specifically on Duesberg?” “No.”What was once “all” has now become “a majority.””You don’t ever have polio without polio virus,” Duesberg says. “A hundred cases can support a theory, but it only takes one to destroy it.”So when the leading scientists disagrees with the status quo… you cut his funding to shut him up? Why? So the failed cancer drug can become the HIV drug?I could keep finding these failures all day.
    - John
      
      So RA have you got any examples or not?
      
      Your original comment was that you would find it “hard to imagine anything that fails MORE than conventional medicine has”.Now unless you were just speaking from ignorance, incredulity, prejudice or generalisation, then you must have some evidence to back up that statement. Presumably you have a long list to of conventional medicine’s failures in order to make such a strongly worded statement? Perhaps you could supply it?And if all you can come up with is an oblique reference to flu shots then that hardly justifies your gross generalisation about the “failures” of medicine.I look forward to seeing your list of medicine’s alleged failures.
      - RA
        
        Read my response to Martin’s comment John ~ it is co-addressed to you. It contains indisputable proof provided by the maker of the flu shot ~ here it is again:
        
        http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_flulaval.pdf
        
        “There have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL”
        
        I’ve provided another for aspirin in the aforementioned response. I have provided what I have to offer. Take it for what it’s worth. Your health is up to you, not me or some doctor. I am done arguing / providing facts here and need to move on. If what I have shared hasn’t opened your mind, then nothing I share will. Peace!
      - RA
        
        One last thought… in case you did get that flu shot…
        
        If you read the package insert ~ like the one I provided ~ (don’t think that one is valid? Get one from Walgreens and compare… plus the same package insert is available on dozens of websites ~ you don’t think there is a conspiracy against Flulaval do you? Did someone mention tinfoil hats earlier?)
        
        Anyway, read on and you will learn that the flu shot has NEVER been tested for its carcinogenic properties. You see, if they don’t “know” it causes cancer, they don’t have to disclose that it does, just that they don’t know. Aluminum, Formaldehyde… Both carcinogens. Both ingredients in flu shots.
        
        For your sake, I hope you passed on the flu shot.
        
        Happy Mothers Day!

RA

…And for the “genius” who can explain exactly how general anesthetics work, perhaps you could enlighten the entire scientific community: “…Yet in the modern era, despite tremendous advances in the quality and selectivity of anesthetics, we still have a poor understanding of how anesthetics work in the brain.” ~ Scientific American: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=anesthesia-what-doctors-dont-understand

http://www.facebook.com/martin.bouckaert Martin Bouckaert

I’ve never questioned homoeopathy on the grounds of how it works. I question it on the grounds of, is there any proven effect whatsoever? Forget the how, I’m not interested in how if there are no demonstrable results. The results of anaesthesia are documented, and substantiated, regardless of how it works, it does. However, homoeopathy just doesn’t work as anything more than a placebo. The documentation supports this conclusion, but there is no legitimate documentation that suggests it does anything more than this.
- RA
  
  Hi Martin (and John),
  
  First and foremost, I am not an advocate for homeopathy and I have not ‘made up’ any facts. I just have an open mind. When I read comments criticizing the author’s comments regarding anesthetics and electricity as being scientifically wrong… I merely pointed out the proof that the author is not wrong… the medical world CLEARLY states that it has no clue how general anesthetics work and Quantum Physics theorizes how electricity works… the problem with QP is it has to make up new rules and/or the existence of a ‘multiverse’ for it to work ~ things that will probably NEVER be proven. The woman who wrote the article clearly states that it is difficult to prove in a ‘controlled study’ where a hypothesis is made and it is tested for homeopathy.
  
  Are there not other sciences where this is not the “Scientific Method”? http://www.electrical-contractor.net/ESF/Why%20Electricity%20is%20Impossible%20to%20Understand.htm) a VERY well written site that explains the standard ‘create a hypotheses, and ‘test’ it is NOT the only Scientific Method.
  
  What about Astronomy ~ is that not a science? Paleontology? How does one design controlled experiments in those valid sciences? Are there particles smaller than the smallest we now are aware of? Was it not Bohr’s theory that the atom was the smallest particle? He was wrong, right?
  
  The problem with “controlled” studies is in the control. In modern “Evidence-Based Medicine” it appears to me that the ‘scientist’ has already made up his mind what the results will be because of a corporate or philosophical agenda ~ They design the study to produce those results, in my (and not only my) opinion. (Why the “test studies”? ~ the unpublished studies that help them figure out how to produce the results they are after?). Proof for that? Vioxx, Fosamax, Accutane… the list goes on and on. Obviously these drugs that passed the “controlled studies” have gone on to cause major damage to the public. That is at least proof that the “controlled studies” are not doing what they are supposed to do ~ unless, of course, that the package inserts for those drugs contains a disclosure similar to that of the flu shot. If the flu-shot doesn’t have to prove it works and is considered “conventional medicine”, why does Homeopathy have to apply those rules? Shouldn’t they both?
  
  The pro-homeopathy sites will produce results that say it works and the anti-homeopthy (conventional medicine) sites will produce the opposite ~ and you can find an approximately 1-1 ratio of pro and anti sites ~ I know this because I could! The problem lies in the agenda. The “pro” group is trying to validate itself and the “anti” group” is trying to discredit the “pro” group because homeopathy ‘drugs’ are CHEAP! I personally do not know if they work. I haven’t used ‘medicine’ of any sort for around 25 years. I believe in the ‘you are what you eat’ theory. I am in my mid 40s and look like I am in my mid 20′s. I do not eat fast foot, smoke, consume MSG or artificial sweeteners, and have a blood pressure of 102/68, haven’t been sick in the last five years (in spite of being around sick kids regularly) and get the cheapest life-insurance rates available.
  
  Your response has been the most scientific thus far Martin. To the guy who says he has degrees in Engineering, Physics, and Psychology ~ you stopped being a scientist when you thought you knew everything. Please start being one again and question all that you think you know. Maybe you’re right and homeopathy is all BS ~ it has out-lived conventional medicine for nearly 200 years though. The simple fact for me is ~ and I repeat ~ I haven’t used it or conventional medicine for over two decades.
  
  Anyway, want proof about conventional medicine? ~ http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_flulaval.pdf
  The funny/sad part is that the manufacturer/Doctor hands you the proof ~ usually AFTER you’ve received the shot. Notice specifically the line that says:
  
  “there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL”
  
  Let me make that bigger for those who just want to skim:
  
  “THERE HAVE BEEN NO CONTROLLED TRIALS ADEQUATELY DEMONSTRATING A DECREASE IN NFLUENZA AFTER VACCINATING WITH FLULAVAL”!
  
  Then it goes on to “warn” you about all the possible side effects that are more common than you think. If a maker of a flu shot can not prove its efficacy, how is it better than homeopathy. Are you supposed to take it on ‘faith’ that it works? And risk all those side effects? I have personally known 5 people that have had Guillain Barre Syndrome and I assure you that it is no joke. “Muscle Weakness” is what the pamphlets describe. Total paralysis is the reality. the drug-makers say it is 1 in 1 million. I don’t know five million people! While it COULD be possible that I happen to know an unfortunate bunch, it is also possible that Guillain Barre Syndrome is as under-reported as I suspect it is. Still, are you going to take all that risk for a shot that the manufacturer discloses it has no idea if it works or not?
  
  I can find examples like this for nearly every pharmaceutical drug available. This is not hearsay – John – I am not the one making up facts so I can take a pill instead of eating responsibly… There ISN’T a pill that can undo McDonalds…
  
  Aspirin: http://www.drugs.com/sfx/bayer-aspirin-regimen-side-effects.html ~ if a ‘safe’ drug like aspirin causes intestinal bleeding ~ from DRUGS.com (a site dedicated to telling you how wonderful pharmaceutical drugs are) ~ after a SINGLE DOSE… Read the disclaimer ~ don’t take my word for it!
  
  Also, a laundry-list of other side effects… Imagine what an “Aspirin Regimen” does! Now study Cayenne Pepper and it’s benefits and potential side effects. What did you learn? I’m tempted to tell you, but I won’t… READ. There isn’t a brand name or a patent! It’s difficult to OD on Cayenne Pepper and easy to OD on Aspirin. That is because one is a poison and one is not.
  
  So those are two crystal clear examples supplied by the drug industry itself of how it is a failure!
  
  Shall I keep going? I am one person. Research and learn! I am trying to help and open peoples minds. Homeopathy may be BS ~ I don’t know… Like I said ~ I have never used it. If it isn’t, cheap medicine that has no side effects surely stands in the way of expensive medicine that doesn’t work and is debilitating!
  
  I won’t keep arguing here. The author obviously believes in Homeopathy. Her facts regarding anesthesia and electricity seem to be right on and THAT is what I was standing up for, not what someone’s 9-year-old knows about electricity (like comparing how to drive a car to how the car actually works perhaps?). The medical industry is quite clear on the fact that it does not know how General Anesthetic works ~ if there is some new proof that Quantum Theory has become Quantum Fact, I’m all ears!
  - John
    
    That’s an awful lot of effort you have put in there RA! For someone who says they don’t support homeopathy you do seem pretty closed minded about the benefits of science and evidence based medicine.
    
    From a careful reading of your comments it does seem that you are very much in the anti science camp. Your examples are all very anti medicine and I will not be drawn into a lengthy discussion about the merits or otherwise of all your examples.
    
    I will say though that your first hyper link gives a 404 page not found error so it is hard to say how well written, or not, the site you suggested is.
    
    I will say though that you seem to have misunderstood the scientific method, for example the reason why we have randomised placebo controlled trials of drugs, it is to see if they are better than the existing treatment and whether they have any measurable benefit
    
    You clearly haven’t understood quantum mechanics, not surprising really, it is very complex and often anti-intuitive. However this is a highly successful scientific theory that is supported by a huge amount of empirical data. But just because you don’t understand it doesn’t mean that the theory is wrong.
    
    Incidentally, your use of the word “theory” seems to display a further lack of understanding of the meaning of that word in a scientific context. A scientific theory is not a “best guess” of how something works.
    
    The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. For example the United States National Academy of Sciences defines a Theory as follows:-
    
    “It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.”
    
    For example the “theory” of evolution is not “just a theory” and the “theory” of quantum mechanics is not “just a theory”.
    
    Your point about the article arguing that “it is difficult to prove homeopathy in a controlled study” just highlights what is a case of special pleading, a common logical fallacy. Homeopath’s often claim this along these lines “your science doesn’t give us the answers we want, so we want different rules applied to us.”
    
    And your point about controlled experiments in Astronomy or Palaeontology is also highlights your ignorance of science, both disciplines have protocols to ensure that data they gather is not contaminated thereby corrupting their results. But what they are not doing is comparing one medical treatment to another. Controls such as randomisation, blinding and so on are needed here to eliminate bias, whether conscious or unconscious.
    
    You are also wrong to say that science has “no clue” how aesthetics work, in some cases we do have good models for this. But as Martin and others have pointed even if we don’t know the precise mechanism for how an aesthetic works we can demonstrate that it does work. Something that you simply cannot demonstrate in any robust way for homeopathy.
    
    I note that you have spoken at some length about your own good health, and I am happy that you enjoy such robust good health.
    
    But whilst you put down your good health to your healthy diet, you cannot prove that this is the reason for your good health. Other factors may be at work, you may have a good set of genes, you may just be lucky enough not to live in sub-Saharan Africa and so on..
    
    I’m not saying that a healthy lifestyle isn’t important but we can only demonstrate that this is very likely to be so by doing proper controlled trials.
    
    For example for many years there was a lot of controversy about the connection between smoking and cancer. The tobacco manufacturers for many years denied any such link. Whilst individuals could make a decision that smoking probably wasn’t a good idea, there was not sufficient evidence to make a positive connection between smoking and cancer. But the British Doctors Survey, that ran from 1951 to 2001 produced, in 1956, convincing statistical evidence that smoking increased the risk of lung cancer.
    
    You should look it up, it makes very interesting reading.
    
    But individual stories, anecdotes, do not make for good evidence. We have no way of knowing what really happened because we were not there to observe and measure at the time, there are just too many variables to draw any sensible conclusions from any anecdote. And as has been said many times, the plural of anecdote is not data.
    
    And you can always find individual stories that support your world view, or examples of individual adverse reactions to a particular drug. But that is just cherry picking data and looking for data that reinforces your world view is a clear form of confirmation bias.
    
    What is important is a view of all the evidence, not just carefully selected evidence, and following the evidence to its logical conclusion, whether we like the conclusion or not.
    
    Sadly for Heidi Stevenson when you look at all the trial data, not just the ones “she would like” we find that there is no evidence to support the idea that homeopathy works. She may not like that conclusion, but that just too bad, that is the what the evidence tells us. To continue to believe in something despite all evidence demonstrating that it is false is not being “open minded” it is being truly closed minded.
    
    This is not about being pro or anti homeopathy. It is about what can be evidenced and what cannot. Sometimes there just aren’t two sides to every story. The fact is that all the evidence shows homeopathy has no benefit other than as a placebo. Homeopaths may not like that conclusion, but that doesn’t give them the right to distort facts in order to get the answer they were looking for. That is certainly no way to do science.
    
    Finally, if you are really interested in facts and the truth can I recommend that you read the excellent blog about the article above by Orac. Just Google Respectful Insolence “Once again: Plausibility does not mean knowing the mechanism”.
    - RA
      
      It wasn’t too much trouble John… A half hour or so ~ and probably why I wrote Bohr where I meant to write Dalton ~ I’m actually surprised that you didn’t specifically point that out.
      
      I never said that I thought Quantum Theory was wrong and I never said I was a scientist. I don’t have to be an expert on Quantum Theory to know that it hasn’t been unified with the Theory of Relativity or to find people that ARE experts in QM that disagree on many aspects of the theory. One could get that information by simply watching the Science Channel for a week.I’m not at all anti-science John. I AM, for the most part, anti-drug. The six examples that I had provided are quite general and are NOT cherry picked, individual anecdotes. You know as well as I do that one doesn’t get a headache because of an aspirin deficiency. 1. Flu Shots ~ ”there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL” ~ right from their own package insert.2. AZT ~ failed cancer drug, now becoming a failed HIV drug perhaps?3. Aspirin ~ 3% of people suffer intestinal bleeding from a single dose.4. Peter Duesberg ~ one of the world’s leading experts on retrovirus (like HIV) has funding pulled and called a quack: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/tbcould.htm5. Vioxx, Accutane ~ two of many. Even Alka Seltzer Cold medicine was pulled years ago because it was killing people.6. Antibiotics routinely prescribed for colds (approx 20 mil / year)You asked for facts and I provided them. They are NOT, as you said, individual anecdotes ~ unless you want to count all of the individuals who got a flu shot or an antibiotic for a cold ~ then I have given you hundreds of millions of individual anecdotes.You never did answer my first question though, John: Have you gotten a flu shot lately? I think I know the answer already and you are likely now suffering from what our Psychologist friend below would call “Post-Purchase Rationalization”.
      
      Over and out for good this time.
      RA
      - RA
        
        Sorry about the post blending together ~ not how I wrote it ~ when I posted it went from individual paragraphs to a big cluster.
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Rein-Jeelof/100001034644204 Rein Jeelof
  
  Dear Martin,
  Did you ask your SELF how placebo’s/nocebo’s do work? Is n’t ilness the reaction of the body on disharmony in the psyche?Is n’t ilness the way a person has to go through to connect again on harmony? Don’t allopaticmedicins work by “hiding” the illnes for a while?Is there a medicin that realy can cure a “sick” person?Isn’t your health the result of your thoughts and feelings?!

RA

Six examples of conventional medicine’s failures:1. Flu Shots ~ ”there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccinating with FLULAVAL” ~ right from their own package insert.

2. AZT ~ failed cancer drug, now becoming a failed HIV drug perhaps?

3. Aspirin ~ 3% of people suffer intestinal bleeding from a single dose.

4. Peter Duesberg ~ one of the world’s leading experts on retrovirus (like HIV) has funding pulled and called a quack: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/….

5. Vioxx, Accutane ~ two of many. Even Alka Seltzer Cold medicine was pulled years ago because it was killing people.

6. Antibiotics routinely prescribed for colds (approx 20 mil / year)

There ~ that should make it easier to read.
- John
  
  Hi there RA
  
  Firstly, not that I see it as being relevant to the discussion of science of homeopathy, but I have never had a flu jab, so no “Post Purchase Rationalisation” here.
  
  Thank you for the concise list.
  
  No-one ever said that science was perfect, and as long as we use fallible humans to conduct it it is unlikely ever to be perfect. The point here is that it is always possible to pick example of things that are less than optimal or where they have gone wrong.
  
  One can also play this game with homeopathy, try searching Google for Penelope Dingle and her homeopath Francine Scrayen.
  
  But to address your list.
  
  1) Flu shots. To bring you up to date, this drug was approved by the FDA under the accelerated approval regulations, but the FDA wrote to GlaxoSmith Kline on the 9th June 2011 requiring completion of further studies under threat of withdrawing approval for the drug. See here
  
  2) AZT. Well as many of 20% to 40% of human cancers are caused by a virus, so it was not unreasonable to develop an antiretroviral such as AZT to try and fight cancer. AZT is however very effective in combating AIDS. Just out of interest why do you suggest that it may now be failing?
  
  3) Asprin – So 3% of people suffer intestinal bleeding from a single dose? This is a rather unhelpful statistic, what is your source? But even this bare statistic that does mean that 97% of people do not suffer this symptom. But you don’t mention at what doseage this problem occurs, or the age range of the patients, whether this is in patients with a history of gastrointestinal bleeding, or how recent your figure is.
  
  4) Peter Duesberg. Is this the same Peter Duesberg who claimed that HIV was harmless and that the anti AID’s drugs were actually causing AIDS? If so then to call him a quack and withdraw his funding seems like a wise decision. Whilst there is no single study that conclusively connects HIV with AIDS, when one considers ALL the evidence the case for such a connection is overwhelming.
  
  5) Vioxx, Accutane etc. Yes there have been problems, as I said science is not perfect, but, you need to balance risk against benefit. If you only look at the problems with science based medicine you will naturally form a negative view. But that is being selective with your evidence, cherry picking. Consider the whole picture, look at the lives saved, the conditions successfully treated and so on. The massive increase in life expectancy over the last 100 years is testament to the benefits of science based medicine. Of course homeopathic medicines have no recorded direct adverse side effects, that is because they are just water! They have no recorded positive effects either. And when weighing up risk verses benefit of a treatment with no benefit the result is a divide by zero error. But the biggest risk of homeopathic medicine is the risk of someone forgoing effective treatment in favour of something that does not work and cannot work. That is what happened to Penelope Dingle and as a result she died of a cancer that was potentially survivable.
  
  6) Overuse of antibiotics. No argument from me her about the dangers of over use of these, and this is not just linked to human medicine, it is also a problem in veterinary science. In part though this is driven by demand from human patients for the doctor to “do something”. Part of the solution is better education of both patients and doctors. But that is not to say that antibiotics don’t work, when properly prescribed, because they do.
  
  To summarise, it seems to me that you are only looking for evidence that supports your anti drug position, that is not thinking critically and is no way to do science.

RA

http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/

If you don’t already know who this man is, John, check him out. Here is perhaps on of “medicines” victories.

The short version of his story: He has cured 100s of cancer patients that “conventional medicine” sent home to die with nothing else to offer. The FDA tried to shut him down for curing cancer with his own medicine, but he appealed and took it to high courts and 100s of people that would have long ago died if not for Burzynski’s “illegal medicine” testified on his behalf.
- John
  
  Seriously, you’re quoting Burzynski as a good news story?
  
  You REALLY need to do better research. The man is a well documented fraud who preys on desperately sick people and leaves them just as sick, if not more so, but also a whole lot poorer. .
  
  He has been touting his antineoplastin treatment for over 30 years without publishing any results in a peer reviewed journal. He has been conducting “clinical trials” on his treatment for over 30 years, but not moved beyond that stage. The FDA has not licensed his treatment because he has not produced any evidence that would allow them to do so.
  
  In addition he charges huge sums of money for patients to enter his “clinical trials” an immoral action if there ever was one, to say nothing of corrupting the integrity of his so called trials.
  
  His organisation has also tried to silence critics with legal threats. He does not do good or effective science, not is there any evidence of him “curing” hundreds of people. If you got that information from his website and took it at face value you have failed to think critically.
  
  The claim to have “cured cancer” is an extraordinary one and would require extraordinary evidence. Burzynski has produced none.
  
  I could go on, but you have again only looked at the evidence that you want to see.
  
  I doubt you’ll do this but try and look wider, do better research.
  
  Your hypothesis seems to be that drugs are bad and that conventional medicine has failed..
  
  You should try looking for evidence to falsify your hypothesis, not just evidence that reinforces your world view. There is plenty of evidence to falsify your beliefs, you just have to have the courage and integrity to look.
  
  And whilst you are looking try Googling Burzynski fraud and see what you get. You could also have a look at the Wikipedia page on Dr Burzynski, you would find it helpful.
  
  I doubt you will do any of this though, it strikes me that you are too close minded to even consider the possibility that you are wrong.
  
  It does occur to me though that we need a new version of Godwin’s law in that now anyone who cites Stanislaw Burzynski as a good news story immediately loses the debate. If there is one thing Burzynski is not, it is a good news story, nor is it a success story, unless your name is Stanislaw Burzynski.

Pingback: Homeopathy Plus

JoeW

“…preys on desperately sick people and leaves them just as sick, if not more so, but also a whole lot poorer.”
You’ve perfectly described the conventional cancer-treatment industry in your attempt to call someone a ‘quack’. Congratulations!

stv3

Always the dismissive”intellectuals. Regurgitating “facts” and vomited up half given opportunity.

10% intellectual ability and 90% presentation.

Pingback: cascading failure

Pingback: mouse click the following web page

Pingback: simply click

Pingback: Learn Alot more Here

Pingback: Learn Additional Here

Pingback: More Information

Pingback: linked web site

Pingback: mouse click the next web page

Pingback: simply click the up coming internet page

Pingback: mouse click the following article

Pingback: more

Pingback: source

Pingback: relevant web page

Pingback: similar website

Pingback: Suggested Website

Pingback: simply click the following internet page

Pingback: simply click the following internet page

Pingback: simply click the next website

Pingback: simply click the up coming article

Pingback: Suggested Reading

Pingback: our website

Pingback: Suggested Web site

Pingback: Read

Pingback: visit the next website page

Pingback: visit the following web site

Pingback: Read A great deal more

Pingback: Read the Full Piece of writing

Pingback: Recommended Studying

Pingback: related web-site

Pingback: relevant website

Pingback: relevant webpage

Pingback: simply click

Pingback: similar internet page

Pingback: simply click the following webpage

Pingback: simply click the next website page

Pingback: Suggested Online site

Pingback: mouse click the next document

Pingback: simply click the up coming website

Pingback: visit the following internet site

Pingback: visit the next page

Pingback: mouse click the next site

Pingback: please click the following website

Pingback: Click On this website

Pingback: Visit

Pingback: Read the Full Guide

Pingback: click through the next article

Pingback: visit the following website page

Pingback: mouse click the next page

Pingback: relevant internet page

Pingback: please click

Pingback: Click On this website

Pingback: Full Report

Pingback: Going Here

Pingback: Read A lot more

Pingback: Highly recommended Site

Pingback: Suggested Internet page

Pingback: just click the next site

Pingback: Recommended Web site

Pingback: Recommended Looking at

Pingback: This Web site

Pingback: click through the following post

Pingback: just click the up coming web site

Pingback: resources

Pingback: relevant web site

Pingback: More Bonuses

Pingback: simply click the next internet page

Pingback: Full Document

Pingback: similar internet page

Pingback: click the next web page

Pingback: Suggested Looking at

Pingback: simply click the following post

Pingback: Click This Link

Pingback: simply click the up coming article

Pingback: source

Pingback: click through the next internet site

Pingback: click through the next website page

Pingback: Visit

Pingback: visit the following webpage

Pingback: visit the following webpage

Pingback: visit the next web site

Pingback: Click Here

Pingback: Full File

Pingback: click the following document

Pingback: Full Survey

Pingback: click the next post

Pingback: just click the next site

Pingback: Going in

Pingback: home-page

Pingback: click through the following web site

Pingback: linked internet site

Pingback: just click the following internet page

Pingback: click through the up coming internet page

Pingback: just click the next article

Pingback: Full Guide

Pingback: Look At This

Pingback: Go Here

Pingback: relevant website

Pingback: more

Pingback: just click

Pingback: Highly recommended Site

Pingback: just click the following website

Pingback: mouse click the up coming article

Pingback: just click the next web page

Pingback: link

Pingback: More about the author

Pingback: This Web-site

Pingback: Read the Full Guide

Pingback: Recommended Internet page

Pingback: Suggested Internet site

Pingback: Recommended Reading

Pingback: similar internet site

Pingback: Related Site

Pingback: simply click the following internet page

Pingback: visit the next internet site

Pingback: simply click the next website page

Pingback: Suggested Online site

Pingback: stay with me

Pingback: This Internet page

Pingback: Suggested Website

Pingback: visit the following internet site

Pingback: Suggested Web page

Pingback: this website

Pingback: visit the following web site

Pingback: visit the following webpage

Pingback: visit the up coming internet page

Pingback: visit the up coming post

Pingback: Check This Out

Pingback: Click On this page

Pingback: mouse click the following web page

Pingback: mouse click the following webpage

Pingback: mouse click the next article

Pingback: mouse click the up coming web site

Pingback: mouse click the up coming web site

Pingback: mouse click the up coming article

Pingback: click through the up coming website

Pingback: please click the following website

Pingback: please click for source

Pingback: please click the following internet page

Pingback: please click the next site

Pingback: Full Record

Pingback: Read More At this website

Pingback: Get More Info

Pingback: please click the following post

Pingback: please click the following web site

Pingback: Read the Full Document

Pingback: Highly recommended Website

Pingback: Read the Full Piece of writing

Pingback: just click the next website page

Pingback: just click the up coming web site

Pingback: related web page

Pingback: Read Even more

Pingback: relevant web site

Pingback: simply click the following website page

Pingback: relevant site

Pingback: simply click the next document

Pingback: Recommended Resource site

Pingback: Recommended Webpage

Pingback: simply click the up coming internet page

Pingback: Suggested Site

Pingback: source for this article

Pingback: Related Site

Pingback: Suggested Looking at

Pingback: resources

Pingback: relevant webpage

Pingback: visit the following site

Pingback: visit the following web site

Pingback: similar website

Pingback: visit the up coming internet page

Pingback: visit the up coming article

Pingback: Bonuses

Pingback: simply click for source

Pingback: Click In this article

Pingback: simply click the next website

Pingback: mouse click the next page

Pingback: click the up coming post

Pingback: mouse click the next site

Pingback: simply click the up coming site

Pingback: click through the following website page

Pingback: please click the up coming post

Pingback: click through the up coming webpage

Pingback: Read More In this article

Pingback: Read This

Pingback: Recommended Website

Pingback: Full Statement

Pingback: related web-site

Pingback: just click

Pingback: visit the up coming document

Pingback: just click the following document

Pingback: simply click the next web page

Pingback: just click the next website

Pingback: Suggested Browsing

Pingback: just click the up coming web site

Pingback: linked internet site

Pingback: click the following post

Pingback: click the next document

Pingback: click the next website page

Pingback: article source

Pingback: relevant web page

Pingback: Click This Link

Pingback: click through the following article

Pingback: click through the next page

Pingback: simply click the next site

Pingback: click through the following web site

Pingback: click through the next post

Pingback: click through the up coming webpage

Pingback: Suggested Web page

Pingback: Full Statement

Pingback: Go At this site

Pingback: visit the next internet site

Pingback: visit the next website

Pingback: Full Review

Pingback: Full Posting

Pingback: just click the next website

Pingback: Get the facts

Pingback: mouse click the next webpage

Pingback: please click the following article

Pingback: linked web page

Pingback: More hints

Pingback: homepage

Pingback: please click the following web site

Pingback: More suggestions

Pingback: please click the next site

Pingback: relevant web site

Pingback: similar webpage

Pingback: Read More At this website

Pingback: just click the following webpage

Pingback: Read the Full Article

Pingback: simply click the following site

Pingback: Read the Full Report

Pingback: sources

Pingback: Recommended Website

Pingback: Suggested Site

Pingback: just click the up coming web site

Pingback: related web-site

Pingback: Learn More

Pingback: similar internet site

Pingback: mouse click the following webpage

Pingback: more

Pingback: simply click the up coming website page

Pingback: please click the up coming post

Pingback: Suggested Web page

Pingback: relevant web site

Pingback: Read More In this article

Pingback: visit the following page

Pingback: visit the following webpage

Pingback: Recommended Web site

Pingback: relevant internet page

Pingback: Check Out

Pingback: resources

Pingback: simply click the following webpage

Pingback: Click On this website

Pingback: simply click the following website page

Pingback: click the next document

Pingback: simply click the next website page

Pingback: simply click the up coming internet page

Pingback: simply click the up coming website

Pingback: Suggested Reading

Pingback: click through the following internet site

Pingback: Suggested Web site

Pingback: click through the next article

Pingback: This Web-site

Pingback: supplemental resources

Pingback: This Internet site

Pingback: visit the up coming document

Pingback: click through the up coming post

Pingback: Additional Info

Pingback: This Webpage

Pingback: visit the following post

Pingback: visit the next web page

Pingback: click the next webpage

Pingback: helpful hints

Pingback: visit the next web page

Pingback: Highly recommended Webpage

Pingback: just click for source

Pingback: just click the next web page

Pingback: click through the up coming website page

Pingback: Full Article

Pingback: Going at

Pingback: Going On this page

Pingback: linked web site

Pingback: mouse click the next article

Pingback: internet site

Pingback: More hints

Pingback: just click the following article

Pingback: mouse click on

Pingback: just click the next document

Pingback: just click the up coming page

Pingback: Learn Even more

Pingback: simply click the following internet page

Pingback: More about the author

Pingback: simply click the next internet site

Pingback: mouse click on

Pingback: relevant internet site

Pingback: similar website

Pingback: Suggested Looking at

Pingback: simply click the following internet page

Pingback: simply click the next website

Pingback: Read More Listed here

Pingback: simply click the up coming webpage

Pingback: Suggested Reading

Pingback: This Web site

Pingback: visit the next document

Pingback: related resource site

Pingback: mouse click the following webpage

Pingback: relevant webpage

Pingback: mouse click the next document

Pingback: similar site

Pingback: simply click the following internet page

Pingback: mouse click the up coming article

Pingback: mouse click the up coming post

Pingback: our website

Pingback: Our site

Pingback: please click the following post

Pingback: simply click the next document

Pingback: please click the following post

Pingback: simply click the up coming internet site

Pingback: Suggested Resource site

Pingback: Read More

Pingback: Read More Here

Pingback: This Site

Pingback: Read More In this article

Pingback: visit the following post

Pingback: Read More Here

Pingback: Recommended Internet site

Pingback: Recommended Reading

Pingback: Recommended Webpage

Pingback: related internet page

Pingback: related webpage

Pingback: relevant internet site

Pingback: Read the Full Posting

Pingback: similar internet page

Pingback: please click

Pingback: Recommended Online site

Pingback: simply click the following page

Pingback: Read

Pingback: simply click the up coming document

Pingback: simply click the up coming document

Pingback: Suggested Browsing

Pingback: This Internet page

Pingback: This Web page

Pingback: simply click the following post

Pingback: visit the next post

Pingback: visit the next website page

Pingback: Click at

Pingback: Check This Out

Pingback: sources

Pingback: Suggested Looking at

Pingback: click the next post

Pingback: click through the following document

Pingback: Suggested Website

Pingback: click the next webpage

Pingback: click through the following post

Pingback: This Web-site

Pingback: click through the next web site

Pingback: visit the up coming site

Pingback: Full Posting

Pingback: click through the up coming post

Pingback: please click the next document

Pingback: Click On this site

Pingback: Going in

Pingback: please click the up coming document

Pingback: Full Record

Pingback: click the next post

Pingback: Going At this website

Pingback: click the next webpage

Pingback: Read More On this page

Pingback: just click the next webpage

Pingback: keep reading

Pingback: please click the following web site

Pingback: Read This

Pingback: Learn Even more Here

Pingback: Read Far more

Pingback: click through the up coming website

Pingback: More about the author

Pingback: relevant web-site

Pingback: Read the Full Piece of writing

Pingback: Recommended Resource site

Pingback: Get More Info

Pingback: simply click the following post

Pingback: more resources

Pingback: relevant site

Pingback: simply click the up coming document

Pingback: relevant internet site

Pingback: simply click the up coming website

Pingback: simply click

Pingback: Suggested Online site

Pingback: Suggested Internet page

Pingback: simply click the following site

Pingback: sources

Pingback: Suggested Website

Pingback: simply click the up coming internet page

Pingback: visit the following page

Pingback: Susy Labbadia

Pingback: visit the next document

Pingback: This Web page

Pingback: just click the up coming document

Pingback: Suggested Online site

Pingback: visit the following web page

Pingback: visit the up coming document

Pingback: additional reading

Pingback: similar site

Pingback: simply click the following webpage

Pingback: click through the following web site

Pingback: click through the next web site

Pingback: click through the up coming website

Pingback: simply click the up coming web site

Pingback: Suggested Internet site

Pingback: Suggested Web page

Pingback: Going On this page

Pingback: visit the next page

Pingback: visit the up coming site

Pingback: just click the next document

Pingback: just click the up coming article

Pingback: linked web-site

Pingback: more

Pingback: relevant site

Pingback: similar resource site

Pingback: simply click the next website page

Pingback: This Web page

Pingback: visit the following site

Pingback: visit the following website page

Featured

If Homeopathy Can’t Work, Then Neither Can Anesthesia.

Electricity

The Allopathic View

Allopathy’s Suppression of Homeopathy

Related Posts

News from Around the Internet:

Minnesota Law Bans Formaldehyde—Except in Vaccines

New Pap Smear Tests Are Defective

Parents Charged in Baby’s Vaccine Death

Are Teens Complainers or Are HPV Vaccines Worse?

World Peace Day Used to Promote Vaccines

How Medical ‘Science’ Proves that Black Is White

On the Verge of Losing Supplements … Again!

Search Gaia Health

Archives

Register/LogIn

Latest Posts