Announcement

**acarol** · 26-Jun-2008, 03:14

Originally posted by Richard_R View Post

The subject of homeopathy is an emotional subject for adherents and I don't have the desire to change the minds of those who know what it is AND STILL THINK IT HAS VALUE. I do however want to let folks new to homeopathy know that HOMEOPATHY is not to be confused with HOLISTIC or NATUROPATHIC treatments. They are not related in any manner shape or form.

My personal opinion is that homeopathy is complete and utter BS. I am not the only one that believes this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWE1tH93G9U

For a decent overview of the philosophy of homeopathy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy

My desire here is not to shoot down treatments that are working for folks, but to help folks understand what homeopathy is. I do not have anything whatsoever against herbal or any natural treatments, but I do not believe in homeopathy, and would be floored to find that doctors Holly and Latkany would give it any value exceeding the placebo effect.

Sincerely, Richard.

Well Richard when your desperate for some sort of relief you'll try ANYTHING that MIGHT help, Homeopath has helped other people here and when you've been to several medical professionals that can't help (like i have), then i'm sure you'd be willing to look elsewhere. Have you actually tried any homepathic remedies or is this just your opinion??

**liz56** · 26-Jun-2008, 04:26

Originally posted by Richard_R View Post

The subject of homeopathy is an emotional subject for adherents and I don't have the desire to change the minds of those who know what it is AND STILL THINK IT HAS VALUE. I do however want to let folks new to homeopathy know that HOMEOPATHY is not to be confused with HOLISTIC or NATUROPATHIC treatments. They are not related in any manner shape or form.

My personal opinion is that homeopathy is complete and utter BS. I am not the only one that believes this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWE1tH93G9U

For a decent overview of the philosophy of homeopathy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy

My desire here is not to shoot down treatments that are working for folks, but to help folks understand what homeopathy is. I do not have anything whatsoever against herbal or any natural treatments, but I do not believe in homeopathy, and would be floored to find that doctors Holly and Latkany would give it any value exceeding the placebo effect.

Sincerely, Richard.

Richard,

I apologize if I seem defensive or if I misunderstood your post. What I think I read with your quote of traveler's post was an implication that the Dwelle family of eye drops is homeopathic and not scientific, that results come from a placebo effect rather than chemical responses.

First, I think that you are right to be skeptical. I think that we all should be. However, I don't think that Dwelle eye drops are homeopathic. They have science behind them. Dr. Holly is a chemical engineer and ophthalmologist. The first eye drops developed to fight RCE's, based on oncotic pressure rather than hypertonicity were made and tested at Duke University.

I know that the "folky" name "Dr. Holly's drops" makes it sound like it's some kind elixir, but that is just not the case. I've been examined by a corneal specialist who is accomplished and who dedicates most of his time to teaching and research. He recommends Dwelle for ABMD. Just because it is OTC does not necessarily mean that it has been cooked up in somebody's kitchen.

Given reputable publications about the effects of oncotic eye drops, reputable doctors who prescribe them, and the testimony of real people who find relief from using them, I am inclined to think that they are worth trying for people whose ocular surface is uneven due to either an irregular basement membrane or dry eyes.

That is all not to say that I don't think that people should take it all at face value or my word. It does help to look around at the research.

--Liz

**Richard_R** · 26-Jun-2008, 13:48

Originally posted by liz56 View Post

Richard,

I apologize if I seem defensive or if I misunderstood your post. What I think I read with your quote of traveler's post was an implication that the Dwelle family of eye drops is homeopathic and not scientific, that results come from a placebo effect rather than chemical responses.

First, I think that you are right to be skeptical. I think that we all should be. However, I don't think that Dwelle eye drops are homeopathic. They have science behind them. Dr. Holly is a chemical engineer and ophthalmologist. The first eye drops developed to fight RCE's, based on oncotic pressure rather than hypertonicity were made and tested at Duke University.

I know that the "folky" name "Dr. Holly's drops" makes it sound like it's some kind elixir, but that is just not the case. I've been examined by a corneal specialist who is accomplished and who dedicates most of his time to teaching and research. He recommends Dwelle for ABMD. Just because it is OTC does not necessarily mean that it has been cooked up in somebody's kitchen.

Given reputable publications about the effects of oncotic eye drops, reputable doctors who prescribe them, and the testimony of real people who find relief from using them, I am inclined to think that they are worth trying for people whose ocular surface is uneven due to either an irregular basement membrane or dry eyes.

That is all not to say that I don't think that people should take it all at face value or my word. It does help to look around at the research.

--Liz

Liz,

Please be completely assured that my comments on homeopathy are not meant to denigrate Dr. Holly's medicines. Quite the opposite. Dr. Holly's methods are an example of the way scientific discovery should proceed. Correct me if I am wrong, but Dr. Holly's drops aren't considered homeopathic are they?

Richard.

**Rojzen** · 26-Jun-2008, 15:48

indeed; a plethora of scholarship and debate within Heilkunst

Thank you, Rebecca, for pulling us back to a more constructive direction. . .For those wondering about the efficacy of homeopathy, it is best to go WAY beyond the nutshells on this branch of medicine that one can find in places like Wikipedia. An example of the profundity of the debate even among homeopaths can be found in the rise, in Canada, of the healing art called Heilkunst, which derives its principles from the TOTALITY of Samuel Hahnemann's writings and practice. Hahnemann himself by no means subscribed ONLY to the law of similars, or to single-remedy prescribing. His teachings were much more diverse than this, and this may explain why Hahnemann himself was able to bring about truly astounding cures.

It may be of interest that the law of opposites, which claimed part of Hahnemann's practice, today can find expression in the tradition of the Bach Flower Essences, founded by Dr. Edward Bach in the 1930s. I know that many here have used Bach's Rescue Remedy, but there is lots more to his system. . .and indeed it is based on the principle that for personality-level disturbances, as opposed to disturbances that lead to deep-seated chronic disease, using the essence bearing the quality opposite to what is manifest will heal. . .

Please feel free to write me privately about this. . .I am a Registered Practitioner in the Bach Flower Essences. . .not actively practicing now, but still interested. . .The Bach Flower Foundation also has some excellent web sites for use in self-help. The system is, moreover, specifically intended to be used as a primarily self-help modality. . .

For deep chronic disease, google Heilkunst. . .

**MyDryEyes** · 26-Jun-2008, 15:56

Rebecca - I know you are trying to shut down the debate, but I just need to get this information out there. My apologies!!

I happen to work at a regionally accredited naturopathic university (i.e. recognized by the U.S. Department of Education just like any state school). We do science-based research on all forms of natural medicine, including homeopathic medicine. So, there is scientific evidence that supports the effectiveness of some homeopathic medicine.

And yes, homeopathy is related to naturopathic medicine. It is one of the five core modalities (tools) that naturopathic doctors use to treat their patients. The five modalities of naturopathic medicine are: clinical nutrition, botanical medicine, HOMEOPATHY, counseling and physical medicine.

For more information on naturopathic medicine, check out the following websites:

American Association of Naturopathic Medicine: www.naturopathic.org
Association of Accredited Naturopathic Medical Colleges: www.aanmc.org

**Rebecca Petris** · 26-Jun-2008, 16:03

I decided to separate this into a new thread.

Richard, meet Rojzen. Rojzen, meet Richard.

For the record, I am far too ignorant to have any strong feelings about homeopathy one way or another myself. I remember using a homeopathic tablet of some kind for my daughter's teething when she was a baby, and I occasionally use Similasan's allergy drop. But I personally consider homeopathic remedies for dry eye flat-out useless. I'm talking about the DryEyeZone variety of dry eye here - the kind severe enough to drive people online in desperation for help. The reason I don't take homeopathy seriously for dry eye is simply that to the best of my knowledge I've never known anyone who made any credible claim to have had significant improvement from it. To me "credible" means (among other things) a situation where they've made at least a reasonable attempt to use the treatment without changing anything else in their routine for a considerable length of time.

Anybody else that wants to jump in, feel free!!

**Rebecca Petris** · 26-Jun-2008, 16:17

Gawd!

I feel like a single-handed comedy of errors today!

First I didn't read the thread carefully and started posting and tapping gently with a ruler.

Then I decided to move the homeopathy section of the thread to make a new thread. But I missed a few posts.

And I went back to get the others, by which time there was a new post, and the system doesn't let me order them manually, so I've made a mess!

Sorry guys

Carry on, while I go make some strong coffee. Or maybe a G&T.

EDIT: I removed a few posts from this thread that were no longer relevant now that it's been moved.

**Rojzen** · 26-Jun-2008, 16:25

why OTC homeopathy cannot work

I'm with Rebecca, here, on believing that no "homeopathic remedy" sold in a store has the potential to affect our kind of serious ailment. . .I'll even add that I saw some of the most respected homeopaths in the world, for extended, individualized prescribing, when my dry eye started, and they did not succeed in improving my dry eye, over the several years of time I dedicated to their treatments. . .

The problem, though, in dismissing a branch of medicine altogether is in defining accurately what that system entails. In brief, there is no such thing as a homeopathically selected remedy for CHRONIC disease that can work without extensive history-taking and serial remedy use. . In fact, there is no such thing as a "homeopathic remedy." The principles of CHOOSING the remedy are what is homeopathic, allopathic, or otherwise a species of Heilkunst.

Sadly, the Big Pharma of homeopathy, like Boiron, Hylands, Nelson's, Washington Homeopathic, etc. have mistakenly conveyed an erroneous message about homeopathy by selling remedies to users who are not having their cases worked up AT ALL. . .In other words, there can be no single set of remedies for dry eye, by definition. . .Curing dry eye that is the result either of injury or chronic disease absolutely requires very careful and prolonged case analysis, including family histories and a detailed history of the patient's health and experiential (traumatic) background. . .

And so while I personally have never encountered a homeopathic healer anywhere who was competent to cure my case of dry eye, or that of others, I believe such a cure is not impossible. . .Similisan and the like may be dilute substances, but they SURE do not reflect anything remotely like homeopathy or the larger field of Heilkunst.

I remain content to be in near-full remission through Dr. Holly's drops..., and I personally would never spend another penny on the services of an alleged homeopath. . .but maybe in future generations, another Samuel Hahnemann will be born who is skilled enough to be able to cure through homeopathic laws. . .

For what it's worth, I have seen some remarkable successes through classical homeopathy in the veterinary world. . .I have seen a cat with lymphoma survive much longer, on homeopathy ALONE, than she was projected to have through chemotherapy. . .But that was a rarity. . .Other animals I've watched under the care of homeopaths have done poorly. . .and even suffered unjustifiably.

The magic is in the skill of the practitioner, when a particular therapy is as technical as is homeopathy. . .The level of its complexity is truly mindboggling, to wit the many, many shelves of homeopathy books that line my walls, each on a completely different subject (;^). I love the potential that homeopathy holds; but I have yet to seen it operate consistently well, in this day and age so far removed from its original founder. . .

**liz56** · 26-Jun-2008, 19:04

Originally posted by Richard_R View Post

Liz,

Please be completely assured that my comments on homeopathy are not meant to denigrate Dr. Holly's medicines. Quite the opposite. Dr. Holly's methods are an example of the way scientific discovery should proceed. Correct me if I am wrong, but Dr. Holly's drops aren't considered homeopathic are they?

Richard.

Richard,

I don't even really know what all constitutes the category of homeopathy, so I cannot comment on whether the drops are or not.

I just wanted to make it clear that they are connected to not only reputable but prestigious research centers and researchers, just in case readers were confused by the idea.

I see now that your use of the quote was not to implicate Dr. Holly's drops. Thanks for clearing that up.

--Liz

**NYer** · 26-Jun-2008, 19:23

First of all, Dr. Holly's drops have nothing to do with homeopathy. I don't know how that even got into this topic.

Secondly, I have used certain pre-packaged homeopathic products that have worked wonderfully, some that have been useless, and some that worked contrary to the way they were supposed to.

Calendula gel by Boiron is amazing for burns.
I've used the Boiron oral arnica pellets and actually found them to be helpful for certain conditions. But I have also used a number of their oral pellets that did absolutely nothing for various other conditions.
I used Sinusin (by Heel) last night for my sinuses and within minutes, it made my sinuses worse than they were. (errggghhh). So they're not necessarily innocuous.

In regards to what MyDryEyes said, I've been seeing a Naturopath who has been tremendously helpful to me. She isn't into homeopathy. She feels that
if someone were to go to specialist in homeopathy and have homeopathic meds designed uniquely for them, there is a much greater likelihood that the medication would be helpful. That logic makes sense to me.

And, similarly, I agree with what Rojzen said. Unfortunately, much of the pre-packaged stuff by the big companies is to general and too generic and not individualized for a particular person. So it's not likely to work. I agree with that logic.

But there is certainly a logic to the concept of what homeopathy is about. It's a similar logic to allergy shots...take a tiny bit of what would otherwise kill you and it can cure you instead. It's also something that has to do with using the "essence" of something. And western minds are not attuned to essences and energy and yin and yang, etc. Acupuncture works. We westerners don't have a good explanation for why it works. Hey, even the big insurance companies actually reimburse for it. And you KNOW that they wouldn't do that unless it was proven to help. But it works by doing stuff with our energy. We don't understand it ...but it works.

So how can you simply make a statement denigrating the whole philosophy of a practice that some people swear by? Yes, the stuff that's pumped out and pre-packaged may be a cut-rate version of what real homeopathy is, but you simply don't know if real homeopathy is a valid form of treatment. Frankly, neither do I...but I'd give it a shot before I'd say that it's useless.

**Richard_R** · 27-Jun-2008, 00:33

As I said before, the subject of homeopathy can be an emotional one. I do not expect or desire to change adherent's minds. I will not engage in arguments about it here; that would be like trying to change someone's religion or political party.....not going to happen. I would however like folks new to homeopathy to understand why I believe money spent on homeopathic drops has done nothing but lighten my wallet.

For those unfamiliar with homeopathy, let's take a look at a particular preparation that has been discussed on this board before:

http://www.naturaleyecare.com/store/detail.aspx?ID=1509

If we look at this particular preparation, we find these active ingredients on the label:

Sulphur HPUS 6x
Nux Vomica HPUS 12x
Euphrasia HPUS 5x
Alumina HPUS 10x
Arsenicum album HPUS 12x
Nux moschata HPUS 6x
Zincum metalicum HPUS 10x

See the 6x, 12x, 5x etc.? Those are the measures of "potency". As strange as it may seem, in the world of homeopathy, the more dilute, the more potent.

Let's take an example from above.

For the Nux Vomica HPUS 12x.......this means that for every molecule of Nux Vomica HPUS, there are 1,000,000,000,000 (12x = 12 zeros after the 1) molecules of water. Folks, this is some serious dilution. In fact, this is so dilute that it is chemically unlikely to contain any molecules of the original material! Those familiar with Avogadro's number will remember this.

So those were the "active ingredients". What else is in there? Well here you go:

Sterile water, Sodium Chloride (salt for isotonicity to tears), Citrates (pH balancer), Polysorbate-80 (0.4% as a very light lubricant with preservative qualities).

Basically salt water with a light lubricant. Salt water that sells for over $6,000.00 per gallon!

Here is another vid by the BBC's Horizon show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z1QFZcnAi4

Regards, Richard.

PS - I hope this is making sense to someone

**NYer** · 27-Jun-2008, 15:02

Richard,

If, after my last post, you can respond by saying that I am emotionally adherent to homeopathy or that it's like a religion, then you either didn't read my post or you are so determined to make a point that you just don't care what anyone else says.

Also, I have no idea whether the particular preparation that you are referring to actually works or not. However, you seem to be completely missing the point of the principle of homeopathy: the fact that the item is so dilute is exactly the idea behind it. I am not defending whether or not it works, but the extreme dilution is the whole point. You are not making a case against it by stating that it is extremely diluted.

I don't know if homeopathy, when done properly, actually works they way it's supposed to - but I do understand the principles of why it's supposed to work.

If you are going to take this strong of a stand against something, it would probably be a good idea for you to understand the principle of how it is supposed to work. Otherwise, it's just really annoying and, frankly, it's insulting to a number of people on this board who do have an interest in it.

And by the way, regarding your comment:
"that would be like trying to change someone's religion or political party",
You are preaching to the wrong choir. I have never read any posts on this board by people who are particularly zealous in their interest in homeopathy. Just people who have an interest and are hoping to find something to help them.

**Richard_R** · 27-Jun-2008, 18:41

Originally posted by NYer View Post

Richard,

If, after my last post, you can respond by saying that I am emotionally adherent to homeopathy or that it's like a religion, then you either didn't read my post or you are so determined to make a point that you just don't care what anyone else says.

Also, I have no idea whether the particular preparation that you are referring to actually works or not. However, you seem to be completely missing the point of the principle of homeopathy: the fact that the item is so dilute is exactly the idea behind it. I am not defending whether or not it works, but the extreme dilution is the whole point. You are not making a case against it by stating that it is extremely diluted.

I don't know if homeopathy, when done properly, actually works they way it's supposed to - but I do understand the principles of why it's supposed to work.

If you are going to take this strong of a stand against something, it would probably be a good idea for you to understand the principle of how it is supposed to work. Otherwise, it's just really annoying and, frankly, it's insulting to a number of people on this board who do have an interest in it.

And by the way, regarding your comment:
"that would be like trying to change someone's religion or political party",
You are preaching to the wrong choir. I have never read any posts on this board by people who are particularly zealous in their interest in homeopathy. Just people who have an interest and are hoping to find something to help them.

Yes, I am able to understand the supposed purpose of the extreme dilution, it is all quite basic. I guess the fact that the ingredients are diluted to the point where they are scientifically unlikely to be present in the preparation at all, gives me a problem. That's just me I suppose. I'm sorry if someone were to become annoyed or insulted because I think homeopathic eye preparations are a fraud, but that is MY OPINION (and many many others) and I have a right to it.

If folks would like to discuss the details of the homeopathic system such as the "law of similars", and "dilution and succussion", I would be glad to partake. Otherwise, I'll pass,

Richard.

**inthedark** · 29-Jun-2008, 02:46

@ RichardR:

I applaud your willingness to inform others about the fallacy of Homeopathic medicine. Unfortunately, many people believe in the governing principles of Homeopathy, some of which are so inane that they make my head hurt. (i.e. Atoms have a spiritual "essence" and thus extremely diluted mixtures retain the "essence" of the atoms. OR Treatments are made for individual's personalities, not their symptoms!) You'll never really be able to convince someone, no matter how many websites and studies you link to. What you said about religion and political party is correct. Homeopathy is not based on any quantitative, peer reviewed, physical evidence. It's a matter of faith, not reason, and thus you can't really argue with people who believe it.

However, I must say that I don't blame people for trying. If someone 100% believes that homeopathy is an effective treatment, then by all means spend your money. The placebo effect is very strong.

It's also interesting to note for people who believe that homeopathy actually does work and it relates to why it DOESN'T work for dry eye. Let's say I cut myself. Everyone knows that a regular cut will heal almost completely in a week or so without any type of medical treatment. But let's say, right after getting cut, I went to a homeopath who gave me something great for healing cuts. So I used this homeopathic treatment religiously for the next week. At the end of the week, I noticed my cut was completely healed and, instead of attributing it to the body's general healing mechanisms, I attributed it to the homeopathic drugs.

Announcement

Homeopathy and dry eye

Homeopathy and dry eye

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment