Sooky, sooky homeopaths

After the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) fired all of the barrels of their not insignificant scientific armoury at the 16^th Century sugar pills and potions prepared by homeopaths, the logic-dodgers at Homeopathy Plus decided that they would have a darnedgood sook about it.

 

“There were no qualified homeopaths on the panel.” 

 

Off to a lousy start! To imagine that you need to be a ‘qualified’ homeopath to determine the quality of evidence is to equate having to have a ‘qualified’ psychic to test talking to the dead.  The review of studies does not require a party whose studies are being examined, in fact if one was involved there could be a resultant conflict of interest or even a bias that might affect the outcome.

 

So, scratch that from the argument as sour grapes.  Too bad.

 

Then Homeopathy Plus ventures straight into the resort of the woo and nonsense peddlers from almost all pseudo-scientists, the ‘special pleading’. “that homeopathy is practised by very different principles to those of conventional medicine.” Well, how about that. Homeopathy doesn't work via the same principles as ‘conventional medicine’ or as science calls it, ‘medicine’.  They wanted the NHMRC to focus on ‘principles and clinical practice’ instead of double blinded random clinical tests.  What they mean by this is “we’ll show you a bunch of stuff we’ve done with tales from our clients and our ‘specialist’ that make homeopathy shine like a beacon in the dark.” rather than the actual evidence that shows it doesn’t work any better than a sugar pill.  No surprise there because a great proportion of homeopathy is a sugar pill.  

 

Scratch that as “we’re special, you don’t understand us.” 

 

Next they make another attempt to show that homeopathy is special again.  This time by condescendingly pointing out that the NHMRC need to be shown how to understand how to see homeopathy’s effectiveness. “the AHA has recommended the NHMRC take “a more comprehensive approach  so that the evidence for its effectiveness is more easily understood and studied”  A really backhanded slap to the experts at the NHMRC.  They go on to indicate that a lack of this understanding is “This alone has had a negative impact on the NHMRC findings”. Right, that’s all sorted then. 

 

Scratched as more ‘special pleading with a dose of insult.”

 

Homeopathy Plus then calls for the reinforcements from the Australian Traditional Medicine Society (ATMS)  The ATMS is an association of almost every type of pseudo medicine that you can imagine.  If you have the time, click on all of these and see how many contradict the methodologies of any or all of the others. 

 

Acupuncture                                         Counselling                     Reflexognosy 

Aromatherapy                                      Homoeopathy                 Reflexology 

Ayurvedic Medicine                            Hypnotherapy                 RemedialMassage 
Bowen                                                   Kinesiology                     RemedialTherapies

Chinese Herbal Medicine                 MyofascialRelease       Rolfing 

Chinese Massage                               Naturopathy                   Shiatsu 

Chiropractic                                          Nutrition                          Thai Massage 

Complete Decongestive Therapy    Osteopathy                     TibetanMedicine 

Western Herbal Medicine

 

The ATMS reverses the burden of proof, another crappy arguing method used by cranks. “has no compelling evidence of a lack of effectiveness with homeopathy, just a lack of high quality studies” They then think that someone else should prove their nonsense should be tested by anybody except those people who sell it.  Isn’t that just what happened? All the existing decent trials were examined and no sound results were found.  Now they want MORE studies after 250 years, if it hasn’t shown results, my guess is it won’t ever.  And if they want to tout homeopathy they should show its effectiveness before they sell any more. 

 

Scratched.  The burden of proof lies with the claimant or proponent, not anyone else.

 

The “NHMRC exclusion of homeopathic prophylactic studies” The NHMRC wanted proof that homeopathy actually works when applied as described.

 

Scratched.  They really love special pleading. "They won’t listen to our poorly monitored and non blinded ‘tests’"

 

Finally, we have “ooo, it was expensive and took three years”  You would think that Homeopathy Plus would be really pleased that experts whose approval they crave took three years to fund and execute a comprehensive study into the effects of homeopathy.  That is exactly the very thing they have called for in this tantrum.  I believe that no study, however extensive, comprehensive or expensive would ever satisy Homeopathy Plus or the ATMS until it showed that magic shaken water, acupuncture, naturopathy, ayurvedic and all the other nonsense all worked. 

 

Scratched.  We all know that’s NEVER gonna happen.