'Nothing' in it - a sweeping denouncement of homeopathy, Chrys, and in a five-page article you’ve really provided very little of any substance to back it up.

A bottle of pills bought from a corporate conglomerate like Boots is hardly indicative of the work being done by the many thousands of dedicated and experienced homeopaths the world over. And one extreme example of negligence is not enough to damn the whole profession. Many thousands die every year due to medical malpractice. Let’s have a little perspective here.

I haven't used homeopathy myself, but I do look to natural alternatives in preference to pharmaceutical quick-fixes. I know from cold hard experience that my health wouldn't be as good as it is now if I'd confined myself to conventional western medicine.

I do take my dog to a homeopathic vet though and would never go back to a conventional practitioner. I’ve had two dogs (both the same breed) and both developed a heart condition at about the same age. The older one was treated conventionally, and the younger one homeopathically and with natural supplements. He is now fifteen and his general health and quality of life has been far superior to that of my other dog, who was killed accidentally but who was sicker then than this dog is now, even though she was four years younger when she died than he is now. I realise there are other variables that come into play, but this certainly convinces me that, contrary to Chry's derision and that on show in some of the comments here, there is definitely 'something' to homeopathy.

BTW, Pericles is wise to avoid statins. A simple web search will bring up pages of warnings. There are natural alternatives, but of course with statins being one of its biggest milking-cows, Big Pharma goes out of its way to ensure any such information is either derided or suppressed. Cholesterol levels can actually be too low. They should be between 5.1 and 7.7 and it's the ratio between the LDL and HDL components that is significant, rather than the overall level.

Bronwyn, it's got nothing to do with opinion, it's simple chemistry, arithmetic and logic.

When a substance has been diluted homeopathically, there is no possible chance that one single molecule of the original substance remains. What you have is pure water and nothing else.

There is no evidence whatsoever to back up homeopathic claims of 'water memory', and a good deal of evidence to disprove it.

Besides, simple logic leads to the inevitable question: every single molecule of water on Earth has been recycled endless times - so why would water choose to retain a 'memory' of arnica rather than, say, a memory of Winston Churchill's bladder?

Oh, silly me, I forgot - one has to bang it ten times on a horsehair & leather stool to make the water 'remember'. To neglect that scientific procedure would just make homeopathy look silly, now wouldn't it?

Before you take your dog to your homeopathic 'vet' again, you might like to know that Britain has banned homeopathic water from being given to animals as 'medicine'. If only humans were so well protected.

Also, before you deride 'Big Pharma' (as they often deserve, I might add), you should also consider that Homeopathy is likewise a multi-billion dollar industry, only unlike 'Big Pharma', it is almost totally unregulated.

Apologies, Clownfish, I mistakenly assumed that you posted your study in order to prove a point about statins.

>>Interestingly, you quickly replied to me with a link to just such a meta-study as you claimed no-one had or ever would do. I'll generously assume that you suddenly did the research that had previously eluded you (even though you stated, 'Believe me, I have asked. Many times.').<<

I simply pointed out that of the studies themselves, none is foolish enough to claim that they work, and none is brave enough to say they don't.

Even your report, that you say is the "gold standard", comes to no clear conclusion.

As my GP agrees.

Who is, by the way, the person who "believe me, I have asked. Many times". You don't have consistently high cholesterol levels as I do without taking as much advice as you can get.

>>The use of statins has prolonged millions of lives and there is endless evidence to show this.<<

Thank you for pointing that out, Shadow Minister. If indeed statins have prolonged "millions" of lives, and if indeed there is "endless evidence to show this", I'm sure my GP would have heard about it.

Interesting article I am confused though as the intent of the article may be to help inform people of the plights of homeopaths? However I do not see a valid position put forward as to why homeopathy is sold by large pharmaceutical companies world wide.

They do it to make money nothing else, large pharmacies that have discount medicines make so much money from selling remedies that do not actually do much other than fool some people. Homeopathy since its interesting inception in Germany has always had controversy around it.

As Edzard Ernst has said a former Homeopath "My plea is simply for honesty. Let people buy what they want, but tell them the truth about what they are buying. These treatments are biologically implausible and the clinical tests have shown they don't do anything at all in human beings. The argument that this information is not relevant or important for customers is quite simply ridiculous."

People will take it as we are all aware some will believe anything and like to go against the grain. However my issue is when children are harmed I do not care if a adult chooses this course of treatment by this solely for a child is dangerous thinking and people need to be prosecuted, it does not work and most have known this since conclusive tests came out of WW2.

10:23 is a silly way to get peoples attention solutions and correct information is the only key.It will only make those trying to show valid reasons to not take homeopathic treatments as foolish and not get a point across. Practitioners say of course it will not harm you that is why we take it, sad but people will valid their positions. This is what all of us do when we have been presented with something that does not fit into our schema.

This is information for Bronwyn which I am sure she will not bother with as she has her own anecdotal evidence so it must be real. It will be dismissed right away.

http://www.vetpath.co.uk/voodoo/edwards1.html

http://www.ukskeptics.com/article.php?dir=articles&article=it_works_in_animals.php
direct cut and paste for Bronwyn who I am sure is not interested in points of view. Correlation must be causation.

"What is really happening, is that the vet who is using homeopathic remedies, is using his authoritative position to convince the animal owner that the animal being treated with homeopathy is getting better.

Vets, like doctors, hold a lot of power over their clients. This can lead to a placebo effect by proxy where the animal’s owner is assured that the treatment will work, the owner de-stresses and becomes less anxious, the animal senses this and de-stresses itself and responds more positively to its owner’s more positive attitude. Illusion: the treatment is working! But of course the animal remains medically untreated."

This is possible irrelevant however a friend suggested I read more about the day and watch a video and sent me the author's blog address to get some more information. I went to read this

http://thatsmyphilosophy.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/homeopathy-theres-nothing-in-it/

and then found this

http://thatsmyphilosophy.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/my-free-speech-fiasco/

I now confused :/