[henchard]

So please stop ramming your ignorant and bigotted views down the throats of those who know from  experience that homeopathy works.

It's not my views it's the opinion of the scientific world. You can believe what you wish it doesn't alter the facts.

This is the conclusion from one of the latest reviews by the Australian Government:

The available evidence is not compelling and fails to demonstrate that homeopathy is an effective treatment for any of the reported clinical conditions in humans.

Perhaps you could advise us of your scientific credentials?

[ladyK]

Most people try alternative treatment methods after conventional medicine has failed them, not before.

There are just as many if not more examples of conventional medicine 'not working' for certain individuals despite what would have been expected by research, as there are plenty of examples of 'scientific research' proven to be wrong by subsequent equally scientific studies (the effects of fat in our diet being only one such recent example). Aspirin is a helpful everyday medicine for the vast majority of people yet it can have serious, sometimes fatal side effects for some. It all boils down to what works for an individual and what doesn't.
Choices and decisions about which course of treatment to follow and at which point to try something else if the first course of action did not bring the results we hoped for, is tricky in the best of cases, and can be agonising in other cases; I'm sure we all have experience of that.

All of us are free to decide which way we want to manage our health, and that of the animals in our care, and I don't understand the interest behind those shouting down anybody who may want to know more about alternatives and options at their disposal, for themselves, their family or their animals. The more we inform ourselves about the optionsn available the more we can make our own informed decisions.

[Marches Farmer]

Only consider that aspirin was derived from meadowsweet, digitalin from foxgloves, narciclasine from daffolis, taxin from yew .....

[Me]

"The more we inform ourselves about the options available the more we can make our own informed decisions."

Of course everyone is free to make their choice, my experiences of the options in question are that they are ineffective and therefore dangerous and not to be relied upon if there is an effective known alternative. I thought this worth mentioning so you can make a slightly more informed decision as surely everyones experiences are worth considering not just the positive ones. In many ways the negatives are more important to consider.

As regards animal health you are not entirely free to make your own choices as animal welfare law kicks in at some point.

Homeopathy is a world apart from the chemicals naturally occurring and isolated from the plants you mention M Farmer which have been proven to work.   

[Buttermilk]

Only consider that aspirin was derived from meadowsweet, digitalin from foxgloves, narciclasine from daffolis, taxin from yew .....

I thought aspirin came from willow bark?  However the list you mention are herbal medicines and not homeopathic medicines.

[SallyintNorth]

I agree that science has so far failed to prove that homeopathy works.

That is not the same as proving that it doesn't work under any circumstances. 

When I was a veterinary student, a group of my peers went to China to research the potential use of acupuncture in pets.  At the time, all alternative medical practises, including acupuncture, were regarded as complete hokum by science.  Many doctors and vets will now refer patients for acupuncture.

I do not find it at all hard to believe that the passage of a molecule of something leaves a trace that we cannot at the moment identify.

So, my mind is open.

That said, I would be nervous of someone eschewing a proven conventional remedy if the animal is suffering in any way that could be addressed more quickly and surely by that conventional remedy.  Even fully organic farmers can get derogations from their vets to treat animals where animal welfare would otherwise be compromised.

So by all means, read up and research, use these remedies where you are not prolonging suffering in any way by so doing (but not otherwise) - and tell us what you find out and how you get on!

[henchard]

The more we inform ourselves about the optionsn available the more we can make our own informed decisions.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts. You can only make informed choices if you know those facts.

If you or anyone else wishes to treat yourself with 'magic water' please feel free to do so.

However, if you wish to foist magic water on children or animals in the belief that it is an effective treatment that is a different matter.

It is not my opinion,  I'm not shouting down anyone; I'm giving people facts based on the evidence of some of the best scientific brains in the world;

Professor Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer for England and Emeritus Professor at Imperial College, giving evidence to the Commons Science and Technology committee concluded her evidence by remarking that homeopathy “is rubbish”.

Sir Mark Walport Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Professor of Medicine at Imperial college, said 'my view scientifically is absolutely clear: homoeopathy is nonsense, it is non-science.'

If you or anyone else here has better qualifications than these please add your contributions to the debate.

[SallyintNorth]

I have a high regard for science - I was a scientist myself once!    - but the scientific method does have its own limitations.

So whilst I am happy that eminent scientists may choose to express the current views of science in such colourful terms, I still, personally, prefer to treat all views, and those who hold them, with respect.

With, as I said above, the proviso that no-one is prolonging any suffering of those who cannot choose for themselves.

[henchard]

So whilst I am happy that eminent scientists may choose to express the current views of science in such colourful terms

Personally I see nothing wrong with eminent scientists stating clearly that it is nonsense.

I still, personally, prefer to treat all views, and those who hold them, with respect.

Well if you use that argument you must of course treat the views of Boko Haram with respect;  their principal tenant being

“Boko Haram is intrinsically opposed to Western science and to Western medicine.

“It does not even recognise the existence of germs or viruses, because they are not mentioned in the Koran,”

[Womble]

Hang on a sec, there's a big difference between believing that very dilute somethingorother may help you, and believing that germs don't exist and all unbelievers should be wiped out!

There have been some very good points made here, such as using a scientifically proven alternative where one exists. However, if somebody wants to try homeapathy* on themselves or their stock after conventional techniques have failed, why is that so wrong?

I'm not saying "it doesn't matter what you believe, as long as you're sincere" - you can be sincerely wrong! However, each to their own, especially on an internet forum  .


* That was originally a typo, but it was so good, I decided to leave it in.

[Me]

When I was a veterinary student

Ooh another tas vet thats exciting! Should be tav

[pgkevet]

A colleague and I decided to test the homeopathic theory of potentising and diluting to achieve a stronger effect. We were bitterly disappointed with our first attempt at making homeopathic whisky. Theory would have allowed us to amplify the stock bottle of teachers into many a drunken night of bliss.

With preliminary failure reflected in our sadly sober faces we carried out further research on the theory of treating like with like. Following on from that theory we decided to try potentising hangover cures..again with dismal failure. Our last attempt was to potentise mineral waters and fruit juices to treat sobriety with like for like. We still failed to get drunk.

In my second job (as a vet in ages past) I took over the running of a previously homeopathic vet practice whose owner had gone nuts. There was an impressive array of tiny bottles of 'stuff' about but also a huge jar of antibiotics which she used entirely incorrectly. And most disturbing was a collection of several tiny wax encased bottles of potassium cyanide - as a post WW2 method of euthanasia. For those interested in historical vet therapy the  method was one drop in the conjunctival sac and hope the patient didn't flick it back at you!! I had the devil's own job legally disposing of enough to kill several hundred people.

A veterinary (and doubtless human) truism is that some 90%+ of our patients will get better despite treatment. That a good vet will get that up to(say) 94%, that a great vet may well make that (say) 96% and an awful lot of vets don't manage the 90%.....

Nutty homeopathic vet's grandson fell out of the apple tree and was clutching his arm and screaming. She started rubbing potentised arnica into the arm amidst more screaming - until i suggested that perhaps it would be better to take child and broken arm to A&E.

The whole point of the above is that therapy isn't the issue... it's getting the bloody diagnosis right first and knowing when you actually need to do something.

[SallyintNorth]

When I was a veterinary student

Ooh another tas vet thats exciting! Should be tav

Nah, this one failed to complete.    to those who made it all the way through training!

[Me]

When I was a veterinary student

Ooh another tas vet thats exciting! Should be tav

Nah, this one failed to complete.    to those who made it all the way through training!

Pfft you obviously saw the light first!

[landroverroy]

 Now in actual fact this post was started as a request for a recommendation for a book on homeopathy and for people's experiences with using it on sheep. So briefly that's what I responded with.
 I did not expect to get the response that I was talking rubbish. I found it rude and insulting as Henchard had no idea under what circumstances I had used homeopathic products, or indeed what the results were.
 So - to give a bit of background info - I have a degree in agriculture and worked for several  years at  Leeds university and then at York uni on research grants. So I am not entirely ignorant of how science works, nor of what degree of proof is needed to substantiate a claim. But  I discovered that the more one learns, the more one realises the total extent of one's ignorance, and there are still numerous things for which science at present has no explanation.
Now when I say I have successfully used homeopathic products, I could also add that they don't always work, any more than conventional medicine does. And if I am telling someone about homeopathy, I always add the comment that it doesn't always work instantly like taking an aspirin, so sometimes you wonder if the animal would have got better naturally anyway. But having said that, I personally believe that on the balance of things I have had significantly more successes than failures.  But I still use the vet and conventional medicines for any acute problems I have with my animals. I don't just leave them to suffer and slowly die while I heat up my cauldron and consult my book on witchcraft.
So, I'm not ramming it down anyone's throat - I see it as a personal choice. I respect other people's views on the subject and consider it only manners that they do me the same courtesy.