Where western medicine (allopathic medicine) fails, an increasing number of cancer patients are turning to alternative therapies to fill the gap. Research on the effectiveness of these therapies lags behind conventional treatments, yet many of us in medicine have heard anecdotal stories of good results. Until we know more, we are often reduced to asking the questions: "Is it safe?" and "Will it interfere with conventional cancer treatments?"
A recent Cochrane Review addresses these concerns – at least with that form of alternative medicine termed homeopathy. Homeopathic medicine is based on the theory that “like cures like,” and uses small amounts of substances that in larger amounts would cause a disease. It differs from “herbal therapies” in that a very dilute solution of ingredients is used.
The review didn’t really offer any conclusions on whether homeopathy works, but it did answer these questions that many oncologists consider. Homeopathic remedies did not seem to have any severe side effects, and most importantly, did not appear to interfere with conventional cancer treatments.
The review did suggest that 2 particular remedies may ease a few side-effects of treatment including mouth sores during chemotherapy and skin problems during radiation therapy, but more research needs to be done.
Talk to your doctor about alternative therapies that may benefit you, and check out:
Alternative Treatments for Lung Cancer – What Really Works?
Photo: IStockPhoto.com
Source:
Kassab, S. et al. Homeopathic medicines for adverse effects of cancer treatments. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004845. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004845.pub2.
good to hear that homoeopathy is undergoing thru such trials.
Bit of a misleading headline. Using homeopathy to treat the side effects of cancer treament is not using it for cancer treatment, as the headline implies.
Also a good instance of moving the goalposts:
To quote the report: “This review looked at whether these medicines could help patients with problems caused by cancer treatments,” but finding no effect in four trials, potential bias in two and some effect in another two (overall not an overwhelming tick for homeopathy) the article seeks to spin it into a trial looking at the side-effects of homeopathy on conventional treatments! It was, of course, never meant for this, as the effect of taking a water-based treatment with no active ingredient would be much like drinking a glass of water whilst on chemo – no effect. I could have told you that and I suspect you could have also.
philsgotblues – Good point. This study does address homeopathic medications used to aleviate side effects of cancer treatment, and not used for cancer treatment itself. On trial here is not whether homeopathy works, or even if it is a waste of money. It only seeks to ask if homeopathic treatments are safe, and if they would hinder conventional treatments and make them less effective. That said, for a disease that has an overall survival of only 15%, those of us practicing traditional western (allopathic medicine) should probably not be the first to throw a stone.
It’s worth noting that the two homeopathic treatments that were found to have an effect were not what the lay observer might consider to be homeopathic. They weren’t very dilute and contained ingredients that might have been expected to work by conventional means.
If this study achieves anything, I hope it is to draw peoples attention to the fact that not all ‘homeopathic’ medicines are diluted to the point that conventional science is confident that they are safe. Let the buyer beware!
This ‘review’ was very misleading and a waste of time, it definitely does not prove that homeopathy is useful for anything:
http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=519
Notice how the article I just linked to made an accurate headline.
lungcancer – thanks for the comment. I think the second point I was trying to make, albeit in a bit of a kackhanded sort of way was that the review was on trials of ‘homeopathic’ solutions and whether they could mitigate the side effects of conventional cancer treatments. Having not really found any effect at all they took the next best thing. It’s like the conversation went like this:
Person A: “So how’d it go?”
Person B: “Not good, 6 negative or biased and the two showing positive effects aren’t diluted so they’re not covered under homeopathy.”
Person A: “Oh, bugger. Is there anything positive out of this trial?”
Person B: “Well we didn’t kill anybody.”
Person A: “Excellent, there’s our headline.”
Actually sorry, that’s probably an even more kackhanded way of explaining. I’m going to bed.
Homeopathic medicne Carcinocin Lung 30 of Selene Homoepathic Pharmacy New Zealand and Carc. Squamous Pulmonary 30c of Nelson Homeopathic Pharmacy England is very effective in treating the lung cancers.Other medicnes may also be considered and it can be continued with the conventional treatment
Homeopathy is so wonder medicine improved gress root booting immunity power and incresed oxygen higher in blood. Homeopathy medicine carbo veg 30, carcinocin 200and antim crud wonder drug in my 25 years of prectised.