Prev: free software and info , Bio chat free
Next: Free Ophthalmic journals
From: Citizen Jimserac on 11 Aug 2008 09:33
Letter from Mr. Powers, President of Liddell Laboratories
to Consumer Reports regarding their recent negative
evaluation of Homeopathy.

OPEN LETTER TO CONSUMER REPORTS

Dear Mr. Podolsky:



Below is a significant body of evidence that refutes your recent
article on homeopathy, Homeopathic Drugs -- Look-Alike Medicines. In
your article you say that "there's little evidence to back up the
notion ... that homeopathy can improve health." I believe that the
accuracy of your article suffered greatly from inadequate research.
When people tell me that there is little convincing proof of the
efficacy of homeopathy, I always find that they have not had access to
the relevant scientific literature. As you will see below, there are
an abundance studies demonstrating the efficacy of homeopathic
remedies:

1. Clinical Trials in Homeopathy, the British Medical Journal,
February
1991. The authors were skeptics who reviewed 107 papers on
controlled
clinical trials in homeopathy. In its conclusions, the paper
states
"The amount of positive evidence, even among the best studies,
came as
a surprise to us. Based on this evidence, we would readily
accept that
homeopathy could be efficacious ... "

2. Critical Review and Meta-Analysis of Serial Agitated Dilutions
in
Experimental Toxicology, Human and Experimental Toxicology,
1994. Six
non-homeopathic doctors, led by Dr. Wayne Jonas of the National
Institute of Health and Walter Reed Army Institute of Research
reviewed
135 studies found in 105 published papers addressing the
effects of
serial agitated dilutions on toxicological systems. Of the
tests
meeting their highest scientific quality and comparability
criteria,
"70% showed positive effects."

3. The British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published a study
on the
homeopathic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis conducted in the
Glasgow
Homeopathic Hospital in 1980. It involved patients with
rheumatoid
arthritis taking orthodox anti-inflammatory treatment. Half the
patients took additional homeopathy and half took a placebo.
Results
showed improved symptoms (pain, articular index and stiffness)
in 82%
of homeopathic patients, as compared with 21% in the placebo
group.
There were no side effects seen with homoeopathic remedies.

4. In 1983, Wiesenauer et al., in Fortschr Med. published the
results of
their double blind study on the treatment of hay fever with
Galphimia
glauca 6X. The results were positive in favor of homeopathic
therapy.
However, the most interesting aspect of this study was that
they also
studied the effects of treatment with Galphimia glauca 10-6
(serially
diluted, but not succussed according to homeopathic
methodology). The
simple dilution without homeopathic succussion exhibited no
activity
with results being identical to the placebo.

5. In 1991, Brigo and Serpelloni, in Berlin Journal of Research in
Homeopathy, published their study in the homeopathic treatment
of
migraine. According to convention study guidelines, patients
were
treated for several months with homeopathy with an equal number
of
patients treated with a placebo. Over four months, 80% of the
patients
improved with homeopathy versus 13% improvement with placebo.

6. In 1986, Albertini and Golberg, in the journal Homeopathie,
published
their study of homeopathic treatment of acute nerve pain
following
tooth extraction. 76% of the homeopathic patients received
pain relief
as compared to 40% for placebo.

7. In 1994, Linde et al., reviewed 109 publications and found that
nearly
all papers reported positive results at specific dilutions.
Based on
the best studies methodologically, the author concluded, "There
is
distinct evidence of efficacy of both low and high dilutions of
homeopathic remedies."


Children: Homeopathic treatment is regarded as particularly effective
and fast-acting in children. Such rapid effects on diseases (which are
not psychosomatic in nature) cannot be explained by the placebo
effect. A few examples of homeopathic studies focused on children:

1. The British Homeopathic Journal, Frei and Thurneysen, November
2001.
This study was performed on 230 children with acute otitis
media
(middle ear infection).
-- 39% had achieved pain control within 6 hours
-- 72% had achieved pain control within 12 hours
-- Results were 240% faster than for children taking placebo

2. The British Homeopathic Journal, October 1997. Double blind,
placebo-controlled study on the treatment of 43 children with
ADHD.
-- After 10 days of homeopathic treatment children taking the
active
product showed significantly less ADHD behavior than those
given the
placebo.
-- Two months after the study's end, with no further treatment:
57%
continued to improve; 19% had continued benefits; and 24%
relapsed
into old behavior patterns

3. The British Homeopathic Journal, Frei & Thurneysen, 2001, This
study
was performed on 115 children (average age 8.3 years) comparing
homeopathic treatment with that of methylphenidate (Ritalin)
for
children suffering from ADHD symptoms.
-- After 3.5 months, children receiving homeopathy had a
clinical
improvement rating of 73%, compared to a clinical
improvement rating
of only 65% for the Ritalin children.
-- In preschoolers, homeopathy was found to be particularly
effective.




Quality studies similar to these are numerous. In my view, these
studies comprehensively demonstrate the effectiveness of today's
properly prepared homeopathic medicines. I hope that you find this
information helpful and that you will consider it when writing future
articles about homeopathy and health, in general.
Randy L. Powers, President, Liddell Laboratories, http://www.liddell.net
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: free software and info , Bio chat free
Next: Free Ophthalmic journals