In the November 2009 issue of O (The Oprah Magazine), Dr. Oz analyses four approaches for treating headaches: Neurology, Acupuncture, Nutrition and HOMEOPATHY!  Dana Ullman is quoted in the section on homeopathy-Dana has been very active promoting homeopathy in the US media, Huffington Post Online as well.

Under MY RECOMMENDATION Dr. Oz  says: “Acupuncture and homeopathy are worth considering as adjunct therapies once you are sure that the headache is not a sign of serious disorder.”

YAY!!

Professor Luc Montagnier is a French virologist who co-discovered HIV and who won the Nobel Prize in 2008.   Dr. Montagnier has received many other significant awards, though his newest research, which may explain how and why homeopathic medicines maintain their biological activity in extreme dilution, may be his most significant to date.

In a recent paper, Prof Montagnier, and his team report the results of a series of rigorous experiments investigating the electromagnetic (EM) properties of highly-diluted biological samples. 
The abstract of this research in part asserts, “A novel property of DNA is described: the capacity of some bacterial DNA sequences to induce electromagnetic waves at high aqueous (water) dilutions. It appears to be a resonance phenomenon triggered by the ambient electromagnetic background of very low frequency waves.”

For more info click here!

A new study published in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine  (other wise known as eCAM, an online journal published by Oxford University Press) showed that individually selected Q potencies (also called LM potencies) were as effective and were safer than Fluorxetin (also called Prozac). 

You can read the study here!!

Here is another great article by Harald Walach, research Professor in Psychology at the University of Northhampton. The summary is; 

Check out the entire article here.

I just LOVE this article published in NewScientist. Maybe one day Gimpy et al will admit there is something to homeopathy as well! After all, hope does spring eternal!!

MADELEINE Ennis, a pharmacologist at Queen’s University, Belfast, was the scourge of homeopathy. She railed against its claims that a chemical remedy could be diluted to the point where a sample was unlikely to contain a single molecule of anything but water, and yet still have a healing effect. Until, that is, she set out to prove once and for all that homeopathy was bunkum.

In her most recent paper, Ennis describes how her team looked at the effects of ultra-dilute solutions of histamine on human white blood cells involved in inflammation. These “basophils” release histamine when the cells are under attack. Once released, the histamine stops them releasing any more. The study, replicated in four different labs, found that homeopathic solutions – so dilute that they probably didn’t contain a single histamine molecule – worked just like histamine. Ennis might not be happy with the homeopaths’ claims, but she admits that an effect cannot be ruled out.

So how could it happen? Homeopaths prepare their remedies by dissolving things like charcoal, deadly nightshade or spider venom in ethanol, and then diluting this “mother tincture” in water again and again. No matter what the level of dilution, homeopaths claim, the original remedy leaves some kind of imprint on the water molecules. Thus, however dilute the solution becomes, it is still imbued with the properties of the remedy.

You can understand why Ennis remains sceptical. And it remains true that no homeopathic remedy has ever been shown to work in a large randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial. But the Belfast study (Inflammation Research, vol 53, p 181) suggests that something is going on. “We are,” Ennis says in her paper, “unable to explain our findings and are reporting them to encourage others to investigate this phenomenon.” If the results turn out to be real, she says, the implications are profound: we may have to rewrite physics and chemistry.

It is interesting how the critics of homeopathy are constantly harping on the dangers of homeopathy. How we cannot prove it is effective, that our studies are not “scientific” or at the very least flawed. How giving a remedy and seeing the individual get healthier is anecdotal and therefore worthless. The more I research the studies done on drugs the more I realize that “good science” has nothing to do with it. That their randomized clinical trials are manipulated to create a positive outcome for the benefit of the drug companies, not the individual. Just look at the long list of dangerous side effects of any given drug and you will quickly conclude that drugs are not about “cure”, but about suppression and palliation with numerous risks. One thing the skeptics cannot say about homeopathy, is that the studies being done are for the benefit of the homeopathic pharmaceutical companies, there are no long list of side effects that come with every vile of remedy and no one is getting rich.

Here is the latest evidence of the continuing corruption behind drug companies:

The “14 Studies” commonly quoted in the press are corrupt:

1. Contrary to popular belief, to date, their have only been a small amount of studies, most of those, if not all, are pharmaceutical influenced, that only look at two possible vaccine induced causes of autism –the MMR Vaccine and Mercury (one vaccine out of 36 and one ingredient out of 35)

1. All of the 14 “studies” that are commonly spoken about in the media are heavily influenced by the pharmaceutical industry and often fraudulent.
   1. All of the 14 studies have serious, undisclosed conflicts of interest, are influenced by pharmaceutical companies or have serious design flaws.
   2. No independent vaccine-autism studies have been conducted.
   3. No studies asking questions about long-term side effects including health outcomes (like chronic illness and neurological disorders) or comparing the vaccinated and unvaccinated community have been conducted.
   4. No studies have been conducted to look at the present (or any) vaccine schedule to monitor vaccine interactions in individuals.

(To read examples of conflicts of interest go to www.14Studies.org)

Another brilliant study shows the effectiveness of homeopathy reported by a conventional medical journal! A study of 82 patients suffering psoriasis treated with homeopathy in primary care over a period of two years shows significant improvement in their quality of life and reduction in their psoriasis symptoms. Many of the patients had suffered psoriasis for as long as 15 years and had previously unsuccessfully tried conventional treatments. The full paper of the study is published in the Journal of the European Academyof Dermatology and Venereology.  Here is an excerpt:

Homeopathic treatment of patients with psoriasis – a prospective observational study with 2 years follow-up:

CM Witt*†, R Lüdtke ‡ , SN Willich †

  † Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin, Germany
 ‡ Karl and Veronica Carstens Foundation, Essen, Germany

Copyright Journal compilation © 2009 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology:

KEYWORDS:

homeopathy • prospective observational study • psoriasis • usual care • utilization

ABSTRACT:

Design Prospective multicentre observational study.

Objective:

To evaluate details and effects of homeopathic treatment in patients with psoriasis in usual medical care.

Methods Primary care patients were evaluated over 2 years using standardized questionnaires, recording diagnoses and complaints severity, health-related quality of life (QoL), medical history, consultations, all treatments, and use of other health services.

Results Forty-five physicians treated 82 adults, 51.2% women, aged 41.6 ± 12.2 (mean ± SD) years. Patients had psoriasis for 14.7 ± 11.9 years; 96.3% had been treated before. Initial case taking took 127 ± 47 min. The 7.4 ± 7.4 subsequent consultations (duration: 19.4 ± 10.5 min) cumulated to 169.0 ± 138.8 min. Patients received 6.0 ± 4.9 homeopathic prescriptions. Diagnoses and complaints severity improved markedly with large effect sizes (Cohen’s d= 1.02–2.09). In addition, QoL improved (SF-36 physical component score d = 0.26, mental component score d = 0.49), while conventional treatment and health service use were considerably reduced.

Conclusions:

Under classical homeopathic treatment, patients with psoriasis improved in symptoms and QoL.

Conflicts of interest:

None declared.

This article was posted on the Natural News website yesterday.

A Listing of the Twenty-One Fabricated Studies by Dr. Scott Reuben

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) The health community is up in arms over the discovery that a highly-respected and influential clinical researcher, Dr. Scott Reuben, fabricated the data used in over twenty pharmaceutical studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals. Read the full NaturalNews report on this topic here: http://www.naturalnews.com/025833.html

These studies promoted the safety and “benefits” of drugs like Bextra (Pfizer), Vioxx (Merck), Lyrica, Celebrex and Effexor. The lead researcher on these studies, Dr. Scott Reuben, was being paid by Pfizer and Merck, so there’s a verified financial connection between this clinical researcher and at least two of the drug companies that benefitted from his fabricated findings. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/h…)

Note carefully the names of the medical journals that published Dr. Reuben’s fabricated data (see below). These so-called “science journals” claim to be peer-reviewed, which means these studies were approved by multiple scientists who agreed with the findings.

What this scandal reveals is that even peer-reviewed medical journals cannot be trusted to publish truthful, accurate information about pharmaceuticals. In fact, they are just as much a part of the Big Pharma / FDA conspiracy as the pill-pushing researchers who fabricate these studies, in my opinion.

The only honest medical science journal I’ve found is PLoS Medicine (http://medicine.plosjournals.org). Everything else I’ve seen is just tabloid medicalized fiction sandwiched in between pages of false advertising.

And conventional doctors, for all their self-proclaimed intelligence and scientific skepticism, were universally hoodwinked by this faked data! Apparently the best way to convince doctors that a drug is safe and effective is to just invent whatever story you want and submit it to a medical journal, which then gladly publishes it.

If you’re looking for a career as a fiction writer, the heck with authoring books sold in the “fiction” section of the local bookstore… just write for medical journals and drug companies! They pay is better and the fiction is even more outrageous!

Speaking of fiction and false advertising, here’s a list of studies authored or co-authored by Dr. Scott Reuben who admittedly fabricated at least twenty-one of these studies. Dr. Reuben was recently a faculty member at Tufts Medical School and co-founder of the Orthopedic Anesthesia, Pain and Rehabilitation Society, by the way. You can read more about his fraud in Scientific American (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id…).

Medical studies authored / fabricated by the shamed Dr. Scott Reuben

Preventing the development of chronic pain after thoracic surgery.
Reuben SS, Yalavarthy L.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2008 Dec;22(6):890-903. Epub 2008 May 7. No abstract available.
PMID: 18834790

A prospective randomized trial on the role of perioperative celecoxib administration for total knee arthroplasty: improving clinical outcomes.
Reuben SS, Buvenandran A, Katz B, Kroin JS.
Anesth Analg. 2008 Apr;106(4):1258-64, table of contents.
PMID: 18349203

Update on the role of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and coxibs in the management of acute pain.
Reuben SS.
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2007 Oct;20(5):440-50. Review.
PMID: 17873597

The effect of initiating a preventive multimodal analgesic regimen on long-term patient outcomes for outpatient anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery.
Reuben SS, Ekman EF.
Anesth Analg. 2007 Jul;105(1):228-32.
PMID: 17578979

Evaluating the analgesic efficacy of administering celecoxib as a component of multimodal analgesia for outpatient anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery.
Reuben SS, Ekman EF, Charron D.
Anesth Analg. 2007 Jul;105(1):222-7.
PMID: 17578978

Preventing the development of chronic pain after orthopaedic surgery with preventive multimodal analgesic techniques.
Reuben SS, Buvanendran A.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Jun;89(6):1343-58. Review.
PMID: 17545440

The efficacy of postoperative perineural infusion of bupivacaine and clonidine after lower extremity amputation in preventing phantom limb and stump pain.
Madabhushi L, Reuben SS, Steinberg RB, Adesioye J.
J Clin Anesth. 2007 May;19(3):226-9.
PMID: 17531734

Chronic pain after surgery: what can we do to prevent it.
Reuben SS.
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2007 Feb;11(1):5-13. Review.
PMID: 17214915

The analgesic efficacy of celecoxib, pregabalin, and their combination for spinal fusion surgery.
Reuben SS, Buvanendran A, Kroin JS, Raghunathan K.
Anesth Analg. 2006 Nov;103(5):1271-7.
PMID: 17056968

Acute post-surgical pain management: a critical appraisal of current practice, December 2-4, 2005.
Rathmell JP, Wu CL, Sinatra RS, Ballantyne JC, Ginsberg B, Gordon DB, Liu SS, Perkins FM, Reuben SS, Rosenquist RW, Viscusi ER.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2006 Jul-Aug;31(4 Suppl 1):1-42.
PMID: 16849098

Postoperative modulation of central nervous system prostaglandin E2 by cyclooxygenase inhibitors after vascular surgery.
Reuben SS, Buvanendran A, Kroin JS, Steinberg RB.
Anesthesiology. 2006 Mar;104(3):411-6.
PMID: 16508386

The incidence of complex regional pain syndrome after fasciectomy for Dupuytren’s contracture: a prospective observational study of four anesthetic techniques.
Reuben SS, Pristas R, Dixon D, Faruqi S, Madabhushi L, Wenner S.
Anesth Analg. 2006 Feb;102(2):499-503.
PMID: 16428550

The effect of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition on acute and chronic donor-site pain after spinal-fusion surgery.
Reuben SS, Ekman EF, Raghunathan K, Steinberg RB, Blinder JL, Adesioye J.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2006 Jan-Feb;31(1):6-13.
PMID: 16418018

Interscalene block superior to general anesthesia.
Reuben SS.
Anesthesiology. 2006 Jan;104(1):207; author reply 208-9. No abstract available.
PMID: 16394719

High dose nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs compromise spinal fusion.
Reuben SS, Ablett D, Kaye R.
Can J Anaesth. 2005 May;52(5):506-12.
PMID: 15872130

More on current issues in pain management for the primary care practitioner. Acute pain: a multi-modal management approach.
Carr DB, Reuben S.
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2005;19(1):69-70. No abstract available.
PMID: 15814519

The effect of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition on analgesia and spinal fusion.
Reuben SS, Ekman EF.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Mar;87(3):536-42.
PMID: 15741619

The prevention of post-surgical neuralgia.
Reuben SS.
Pain. 2005 Jan;113(1-2):242-3; author reply 243-4. No abstract available.
PMID: 15621388

Surgery on the affected upper extremity of patients with a history of complex regional pain syndrome: the use of intravenous regional anesthesia with clonidine.
Reuben SS, Rosenthal EA, Steinberg RB, Faruqi S, Kilaru PA.
J Clin Anesth. 2004 Nov;16(7):517-22.
PMID: 15590255

Preventing the development of complex regional pain syndrome after surgery.
Reuben SS.
Anesthesiology. 2004 Nov;101(5):1215-24. Review. No abstract available.
PMID: 15505459

Evaluation of efficacy of the perioperative administration of venlafaxine XR in the prevention of postmastectomy pain syndrome.
Reuben SS, Makari-Judson G, Lurie SD.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2004 Feb;27(2):133-9.
PMID: 15157037

Analgesic effect of clonidine added to bupivacaine 0.125% in paediatric caudal blockade.
Joshi W, Connelly NR, Freeman K, Reuben SS.
Paediatr Anaesth. 2004 Jun;14(6):483-6.
PMID: 15153211

The perioperative use of cyclooxygenase-2 selective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs may offer a safer alternative.
Reuben SS, Connelly NR.
Anesthesiology. 2004 Mar;100(3):748. No abstract available.
PMID: 15109000

An evaluation of the safety and efficacy of administering rofecoxib for postoperative pain management.
Joshi W, Connelly NR, Reuben SS, Wolckenhaar M, Thakkar N.
Anesth Analg. 2003 Jul;97(1):35-8, table of contents.
PMID: 12818939

An evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of intravenous regional anesthesia with lidocaine and ketorolac using a forearm versus upper arm tourniquet.
Reuben SS, Steinberg RB, Maciolek H, Manikantan P.
Anesth Analg. 2002 Aug;95(2):457-60, table of contents.
PMID: 12145071

Preoperative administration of controlled-release oxycodone for the management of pain after ambulatory laparoscopic tubal ligation surgery.
Reuben SS, Steinberg RB, Maciolek H, Joshi W.
J Clin Anesth. 2002 May;14(3):223-7.
PMID: 12031758

Intravenous regional anesthesia with clonidine in the management of complex regional pain syndrome of the knee.
Reuben SS, Sklar J.
J Clin Anesth. 2002 Mar;14(2):87-91.
PMID: 11943518

Preemptive multimodal analgesia for anterior cruciate ligament surgery.
Reuben SS, Sklar J.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2002 Mar-Apr;27(2):225; author reply 225-6. No abstract available.
PMID: 11915075

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the perioperative administration of rofecoxib for total knee arthroplasty.
Reuben SS, Fingeroth R, Krushell R, Maciolek H.
J Arthroplasty. 2002 Jan;17(1):26-31.
PMID: 11805921

The preemptive analgesic effect of rofecoxib after ambulatory arthroscopic knee surgery.
Reuben SS, Bhopatkar S, Maciolek H, Joshi W, Sklar J.
Anesth Analg. 2002 Jan;94(1):55-9, table of contents.
PMID: 11772800

It seems that “Gimpy” and his gang of anti-homeopathic bloggers are on another rampage. This time the focus of their vicious attacks is one of the world’s most revered homeopaths, Jeremy Sherr. Here is a letter from Jeremy in response to their mindless, wretched and inane accusations:

 My homoeopathic friends,
 
In the past few days the Tanzanian AIDS project and I have become the target of the “anti homoeopathy” attackers in the UK.  They have posted on both my blog, the “gimpyblog” http://gimpyblog.wordpress.com/  and others with inflammatory speculation and erroneous conclusions about the Homoeopathy AIDS project. 
 
We would like to bring this to the attention of the larger homoeopathic community.  As many of you know, there has been an ongoing campaign to discredit and annihilate homoeopathy in the UK by posting false information and unfounded and inflammatory opinions. Their battlefield has now expanded to Tanzania. 
 
In the attacks on the Tanzanian AIDS project they took parts of my blog and previous interviews from my website archives and contrived a story in order to further their desire to malign homoeopathy.  They allege that I am persuading patients to use homoeopathy in place of ARVs, which is totally untrue. They claim that any research of homoeopathy is unethical as there is no proof that homoeopathy works.  They even went so far as to claim that my treating AIDS patients in Tanzania with homoeopathy will lead to mass murder.  These accusations are not only malicious, they are libelous.
Their tactics were not confined to regurgitation their thoughts online.  One follower even phoned a UK organization that supports the AIDS project and also contacted UK and Tanzanian government officials, claiming that there was an ‘unethical’ project taking place.
 
I am urging the global homoeopathic community to rise up in solidarity.
 
This is a tiny but dedicated faction who uses the internet blogs and the media to amplify their spurious attacks.
 
They have stated that they are determined to kill homoeopathy. 
 
They have had negative impact on the availability of homoeopathy in the UK and are responsible for the closing of homoeopathy hospitals and clinics as a direct consequence of their campaign.

Here are some ways to show your support for the work of all homoeopaths worldwide and for the Tanzanian AIDS clinic. 
 
1. MEET THEM ON THEIR OWN GROUND: Flood their blogs http://gimpyblog.wordpress.com/  with posts on the benefits of homeopathy, using examples of your own experiences.  They can argue endlessly about the theory, but what do they say to the hundreds of thousands of people who have had improved health?
 
2. USE THE INTERNET TO AMPLIFY HOMOEOPATHY’S VOICE.
Go to my blog and post your supportive comments on http://www.jeremysjournalfromafrica.blogspot.com
Let anyone visiting the blog see the overwhelming support for this project and homoeopathy in general.  To learn more about the project, see my website http://www.dynamis.edu
 
3. PUT A STOP TO THESE ATTACKS.  Homoeopathy is our beloved profession, our mission in life. Respond vigorously to any attempts to intimidate practitioners or to denigrate your passion to bring our gentle healing to others, wherever they may live. 
 
Meanwhile, I am returning to Tanzania to continue treating AIDS patients.  In my first six weeks I have treated 100 AIDS patients with very promising results.  We have a clinic administrator in the north where a high percent of the people have AIDS and where there are very few medical institutions. The situation is worse than I could ever have imagined, worse than anything shown on television or written in books. The patients are eager to use homoeopathy and I am eager to help them.

I and my colleagues are fully committed to establishing a treatment, teaching and research center in Tanzania.  This is homoeopathy’s chance to shine.  Please join us!

Natural News posted this article by Sherry Baker:

In August of 2005, the prestigious British medical journal the Lancet published a review comparing clinical trials of homeopathy with trials of conventional medicine. The conclusion of this study, which was widely hailed as evidence that homeopathy is worthless quackery, stated that homeopathic medicines are non-effective and, at best, just placebos. What’s more, an accompanying editorial in the Lancet said this “evidence” should close the door on the non-toxic, alternative treatment method, and flatly proclaimed this review should mark “the end of homeopathy”. Now two newly published studies, one in the journal Homeopathy and the other in the mainstream medical Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, have both gone on record to say the Lancet review was enormously flawed and downright inaccurate. Instead of showing homeopathy doesn’t work, the conclusion should have been that, at least for some ailments, it is effective.

Homeopathy involves giving very small doses of substances called remedies that, according to homeopathy, would produce the same or similar symptoms of illness in healthy people if they were given in larger doses. The goal of homeopathy is to stimulate the body’s defense system in order to prevent or treat illness. Homeopathy treatment is tailored to each individual and homeopathic practitioners work to select remedies according to a total picture of the patient, including not only symptoms but lifestyle, emotional and mental states, and other factors.

The original claim made in the Lancet review that homeopathic medicines are worthless treatments (other than being placebos) was based on six clinical trials of conventional medicine and eight studies of homeopathy. But what trials, exactly, were studied? It turns out the Lancet did not reveal this most basic information and, as the new studies point out, seriously flawed assumptions were made about the data that was presented. There are a limited number of homeopathic studies so it is not difficult to pick and choose facts to interpret selectively and unfavorably, which appears to be just what was done in the original Lancet anti-homeopathy article.

Bottom line: the Lancet’s report showing homeopathy is worthless lacked the academic care and scientific approach called for in medical journals. In fact, it could well be seen as a hack job.

In a statement to the press, George Lewith, Professor of Health Research at Southampton University in Great Britain, stated: “The review gave no indication of which trials were analyzed nor of the various vital assumptions made about the data. This is not usual scientific practice. If we presume that homeopathy works for some conditions but not others, or change the definition of a ‘larger trial’, the conclusions change. This indicates a fundamental weakness in the conclusions: they are NOT reliable.”

The two recently published scientific papers that investigated the previous Lancet review conclude that an analysis of all high quality trials of homeopathy show positive outcomes. What’s more, the eight larger and higher quality trials of homeopathy looked at a variety of medical conditions. The new studies point out that because homeopathy worked consistently for some of these ailments and not others, the results must indicate that homeopathic remedies can’t be simply placebos. In addition, the studies conclude that comparing homeopathy to conventional medicine was a meaningless apples-and-oranges approach. There are also concerns that the original anti-homeopathy review used unpublished criteria. For example, the researchers didn’t bother to define what they meant by “higher quality” homeopathy research.

The new studies not only cast serious doubts on the original Lancet review, which was headed by Professor Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne, but they strongly indicate Egger and his team based their conclusions on a series of hidden judgments that were prejudiced against homeopathy. So far,Professor Egger has declined to comment on the findings of the new studies in Homeopathy and the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,

A press statement from the National Center for Homeopathy explains that an open assessment of the current evidence suggests that homeopathy is probably effective for many conditions including allergies, upper respiratory tract infections and flu, but agrees that much more research is needed. To that end, the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) has announced it is currently supporting research in these areas:

* Homeopathy for physical, mental, and emotional symptoms of fibromyalgia (a chronic disorder involving widespread musculoskeletal pain, multiple tender points on the body, and fatigue).
* Homeopathy to help relieve or prevent brain deterioration and damage in stroke and dementia.
* Homeopathy (specifically the remedy cadmium) to potentially prevent damage to the cells of the prostate when those cells are exposed to toxins.