Grams are you a Doctor, led a homeopathy practice and actually wanted to write a book about the Benefits of homeopathy. But a book came out, in which you abjured. What happened?
Natalie Grams : I homeopathy for a long time have become familiar, as quite a lot of people. I didn’t ask particularly critical. Also, because it has helped me. For the book I wanted to go a step further and really got me with the critical points of homeopathy, which I had hidden so far. But then I realized: Many of the arguments of homeopathy are built on Sand and not at all durable. Both in terms of the mechanism of action, as well as the effectiveness.

As a practicing Doctor, I had a pragmatic approach: you don’t need to know as a Patient and I as a Doctor, even so, exactly how homeopathy works. It two is enough for us to know that it works. With the mechanism of action I never was so intense. Sure, I had heard of homeopathy-based researchers as Stephan Baumgartner, the studies with water has made lenses. But I looked at his experiments never. Or of Masaru Emoto’s research with water. Only later did I learn that this is an artist and not a scientist. As such, I have incorporated me until much later in the studies of the efficacy of homeopathy. And had to recognize: they are implausible, unscientific, and often very contradictory. Until now, homeopaths have not presented a scientifically durable, or just common sense, comprehensible model of how homeopathy could work.

I said earlier: There is these studies that suggest efficacy, so must be something to it. I can blame anyone, if he thinks the same. Why should one distrust scientific studies, just as a layman? But you must learn how studies properly read – in my study of medicine, which came much too short.

We never taught properly, how to build studies, how to interpret them, what values are important, how to Pay compares, to come to solid conclusions. Many homeopathic studies are methodologically very bad. And the worse you are, the more they distort the results in favour of homeopathy. Robert Mathie, one of the most important homeopathy-researchers, has published four major overview studies and is not biased as a homeopath for sure negative, says: The statements from studies that homeopathy is active better than Placebo, not be interpreted with extreme caution because the methodological quality was good enough for clear conclusions.

Only recently, Mathie has published results of overview of the work and also evaluated whether or not studies of homeopathy have a so-called Bias – a bias in the planning or Interpretation of the results. Most of the studies had a “high risk of bias”. Of the claim of homoeopathy to be able to rapidly, gently, permanently and safely, even in chronic and difficult diseases to cure, we see nothing in scientific studies. The results not be over-interpreted by homeopaths total, probably because they do not speak the language of scientific studies properly. This is not a reproach, but simply a fact.

homeopaths often cite a study of 1.5 million Dutch, thanks to homeopathy, less sick, better felt – and even lived longer.
talk to the study of Erik Baars. I have to tell you: In this study, it is not a question of the assessment of the efficacy of homeopathy. This study is always fed back as a defense for homeopathy in the field, surprised me. It shows how wrong homeopaths “quote your” studies. The study examined only how many costs for Doctors, complementary medical methods in addition to conventional medicine to apply. Has been compared, neither therapies nor patients, but the costs for these Doctors. Of the 1.5 million people, only 1.2 percent were in such a complementary medical treatment. You can’t compare at all to each other.

she showed that the patients who participated in complementary medicine, are socio-economically better. That is, they are, per se, healthier and probably happier. It would be for this question much better studies. For example, Claudia Witt, who has also conducted research in Zurich, and Julia Ostermann. They examined 44’500 patients in two groups: only school medically treated, and those who also took homeopathy. The patients were studied over 18 months, and it showed: The homeopathy-patients costs significantly more. As a result it is claimed, 18 months is not a sufficient treatment duration. But the result remained the same even after 33 months of follow-up. Why not quote homeopaths in this study?

Also, some methods of conventional medicine does not know the mechanism of action. This does not speak against the homeopathy.
there are two big differences. Firstly, the mechanism of action may not be resolved in the case of certain drugs although. But the effectiveness is confirmed clear. For example, we don’t know the widely-used painkiller Paracetamol exactly how it works in the body. But there is enough evidence that it is good, that is, to alleviate pain. And secondly, the possible mechanisms of action are not implausible. They are not equipped from the outset with a improbability, as in the case of homeopathy. This means Yes, a no more existing active ingredient to have an effect.

This statement is not true, unfortunately.

homeopathy has only an interpersonal or psychological effect, that is to say Placebo. This effect may occur with each therapy. But beyond that, homeopathy has no specific therapeutic effect. This is not just my opinion, but the state of the science. It is simply not a drug available that could have an effect. And the homeopaths proclaimed “Transformation in the Energy”. This is proved on the basis of knowledge in chemistry, physics, pharmacology and physiology.

no. We are with the Knowledge so far that we can judge these things. We can assess that in the case of a gross-motor-shaken solution, with not more existing active substance no energy is created or transferred. For this purpose, our measurement methods. It is simply a question of common sense. We don’t say: Maybe there are unicorns that make us healthy, we simply have not yet found the correct method of measurement.

That’s right. There is the magic aspect that is wonderful. We all don’t really believe in unicorns or the Easter Bunny, because it is nonsense, of course. But we are, that we Think of magic, with a certain Humor, a certain lightness, or embedded in a belief system can tolerate. This is okay for children, and it is okay if one is a religious believer. But in medicine, this magic has lost nothing. To recognize this, for me was hard. I went from this magical world, as I stopped the homeopathy. And today, I have to say that On the ground of the facts is, unfortunately, too little glitter. Before, I could not believe in energies that exist. Could believe that everything is connected. And that I have the opportunity to influence all of this. Sometimes I miss that today, but it’s the reality.

to Know More on higgs – the magazine for all who want to know.