Peter Gold argues four retracted homeopathy studies were erased for challenging orthodoxy, not for misconduct, raising questions about scientific gatekeeping.
Pretty sure homeopathy has already been rigorously tested. Homeopathic Medicine was the medicine of choice in the US before the AMA can onto the scene. Homeopathic medicine is safe and without side effects. I say let’s bring it back big time!
Apparently you do not know the history of homeopathy. Allow me to fill you in.
In 1790 Samuel Hahnemann was transcribing world medical journals into German. He had quit his position as a doctor due to the barbaric treatments at the time killing as many people as they were healing . Back then blood letting and leaching was common. So he was translating a Chinese medical journal into German and can apron a theory that said “ Anything that will cause symptoms in a healthy person, when you dilute it and give it to an unhealthy person, it will get rid of those same symptoms.” He was fascinated by this and started testing different plants, animal and minerals. First up was cinchona bark. He ate some and wrote down every symptom he experienced some of the being the same symptoms of someone with malaria. And just as a note all homeopathic remedies are named as the latin name of the substance. Then he potentized cinchona bark. This also involves Latin. Potencies are numbered 1x or 1 c (common) homeopathic doctors can deal with L’s and
M’s but most common are x’s and c’s. What are these you ask? Well, take one part plant, 9 parts alcohol. Mix succus and also there is light and dark involved. This is a 1 x or a mother tincture. The same would be a c potency with one part plant 99 parts alcohol. From there you take one part mother tincture and 9 (or 99) parts alcohol and take it through the mixing process again. This is a 2 x or a 2c. Next dilution same thing. Common potencies are 6 x or 6c , 30x or 30c. So each dilution makes the healing qualities of the matter stronger. The blueprint of the plant, so to speak. But let me go back, so Samuel then excited about how the cinchona experiment turned out started testing lots of substances and wrote down every little symptom whether it was arms, legs, head, stomach, flu, emotional, mental, and physical. There is a lot of discussion about when to use what potency of a remedy. Should it be an x potency or a c ? 6 or 30? And monkey wrench in also in natural food stores you can get 200 c or 200 ck’s I’ll explain these later. So I’m sure you have heard of Arica. This is the #1 remedy. It is for trauma. This is trauma of any kind and not just bruising or muscle soreness. This would be the first remedy for your house burning down, your dog dying, car crash, finding
Your liver in bed with someone else, you get robbed. You get the idea. When would you take a high potency and when would you take a low potency? Say you are walking down the aisle of your natural food store and you stub your toes on the racks. OWCH I hurt my foot. This is a low potency. You have a sore foot. But say you are walking down that same aisle
And I stomp on your foot. OUCH that hurt, physical…why did she do that to me? Emotional… And last but certainly not least THAT B@@TCH !!! Mental! Higher potency. So the more levels of an issue the higher potency you can use. Another cool thing to say about remedies is that a dose is a dose is a dose is a dose. So if you take 3 or you take 33 it’s the same dose. The only way to increase your dose is to take it more often. When starting a remedy you can start by taking 3 every 15 minutes for 2 hours. Get it in there and get it working. Homeopathy is also symptom based and not disease based. Let’s take a common cold. Every cold is different. Let’s start with the watery eyes runny nose cold and the remedy Allium Cepa. This is common onion. So when we go back to the theory, anything that causes symptoms in a healthy person, when you dilute it and give it to an unhealthy person it will get rid of those same symptoms. So what happens when you put a sliced onion up to your face? Watery eyes? Runny nose? Drip down the back of the throat? Prepare it as a homeopathic remedy and it will get rid of your watery eyes and runny nose from either cold or allergies and it will do it quick! Right remedy equals relief. But say you have stuffed up cold and a fever. That is not an Allium remedy and if you took it you just would not get any relief. That type of cold would be more of a belladonna cold. So which brings us to belladonna being a poisonous substance…. How much of the plant matter do you think is left in a 30x or a 30 c remedy? I’m trying to think back, but I think a 7x or c would be classified as no more actual plant matter being left in the remedy, but please don’t hold me to that. So that being the case there is no toxic part left, only the healing blueprint of the plant.
But back to Samuel, he tested everything on himself, his family, his friends and his animals. And tested on all of use that use homeopathy instead of drugs with massive side effects and life reducing effects as well.
Homeopathy has no side effects and no contraindications. Even bases and pets will get no side effects even if 9 bottles were ingested all at the same time. If they did it would be from the consistency of the tablet or pellet and not the remedy.
And so homeopathy treats like with like. The Material Medica is the guide. Homeopathy is grandfathered in by FDA and is regulated by the FDA. Every company that makes remedies under the FDA by law has to have an NDC code on it. So if you are getting an arnica 30c from any brand it must be made the same way. The Hahnemann method. There is another method used by Boiron utilizing a ck potency. Process is the same except for the potentizing. They start with one part matter with 99 parts alcohol and then instead of starting the next dilution with one part, they just empty the beaker and assume the residual residue in the beaker is that one part needed for the next dilution. So the 200 c’s and 200 ck’s I feel should only be used under homeopathic practitioners. There is a lot more nuance in there with cross over potencies and such but that’s the basics. Highly and rigorously studied. Let me know if you have questions. If I don’t know the answer because I’m not an expert, I can steer you towards folks that can answer. Thanks for listening
And you are a liberal with your mind erroneously made up so there is no talking to you. Complete waste of my time. For forth and be ignorant the rest of you miserable life…
Each of those four papers is available (full text) by following the links you provided. All linked to retraction notices including relevant details. One with links to a corrected paper.
You just typed out your diatribe about "erasure" and "censorship" - Facts be damned.
This blurb is weaker than maha-report's usual sewage. Peter Gold makes clueless people look intelligent.
These retracted studies remain, with notices - except in the most egregious cases.
"One rationale offered was that the study was not reproducible because patients received individualized homeopathic treatment. Yet individualized treatment is a defining characteristic of classical homeopathy and was fully described in the study design. If individualized prescribing were grounds for retraction, many forms of personalized medicine would face similar challenges."
That's why sham treatments and double-dummy designs are employed.
Retracted studies remain in the scientific record - which you know by now. These retractions were not because of the tested therapeutics. The reasons were clearly stated by the editors. No blinding, no placebo control, etc. You folks are all about those placebo controls - except when you aren't.
For the Oberbaum study - "Concerns were raised regarding the methodology as described in this article. Post-publication review confirmed concerns regarding the absence of blinding and placebo controls, which in the view of the Editor may introduce significant bias in the interpretation of the data, results and conclusions, which cannot be rectified by an erratum. The Editor therefore no longer has confidence in the reliability of this article. The authors have been invited to submit a revised manuscript that addresses these concerns."
Yes. As a lifelong occasional and appreciative user of homeopathic remedies, I feel concerned when peer-reviewed studies are removed from the literature for reasons that appear to reflect disagreement rather than demonstrable misconduct!
This piece demonstrates the author's unawareness of the most basic facts about what a journal retraction is (and isn't), how and why it would occur, and what the results are. It muddles detail after detail of the studies themselves, all while decrying some imaginary persecution campaign, and 'erasure,' because of 4 retractions over 10 years.
After reading through the 4 retracted studies (Yes, you can do that), and the retraction notes, the only concerning issue is that these publishers' review processes were so lax that these papers slipped through to publication - 2 of the 4, were obvious schlock (Marcia-Cortes and Bellavite), with the Oberbaum paper nearly as bad. Only the Frass Lung CA paper would have been viable, if the Editor's has done their jobs.
The LA Weekly once wrote an article about me titled Remedy Man in the late 80's. I can assure you homeopathy, the grandfather of energy medicine, has validity. How long are we going to let them do this to us. Hyland's pulled their teething tablets, because many parents gave teething tablets to their babies post vaccination who were irritable not knowing thery were developing post vaccine encephalitis - some went on to SIDS. So t he parents get asked did you give you kid anything..."nothing but teething tablets" so the FDA blamned the teetgin tablets for what the vaccines were doing.
Hyland's pulled their teething tablets because the belladonna content varied widely (up to 40-fold), sometimes even varying between tablets within the same bottle.
Belladonna has a steep dose-response curve, and substantial inter-individual variability in response. Even with the most consistent tablet manufacture and precise dosing, giving it to babies is a terrible idea. Much safer rubbing booze on your baby's gums - literally.
"Government tyrants won't let us play poison roulette with our baby!"
Potatoes have 12 to 75 mg of belladonna alkaloids per kilo. The FDA didn't say don't give mashed potatoes to your babies. A 6x teetthing tab would have about 0.0001 mg ot belladonna. A 24 x would have about 0.00000001 mg This is about SIDS caused by vaccines not 0.000000001 mg of belladonna
Perhaps you should spend your time researching and arguing with big pharma who has killed and injured more people than it has ever saved. *Unless* you are here representing them, of course.
Have you looked at any pharma scandals lately? If you're going to talk about poorly written articles...
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine” (1).
More recently, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness” (2). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4572812/#b1-cvj_10_1011
Have you looked at Big Pharma's rap sheet lately? And you're worried about poorly written articles? That's adorable. The medical-industrial-academic-publishing complex has been running a perpetual reality-distortion field for decades while everyone politely pretends the emperor is wearing a peer-reviewed lab coat.
Even the insiders have started blurting it out. The former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine eventually concluded that it was no longer possible to trust much of the published clinical research or even the supposedly authoritative experts interpreting it. That's not some guy wearing a tinfoil hat broadcasting from a bunker. That's someone who spent decades helping decide what entered the scientific canon.
Then The Lancet's editor comes along and basically says that maybe half the scientific literature could be wrong, distorted, or outright untrue because of tiny studies, microscopic effects, tortured statistical gymnastics, fashionable nonsense, and conflicts of interest stacked higher than a pharmaceutical executive's bonus package. Translation: the foundation is held together with p-values, wishful thinking, and marketing budgets.
At this point you're expected to believe that the corporations paying billions in criminal settlements just happen to transform into paragons of scientific virtue the moment they submit a manuscript. Every scandal is supposedly an isolated incident. Every regulatory failure is an unfortunate coincidence. Every revolving door between industry and regulators is perfectly innocent. Every guideline committee just accidentally ends up packed with people financially connected to the products they're evaluating.
But don't worry. You're assured that this time the system has rigorously investigated itself and found itself to be exceptionally trustworthy. Again.
The conspiracy isn't that there's one secret cabal meeting beneath a volcano. The conspiracy is believing that a system overflowing with money, prestige, career incentives, publication bias, regulatory capture, and institutional self-preservation somehow produces immaculate truth by magic. That's the fairy tale.
Well, there is profit in complicating things. So, if you want to use a ton of big impressive words and finance and provide double blind studies that contain pages upon pages of gobbledygook proving your point… by all means, do.
Homeopathy should not be called alternative: it has long replaced the drug, cut, burn Big Pharma scams. Awakened individuals have been studying and using it for many, many years.
Absolutely agree. So many medicinal plants & their healing properties have been hidden from the public because they work better than pharm. and because they are free to grow in your backyard! Break the dependence on big pharm.
Almost half of Big Pharma's medicines come from plants. Chemists find the actual chemical in the plant that has the medicinal effect and isolates it. You'd probably be interested to learn more:
Well done is right and thank you. It’s amazing to see positive results when all else has failed. I am a nurse practitioner and have used homeopathy for over 20 years. Patients become the spokespersons for successful use of that ‘dynamic spark’ within the remedy. The spark that resulted in a positive stimulation of the healing process and at pennies per dose. Oh wait. Thats the real problem
Pretty sure homeopathy has already been rigorously tested. Homeopathic Medicine was the medicine of choice in the US before the AMA can onto the scene. Homeopathic medicine is safe and without side effects. I say let’s bring it back big time!
Which homeopathic treatments have been rigorously tested?
Apparently you do not know the history of homeopathy. Allow me to fill you in.
In 1790 Samuel Hahnemann was transcribing world medical journals into German. He had quit his position as a doctor due to the barbaric treatments at the time killing as many people as they were healing . Back then blood letting and leaching was common. So he was translating a Chinese medical journal into German and can apron a theory that said “ Anything that will cause symptoms in a healthy person, when you dilute it and give it to an unhealthy person, it will get rid of those same symptoms.” He was fascinated by this and started testing different plants, animal and minerals. First up was cinchona bark. He ate some and wrote down every symptom he experienced some of the being the same symptoms of someone with malaria. And just as a note all homeopathic remedies are named as the latin name of the substance. Then he potentized cinchona bark. This also involves Latin. Potencies are numbered 1x or 1 c (common) homeopathic doctors can deal with L’s and
M’s but most common are x’s and c’s. What are these you ask? Well, take one part plant, 9 parts alcohol. Mix succus and also there is light and dark involved. This is a 1 x or a mother tincture. The same would be a c potency with one part plant 99 parts alcohol. From there you take one part mother tincture and 9 (or 99) parts alcohol and take it through the mixing process again. This is a 2 x or a 2c. Next dilution same thing. Common potencies are 6 x or 6c , 30x or 30c. So each dilution makes the healing qualities of the matter stronger. The blueprint of the plant, so to speak. But let me go back, so Samuel then excited about how the cinchona experiment turned out started testing lots of substances and wrote down every little symptom whether it was arms, legs, head, stomach, flu, emotional, mental, and physical. There is a lot of discussion about when to use what potency of a remedy. Should it be an x potency or a c ? 6 or 30? And monkey wrench in also in natural food stores you can get 200 c or 200 ck’s I’ll explain these later. So I’m sure you have heard of Arica. This is the #1 remedy. It is for trauma. This is trauma of any kind and not just bruising or muscle soreness. This would be the first remedy for your house burning down, your dog dying, car crash, finding
Your liver in bed with someone else, you get robbed. You get the idea. When would you take a high potency and when would you take a low potency? Say you are walking down the aisle of your natural food store and you stub your toes on the racks. OWCH I hurt my foot. This is a low potency. You have a sore foot. But say you are walking down that same aisle
And I stomp on your foot. OUCH that hurt, physical…why did she do that to me? Emotional… And last but certainly not least THAT B@@TCH !!! Mental! Higher potency. So the more levels of an issue the higher potency you can use. Another cool thing to say about remedies is that a dose is a dose is a dose is a dose. So if you take 3 or you take 33 it’s the same dose. The only way to increase your dose is to take it more often. When starting a remedy you can start by taking 3 every 15 minutes for 2 hours. Get it in there and get it working. Homeopathy is also symptom based and not disease based. Let’s take a common cold. Every cold is different. Let’s start with the watery eyes runny nose cold and the remedy Allium Cepa. This is common onion. So when we go back to the theory, anything that causes symptoms in a healthy person, when you dilute it and give it to an unhealthy person it will get rid of those same symptoms. So what happens when you put a sliced onion up to your face? Watery eyes? Runny nose? Drip down the back of the throat? Prepare it as a homeopathic remedy and it will get rid of your watery eyes and runny nose from either cold or allergies and it will do it quick! Right remedy equals relief. But say you have stuffed up cold and a fever. That is not an Allium remedy and if you took it you just would not get any relief. That type of cold would be more of a belladonna cold. So which brings us to belladonna being a poisonous substance…. How much of the plant matter do you think is left in a 30x or a 30 c remedy? I’m trying to think back, but I think a 7x or c would be classified as no more actual plant matter being left in the remedy, but please don’t hold me to that. So that being the case there is no toxic part left, only the healing blueprint of the plant.
But back to Samuel, he tested everything on himself, his family, his friends and his animals. And tested on all of use that use homeopathy instead of drugs with massive side effects and life reducing effects as well.
Homeopathy has no side effects and no contraindications. Even bases and pets will get no side effects even if 9 bottles were ingested all at the same time. If they did it would be from the consistency of the tablet or pellet and not the remedy.
And so homeopathy treats like with like. The Material Medica is the guide. Homeopathy is grandfathered in by FDA and is regulated by the FDA. Every company that makes remedies under the FDA by law has to have an NDC code on it. So if you are getting an arnica 30c from any brand it must be made the same way. The Hahnemann method. There is another method used by Boiron utilizing a ck potency. Process is the same except for the potentizing. They start with one part matter with 99 parts alcohol and then instead of starting the next dilution with one part, they just empty the beaker and assume the residual residue in the beaker is that one part needed for the next dilution. So the 200 c’s and 200 ck’s I feel should only be used under homeopathic practitioners. There is a lot more nuance in there with cross over potencies and such but that’s the basics. Highly and rigorously studied. Let me know if you have questions. If I don’t know the answer because I’m not an expert, I can steer you towards folks that can answer. Thanks for listening
The question was straightforward. "Which homeopathic treatments have been rigorously tested?"
You pasted 1200 words of woo.
It’s not a straightforward answer. Too many words for you? Awe…. Poor baby
The answer is - lots of them:
Oscillococcinum for influenza-like illness.
Arnica montana for pain, bruising, and surgical recovery.
Galphimia glauca for allergic rhinitis.
Rhus toxicodendron for arthritis and musculoskeletal pain.
Traumeel for pain and inflammation.
Various combination homeopathy regimens for asthma, migraine, fibromyalgia, depression, irritable bowel syndrome, ADHD, and eczema.
I’m not baked at all. Just like educating the ignorant.
yes and none of these results were clinically significant.
Are you talking to me?
Another TDS asp…go be kind for a change…you are boring me
Anything with zero side effects also has zero therapeutic effects.
Not fact
Yet you are incapable of offering any substance to explain your disagreement?
And you are a liberal with your mind erroneously made up so there is no talking to you. Complete waste of my time. For forth and be ignorant the rest of you miserable life…
Thanks for reporting on this topic.
I think we should no longer call homeopathy alternative medicine.
Technically, allopathic medicine is the "alternative" medicine. It came later.
Each of those four papers is available (full text) by following the links you provided. All linked to retraction notices including relevant details. One with links to a corrected paper.
You just typed out your diatribe about "erasure" and "censorship" - Facts be damned.
This blurb is weaker than maha-report's usual sewage. Peter Gold makes clueless people look intelligent.
These retracted studies remain, with notices - except in the most egregious cases.
"One rationale offered was that the study was not reproducible because patients received individualized homeopathic treatment. Yet individualized treatment is a defining characteristic of classical homeopathy and was fully described in the study design. If individualized prescribing were grounds for retraction, many forms of personalized medicine would face similar challenges."
That's why sham treatments and double-dummy designs are employed.
I couldn't read beyond that joke of a paragraph.
Retracted studies remain in the scientific record - which you know by now. These retractions were not because of the tested therapeutics. The reasons were clearly stated by the editors. No blinding, no placebo control, etc. You folks are all about those placebo controls - except when you aren't.
For the Oberbaum study - "Concerns were raised regarding the methodology as described in this article. Post-publication review confirmed concerns regarding the absence of blinding and placebo controls, which in the view of the Editor may introduce significant bias in the interpretation of the data, results and conclusions, which cannot be rectified by an erratum. The Editor therefore no longer has confidence in the reliability of this article. The authors have been invited to submit a revised manuscript that addresses these concerns."
Yes. As a lifelong occasional and appreciative user of homeopathic remedies, I feel concerned when peer-reviewed studies are removed from the literature for reasons that appear to reflect disagreement rather than demonstrable misconduct!
It's not removed from the literature. It stays, with a watermark.
Well, that's better than removal.
"Disagreement?"
Scroll down (or up) - someone pasted what this little disagreement was about.
Here's the paper- https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00431-024-05791-1.pdf
Would you like the Editor's retraction notice, listing issues?
No, thanks. I'm caring for a bedridden disabled daughter. Short on time!
This piece demonstrates the author's unawareness of the most basic facts about what a journal retraction is (and isn't), how and why it would occur, and what the results are. It muddles detail after detail of the studies themselves, all while decrying some imaginary persecution campaign, and 'erasure,' because of 4 retractions over 10 years.
After reading through the 4 retracted studies (Yes, you can do that), and the retraction notes, the only concerning issue is that these publishers' review processes were so lax that these papers slipped through to publication - 2 of the 4, were obvious schlock (Marcia-Cortes and Bellavite), with the Oberbaum paper nearly as bad. Only the Frass Lung CA paper would have been viable, if the Editor's has done their jobs.
The LA Weekly once wrote an article about me titled Remedy Man in the late 80's. I can assure you homeopathy, the grandfather of energy medicine, has validity. How long are we going to let them do this to us. Hyland's pulled their teething tablets, because many parents gave teething tablets to their babies post vaccination who were irritable not knowing thery were developing post vaccine encephalitis - some went on to SIDS. So t he parents get asked did you give you kid anything..."nothing but teething tablets" so the FDA blamned the teetgin tablets for what the vaccines were doing.
Hyland's pulled their teething tablets because the belladonna content varied widely (up to 40-fold), sometimes even varying between tablets within the same bottle.
Belladonna = Deadly Nightshade
https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts/standard-homeopathic-company-issues-nationwide-recall-hylands-baby-teething-tablets-and-hylands-baby
Belladonna has a steep dose-response curve, and substantial inter-individual variability in response. Even with the most consistent tablet manufacture and precise dosing, giving it to babies is a terrible idea. Much safer rubbing booze on your baby's gums - literally.
"Government tyrants won't let us play poison roulette with our baby!"
Potatoes have 12 to 75 mg of belladonna alkaloids per kilo. The FDA didn't say don't give mashed potatoes to your babies. A 6x teetthing tab would have about 0.0001 mg ot belladonna. A 24 x would have about 0.00000001 mg This is about SIDS caused by vaccines not 0.000000001 mg of belladonna
How many kilos if potatoes do you feed your babies? And that's before cooking (= different chemical). And you had no clue that's why it was pulled.
And mucosal absorption (via gums) is considerably greater than by GI tract.
Let's say the teething table don't have 10 -24 power but as much as 10 to the negative 6th do you know how much belladonna that is? 0,0001 mg
Dude - those tablets contained random amounts of hyoscamine and scopolamine.
Have fun giving random amounts to the babies in your family - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/24/us-tourists-colombia-deadly-robberies-kidnappings-tinder/
https://kpstoller.substack.com/publish/post/203472836
The main point is not how much Belladonna was in the teething tabs, whic is like 0.0000001 mg but that the vaccines are causing SIDS.
A lot of trolls on this thread. Don't mind them.
Pointing out how poorly reasoned and written this newsletter is isn't trolling. My daughter's high school Science teacher would require a re-write.
Perhaps you should spend your time researching and arguing with big pharma who has killed and injured more people than it has ever saved. *Unless* you are here representing them, of course.
Have you looked at any pharma scandals lately? If you're going to talk about poorly written articles...
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine” (1).
More recently, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness” (2). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4572812/#b1-cvj_10_1011
Have you looked at Big Pharma's rap sheet lately? And you're worried about poorly written articles? That's adorable. The medical-industrial-academic-publishing complex has been running a perpetual reality-distortion field for decades while everyone politely pretends the emperor is wearing a peer-reviewed lab coat.
Even the insiders have started blurting it out. The former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine eventually concluded that it was no longer possible to trust much of the published clinical research or even the supposedly authoritative experts interpreting it. That's not some guy wearing a tinfoil hat broadcasting from a bunker. That's someone who spent decades helping decide what entered the scientific canon.
Then The Lancet's editor comes along and basically says that maybe half the scientific literature could be wrong, distorted, or outright untrue because of tiny studies, microscopic effects, tortured statistical gymnastics, fashionable nonsense, and conflicts of interest stacked higher than a pharmaceutical executive's bonus package. Translation: the foundation is held together with p-values, wishful thinking, and marketing budgets.
At this point you're expected to believe that the corporations paying billions in criminal settlements just happen to transform into paragons of scientific virtue the moment they submit a manuscript. Every scandal is supposedly an isolated incident. Every regulatory failure is an unfortunate coincidence. Every revolving door between industry and regulators is perfectly innocent. Every guideline committee just accidentally ends up packed with people financially connected to the products they're evaluating.
But don't worry. You're assured that this time the system has rigorously investigated itself and found itself to be exceptionally trustworthy. Again.
The conspiracy isn't that there's one secret cabal meeting beneath a volcano. The conspiracy is believing that a system overflowing with money, prestige, career incentives, publication bias, regulatory capture, and institutional self-preservation somehow produces immaculate truth by magic. That's the fairy tale.
100%. Well said!
Well, there is profit in complicating things. So, if you want to use a ton of big impressive words and finance and provide double blind studies that contain pages upon pages of gobbledygook proving your point… by all means, do.
I’m trying a homeopathic vet for my dog after 3 separate pet vets and hospitals could not figure out a diagnosis.
So far my dog has improved immensely it’s been about a month of treatment of less.
I was skeptical but, it was a last resort as we almost put him down 2 times due to his undiagnosed condition.
Motive for anti-homeopathic action is simple. Pharmaceuticals greed.
Nope. If homeopathic medicines worked for a problem, then Big Pharma would profit off of them.
Homeopathy should not be called alternative: it has long replaced the drug, cut, burn Big Pharma scams. Awakened individuals have been studying and using it for many, many years.
Absolutely agree. So many medicinal plants & their healing properties have been hidden from the public because they work better than pharm. and because they are free to grow in your backyard! Break the dependence on big pharm.
Almost half of Big Pharma's medicines come from plants. Chemists find the actual chemical in the plant that has the medicinal effect and isolates it. You'd probably be interested to learn more:
https://thescamdoctor.substack.com/p/mother-nature-is-your-enemy?r=6hgshq
Well done is right and thank you. It’s amazing to see positive results when all else has failed. I am a nurse practitioner and have used homeopathy for over 20 years. Patients become the spokespersons for successful use of that ‘dynamic spark’ within the remedy. The spark that resulted in a positive stimulation of the healing process and at pennies per dose. Oh wait. Thats the real problem
Great article. Thanks for bringing attention to this important issue.
Doesn’t fit their current scam! Case closed? F them! I will follow homeopathic and any alternative. Credibility long gone!
https://kpstoller.substack.com/publish/post/203472836