Comments on: Homeopathic Society ‘Misled’ MPs In Inquiry

By: Tony

Tony — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 09:33:59 +0000

“Robert Mathie, a researcher at the BHA, said the reviews found evidence for a difference between homeopathic remedies and sugar pills, which contain no active ingredients.”

Erm, homeopathic remedies contain no active ingredients either. The homeopaths even admit this.

By: spiderabc1

spiderabc1 — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:34:34 +0000

The name Edzard is not as good as Edward. Fluffy pills are no subsitute for scientific ones. If there is a real medical ailment and aloe vera etc. won’t cure it, best to get the real chemical rat tested up to date solution from a giant chain.

By: andy c

andy c — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 20:10:51 +0000

@simon: its impossible to keep all of the solution when creating homeopathic products because of the extreme dilution involved. less than 1 molecule in all the world’s oceans.

By: jojoes6969

jojoes6969 — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:51:51 +0000

Well, thats just the icing on the sugar pill cake

By: roz

roz — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:30:26 +0000

gee, just like tobacco companies did!

By: Simon Williams

Simon Williams — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:28:23 +0000

This report is, in itself, misleading. If you dilute a substance in solution, as long as you keep all of the solution, it doesn’t matter how much water you add, it will still contain as many molecules of the ‘active’ ingredient as there were originally. It’s the fact that the sugar pills are dipped in the solution, only coming into contact with a small part of it, which *statistically* means none of the ‘active’ molecules are likely to be present on any given pill. I’ll get my coat.

By: Gordon Wilson

Gordon Wilson — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:06:36 +0000

At last some sensible comment. Maybe the most worrying thing is that approximately one in six GP’s continue to support homeopathy in the face of incontravertable evidence.