Liddell Laboratories Sends Open Letter to Consumer Reports – In Defense of Homeopathy
MORAGA, Calif., July 24 /PRNewswire/ — Dear Mr. Podolsky:
Below is a significant body of evidence that refutes your recent article on homeopathy, Homeopathic Drugs — Look-Alike Medicines. In your article you say that “there’s little evidence to back up the notion … that homeopathy can improve health.” I believe that the accuracy of your article suffered greatly from inadequate research.
When people tell me that there is little convincing proof of the efficacy of homeopathy, I always find that they have not had access to the relevant scientific literature. As you will see below, there are an abundance studies demonstrating the efficacy of homeopathic remedies:
1. Clinical Trials in Homeopathy, the British Medical Journal, February 1991. The authors were skeptics who reviewed 107 papers on controlled clinical trials in homeopathy. In its conclusions, the paper states "The amount of positive evidence, even among the best studies, came as a surprise to us. Based on this evidence, we would readily accept that homeopathy could be efficacious ... " 2. Critical Review and Meta-Analysis of Serial Agitated Dilutions in Experimental Toxicology, Human and Experimental Toxicology, 1994. Six non-homeopathic doctors, led by Dr. Wayne Jonas of the National Institute of Health and Walter Reed Army Institute of Research reviewed 135 studies found in 105 published papers addressing the effects of serial agitated dilutions on toxicological systems. Of the tests meeting their highest scientific quality and comparability criteria, "70% showed positive effects." 3. The British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published a study on the homeopathic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis conducted in the Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital in 1980. It involved patients with rheumatoid arthritis taking orthodox anti-inflammatory treatment. Half the patients took additional homeopathy and half took a placebo. Results showed improved symptoms (pain, articular index and stiffness) in 82% of homeopathic patients, as compared with 21% in the placebo group. There were no side effects seen with homoeopathic remedies. 4. In 1983, Wiesenauer et al., in Fortschr Med. published the results of their double blind study on the treatment of hay fever with Galphimia glauca 6X. The results were positive in favor of homeopathic therapy. However, the most interesting aspect of this study was that they also studied the effects of treatment with Galphimia glauca 10-6 (serially diluted, but not succussed according to homeopathic methodology). The simple dilution without homeopathic succussion exhibited no activity with results being identical to the placebo. 5. In 1991, Brigo and Serpelloni, in Berlin Journal of Research in Homeopathy, published their study in the homeopathic treatment of migraine. According to convention study guidelines, patients were treated for several months with homeopathy with an equal number of patients treated with a placebo. Over four months, 80% of the patients improved with homeopathy versus 13% improvement with placebo. 6. In 1986, Albertini and Golberg, in the journal Homeopathie, published their study of homeopathic treatment of acute nerve pain following tooth extraction. 76% of the homeopathic patients received pain relief as compared to 40% for placebo. 7. In 1994, Linde et al., reviewed 109 publications and found that nearly all papers reported positive results at specific dilutions. Based on the best studies methodologically, the author concluded, "There is distinct evidence of efficacy of both low and high dilutions of homeopathic remedies."
Children: Homeopathic treatment is regarded as particularly effective and fast-acting in children. Such rapid effects on diseases (which are not psychosomatic in nature) cannot be explained by the placebo effect. A few examples of homeopathic studies focused on children:
1. The British Homeopathic Journal, Frei and Thurneysen, November 2001. This study was performed on 230 children with acute otitis media (middle ear infection). -- 39% had achieved pain control within 6 hours -- 72% had achieved pain control within 12 hours -- Results were 240% faster than for children taking placebo 2. The British Homeopathic Journal, October 1997. Double blind, placebo-controlled study on the treatment of 43 children with ADHD. -- After 10 days of homeopathic treatment children taking the active product showed significantly less ADHD behavior than those given the placebo. -- Two months after the study's end, with no further treatment: 57% continued to improve; 19% had continued benefits; and 24% relapsed into old behavior patterns 3. The British Homeopathic Journal, Frei & Thurneysen, 2001, This study was performed on 115 children (average age 8.3 years) comparing homeopathic treatment with that of methylphenidate (Ritalin) for children suffering from ADHD symptoms. -- After 3.5 months, children receiving homeopathy had a clinical improvement rating of 73%, compared to a clinical improvement rating of only 65% for the Ritalin children. -- In preschoolers, homeopathy was found to be particularly effective.
Quality studies similar to these are numerous. In my view, these studies comprehensively demonstrate the effectiveness of today’s properly prepared homeopathic medicines. I hope that you find this information helpful and that you will consider it when writing future articles about homeopathy and health, in general.
Randy L. Powers, President, Liddell Laboratories, http://www.liddell.net/ About Liddell Laboratories
Liddell Laboratories was founded out of a caring passion for the value of human life, which has motivated Liddell to become an agent of change. Our aim is to empower people with the knowledge necessary to better control their health and to provide important therapy options that help people avoid the often toxic effects of pharmaceutical drugs.
Contact: Audrey Hughey; 1-800-460-7733; http://www.liddell.net/
CONTACT: Audrey Hughey of Liddell Laboratories, 1-800-460-7733
Web site: http://www.liddell.net/