Returning to an old thread having to do with alternative medicine...
-
http://respiratorycare.medscape.com/reuters/prof/2000/08/08.18/2818clin015.h
tml
Homeopathic Preparations Appear to Have Therapeutic Effect
WESTPORT, Aug 18 (Reuters Health) - A homeopathic preparation for perennial
allergic rhinitis appears to be more effective than placebo, according to a
report in the August 19/26 issue of the British Medical Journal.
Dr. David Reilly from the Homoeopathic Hospital, Glasgow, UK, and a multicenter
team studied 50 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. The subjects were
randomized to receive either 30c of a homeopathic preparation of principal
inhalent allergen or placebo. In the third and fourth week after the start of
treatment, the group compared changes in nasal inspiratory peak flow and visual
symptom analogue scale scores to baseline measurements.
"The homoeopathy group had a significant objective improvement in nasal airflow
compared with the placebo group (mean difference 19.8 L/min)," Dr. Reilly's
group reports.
While both groups reported an improvement in symptoms, when the researchers
combined the results from this trial with those of three previous trials (n =
253), there was "a mean symptom reduction on visual analogue scores of 28% (10.9
mm) for homoeopathy compared with 3% (1.1 mm) for placebo."
Given these results, Dr. Reilly and colleagues conclude, "this study has failed
to confirm our original hypothesis that homoeopathy is a placebo."
Editorials point out that "homoeopathy is biologically implausible because of
the use of medicines diluted beyond the Avogadro limit." Dr. Tim Lancaster, from
the Institute of Health Sciences, Oxford, UK, and Dr. Andrew Vickers, from
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, add that trials of homoeopathy
are difficult because "there are no established animal models, mechanisms of
action, or examples of similar treatment for proved benefit."
Although the "methods used by Reilly and colleagues in their study of homeopathy
for perennial allergic rhinitis were rigorous and it is unlikely that their
results arose from methodological bias," the editorials believe that much larger
trials are still needed.
BMJ 2000;321:471-476.
Copyright © 2000 Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. Republication or
redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior
written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays
in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
Robert F. Tatman
Information Technology Consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jenkintown, PA, USA
*Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.*
A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html"Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/A
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/"ctrl/A
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
