ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th June 2005, 08:35 AM   #1
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
Another Positive Study for Ultra-dilute Solutions

People who say there are no studies that support ultra-dilute solutions are being dishonest. There are plenty of them. Okay, begin your absurd and ridiculous attacks on this one. Feel free to attack the researchers, manipulate the statistics (Rolfe, you claim to be a specialist at that), hurl unfounded accusations, and basically twist the facts as much as you can.

Remember, your belief system is like an addiction. You are addicted to what you believe in a similar manner as a heroin addict. You will do whatever it takes to maintain your beliefs just as a junkie will do whatever it takes to get his drug.






http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...779&query_hl=1






. Chest. 2005 Mar;127(3):936-41.


Influence of potassium dichromate on tracheal secretions in critically ill patients.

Frass M, Dielacher C, Linkesch M, Endler C, Muchitsch I, Schuster E, Kaye A.

Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Homeopathy, Duerergasse 4, A 8010 Graz, Austria. michael.frass@kabsi.at

BACKGROUND: Stringy, tenacious tracheal secretions may prevent extubation in patients weaned from the respirator. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with parallel assignment was performed to assess the influence of sublingually administered potassium dichromate C30 on the amount of tenacious, stringy tracheal secretions in critically ill patients with a history of tobacco use and COPD. METHODS: In this study, 50 patients breathing spontaneously with continuous positive airway pressure were receiving either potassium dichromate C30 globules (group 1) [Deutsche Homoopathie-Union, Pharmaceutical Company; Karlsruhe, Germany] or placebo (group 2). Five globules were administered twice daily at intervals of 12 h. The amount of tracheal secretions on day 2 after the start of the study as well as the time for successful extubation and length of stay in the ICU were recorded. RESULTS: The amount of tracheal secretions was reduced significantly in group 1 (p < 0.0001). Extubation could be performed significantly earlier in group 1 (p < 0.0001). Similarly, length of stay was significantly shorter in group 1 (4.20 +/- 1.61 days vs 7.68 +/- 3.60 days, p < 0.0001 [mean +/- SD]). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that potentized (diluted and vigorously shaken) potassium dichromate may help to decrease the amount of stringy tracheal secretions in COPD patients.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 15764779 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:42 AM   #2
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
was reduced significantly in group 1 (p < 0.0001).
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:45 AM   #3
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
geni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,185
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Homeopathy hmmm
geni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:46 AM   #4
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
.
.


Extubation could be performed significantly earlier in group 1 (p < 0.0001). Similarly, length of stay was significantly shorter in group 1 (4.20 +/- 1.61 days vs 7.68 +/- 3.60 days, p < 0.0001 [mean +/- SD]). .
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:47 AM   #5
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
geni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,185
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
was reduced significantly in group 1 (p < 0.0001).
I'll se your study and raise you:

Quote:

CONCLUSIONS: This 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.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

CONCLUSION: Ultramolecular homeopathy had no observable clinical effects

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

A double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of a homeopathic treatment of neonatal calf diarrhoea was performed using 44 calves in 12 dairy herds. Calves with spontaneously derived diarrhoea were treated with either the homeopathic remedy Podophyllum (D30) (n = 24) or a placebo (n = 20). No clinically or statistically significant difference between the 2 groups was demonstrated. Calves treated with Podophyllum had an average of 3.1 days of diarrhoea compared with 2.9 days for the placebo group.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

We conclude that this systematic review does not provide clear evidence that the phenomenon of homeopathic aggravations exists.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

CONCLUSION: The effect of homeopathic treatment on mental symptoms of patients with generalized anxiety disorder did not differ from that of placebo. The improvement in both conditions was substantial. Improvement of such magnitude may account for the current belief in the efficacy of homeopathy and the current increase in the use of this practice.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

Swelling and use of analgesic medication also did not differ between arnica and placebo groups. Adverse events were reported by 2 patients in the arnica 6C group, 3 in the placebo group and 4 in the arnica 30C group. The 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.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

RESULTS: Nine of 30 subjects in the homeopathy group and 7 of 30 subjects in the placebo group experienced at least 50% reduction in area occupied by warts (chi 2 = 0.34; P = .56);

"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&li st_uids=9828870

CONCLUSION: There was no apparent difference between the effects of homoeopathic therapy and placebo in children with common warts under the conditions of this study

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...t_uids=8993956
geni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:48 AM   #6
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
geni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,185
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
.
.


Extubation could be performed significantly earlier in group 1 (p < 0.0001). Similarly, length of stay was significantly shorter in group 1 (4.20 +/- 1.61 days vs 7.68 +/- 3.60 days, p < 0.0001 [mean +/- SD]). .
that's one heck of a error compared to the result size.
geni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:49 AM   #7
Ashles
Pith Artist
 
Ashles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,689
Re: Another Positive Study for Ultra-dilute Solutions

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
Okay, begin your absurd and ridiculous attacks on this one. Feel free to attack the researchers, manipulate the statistics (Rolfe, you claim to be a specialist at that), hurl unfounded accusations, and basically twist the facts as much as you can.

Remember, your belief system is like an addiction. You are addicted to what you believe in a similar manner as a heroin addict. You will do whatever it takes to maintain your beliefs just as a junkie will do whatever it takes to get his drug.
Whoah! Sounds like someone doesn't believe experimental data carries its own weight.

I always find it interesting when people post things for comment, but attempt to preempt any negative comment.

It sounds a bit too much like "This is my data but You're Not Allowed To Criticise It!".

Weren't you worried about some form of censorship Olaf? And now you're trying to do the same to others?

Let people read the information and comment on it. If you aren't interested in comments, or can't debate criticism then why bother posting?

Real scientific results and breakthroughs aren't usualy accompanied by hysterical screeching and pleas for no criticism.
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell
It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996
Ashles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:51 AM   #8
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally posted by geni
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Homeopathy hmmm
So what.

The facts are what they are. It was a DBPC study. just like all the rest of them.

The fact is that S-O-M-E-T-H-I-N-G is going on with respect to ultra-dilute solutions. Something is captured, and whatever it is it is working.

The basophil/histamine studies have shown this, and Louis Rey's thermoluminescence study has shown that lithium ---after being diluted out of existance-- is able to show a prescence through the water that it was diluted in.
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 08:59 AM   #9
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally posted by geni
I'll se your study and raise you:

CONCLUSIONS: This 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.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...4&dopt=Abstract

CONCLUSION: Ultramolecular homeopathy had no observable clinical effects

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...1&dopt=Abstract

A double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of a homeopathic treatment of neonatal calf diarrhoea was performed using 44 calves in 12 dairy herds. Calves with spontaneously derived diarrhoea were treated with either the homeopathic remedy Podophyllum (D30) (n = 24) or a placebo (n = 20). No clinically or statistically significant difference between the 2 groups was demonstrated. Calves treated with Podophyllum had an average of 3.1 days of diarrhoea compared with 2.9 days for the placebo group.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...8&dopt=Abstract

We conclude that this systematic review does not provide clear evidence that the phenomenon of homeopathic aggravations exists.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...1&dopt=Abstract

CONCLUSION: The effect of homeopathic treatment on mental symptoms of patients with generalized anxiety disorder did not differ from that of placebo. The improvement in both conditions was substantial. Improvement of such magnitude may account for the current belief in the efficacy of homeopathy and the current increase in the use of this practice.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...9&dopt=Abstract

Swelling and use of analgesic medication also did not differ between arnica and placebo groups. Adverse events were reported by 2 patients in the arnica 6C group, 3 in the placebo group and 4 in the arnica 30C group. The 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.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...4&dopt=Abstract

RESULTS: Nine of 30 subjects in the homeopathy group and 7 of 30 subjects in the placebo group experienced at least 50% reduction in area occupied by warts (chi 2 = 0.34; P = .56);

"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&li st_uids=9828870

CONCLUSION: There was no apparent difference between the effects of homoeopathic therapy and placebo in children with common warts under the conditions of this study

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...st_uids=8993956





I am not the least bit surprised that there are several studies out there that fail to detect a difference between placebo and a remedy.


Many fall just outside the border of significance and others are handicapped by short duration of trial or the inherent complexity of prescribing for a group of people as opposed to individuals. I.E., it is darn difficult to get the correct remedy.
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 09:04 AM   #10
Ashles
Pith Artist
 
Ashles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,689
Interesting - Dr Fras seems to be one of the accredited physicians at Wiener Privatklinik which seems to be a private healthcare group.

And he appears to be the only one on the list practising homeopathy.

He seems to appear quite regularly in a search lecturing about homeopathy.

Not, of course, that that means anything - merely that he is certainly fairly pro-homeopathy in the first place.
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell
It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996
Ashles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 09:05 AM   #11
Jekyll
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,586
So a preliminary study didn't come back negitive?
Jekyll is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 09:15 AM   #12
Capsid
Graduate Poster
 
Capsid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally posted by geni
that's one heck of a error compared to the result size.
I agree. The SDs overlap, it seems unlikely that the significance level is <0.0001. Anyone have access to the full paper?
Capsid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 09:31 AM   #13
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,785
Re: Another Positive Study for Ultra-dilute Solutions

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
Remember, your belief system is like an addiction. You are addicted to what you believe in a similar manner as a heroin addict. You will do whatever it takes to maintain your beliefs just as a junkie will do whatever it takes to get his drug.
Ipsa dixit.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 09:45 AM   #14
Jekyll
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,586
From;
http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/cont...l/127/3/936/T1

Pre-hospital information.

BMI 28.0 ± 2.8 (21.7–33.3), 26.8 ± 2.8 (21.1–32.6) , 0.174
FEV1, % 54.0 ± 5.3 (32–60), 52.4 ± 5.5(32–59), 0.152
Stage of COPD{ddagger} 1.08 ± 0.4 (1–3), 1.20 ± 0.5 (1–3), 0.178.
Need for long-term oxygen therapy, No. 5, 9
(25 people in each group)
Appologies for formatting.
The first column is those treated with the homeopathic remedy, the second those treated with the placebo, and the third the Kruskal-Wallis test ~ a mesure of 'what are the chances of that happening'?
http://www.graphpad.com/articles/int...kal_wallis.htm

So people in the control group were significantly more likely to be thinner, to have more severe COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/c...rydisease.html , with a lower FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second ) http://www.spirxpert.com/indices7.htm and twice as likely to need long-term oxygen therapy before the treatement started.
Oh, and directly before treatment the measurement of arterial carbon dioxide tension(PaCO2) was significantly lower.
PaCO2, torr 61.6 ± 4.5 (53–69) 59.8 ± 4.1 (51–67) 0.140

Now I'm no medical researcher but to me a lot of the evidence seems to point to those on the placebo being somewhat more ill then those who took the homeopathic remedy.

Time for a re-trial?
Jekyll is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 10:06 AM   #15
Capsid
Graduate Poster
 
Capsid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally posted by Jekyll
Now I'm no medical researcher but to me a lot of the evidence seems to point to those on the placebo being somewhat more ill then those who took the homeopathic remedy.
But doesn't the p value for the Kruskal-Wallis test show that the test and control groups are not different?
Capsid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 10:28 AM   #16
Jekyll
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,586
High values of the p-test correlate to the groups being the same. I'm not a statistion so I'm fairly ignorent about the subject but I'd assume <0.2 is quite low.
Quote:
How to think about post tests following the Kruskal-Wallis test

Dunn's post test calculates a P value for each pair of columns. These P values answer this question: If the data were sampled from populations with the same median, what is the chance that one or more pairs of columns would have medians as far apart as observed here? If the P value is low, you'll conclude that the difference is statistically significant. The calculation of the P value takes into account the number of comparisons you are making. If the null hypothesis is true (all data are sampled from populations with identical distributions, so all differences between groups are due to random sampling), then there is a 5% chance that at least one of the post tests will have P<0.05. The 5% chance does not apply separately to each individual comparison but rather to the entire family of comparisons
I think this is the relivent quote from the link I posted above.
http://www.graphpad.com/articles/int...kal_wallis.htm
Jekyll is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 11:02 AM   #17
Capsid
Graduate Poster
 
Capsid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally posted by Jekyll
High values of the p-test correlate to the groups being the same. I'm not a statistion so I'm fairly ignorent about the subject but I'd assume <0.2 is quite low.
Well no actually, p<0.2 is 20% which is quite high in statistical terms. Anything under 5% (p<0.05) is the normal cut-off as it is outside the 95% normal distribution. This means that there is a less than 5% chance that the null hypothesis is correct. The null hypothesis being that there is no difference.
Capsid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 11:16 AM   #18
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/cont...l/127/3/936#T1

Potassium dichromate (kalium bichromicum, K2Cr2O7) is a drug widely used in natural and homeopathic medicine. One of its features is its efficacy to treat patients with stringy, tenacious nasal and tracheal secretions. An open-label, practice-based homeopathic study5 described the efficacy and safety of a fixed-combination homeopathic medication containing potassium dichromate in 119 male and female patients with clinical signs of acute sinusitis not previously treated. At the first visit, after a mean of 4.1 days of treatment, mucolysis had increased significantly and typical sinusitis symptoms, such as headache, pressure pain at nerve exit points, and irritating cough, were reduced. Adverse drug effects were not reported.5



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract


Adv Ther. 1999 Mar-Apr;16(2):103-11. Related Articles, Links


Efficacy and safety of a fixed-combination homeopathic therapy for sinusitis.

Adler M.

The efficacy and safety of a fixed-combination homeopathic medication (Sinusitis PMD) consisting of Lobaria pulmonaria, Luffa operculata, and potassium dichromate were investigated in an open-label practice-based study of 119 male and female patients, 12 to 57 years of age, with clinical signs of acute sinusitis not previously treated. At the first visit, after a mean of 4.1 days of treatment, secretolysis had increased significantly and typical sinusitis symptoms, such as headache, pressure pain at nerve exit points, and irritating cough, were reduced. Ninety-nine patients received only the test medication. Twenty patients were able to discontinue concomitant medication at the first visit. Only one patient needed an antibiotic. The average treatment duration was 2 weeks. At the end of treatment, 81.5% of patients described themselves as symptom free or significantly improved. Adverse drug effects were not reported.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial

PMID: 10539378 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 12:49 PM   #19
Diamond
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,726
Not blinded

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
.....were investigated in an open-label practice-based study
No reporting of which group they belonged to.

Quote:
The average treatment duration was 2 weeks. At the end of treatment, 81.5% of patients described themselves as symptom free or significantly improved.
And the least surprising thing:

Quote:
Adverse drug effects were not reported.
One person need antibiotics. Presumeably this wasn't homeopathic.
Diamond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 02:16 PM   #20
Perpetual Notion
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 406
Re: Another Positive Study for Ultra-dilute Solutions

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII

Remember, your belief system is like an addiction. You are addicted to what you believe in a similar manner as a heroin addict. You will do whatever it takes to maintain your beliefs just as a junkie will do whatever it takes to get his drug.
Wow. You're sounding just like Mayday. Are you going to start calling us skeptimaniacs next?
Perpetual Notion is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 02:21 PM   #21
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract



1: Thromb Res. 2000 Nov 15;100(4):317-23. Related Articles, Links


Time related neutralization of two doses acetyl salicylic acid.

Aguejouf O, Malfatti E, Belon P, Doutremepuich C.

Laboratoire d'Hematologie, Faculte de Pharmacie, 146, Rue Leo-Saignat 33 076 Bordeaux Cedex, France.

Aspirin has a well established role in the prevention of arterial thrombosis. Discussion on the efficacy and safety of aspirin in the treatment and prophylaxis of thrombosis has become an important issue. In fact, hemorrhage complications are often associated with its use. On the other hand, previous studies showed unexpected thrombotic potencies associated with the presence of this drug at ultra low doses (ULD) in the circulation. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of aspirin at ULD, injected 1, 2, or 3 hours after the administration of aspirin at 100 mg/kg, on hemostasis and bleeding in rats. We used an experimental model of thrombosis induced by laser beams to evaluate these effects. Platelet aggregation was determined by Cardinal and Flower method. Results from this investigation demonstrate that the neutralizing effect of aspirin at ULD did not operate significantly 1 hour after the injection of aspirin at 100 mg/kg. This effect was observed 2 and 3 hours after. The use of aspirin at ULD to neutralize the side effects of aspirin at high doses will reduce the hemorrhagic risk during extra corporeal circulation. The therapeutic benefit and safety of aspirin therapy in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases can be obtained.

PMID: 11113275 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 02:30 PM   #22
Diamond
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,726
Do you actually read this stuff or is it another attempt to snowstorm the forum into submission?

Snip to the relevant bit:

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
....... Results from this investigation demonstrate that the neutralizing effect of aspirin at ULD did not operate significantly 1 hour after the injection of aspirin at 100 mg/kg. This effect was observed 2 and 3 hours after.
No effect. No drug.
Diamond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 02:31 PM   #23
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
http://www.vhan.nl/documents/Scienti...rtECHNov04.pdf



A/ The experimental model that is cheapest, most reproducible and also the most easily
researched is probably the “acetylcholine-induced contraction of the rat ileum”. It is a wellrecognized
scientific model (Chang FY, Lee SD, et al. Rat gastrointestinal motor responses
mediated via activation of neurokinin receptors. J.Gastroenterol Hepatol 1999; 14: 39-45).
This model has been devised for the verification of very high dilutions of Belladonna by A.
Cristea, a Romanian researcher; results have already been published (Bastide M (ed). Signals
and Images. Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997: 161-170).
Professor Wolfgang Süß, Institute of Pharmacy at the University of Leipzig, has used this
model to test the transfer of the activity of a homeopathic remedy (in this case Atropinum
sulphuricum D60) from the original liquid form to the homeopathic tablet. As usual, several
controls were performed. Alpha-lactose monohydrate tablets impregnated with the highly
diluted Atropinum had systematically efficacy, on the contrary with anhydrous alpha-lactose
tablets no effect can be ascertained. Thus, the quality of homeopathic tablets can be tested
before daily use in pharmacy (constant reproducibility). This very simple model therefore has
the potential to remove doubts about the activity of very highly diluted homeopathic remedies
(Schmidt F, Süß WG, Nieber K. In-vitro Testung von homöopathischen Verdünnungen. Biol.
Med./Heft 1/February 2004;32-37).
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 03:09 PM   #24
Ashles
Pith Artist
 
Ashles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,689
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
Thus, the quality of homeopathic tablets can be tested
before daily use in pharmacy (constant reproducibility). This very simple model therefore has
the potential to remove doubts about the activity of very highly diluted homeopathic remedies
Wow fantastic.

So, seriously Olaf, all you have to do is replicate this study yourself and you get given a million dollars.

Honestly, isn't that a good idea?

By the way that doesn't appear to be a research paper as much as a slightly bias heavy report given to a meeting of GIRI, a group dedicated "to bring together pharmacologists, biologists, physicians, chemists and physicists to communicate, exchange experiences and develop joint research projects; the distinctive feature of the research activities of the group is the study of ultra low dose substances or very high dilutions, homopathics included. Although the mechanism of action of the very diluted solutions of active principles on biological systems is an important concern of the GIRI, the major interest of the Group is directed towards the possible medicinal and therapeutic relevance of the very low doses."

But obviously none of that stops you from demonstrating the efficacy of homeopathy in a manner of your own choosing.

We look forward to your application.
(Assuming, of course, that the International Forces of Darkness and Repression of True Scientific Thought haven't 'vanished' you in the meantime)
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell
It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996
Ashles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 03:34 PM   #25
Perpetual Notion
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
http://www.vhan.nl/documents/Scienti...rtECHNov04.pdf
As usual, several controls were performed.
Wow, that's very informative. I see studies in JAMA all the time that say, "as usual, several controls were performed". Links to conference notes are not exactly sound scientific evidence.
Perpetual Notion is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 03:57 PM   #26
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally posted by Perpetual Notion
Wow, that's very informative. I see studies in JAMA all the time that say, "as usual, several controls were performed". Links to conference notes are not exactly sound scientific evidence.

1. Inflamm Res. 2004 May;53(5):181-8. Epub 2004 Apr 21.
Histamine dilutions modulate basophil activation.

2. Results of a European Multi-Centre Trial,” Inflammation Research 48 (S. 13) 1999:17-18.


P < .0001


There is much research that shows the efficacy of ultra low dilutions. A priori rejection of this research reveals your bias, reveals your closed mind, reveals your ignorance.


A million dollar prize will NEVER be paid out. Only a fool would attempt to win it when it was already stated that ...."I always have an out".

That is correct, only a fool would make an attempt.


p.s. Louis Rey's thermoluminescence study probably has struck deep fear in the hearts of those who are running this phony prize. Of course all they have to do is reject any applicants -- it is that easy.
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 04:09 PM   #27
Diamond
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,726
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
1. Inflamm Res. 2004 May;53(5):181-8. Epub 2004 Apr 21.
Histamine dilutions modulate basophil activation.

2. Results of a European Multi-Centre Trial,” Inflammation Research 48 (S. 13) 1999:17-18.


P < .0001


There is much research that shows the efficacy of ultra low dilutions. A priori rejection of this research reveals your bias, reveals your closed mind, reveals your ignorance.


A million dollar prize will NEVER be paid out. Only a fool would attempt to win it when it was already stated that ...."I always have an out".

That is correct, only a fool would make an attempt.


p.s. Louis Rey's thermoluminescence study probably has struck deep fear in the hearts of those who are running this phony prize. Of course all they have to do is reject any applicants -- it is that easy.
Niow you're repeating yourself with a study with the missing data. As far as I know if the basophyl test is replicable then the million dollars is available.

I think we know the real reason why Randi's million is safe - because the effect does not exist.
Diamond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 04:16 PM   #28
Paracelsus
Student
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 36
Quote:
In statistical hypothesis testing, the p-value of a random variable T used as a test statistic is the probability that T will assume a value "at least as extreme" as the observed value tobserved, given that a null hypothesis being considered is true. "More extreme" would mean less favorable to the null hypothesis; in some cases that means greater than, in some cases less than, and in some cases further away from a specified center.

In other words, assume that a simple null hypothesis is rejected if a test statistic T exceeds a critical value c. Suppose that in a particular case the T was observed to be equal to tobserved. Then the p-value of T in that case is the probability that T would equal or exceed tobserved.

The p-value does not depend on unobservable parameters, but only on the data, i.e., it is observable; it is a "statistic." In classical frequentist inference, one rejects the null hypothesis if the p-value is smaller than a number called the level of the test. In effect, the p-value itself is then being used as the test statistic. If the level is 0.05, then the probability that the p-value is less than 0.05, given that the null hypothesis is true, is 0.05, provided the test statistic has a continuous distribution. In that case, the p-value is uniformly distributed if the null hypothesis is true.


Frequent misunderstandings

There are several common misunderstandings about p-values. All of the following statements are FALSE:

a) The p-value is the probability that the null hypothesis is true, justifying the "rule" of considering as significant p-values closer to 0 (zero).

Comment: In fact, frequentist statistics does not, and cannot, attach probabilities to hypotheses. Comparison of Bayesian and classical approaches shows that p can be very close to zero while the posterior probability of the null is very close to unity. This is the Jeffreys-Lindley paradox.

b) The p-value is the probability of falsely rejecting the null hypothesis. This error is called the prosecutor's fallacy.

Comment: Suppose one selects the 5% significance level. The Type I error rate is the average value over all possible outcomes of the p-value in the range 0 to 0.05. If after carrying out the calculation the p-value is computed to be, say, 0.049999 then the Type I error rate is in fact around 29%. On the other hand, if the p-value is very close to zero then the Type I error rate is much lower than 5%.

c) The p-value is the probability that a replicating experiment would not yield the same conclusion.

Reference

"Calibration of P-values for Testing Precise Null Hypotheses". Sellke, T., Bayarri, M.J. and Berger, J. (2001) The American Statistician (55), 62--71.
p<.0001

Paracelsus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 05:00 PM   #29
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
Re: Another Positive Study for Ultra-dilute Solutions

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII


RESULTS: The amount of tracheal secretions was reduced significantly in group 1 .(p < 0.0001) . Extubation could be performed significantly earlier in group 1 (p < 0.0001). Similarly, length of stay was significantly shorter in group 1 (4.20 +/- 1.61 days vs 7.68 +/- 3.60 days, p < 0.0001 [mean +/- SD]). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that potentized (diluted and vigorously shaken) potassium dichromate may help to decrease the amount of stringy tracheal secretions in COPD patients.



[/color]
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 05:06 PM   #30
Ashles
Pith Artist
 
Ashles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,689
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf
A million dollar prize will NEVER be paid out. Only a fool would attempt to win it when it was already stated that ...."I always have an out".

That is correct, only a fool would make an attempt.
Oh sorry I hadn't realised you were such a moron. Whoops.

Anyone who quotes that single little snippet as an excuse for not applying to the challenge instantly falls to the bottom of the intellectual heap. It's such an old and feeble excuse that I am amazed anyone still uses it.

Well done Olaf - you have shown your agenda very clearly and rendered all your subsequent posts of little interest.

What a pathetic cop-out.
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell
It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996
Ashles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 06:17 PM   #31
Perpetual Notion
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII


There is much research that shows the efficacy of ultra low dilutions. A priori rejection of this research reveals your bias, reveals your closed mind, reveals your ignorance.


And your willingness to open wide and swallow whole half-assed conference notes or abstracts reporting the findings of some woo shows just how very non-critical and close minded you are. (Please don't post your list of the 1000 people who supposedly don't agree with me. I already saw it on the other thread in Forum Mangement.)

For the record, I've been to a homeopath before and guess what, IT DIDN'T WORK!

A million dollar prize will NEVER be paid out. Only a fool would attempt to win it when it was already stated that ...."I always have an out".

That is correct, only a fool would make an attempt.


Homeopaths don't make an attempt because they know they won't succeed. They know that they are unable to tell their magic potions from ordinary tap water. They have already tried and failed.

As to the "I always have an out", well, *yawn*.


p.s. Louis Rey's thermoluminescence study probably has struck deep fear in the hearts of those who are running this phony prize. Of course all they have to do is reject any applicants -- it is that easy.

How do you know this until you apply yourself? You certainly meet your own requirements.
Perpetual Notion is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 06:21 PM   #32
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Re: Another Positive Study for Ultra-dilute Solutions

Quote:
Originally posted by Olaf/QII
Remember, your belief system is like an addiction. You are addicted to what you believe in a similar manner as a heroin addict. You will do whatever it takes to maintain your beliefs just as a junkie will do whatever it takes to get his drug.
Are you preaching to us, or to YOURSELF here, Xanta?
Zep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2005, 10:48 PM   #33
Jocce
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,083
"Mom! Mom! There's a Unicorn outside again!!"

"hmmm...are you really sure this time?"

"Yeah! It's AMAZING!! look for yourself! All you have to do is stand on that rock for a few hours and you'll see for yourself!"

"Sweetie, I've spent hour after hour on that rock each time you scream Unicorn and all I've seen so far is horses, warthogs and miscolored squirrels. Why would I get all excited and spend a few hours more looking for that unicorn when you clearly have shown that your eyes are not working properly?"

"pfftt...they could still have been Unicorns. Just because they look like something else....they could be in disguise!. HAH!
Jocce is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2005, 05:15 AM   #34
Paracelsus
Student
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 36
Those of you who are interrested in the significance criterion(p<0.0001) how its selection(and size of the samples) can have bad things happen can head over to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_power
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_error
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_II_error
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_III_error
Paracelsus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2005, 01:38 PM   #35
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally posted by Diamond


I think we know the real reason why Randi's million is safe - because the effect does not exist.
Absolute denials such as these confirm that i am dealing with people who refuse to read the papers and prefer to keep their head buried in the sands of ignorance.

How do you know the effect does not exist?

At the very least you need to say that "maybe" it exists but you need many more studies that replicate it.
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2005, 04:55 AM   #36
Jekyll
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,586
Quote:
Originally posted by Capsid
Well no actually, p<0.2 is 20% which is quite high in statistical terms. Anything under 5% (p<0.05) is the normal cut-off as it is outside the 95% normal distribution. This means that there is a less than 5% chance that the null hypothesis is correct. The null hypothesis being that there is no difference.
Thanks.
Surely, the null hypothesis was that there was no bias in the selection procedure (that they were picked from the same population). This doesn't mean that there weren't more sick people in the placebo group, just that it is not unlikely that it worked out like this.

Does a relatively low p-value point to anything? Both the height and age returned significantly higher values >=.75 but you would expect them to have a high mean and proportionally small varience.

I fully admit to being biased about this but it still looks to me like there were more sick people in the control group.
Jekyll is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2005, 05:52 AM   #37
Capsid
Graduate Poster
 
Capsid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally posted by Jekyll
Thanks.
Surely, the null hypothesis was that there was no bias in the selection procedure (that they were picked from the same population). This doesn't mean that there weren't more sick people in the placebo group, just that it is not unlikely that it worked out like this.


The data do appear to show a trend that the placebo group are more sick but statistically we have to accept that they are not different.

Does a relatively low p-value point to anything? Both the height and age returned significantly higher values >=.75 but you would expect them to have a high mean and proportionally small varience.

I'm not sure of your question here. A p value lower than 0.05 is considered significantly different, the smaller the p value then the greater the significance. You may be confusing variance with the p value which are not the same.[/b]

I fully admit to being biased about this but it still looks to me like there were more sick people in the control group.

Agreed but not significantly sicker.
Capsid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2005, 10:58 PM   #38
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd. 2004 Oct;11(5):281-92. Related Articles, Links


Growth stimulation of dwarf peas (Pisum sativum L.) through homeopathic potencies of plant growth substances.

Baumgartner S, Thurneysen A, Heusser P.

Kollegiale Instanz fur Komplementarmedizin, Universitat Bern, Insel-Spital, Imhoof-Pavillon, Bern, Switzerland. s.baumgartner@hiscia.ch

BACKGROUND: Efficacy of higher homeopathic potencies is controversial. Universally accepted specific detection assays for homeopathic dilutions do not exist. Basic research has to develop a spectrum of standardized tools to investigate the mode of action and nature of homeopathic potencies. OBJECTIVE: Can the shoot growth reaction of dwarf peas (gibberellin- deficient mutants) be regarded as evidence of treatment with homeopathic potencies of plant growth substances? MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pea seed (Pisum sativum L. cv. Fruher Zwerg) is immersed for 24 hours in homeopathic potency or control solutions for soaking. Plants germinate and grow in a standard cultivation substrate under controlled environmental conditions. Shoot length is measured 14 days after planting.

RESULTS: A screening of homeopathic potencies (12x-30x) of four different plant growth substances revealed biological activity of certain potency levels of gibberellin and kinetin (p < 0.05). Growth stimulation through gibberellin 17x (5 x 10(-18 M)) was assessed in six independent replications; results confirmed those of the screening (p < 0.05). The effect of gibberellin 17x seemed to weaken during the course of the experiments.

CONCLUSION: The results back the hypothesis that homeopathic potencies of plant growth substances affect pea shoot growth. Dwarf peas might thus be an interesting system model for studying the action of homeopathic potencies. Further work is required to identify all boundary conditions modulating the reactivity of this system.

PMID: 15572869 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2005, 11:14 PM   #39
Olaf/QII
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 440
By no means do i think this study proves anything. However, I thought i would post it just to get it out there.

On the other hand the Louis Rey study is pretty much an open and shut case.

"It is TRUSTWORTHY PHYSICS"


http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB...tentOnly=false

High Homeopathic Potencies Are Different from Potentized Solvent when Investigated with the REDEM Technology
C. Witta; R. Lüdtkeb; T.E.R. Weißhuhna; S.N. Willicha

aInstitut für Sozialmedizin, Epidemiologie und Gesundheitsökonomie, Charité – Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, bKarl und Veronica Carstens-Stiftung, Essen, Deutschland

Forsch Komplementärmed Klass Naturheilkd 2005;12:6-13
(DOI: 10.1159/000082635)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary

Objective: To determine in a series of randomized blinded experiments using the REDEM technology whether differences between high homeopathic potencies and similarly potentized solvent can be detected. Design and Analysis: A REDEM device was employed as a black box. Samples were measured in a capacitor that was connected to 60 individual oscillator circuits at frequencies between 250 and 930 KHz; their oscillation damping was recorded. In two experiments (3 and 4 replications) stable differences between a potentized ‘mother tincture’ and potentized solvent were assessed. Statistical analysis was done using ANCOVA. Results: Significant differences (p < 0.01) between remedy and control were found, mostly at the same oscillator frequencies. Those differences found for only one remedy always were at frequencies adjacent to frequencies with differences for other remedies. Visual analysis: Where output curves were not near 0, remedy values were higher than controls. Curves within a replication ran parallel, their distances varied. Between replications, curve shapes and remedy- control differences were similar, however, control curves varied in height. Control and remedy curves between experiments varied in shape. Effects increased with time and sample conductivity. Ethanol 43% as solvent eliminated the observed effects, use of polyethylene containers considerably attenuated them. Conclusions: A probably physical difference was seen between potentized homeopathic remedies and potentized solvent. The differences are associated with sample age, solvent, and container material. The REDEM technology requires further investigation to determine the nature of the underlying mechanisms of the observed differences.

Copyright © 2005 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg




Free Abstract Article (PDF 176 KB)






Journal Home
Editorial Board
Guidelines
Issues

Advertising
Subscriptions
Free Alert
Online Sample




© 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel
Olaf/QII is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2005, 04:21 AM   #40
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
You have some sort of degree in the area of science that Rey works in, Xanta?
Zep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:13 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.