Homeopathy

[horizon]

For three days and nights I had a viciously painful tonsilitis, unusally in just one tonsil. I was unable to swallow even sips of water without bending over in further pain. I had a severe headache. The symptoms changed not a jot over the three days and I had lost 5 kg in weight. I was still at work on the first day and mostly slept and stayed in bed on the second and third days. I was unable to speak. At 9.15 pm on the third day I was given a homeopathic remedy. By 10.30pm the pain had vanished and I drunk a glass of water without any pain at all. The headache had lifted entirely. The next morning I was up and about and holding conversations in full voice.

So my question is: how should I regard this episode?

1. That the "remedy" exerted a powerful placebo effect.
or 2. That the events were coincidental and unrelated and that something else triggered my feeling better.
or 3. That I imagined the whole thing or parts of it or that my memory of it is unreliable.
or 4. That I was getting better anyway.
or 5. Allow other people to believe I've made the whole thing up.
or 6. That the remedy "worked" (which I am actually not suggesting).

Any ideas?

[bovlomov]

7. That you like to stir up an argument.
?

[al_yrpal]

You kept us all on tenterhooks for months with the 'which bike?' dilemma, and now this?

How do you regard it?

Is there a homeopathic cure for indecisiveness?

Al

[[XAP]Bob]

For three days and nights I had a viciously painful tonsilitis, unusally in just one tonsil. I was unable to swallow even sips of water without bending over in further pain. I had a severe headache. The symptoms changed not a jot over the three days and I had lost 5 kg in weight. I was still at work on the first day and mostly slept and stayed in bed on the second and third days. I was unable to speak. At 9.15 pm on the third day I was given a homeopathic remedy. By 10.30pm the pain had vanished and I drunk a glass of water without any pain at all. The headache had lifted entirely. The next morning I was up and about and holding conversations in full voice.

So my question is: how should I regard this episode?

1. That the "remedy" exerted a powerful placebo effect.
or 2. That the events were coincidental and unrelated and that something else triggered my feeling better.
or 3. That I imagined the whole thing or parts of it or that my memory of it is unreliable.
or 4. That I was getting better anyway.
or 5. Allow other people to believe I've made the whole thing up.
or 6. That the remedy "worked" (which I am actually not suggesting).

Any ideas?

Combination of 1-4

[Cunobelin]

... or given the 72 hour duration of most flu and sore throat illness the throat would have cured anyway and it was coincidence?

[661-Pete]

I strongly suspect that James Randi's million dollars are still safely stashed in his bank. Nothing to stop you having a try, though!

[kwackers]

Homoeopathy is what makes non-cyclists experts on cycling issues.

[horizon]

This was actually the first part of a thread, the second part which is located, for obvious reasons, here:

viewtopic.php?f=41&t=98938

[Audax67]

...and here's Barry, who removes his own teeth with a door.

[Tangled Metal]

Doesn't tonsilitis flare up and then dies back down anyway?

Have to admit I do not know much about homeopathy, it is one of those things that claim to cure but never seems to work in medical trials plus Prince Charles is keen on it so a very good reason to ignore it.

Is it the stuff where they find something that they think will cure it then dilute it down so many times that probability calculations would estimate it unlikely to actually contain the something but is just very pure water. You know the water has memory guff so that it takes on the properties of what it was once exposed to. If it is then would tap water work? If you assume that most tap water has gone through a lot of animals before it reaches you then all homeopathy supporters must think it tastes of micturate!!!

Sorry if I am wrong in this or you think I am taking a pot shot at you. It is not the case (last bit of that sentence) but I find a lot of these so called natural remedies a quackery unless they have been through a proper trial in the way medicines have. The day Pfizer or other pharma company starts patenting homeopathic remedies and charging a lot to the NHS then that is when I will take notice of it. Until them I will assume you got better when your body got better, a natural process in a natural timeline and totally separate from whatever stuff you put down your throat.

I once had a killer ear infection once, I went to the GP as I was desperate and no over the counter remedy for the symptoms worked. The GP (a locum) was very up front and even showed me the latest NICE information on effectiveness of antibiotics. The latest research showed that if the patient started an A/B course at the earliest sign of the ear infection it would only reduce the time in pain by typically 6 hours based on a certain sample size and confidence level of 98% (that is research confidence levels IIRC not the normal 95% used). I told him "that is a deal! I'll take them.", but he was not impressed and wouldn't write the script. Seems 6 hours saved over 3 days average length of these infections was not deemed worth it. Since I had been over a week already in pain I disagreed but I lost the argument and another week of pain I got better. At least it didn't rupture my eardrum that time but I wouldn't have minded because the does ease ear infection pain a lot.

Anyway, I guess my point is there is a lot of conditions and infections that can cause severe pain but the body does sort itself out in time. It is just a question as to what time that is going to take when you are suffering. 3 days was probably about right for the OP and it was a coincidence the hogwash had been taken at the time it was about to get better. Could have been the glass of cold water you drank did it, or the fruit juice or whatever you had managed to consume as much as the hogwash you wer given.

[bovlomov]

... I find a lot of these so called natural remedies a quackery unless they have been through a proper trial in the way medicines have. The day Pfizer or other pharma company starts patenting homeopathic remedies and charging a lot to the NHS then that is when I will take notice of it.

A lot of medicines haven't been through proper trials. They've been through fiddled trials, or the trials that have been published are those that suit the manufacturer; the others are hidden from us. It's worth reading what Ben Goldacre (no friend of homeopathy) has to say about it.

About patenting: it has been argued that the large drug manufacturers aren't interested in homeopathy because they can't patent it. Besides, many (including Pfizer) have a rather dirty history - they may not be above marketing a product that they believed was ineffective, or even harmful, if it made them some dosh.

Whether homeopathy works, is a different matter.

[horizon]

Sorry if I am wrong in this or you think I am taking a pot shot at you. It is not the case (last bit of that sentence) but I find a lot of these so called natural remedies a quackery unless they have been through a proper trial in the way medicines have.

Exactly. I only reported (faithfully, honestly and accurately) what I experienced. I do like homeopathy but I also realise it stands on dodgy ground becasue of the lack of large scale results. This post though was just the opener as it struck me that cycle helmets are just as dodgy for exacty the same reasons.