“A resolution discouraging homeopathy is on the agenda for the Jan. 5 regular winter session of the AVMA House of Delegates.” https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/121215c.aspx
Dogs Naturally Magazine has more on the issue as well as a petition against the resolution. http://www.bing.com/search?q=dogs+naturally+magazine+AVMA+homeopathy+&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=dogs+naturally+magazine+avma+homeopathy+&sc=1-16&sp=-1&sk=theBCnutMember
Their high horse is getting really tall. They must feel really threatened that they need to bother going after all these little fish. How stupid that this is what they waste their time on!Hound Dog MomParticipant
They’ve got to go after anything that has the potential to steal market share from the big name pet food companies or the top pharmaceutical companies. Sigh…Ramona72Participant
You know the heads of those huge companies only have six homes, four yachts, two jets, right? Poor things. They’ve got to get those homepathic pellets off the market so they can get more stuff!Jackie BMember
I met a family with their Boxer, a female which looked excessively itchy and miserable with raw, red skin in many places. I asked tactfully why she was like that, and they told me that the vet had been treating her for “mange.” For the last 12 MONTHS. They were taking her in every 3 weeks for an expensive skin treatment. I asked what food they were using– Pedigree. Apparently, their vet had not even mentioned the possibility of the skin problems being related to food allergies or that she might have poor health due to poor food. I of course gave them the DFA website and strongly suggested that they check out the review of Pedigree.
There are plenty of people who listen to vets exclusively and don’t go beyond and do their own investigation.Hound Dog MomParticipant
Got this in my email today:
“Urgent: If you believe in Homeopathic Therapies for Pets, PLEASE READ THIS”
“A call to ban veterinary surgeons from prescribing homeopathy as a treatment for animals”
“The biggest danger of homeopathy is not that the remedies are ineffective, but that some homeopaths are of the opinion that their therapies can substitute for genuine medical treatment. This is at best misleading, and at worst may lead to unnecessary suffering and death”.
First they target homeopathy and then they’ll target herbs or essential oils or anything else that is a risk to big pharma… At one point the government was targeting food based vitamins. It’s really quite laughable.
Are Homeopaths Innocent Victims of Skeptical Attacks?
Posted on November 28, 2015 by skeptvet
Homeopaths often claim they are being unfairly “attacked” when skeptics point out that homeopathy is irrational, pseudoscientific, or simply ineffective. They portray themselves as innocently minding their own business until we spontaneously attack them. This ignores the reality, however, that homeopaths frequently promote homeopathy as an alternative to scientific medicine, and they often do so with their own vigorous criticism of conventional veterinary medicine. Here are a few examples:
click on link for the rest of the article http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2015/11/are-homeopaths-innocent-victims-of-skeptical-attacks/
Ya no, you are right…. Homeopathics should definitely be attacked when I make a personal choice to take my pets (or myself) to them… Makes perfect sense to me????? If allopathic medicine “worked” and worked well, there’d be no way holistic practitioners could stay in business. Allopathic medicine certainly has it’s place but it’s not the only option — THANK GOD FOR THAT!!!
“Promote homeopathy as an alternative to scientific medicine” It seems to me that skeptvet and others like him are threatened by the alternative movement just as they are to the raw movement. It’s not a big secret that allopathic medicine is often ineffective, can be very dangerous and is used inappropriately/off label.
If skeptvet wasn’t so anti everything natural I might be able to consider him somewhat credible but as it is, not so much… Just my opinion of course.
PS — can you point out one homeopathic medicine that directly causes death (or any of the others listed) as a side effect?
“Rimadyl, like other drugs, may cause some side effects. Serious but rare side effects have been reported in dogs taking NSAIDs, including Rimadyl. Serious side effects can occur with or without warning and in rare situations result in <b>death</b>. The most common NSAID-related side effects generally involve the stomach (such as bleeding ulcers), and liver or kidney problems. Look for the following side effects that can indicate your dog may be having a problem with Rimadyl or may have another medical problem:
• Decrease or increase in appetite
• Change in bowel movements (such as diarrhea, or black, tarry or bloody stools)
• Change in behavior (such as decreased or increased activity level, incoordination, seizure or aggression)
• Yellowing of gums, skin, or whites of the eyes (jaundice)
• Change in drinking habits (frequency, amount consumed)
• Change in urination habits (frequency, color, or smell)
• Change in skin (redness, scabs, or scratching)” http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/Products/ApprovedAnimalDrugProducts/DrugLabels/UCM050408.pdf
There are plenty of articles on the internet to support whatever treatment avenues one wants to pursue.
I prefer “Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine”
I immediately thought of skeptvet, and a few others, when I watched this TedTV / Tedx University of Nevada video discussing “propaganda and astroturf”. He, and others, uses many of the words and tactics discussed (“quack” and “pseudo” as examples). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU
- This reply was modified 4 years ago by Shawna.
I clicked on one of your links and a pop up caught my attention. I saw a Ted TV talk by this medical doctor several years ago. It was very interesting and I’ve been trying to find it since. Thanks. It’s not the video I’m linking to today but the same doctor has another Ted TV talk titled “Battling Bad Science”. Dr. Goldacre is clearly opposed to alternatives (at least some) but he demonstrates how “evidence based science” can be quite flawed in how it is reported and therefore utilized. Medicines with questionable efficacy can be licensed and utilized hence leading to the very same illnesses, and potentially, I am assuming, death that skeptvet attacks holistic modalities/practitioners for. https://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science?language=en
Edit — Oh yes, apparently per Dr. Goldacre, in this website I just found, patients are dying due to “bad science”. “I did a new talk at TED about drug companies hiding the results of clinical trials, it went up today. This is a huge, ongoing problem, and it results in patients suffering and dying unnecessarily.” http://www.badscience.net/2012/09/i-did-a-talk-at-ted-about-drug-companies-and-hidden-data/ElMember
I agree with you that there are problems with allopathic medicine.
“Anonymously” has provided several links to studies, including meta analyses, that showed that Homeopathy has never been PROVEN to be effective using peer reviewed studies or double blinded trials.
You have pointed out some of the flaws in traditional western medicine, but I was wondering if you can provide any data, either peer reviewed, or double blinded that shows Homeopathy to be effective, and what it is effective for?
Thank youJenn HMember
From my personal experiences I have found some homeopathic treatments work. Holistic treatments are better, but it integrating allopathic and holistic has provided the best outcomes.
There are certainly a lot of quacks on both sides of medicine. At the end of the day we need to do our homework and make sure the practitioner is reputable and knows what they’re talking about. And as with anything in medicine weigh the risk/reward of treatments.
There’s a place for homeopathy, holistic and allopathy. Sometimes you have to mix & match to get the maximum potential from all of them. Keep in mind all can be equally dangerous if not used properly.aimeeMember
Thanks for posting the skeptvet link here.
I do dislike that homeopathy enjoys an aura of legitimacy when those with medical degrees offer it. I don’t know what the answer is…. I think it says it all a few posts up when the poster shared Dr Becker’s blog post ” Urgent If you Believe in Homeopathic ….” Apparently even those that practice homeopathy, do recognize that is a faith based belief system.. and not science. I don’t think all the data in the world can dissuade someone from a belief that they hold.PitloveMember
Aimee- Your words make me think of this quote: “For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don’t believe, no proof is possible”
Thought provoking article.
“Anti-Medicine Vets: Should Rejection of Scientific Medicine Disqualify One from Practicing as a Licensed Veterinarian?” Posted on July 11, 2016 by skeptvet
I have used, and been using, homeopathy for years. Whether or not skeptics want to consider it as a possible treatment, it WORKS and has the ability to cure, but you have to know what you’re doing, size up the patient *as an individual* (the whole basis of holistic medicine!), and choose a specific remedy for that patient. A dog that has diarrhea and is irritable and edgy and hyperactive is going to get a completely different remedy than a dog that has diarrhea and is needy, clingy, and upset by it. A dog who has problems with chronic diarrhea will get a different remedy than a dog that has an acute case from whatever reason. I could say I have a headache, and take Pepto Bismol. Guess what–I still have a headache. The PB didn’t “work” because I chose the wrong remedy for the wrong situation. So would a sane person get on the internet, create a blog, and spend their lives bad mouthing Pepto Bismol, or would they maybe realize they chose the wrong fix for their specific problem?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.