Homeopathy Research papers
This page was last updated on 5th October 2011. Related links |
Homoeopathic remedies in dermatology: a systematic review of controlled clinical trialsConclusion: “Reviewed trials of homoeopathic treatments for cutaneous diseases were highly variable in methods and quality. We did not find sufficient evidence from these studies that homoeopathy is clearly efficacious for any single dermatological condition.” Simonart T, Kabagabo C, De Maertelaer V. Br J Dermatol. 2011 Oct;165(4):897-905 Dr Elizabeth Thompson of Bristol Homeopathic Hospital finds that pills that contain nothing have no effect (not even placebo effect)"It seemed until this month that burial had been the fate of a trial of homeopathy at the Bristol Homeopathic Hospital, run by Dr Elizabeth Thompson…In March 2006 the University Hospitals Bristol NHS Trust announced a trial that was being run by Dr Elizabeth Thompson at the Bristol Homeopathic Hospital…in July 2011, four years after it was promised, the paper appeared, in the journal Homeopathy…The paper is: The feasibility of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to compare usual care with usual care plus individualised homeopathy, in children requiring secondary care for asthma [full text]. It’s not surprising that publication was delayed. The results are completely negative. In fact it shows that the homeopathic treatment didn’t even produce a placebo effect, never mind an effect of its own…The authors’ conclusions are simple “Conclusions: A future study using this design is not feasible”. That’s pretty feeble. They don’t state the conclusion as "homeopathy doesn’t work", far less that "homeopathy doesn’t even have a placebo effect"." DC Science (27th July 2011) Systematic reviews of RCTs in homeopathy: Systematic reviews conclusively show that homeopathic remedies are placebosProfessor Edzard Ernst, Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies [F.A.C.T] (Volume 15 Issue 2, Pages 107 – 108 Published Online: 14 Jun 2010 – SUBSCRIPTION ONLY) Beliefs about homeopathy among patients presenting at GP surgeries“Contrary to expectation, our survey suggests that among patients consulting orthodox medical practitioners, the majority of respondents believe that they understand how homeopathy works, that it is supported by scientific evidence, is concentrated, and helps the condition for which it was being taken. These findings suggest that scientific evidence is not communicated well to the lay public, but, contrarily, homeopathy is being marketed effectively and still has considerable appeal to general members of the public. In addition, as most homeopathy users believed that it works despite the complete lack of scientific plausibility or evidence, there must be other explanations for its apparent success including placebo responses and confusion between clinical improvements due to homeopathy and the natural history of the illness.” Shaun Holt MD and Andrew Gilbey PhD, The New Zealand Medical Journal (22nd May 2009) [pdf] A systematic review of homoeopathy for the treatment of fibromyalgia“Homoeopathy is often advocated for fibromyalgia (FM) and many FM patients use it. To critically evaluate all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of homoeopathy as a treatment for FM, six electronic databases were searched to identify all relevant studies. Data extraction and the assessment of the methodological quality of all included studies were done by two independent reviewers. Four RCTs were found, including two feasibility studies. Three studies were placebo-controlled. None of the trials was without serious flaws. Invariably, their results suggested that homoeopathy was better than the control interventions in alleviating the symptoms of FM. Independent replications are missing. Even though all RCTs suggested results that favour homoeopathy, important caveats exist. Therefore, the effectiveness of homoeopathy as a symptomatic treatment for FM remains unproven.” Perry R, Terry R, Ernst E. Clin Rheumatol. (2010 May;29(5):457-64) Evidence and simplicity: why we should reject homeopathyWe briefly recap some of the major arguments on each side, but we try to go further by making explicit an underlying philosophical presupposition. In particular, we will claim that there is an important principle, which has ancient roots going back at least to Occam, some version of which constrains all empirical reasoning. We call this constraint the simplicity principle. We argue that this is not something specific to a scientific paradigm, but that, all of us, including proponents of homeopathy, are themselves deeply committed to the simplicity principle. However, once the simplicity principle is made explicit and applied to homeopathy, allegiance to homeopathy is clearly seen as irrational. The point is not merely the lack of clinical trials supporting homeopathy; rather, belief in the efficacy of homeopathy leaves a mountain of unexplained mysteries, and thereby flies in the face of the simplicity rule that guides the homeopaths' own reasoning and arguments. If nothing else, we hope that defenders of homeopathy will gain a greater understanding of why critics are so deeply reluctant to accept the efficacy of homeopathic interventions - and that this reluctance is not mere stubbornness or artificial allegiance to western medicine. Finally, we also hope thereby to illustrate the usefulness of philosophy in unearthing presuppositions in seemingly deadlocked debates.” Sehon S, Stanley D., J Eval Clin Pract. (April 2010) Homeopathy for insomnia: A systematic review of research evidenceCONCLUSIONS: The limited evidence available does not demonstrate a statistically significant effect of homeopathic medicines for insomnia treatment. Existing RCTs were of poor quality and were likely to have been underpowered. Well-conducted studies of homeopathic medicines and treatment by a homeopath are required to examine the clinical and cost effectiveness of homeopathy for insomnia. Cooper KL, Relton C., Sleep Med Rev. (9th March 2010) No effect of a homoeopathic combination of Arnica montana and Bryonia alba on bleeding, inflammation, and ischaemia after aortic valve surgeryCONCLUSIONS: In the study setting, there was no evidence of effects of A. montana and B. alba combination on bleeding, inflammation, pain or myocardial ischaemia. Cornu C, Joseph P, Gaillard S, Bauer C, Vedrinne C, Bissery A, Melot G, Bossard N, Belon P, Lehot JJ., Br J Clin Pharmacol. (2010 Feb;69(2):136-42.) Homeopathy: what does the “best” evidence tell us? (Systematic Review)Conclusions: The findings of currently available Cochrane reviews of studies of homeopathy do not show that homeopathic medicines have effects beyond placebo. Edzard Ernst, Medical Journal of Australia (2010; 192 (8): 458-460) Homeopathy is where the harm is: Five unethical effects of funding unscientific ‘remedies’“Although homeopathic remedies do not directly harm patients, it is very possible that harm could befall homeopathy patients who refrain from seeking traditional medicine. Patients in the NHS could be indirectly harmed if funds are spent on homeopathy that could have been spent on mainstream care. Patients who are prescribed homeopathic treatments are very possibly being deceived, and thus are being treated unethically. And homeopathy is currently weakening public confidence in the NHS, the MHRA and science and medicine in general, and also doing a disservice to efficacious forms of complementary medicine. Most of these unethical effects could be minimised by withdrawing NHS funding for homeopathic practice, and educating the public about the lack of an evidence base for homeopathy. In other words, it would be more ethical for the NHS to stick to treatments of proven worth. There was once a homeopathic hospital in Tunbridge Wells, but it was closed because ‘the NHS has to decide the best use of money on the evidence of clinical effectiveness’. Other NHS trusts would do well to follow this example.” David M. Shaw, J Med Ethics (2010 36: 130-131) [pdf] Should We Maintain an Open Mind about Homeopathy?"Homeopathy is among the worst examples of faith-based medicine that gathers shrill support of celebrities and other powerful lobbies in place of a genuine and humble wish to explore the limits of our knowledge using the scientific method….We are often accused of tilting at windmills; and hey, what's wrong with offering placebos for the worried well with self-limiting conditions? Well firstly, it is considered unethical for modern medical practitioners to sink to this kind of deception that denies the patient his or her autonomy. Secondly, by opening the door to irrational medicine alongside evidence-based medicine, we are poisoning the minds of the public. Finally, if we don't put a brake on the increasing self-confidence of the homeopathic establishment, they will cease to limit their attention to self-limiting or nonspecific maladies. Already, an investigative journalist for Newsnight has exposed the willingness of homeopathic chemists to offer homeopathic prophylactics for malaria. On World AIDS Day, the Society of Homeopaths in London hosted a conference on the treatment and prevention of human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome by using water with a remarkable memory." By Michael Baum, MD, ChM, FRCS, FRCR (hon) and Edzard Ernst, MD, PhD, FRCP, FRCPEd, The American Journal of Medicine (November 2009) [Full text] Homeopathy for cancer?"There is no evidence at all that homeopathic remedies can change the natural history of any cancer….. there is no reason to believe that homeopathic medicines have anything to offer to patients suffering from cancer or other conditions apart from non-specific effects. However, to generate the placebo effect, we do not necessarily need placebos." Article by Edzard Ernst, MD PhD, Current Oncology (August 2007) The use of homeopathic combination remedy for dengue fever symptoms: a pilot RCT in Honduras"…the results of this study do not suggest that this combination homeopathic remedy is effective for the symptoms that are characteristic of dengue fever." Homeopathy (January 2007) Homeopathy for Childhood and Adolescence Ailments: Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical TrialsConclusion: The evidence from rigorous clinical trials of any type of therapeutic or preventive intervention testing homeopathy for childhood and adolescence ailments is not convincing enough for recommendations in any condition. Umut Altunc, MD; Max H. Pittler, MD, PhD; Edzard Ernst, MD, PhD, Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82(1):69-75 A systematic review of the quality of homeopathic pathogenetic trials published from 1945 to 1995The reviewers, who call provings one of homeopathy's "pillars," concluded that, "The central question of whether homeopathic medicines in high dilutions can provoke effects in healthy volunteers has not yet been definitively answered because of methodological weaknesses of the reports." In other words despite more than 200 years of supposed testing the homeopathic community has failed to validate its basic method of remedy selection. The reviewers call for better designed provings to provide "results that can be trusted". (Dantas F. et al Homeopathy 96:4-16 2007) Homoeopathy for cancer?"The analysis of published literature on homoeopathy found insufficient evidence to support the clinical efficacy of homoeopathic therapy in cancer care." Review of Milazzo S, Russell N, Ernst E. Efficacy of homeopathic therapy in cancer treatment. Eur J Cancer 2006; 42: 282-9. Focus Alternative and Complementary Therapies (June 2006) Homeopathic Medicines Do Not Alter Growth and Gene Expression in Prostate and Breast Cancer Cells In VitroConclusions: The results demonstrate that the highly diluted homeopathic remedies used by homeopathic practitioners for cancer show no measurable effects on cell growth or gene expression in vitro using currently available methodologies. Thangapazham RL, Gaddipati JP, Rajeshkumar NV, Sharma A, Singh AK, Ives JA, Maheshwari RK, Jonas WB, Integrative Cancer Therapies, Vol. 5, No. 4, 356-361 (2006) Is homeopathy a clinically valuable approach? [FULL TEXT]Concluding remarks: "Therapeutic decisions should be based foremost on an assessment of the potential risk versus proven benefit. For homeopathy, the benefit side of this equation is currently not clearly defined: the best available evidence does not convincingly show benefits over and above those of placebo. The risks of homeopathy are probably relatively small. But even small risks can weigh heavy if the benefit is uncertain, small or totally absent. If one adds to all this, the scientific implausibility of the basic concepts that underlie homeopathic thinking, the inescapable conclusion is not positive: 250 years after the birth of its 'inventor' homeopathy is not associated with a risk-benefit profile that is demonstrably positive." Edzard Ernst, Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, Vol.26 No.11 (November 2005) [pdf] Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy [FULL TEXT]Interpretation: "Biases are present in placebo-controlled trials of both homoeopathy and conventional medicine. When account was taken for these biases in the analysis, there was weak evidence for a specific effect of homoeopathic remedies, but strong evidence for specific effects of conventional interventions. This finding is compatible with the notion that the clinical effects of homoeopathy are placebo effects." Aijing Shang, Karin Hawiler-Muntener, Linda Nartey, Peter Juni, Stephan Dorig, Jonathan A. C. Sterne, Daniel Pewsner, Matthias Egger; Lancet 2005; 366: 726-32 (27th Aug. — 2nd Sept. 2005) [pdf] Self treatment with one of three self selected, ultramolecular homeopathic medicines for the prevention of upper respiratory tract infections in children. A double-blind randomized placebo controlled trialConcludes that there was no effect over placebo. (March 2005) Ultramolecular homeopathy has no observable clinical effects. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proving trial of Belladonna 30CBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (November 2003) The effects of homeopathic Argentum nitricum on test anxietyThis study demonstrated that homeopathic A. nitricum 12X does not reduce test anxiety in a general population of university students. Complement. Ther. Med. (June 2003) Homeopathy in dermatologyIn dermatology, homeopathy is often used in atopic dermatitis, other forms of eczema, psoriasis, and many other conditions. To date, however, there is no convincing evidence for a therapeutic effect. Dermatologic Therapy (June 2003) Homeopathic aggravations: a systematic review of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trialsConcludes that this systematic review did not provide clear evidence that the phenomenon of homeopathic aggravations exists. Homeopathy (April 2003) Individualised homeopathy as an adjunct in the treatment of childhood asthma: a randomised placebo controlled trialThis study provides no evidence that adjunctive homeopathic remedies, as prescribed by experienced homeopathic practitioners, are superior to placebo in improving the quality of life of children with mild to moderate asthma in addition to conventional treatment in primary care. Thorax (April 2003) A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of classical homeopathy in generalized anxiety disorderThe effect of homeopathic treatment on mental symptoms of patients with generalized anxiety disorder did not differ from that of placebo. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (March 2003) Homeopathic arnica for the prevention of pain and bruising: randomized placebo-controlled trial in hand surgeryThe results of this trial do not suggest that homeopathic arnica has an advantage over placebo in reducing postoperative pain, bruising and swelling in patients undergoing elective hand surgery. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (2003) A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathyBest clinical evidence for homeopathy available to date does not warrant positive recommendations for its use in clinical practice. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (December 2002) A critical review of the possible benefits associated with homeopathic medicineConcludes that, as a result of the recent scientific research on homeopathy, ample evidence exists to show that homeopathic therapy is not scientifically justifiable. Almeida, R. M., Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (October 2002) Can homeopaths detect homeopathic medicines by dowsing? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trialThe results, wholly negative, add to doubts whether dowsing in this context can yield objective information. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (April 2002) HomeopathyThis bulletin summarises the research evidence on the effectiveness of homeopathy. It concludes: "There is currently insufficient evidence of effectiveness either to recommend homeopathy as a treatment for any specific condition, or to warrant significant changes in the current provision of homeopathy." NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2002) [pdf] The effects of homeopathic belladonna 30CH in healthy volunteers — a randomized, double-blind experiment.Concludes that there is no indication that belladonna 30CH produces symptoms different from placebo or from no intervention. Journal of Psychosomatic Research (March 2001) A randomized controlled trial of homeopathy in rheumatoid arthritisConclusion: "We found no evidence that active homeopathy improves the symptoms of RA, over 3 months, in patients attending a routine clinic who are stabilized on NSAIDs or DMARDs". P. Fisher and D. L. Scott (Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital), Rheumatology (2001) Homeopathic prophylaxis of headaches and migraine? A systematic review.Concludes that the trial data available to date do not suggest that homeopathy is effective in the prophylaxis of migraine or headache beyond a placebo effect. E. Ernst, Journal of Pain Symptom Management (November 1999) Homeopathic Arnica 30x is ineffective for muscle soreness after long-distance running: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trialConcludes that homeopathic Arnica 30x is ineffective for muscle soreness following long-distance running. Clinical Journal of Pain (September 1998) Homeopathy again: a questionable meta-analysis"There is nothing to suggest that homeopathic drugs are any more effective than a placebo." Prescrire Int. (1998) Recent systematic reviews of homoeopathy"It is concluded that these new publications cast considerable doubt on the efficacy of homoeopathy." E. Ernst, Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies [FACT] (1998) Efficacy of Homeopathic ArnicaThe claim that homeopathic arnica is efficacious beyond a placebo effect is not supported by rigorous clinical trials. Archives of Surgery (1998) Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial of homoeopathic arnica C30 for pain and infection after total abdominal hysterectomyConcludes that no significant difference between the two groups could be demonstrated. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (1997) Homoeopathic versus placebo therapy of children with warts on the hands: a randomized, double-blind clinical trialConcludes that there was no apparent difference between the effects of homoeopathic therapy and placebo in children with common warts under the conditions of this study. Dermatology (1996) Effect of homoeopathy on pain and other events after acute trauma: placebo controlled trial with bilateral oral surgeryConcludes that no positive evidence was found for efficacy of homoeopathic treatment on pain and other inflammatory events after an acute soft tissue and bone injury inflicted by a surgical intervention. British Medical Journal (3rd June 1995) Review of randomized trials of homeopathy"In our opinion, the results do not provide acceptable evidence that homoeopathic treatments are effective." Rev. Epidemiology Sante Publique (1990) Re-analysis of clinical trial of homoeopathic treatment in fibrositisThis re-analysis shows that the trial of Fisher et al [Effect of homoeopathic treatment on fibrositis (primary fibromyalgia), British Medical Journal 299, 365-366] provides no firm evidence for the efficacy of homoeopathic treatment of fibrositis. D. Colquhoun, Dept. of Pharmacology, University College London. The Lancet (1990) [pdf] |