Wednesday 25 January 2012

The treatment of burns and Homeopathy

Homeopathy has been plagued with 'denialists' for the last 10 years or so. They have no evidence that homeopathy does not work. They just say that people who got better with homeopathic treatment are not telling the truth; or they are mistaken; or they would have got better anyway. Anyone who has experienced the power of homeopathy will know that denialists are wrong. But for those who have an honest skepticism, perhaps this is something you might bear in mind.

I have looked at various blogs and tweets recently ridiculing this article. It explains that when treating a burn it is better to use heat rather that cold (the usual first-aid recommendation). Clearly, using heat is more homeopathic - like cures like is, after all, the primary principle of homeopathy. So does it work? I can confirm that it does. A homeopath told me, several years ago now, that in treating burns don't use cold water to 'bring down' temperature, use warm-hot water - as hot as you can bear. It happened that a year or so later I did receive a burn, remembered the advice, and ran my hand under a hot tap. There was little doubt that it worked better than cold water. Since then, several members of my family have done likewise, with very positive results.

I do not recommend burning yourself to find out! But just keep the advice in your mind, and when you can use it, or someone else who gets burned, see for yourself what works best.

Do enjoy denialist humour in this, and other similar subjects. They can be quite funny (homeopathy does not always conform to conventional wisdom); but whatever you do, don't rely on them for medical advice. Find out for yourself!

Steve Scrutton
Director, ARH

19 comments:

  1. Ye gods, how stupid can you get!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have allowed this comment through in order to show people the level of argument that homeopathy denialists' have access to. I have told him that it works. His only response is that ~I am stupid. Well, if using effective first aid treatment is 'stupid' then I plead guilty!

    I do not usually allow homeopathy denialists access to comment - unless they have something sensible to say. Maccspider clearly has nothing to say, other than to regurgitate is prejudice.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It does not work.
    Anecdotes are not evidence.
    Present evidence from reliable testing if you want to have any credibility.
    All the evidence, apart from the wishful thinking of (admittedly a few quite delusional) homeopaths is that what you are recommending is simply stupid and, frankly, dangerous. Even the basic physics, forget the physiology, of what you suggest it just wrong.
    Unless, of course, this is a spoof - but then it is so difficult to tell when homeopaths are spoofing.
    Now, will you allow this through? There's a question

    ReplyDelete
  4. Patients have one over-arching aim in life - to get better.
    People who are burned want to ease their pain.
    Anecdotes are people getting better; having their pain eased.

    Ahhhh! I have burnt myself! Better go and see if there is a randomised controlled test to tell me what to do.

    Homeopathy is not a spoof, it is a time-honoured medical therapy that works effectively, and is entirely safe.

    Just because you can state 'It does not work' does not mean that it does not work. That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it.

    But just notice how Maccspider presents himself. It does not work! What is your evidence?

    And incidentally, readers, within about 10 minutes of receiving this I had another message from this character saying that I would not publish this. Seems as if he has nothing better to do that to parade his prejudices.

    ReplyDelete
  5. How extraordinary to object with such venom about a piece of interesting, possibly useful and possibly helpful, information. Methinks he doth protest too much - comes to mind. What I find helpful is to think differently about as many different things as I can so as to ensure I can work out for myself what helps and what doesn't. It is MY responsibility to choose what I need in any given situation - especially where my health is concerned. I certainly would not take ORDERS from any health professional - Drs orders is just so last century. However, for people like this Maccspider it is obviously important that he feels safe with his evidence. Good for you - but don't expect us all to follow like you do Maccspider.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Still no evidence from you but you want me to prove a negative, which is impossible.
    If you make an assertion that a particular course of treatment works then you need to present evidence that it does; this you have failed to do. If I was burnt I would use methods which have been demonstrated to work through testing, not stories which have not been tested.
    Anecdotes are completely unreliable. I can happily gather many more anecdotes that completely contradict your assertions; if I do so will you admit that you are wrong?.
    What is your falsifiable hypothesis and what independent testing has there been of it.
    The facts are that heating a burn will increase the risk of tissue damage.
    Easily demonstrated: take a piece of paper and set fire to it. Put it out. Then hold it over a flame. Does it get better or does it deteriorate?
    Now do the same with a piece of meat.
    Why would the physics be different for a human being?
    At what stage do you stop? 1st, 2nd or 3rd degree burns?
    I am surprised that you posted these as your first post suggest that you don't usually (and others suggest that you don't allow their posts - anecdotes or evidence?) and your posts seem to consist of name calling rather than verifiable facts. I am quite happy to state that your assertions are stupid - your assertions, not you.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Homeopathy works and works brilliantly I see this every day!

    ReplyDelete
  8. This email from Maccspider came through, and another identical one less that 90 minutes later. It is the usual hectoring style of denialists who believe they are right, and that they can just deny personal experience as 'anecdotal'. He does not appear to realise that our 'anecdotes' are what determine what we do in life.

    So there is a question here. I have stated that applying heat to a burn ('as hot as you can bear' - no-one is talking about holding it to a flame) deals with the after-effects of burns better than cold, as conventionally recognised. And that other members of my family have done the same.

    Now, what is Maccspider accusing me of? Lying? Being mistaken? Trying to 'trick' people? Actually, who cares what he is accusing me of. I have no problem with Maccspider using cold rather than heat; and Rix, you are quite right, like most denialists, methinks he protests too much! I have no problem about him looking for RCT information about using cold for burns.

    But I do have an issue of wasting my time with such ridiculous people, who pay the Pantomine game of 'Yes it is', 'No it isn't', and have nothing other than this to say - other than equally ridiculous analogies.

    A burn is damaged tissue that will regenerate and repair. Paper, and meat, is dead tissue.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yes, Rob; but this is the problem with homeopathy denialists. They are prepared to deny our experience, just like a Pantomime dame.

    Homeopathy works, and works brilliantly.
    No it doesn't; where is your evidence?
    I know it works, it works for me.
    That evidence is no good; it is anecdotal. These personal experiences are lies, or just designed to trick.
    Well, give me the evidence, then, that homeopathy does not work.
    I can't do that because that is 'proving a negative'.

    Even when you present these people with the RCT evidence they say they want, they reject it for one reason or another.

    When you tell them that BigPharma drugs are based on RCT evidence, and is useless, they usually say nothing.

    All people like Maccspider do is to waste time - which is why I don't usually engage with them. People who read this blog, and the article that I have referred to in my blog, can now keep this information in their memory; and if they suffer burns they can use cold, as recommended by conventional medicine, or use heat, as recommended here. But heat only to a level that is bearable.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Still no evidence from you but you want me to prove a negative, which is impossible.
    If you make an assertion that a particular course of treatment works then you need to present evidence that it does; this you have failed to do. If I was burnt I would use methods which have been demonstrated to work through testing, not stories which have not been tested.
    Anecdotes are completely unreliable. I can happily gather many more anecdotes that completely contradict your assertions; if I do so will you admit that you are wrong?.
    What is your falsifiable hypothesis and what independent testing has there been of it.
    The facts are that heating a burn will increase the risk of tissue damage.
    Easily demonstrated: take a piece of paper and set fire to it. Put it out. Then hold it over a flame. Does it get better or does it deteriorate?
    Now do the same with a piece of meat.
    Why would the physics be different for a human being?
    At what stage do you stop? 1st, 2nd or 3rd degree burns?
    I am surprised that you posted these as your first post suggest that you don't usually (and others suggest that you don't allow their posts - anecdotes or evidence?) and your posts seem to consist of name calling rather than verifiable facts. I am quite happy to state that your assertions are stupid - your assertions, not you.

    I am not surprised that you haven't posted this - will you do so on the 5th attempt?

    Provide robust rct evidence and you'll be listened to, but your straw men do you and continued name calling do you no credit. Is this how you would convince people that you are a credible source of information?

    BTW. nowhere did I say that anecdotal evidence is lies or designed to trick - you made that up.

    I suppose that it is easier to misrepresent what I said instead of actually posting it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sorry, double post and copy error (operator error) - ignore the last one.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Homeopathy didn't work for me. There you go, undeniable proof (well as much as you have offered to the contrary)...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Cold water is applied to a burn to remove heat and prevent further damage to the tissues. HOW does applying heat to a burn help?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Using heat on burns and scalds will only make things worse. You're not even following your own precepts of minimal amounts, dilution, etc.

    The heat should be applied via a highly diluted potentised solution in *cold* water. The worse the burn, the higher the potentisation, obviously. You may also need quite a lot of it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Before we get too far down the ad hominem road, let's look at the real way to effectively provide first aid to burns. The Dutch Burns Foundation (I have no vested interest) sponsors scientific research on a large scale as well as providing care to burns victims. They have a lot of experience, especially since a major steel works is just down the road. I attended an evening class they gave at the local crèche on treating burns (especially for small children) and their advice sheet can be found (in English) here: http://www.brandwonden.nl/download/514

    Basically you can sum it up as: cool the burn (not the patient) with lukewarm running water for at least 10 minutes and call a doctor in the case of blisters, electrical or chemical burns.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dear Steve. I tried to add a comment but failed!

    I learnt about this aspect of Homeopathy - treat burns with heat - from the Introduction section of the Organon.

    The first time I used was when I burnt my finger on a piece of charcoal while making cooking a BBQ. I got the charcoal really hot and held my burnt finger as near as poss to the heat. Afterwards the finger settled quickly - no burning and healed fast.

    Another time my niece was frying aubergines. Those who have fried aubergines may know that it is very prone to spitting the hot oil. Well she got a bit of hot oil on her left forearm and immediately went to put it under cold water. I told her that the best treatment was with hot water. So we started with tepid and gradually reduced the cold until she could no longer bear the pain of hot water and then the forearm was withdrawn. After a few minutes she said that it was not burning any more.

    After about 3-4 days she came to me and said look uncle - my arm is almost completely healed - but look at the marks still from a similar spit on my right arm which happened 2 weeks before!

    QED!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thanks for these comments, Soroush, I don't know why it is always homeopaths, and homeopathy supporters who have difficulty writing to these blog sites (it skews the 'debate' unfortunately) - but I have published your comments above. Especially thanks for the examples you provide - obviously unacceptable to those who demand RCTs - but interesting for anyone who is looking for new methods of treating burns as a 'first aid' response. As you will be aware, after the initial first aid response, there are a number of homeopathic remedies that work well to help the tissue repair itself.

    Many of the comments posted here shows an fixed reliance on conventional wisdom. Reducing the temperature of the burnt skin is clearly necessary. The difference between the 'cold' and 'hot' camps is the speed with which this is done. Cold is rapid. Hot is slower, more gentle. And from my experience is less likely to cause blistering.

    My main personal experience is with sunburn. I love the sun, and being in it; and often 'overdo' it. A cold shower leaves me shivering, almost in a shock condition. A hot shower works far better - and my skin recovers more quickly. Anecdotal? Yep! But my personal experience is not going to be changed by any number of RCTs - if they existed, either way!

    Finally, thanks for reminding me that the use of heat rather than cold appears in the Organon. I had quite forgotten, but have now found the passage you refer to. I will publish it as a separate comment

    ReplyDelete
  18. The Organon, Samuel Hahnemann, Introduction
    Thus we find in these examples of successful domestic practice, that it is not the prolonged application of the degree of cold in which the limb was frozen that restores it isopathically (it would thereby be rendered quite lifeless and dead), but a degree of cold that only approximates to that (homoeopathy), and which gradually rises to a comfortable temperature, as frozen sour crout laid upon the frost-bitten hand in the temperature of the room soon melts, gradually growing warmer from 32 or 33 (Fahr.) to the temperature of the room, supposing that to be only 55, and thus the limb is recovered by physical homoeopathy.

        In like manner, a hand scalded with boiling water would not be cured isopathically by the application of boiling water, but only by a somewhat lower temperature, as, for, example, by holding it in a vessel containing a fluid heated to 160, which becomes every minute less hot, and finally descends to the temperature of the room, whereupon the scalded part is restored by homoeopathy. Water in the act of freezing cannot draw cut the frost isopathically from potatoes and apples, but this is effected by water only near the freezing-point.

        So, to give another example from physical action, the injury resulting from a blow on the forehead with a hard substance (a painful lump) is soon diminished in pain and swelling by pressing on the spot for a considerable time with the ball of the thumb, strongly at first, and then gradually  less forcibly, homoeopathically, but not by an equally hard blow with an  equally hard body, which would increase the evil isopathically.

        The examples of cures by isopathy given alluded to muscular contractions in human beings and spinal paralysis in a dog, which had been caused by a chill, being rapidly cured by cold bathing.  These events are falsely explained by isopathy. What are called sufferings from a chill are only nominally connected with cold, and often arise, in the bodies of those predisposed to them, even from a draught of wind which was not at all cold. Moreover, the manifold effects of a cold bath on the living organism, in health and disease, cannot be reduced to such a simple formula as to warrant the construction of a system of such pretentions!

       The experienced cook holds his hand, which he has scalded, at a  certain distance from the fire, and does not heed the increase of pain  that takes place at first, as he knows from experience that he can thereby  in a very short time, often in a few minutes, convert the burnt part into  healthy painless skin.(33)

 

    (33) So also Fernelius (Therap., lib. vi, , cap.20) considers that the best remedy for a burnt part is to bring it near the fire, whereby the  pain is removed. John Hunter (On the blood, Inflammation, etc., p.218) mentions the great injury that results from treating burns with cold water, and gives a decided preference to approaching them to the fire, guided in this, not by the traditional medical doctrines which (contraria contrariis) prescribe cooling things for inflammation, but by experience, which teaches that the application of a similar heat (similia similibus) is the most salutary

    ReplyDelete
  19. These remarks from Lisa Chalme - for which many thanks.

    Dear Steve,
    It was an early part of my 4 year training that as like cures like, you would put hot water on a burn rather than cold. Even homeopathic students question ideas (!) and when I did burn myself cooking, I decided to try it. It worked.

    My entire family have done this since then, always successfully. Naturally, there are homeopathic remedies that can be turned to if needed, but this has rarely been necessary.

    I do wonder how much training you need to be a skeptic/denialist. After all, every toddler soon learns to say No, and they also spend most evenings in their bedrooms.
    Lisa

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.