Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Homeopathic Remedies Recalled For Containing Real Medicine

Posted by timothy on from the fake-fake-vs-real-fake dept.

ananyo (2519492) writes "The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recalled homeopathic remedies made by a company called Terra-Medica because they may contain actual medicine — possibly penicillin or derivatives of the antibiotic." Diluted enough times with pure water, though, maybe these traces would be even more powerful.

173 comments

  1. Sarcasm by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think many people are going to miss the sarcasm in the summary.

    1. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, it's not sarcasm! It's the gospel truth in how it works!
      FREE XENU!

    2. Re:Sarcasm by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I though the idea of homeopathic water was to dilute the percieved cause* of the ailment. Should diluting a helpful ingredient be considered harmful then?

      *) for very, VERY loose definitions of "cause".

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    3. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that the sarcasm gets it wrong. The idea of homeopathy (as its name indicates) is to cause the body to fight against the effects of the diluted substances. So diluted penicillin would make the body fight antibiotics rather than bacterial infections.

      If you believe in homeopathy, traces of antibiotics are a really bad idea to have in homeopathic medication. And if you don't believe in homeopathy, there is no point in buying the medication in the first place.

      So yes, it makes complete sense to withdraw the medication that is contaminated with penicilline. Depending on the dosage, it can actually be dangerous or counterproductive to people with penicilline allergies. But even if we are talking about homeopathic traces, you don't want them in there if homeopathy is supposed to make sense.

    4. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      > And if you don't believe in homeopathy, there is no point in buying the medication in the first place.

      So homeopathy is one of those things that requires faith to work? Very scientific indeed.

    5. Re:Sarcasm by cyborg_zx · · Score: 1

      I don't think the people selling this believed in homeopathy somehow.

    6. Re:Sarcasm by Mjlner · · Score: 1

      I though the idea of homeopathic water was to dilute the percieved cause* of the ailment. Should diluting a helpful ingredient be considered harmful then?

      Quite so, which is why diluted vitamin C will eventually kill you.

      --
      Lemon curry???
    7. Re:Sarcasm by MiniMike · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Depending on the dosage, it can actually be dangerous or counterproductive to people with penicilline allergies.

      I'm allergic to Penicillin (and similar *cillins), and to idiocy, so this 'remedy' would be doubly dangerous for me.

    8. Re:Sarcasm by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Within the insane homeopathic industry, that's correct. However, penicillin isn't always a helpful ingredient to everyone. Some are deathly allergic. So for those people it would "help" according to people who lack any cognitive function measurable by modern science.

      Also relevant:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    9. Re:Sarcasm by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Wait, Homeopathy is like vaccination???? Does it cause Autism?

    10. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you believe in homeopathy, traces of antibiotics are a really bad idea

      Traces of antibodies are a really bad idea, period. Exposing bacteria to something that doesn't kill them teaches them to become resistant.

    11. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you believe in homeopathy"

      So it's make-belief, not science.

      Move along, nothing to see here.

    12. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "idea" of homeopathy, insofar as there's any thought involved at all, is to con as much money out of idiots as possible by selling water and/or sugar. There's certainly no concept of the body fighting anything at all, whether the treatment or the original cause of illness.

      The original theory (long since discredited) was that any symptom in the body could only have one cause. Therefore, by poisoning you with something else that caused that symptom, the original cause must go away. Or something like that. Since poisoning people is bad, you dilute the "cure" as much as possible so that it doesn't actually do anything, but still manages to make your actual illness disappear. You can verify that more dilution increases potency quite easily: people who are poisoned with very little of a substance live longer than people who are poisoned with a lot of it, and so (relatively speaking) the dilute substance has a stronger curative effect.

      It really is that stupid. However, in a time when most medicine was actively poisonous without any actual benefits, something that was diluted to the point of uselessness (while still not having any actual benefits) was a distinct improvement.

    13. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not supposed to require faith to work, but it does require you acquirer and ingest the "remedy" to work. The probability that someone will choose to take a homeopathic remedy if they don't think it will work should be low as no real doctor will prescribe one.

    14. Re:Sarcasm by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you believe in homeopathy, traces of antibiotics are a really bad idea

      Traces of antibodies are a really bad idea, period. Exposing bacteria to something that doesn't kill them teaches them to become resistant.

      This stuff isn't at a high enough concentration to alter the population dynamics of any bacteria in the gut (the most likely target, there should be few bacteria anywhere else but on the skin). But the concern it the dosage would be high enough to trigger an anaphylactoid response as that system comes with a nice group of biological amplifiers as standard equipment.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    15. Re:Sarcasm by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

      Wait, Homeopathy is like vaccination????

      Yep.

      For a long time allergists and allergy desensitization treatments were disparaged by much of the medical community because of the procredure's similarity to Homeopathic treatments and theory.

      Does it cause Autism?

      Nope.

      Neither, apparently, does vaccination. If I recall correctly: The research claiming to show that was sponsored by trial lawyers, many attempts were made to replicate it but they all failed, the journal which published it (and, eventually, even the doctor who performed it) withdrew it. Vaccines have some risks and downsides, both from the active ingredients and the preservatives, but apparently autism is not one of them.

      Of course, after all the publicity, there are plenty of people who still believe in a vaccine/autism connection. Just as there are still people who believe in autointoxication and that a lack of "regular" daily bowel movements sickens people - a theory that was heavily pushed by the US government during WW I, when it was covering up the spreading of the influenza epidemic by its refusal to "hamper the war effort" by minimizing movement of infected troops among US bases at home.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    16. Re: Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And... whoosh fulfillment fulfilled.

    17. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The research claiming to show that was sponsored by trial lawyers, many attempts were made to replicate it but they all failed,

      Worse than that, it was shown that Wakefield (the fraud who did the bogus study) selected the children in the study because they were already showing the symptoms he was looking to blame on vaccination, then gave them vaccines, blamed their symptoms on the vaccines, and gave them painful, unnecessary tests to "prove" how harmful the vaccination was. This was all so that he could (after being paid to do so) discredit vaccines in order to promote a snake-oil "alternative" immunization method, which was also shown to be completely useless. And of course, blind to the irony, the anti-vaccine movement quite often claims vaccines are there only because the doctors are being paid off, and you should "follow the money" to see proof. (which they never actually do...)

      the journal which published it (and, eventually, even the doctor who performed it) withdrew it.

      Well, the journal withdrew it, yes. Wakefield didn't though, instead he himself was withdrawn, and had his medical license taken away as a result of his unethical behavior.

    18. Re:Sarcasm by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Should diluting a helpful ingredient be considered harmful then?

      "Helpful" is not necessarily true. It's possible to have a life-threatening allergy to penicillin.

      Additionally, all antibiotics intended for human medical use are legally available only with a prescription in the US.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    19. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you believe in homeopathy, traces of antibiotics are a really bad idea

      Traces of antibodies are a really bad idea, period. Exposing bacteria to something that doesn't kill them teaches them to become resistant.

      So you are saying that bacteria are gullible enough to believe in homeopathy.

    20. Re:Sarcasm by cusco · · Score: 3, Informative

      While at the same time you can go down to the feed store and buy the very same antibiotics, nominally for animal use, by the liter.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    21. Re:Sarcasm by jythie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they are not marketed for human consumption nor do they claim to contain no antibiotics.

    22. Re:Sarcasm by meerling · · Score: 1

      It takes gullibility to work. Well, actually that's required to buy into the scam, but there never has been a shortage of that in ignorant populations.

    23. Re:Sarcasm by meerling · · Score: 2

      They believe in the money. It doesn't matter how gullible and ignorant the buyer is, the money is still money and works just the same. Unlike homeopathy, which doesn't work at all.

    24. Re:Sarcasm by rainmouse · · Score: 2

      > And if you don't believe in homeopathy, there is no point in buying the medication in the first place.

      So homeopathy is one of those things that requires faith to work? Very scientific indeed.

      So, could I in theory make a homoeopathic bomb. As it becomes more powerful the more it's diluted, eventually I could just rid the world of stupid people.

    25. Re:Sarcasm by ClickOnThis · · Score: 3, Informative

      I though the idea of homeopathic water was to dilute the percieved cause* of the ailment. Should diluting a helpful ingredient be considered harmful then?

      Quite so, which is why diluted vitamin C will eventually kill you.

      Only if it's diluted in enough water to drown you.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    26. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Homeopathic logic says that taking penicillin in a homeopathic manner should cure those people of their allergic reaction to penicillin.

    27. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hence Homeopathy

      https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/homoe-#English
      https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-pathy

      Literally, same suffering.

    28. Re:Sarcasm by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they are not marketed for human consumption nor do they claim to contain no antibiotics.

      I would not expect any animal antibiotics I buy to have a claim that they contain no antibiotics. That would defeat the purpose of animal antibiotics, wouldn't it?

    29. Re:Sarcasm by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      Or taken over a sufficiently long period of time, say 110-120 years.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    30. Re:Sarcasm by jythie · · Score: 2

      That it would, but then again homeopathic remedies kinda defeat the purpose of remedies.

    31. Re:Sarcasm by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Only if you believe in it.

      Though I'm not sure which causes which.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    32. Re:Sarcasm by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      This stuff isn't at a high enough concentration to alter the population dynamics of any bacteria in the gut (the most likely target, there should be few bacteria anywhere else but on the skin). But the concern it the dosage would be high enough to trigger an anaphylactoid response as that system comes with a nice group of biological amplifiers as standard equipment.

      Homeopathic concentrations are so dilute that the odds are you won't get a *single molecule* of whatever the active ingredient was supposed to be. That's why homeopathy is regarded as quackery by anybody with an understanding of high-school chemistry.

    33. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Citation needed on your claim that smell is magic.

    34. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet when it amounts to contamination, and not an active ingredient, that kind of goes out the window depending on what stage the contamination happens. And that assumes they are doing a proper job in the first place. Or that they even intend to do a proper job, as I've seen things now that are advertised as homeopathic, but diluted to what amounts to 1-10% active ingredient. In that last case, it is like by failing at homeopathy they've made regular strength medicine (or poison or placebo still, depending on the active ingredient).

    35. Re:Sarcasm by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Except that the sarcasm gets it wrong. The idea of homeopathy (as its name indicates) is to cause the body to fight against the effects of the diluted substances.

      It just occurred to me that this is actually kind of how vaccines work. Of course a homeopath would likely just give you a shot of diluted live virulent Ebola (lots of fun if you get some active ingredient!)

      --
      I stole this Sig
    36. Re:Sarcasm by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      A toxin is bad for you. Therefore, less of the toxin is better for you. Even less of it is even better. Therefore by induction, diluting it down until it no longer exists should be amazingly good for you!

      But basically this theory came about at the time when medicine science was already very bad. Thus a bogus theory by a charlatan was not much different from the state of the art in medicine, and probably better for you than leeches or being treated by doctors who didn't wash their hands. The only odd thing really was that this one particular bogus idea survived out of the multitudes that vanished.

    37. Re:Sarcasm by Mr2cents · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course! Quantum effects!

      Every quack claims "quantum effects" for justifying their quackery these days. Nothing new. Me is not impressed.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    38. Re:Sarcasm by ultranova · · Score: 2

      Only if it's diluted in enough water to drown you.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    39. Re:Sarcasm by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      in a controlled test the probability can be quite high even if the subject doesn't know what he is taking. ....but it becomes harder for the doctor performing the medical study to remember which one was the medicine and which one was the placebo since both contain the same amount (pretty much none) of the "active ingredient). brilliant.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    40. Re:Sarcasm by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      If you were a slashdot reader, you wouldn't ask for a cite! lol

    41. Re: Sarcasm by astar · · Score: 1

      Placebo work very nicely even when you tell the patient it is a sugar pill and mark the pill bottle as placebo. Further it is likely to better than perscription drugs for many values of better. The is well tested in reasonable studies but for some reason there is not a lot of money for big studies Watch out for the Whoosh there. This is all nice scientism except there is not a nice reductionist explanation.

      Here is a fun one to inflame all. When I had a nice little chronic pain opiate addiction I notice some claims about acupuncture and an actual cite. The cite supported the claim. But it turned out that one of the controls was sticking needles in randomly instead of doing it correctly. Correct was a bit better than opiates. Random was twice as good. Smallish sample size. Never repeated as best I know.

      The problem with the story is two fold:

      no labeling
      overusing antibiotics but in the US we lost that battle a long while ago and we will be lucky to have any left that work relatively soon. So this company might be doing a big potential plus.

    42. Re:Sarcasm by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I'm not a "quack" or justifying "quackery," I'm pointing to a possible physical mechanism to support marginal effects where the quacks claim significant effects, and the self-appointed anti-quacks have claimed that there is no possible physical mechanism.

      Flat-earth thinking is more of a danger than misguided nutritional supplements. The history of science should make that obvious.

      And getting called a "quack" by a guy with a LaVey quote as a sig is really funny.

    43. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pointing to a possible physical mechanism to support marginal effects where the quacks claim significant effects, and the self-appointed anti-quacks have claimed that there is no possible physical mechanism.

      Yet you do so by misremembering research, which undermines your entire point while giving you a false sense of confidence that is likely to attract the ire of others. Quantum effects have been argued for in smelling (although there is still some open debate about it) that involves close proximity of molecules being smelled or other effects that are not about detecting really faint smells but by using receptors to pick up on a wide variety of different molecules. None of this is applicable to a case where a dose of water contains no molecules of a substance, so there would be no proximity to that substance at all, nor any memory effect in water that can be accounted for by quantum mechanics even if ignoring any debate about what is biologically possible.

      You seem to brush off someone else asking for a citation, which is really just a polite way of saying, "I think you've misread or misremembered something (or are just flat out wrong), but in case I am wrong, provide something more specific." Without any citations or actual clarification, you continue to look like someone making a quack claim, both to the people completely unaware of what you are trying to reference, and those actually familiar with what you are incorrectly referencing.

    44. Re:Sarcasm by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You obviously didn't read the study, or didn't understand it.

      If the study I mentioned, but didn't cite, sounds kinda-like a different study you heard about, but is different in key ways that you point out... then you probably are thinking of a different study! Derrrrr! But you shouldn't need a study to understand that INFORMATION can be transmitted without a molecule being transferred, and that if there is information flow, then you can't just wave your hand and say there "can't" be an effect because no molecules were transferred. There are lots of ways to cause changes in the human body without transferring molecules.

      Go get a clue. You think that identifying a possible physical mechanism for an effect means you're supporting people who claim there is some effect, even though those people claim specific mechanisms that are debunked. That is "us and them" idiocy.

      If there is a physical mechanism or not is an entirely NEUTRAL question of basic science. It does NOT support or oppose proponents or detractors of clinically dis-proven methods of treatment. In fact the only people it makes a difference to are the people who attack "quackery" with quack-science and wrong guesses about what is or isn't physically possible.

    45. Re:Sarcasm by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      At least they don't think astrology is a science.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    46. Re:Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For those of us that have no seen the study you mention or the other AC mention, citing it would make things a lot easier. Because just googling for the topic brings up what the other AC seems to be referring to, and it does make it look like you were misremembering things instead of referring to another study. And while there are methods of transferring information without transferring molecules, that doesn't mean they are necessarily applicable to biological systems. Considering I work on table top quantum mechanics experiments, it is not a lack of understanding on what quantum mechanics is capable of, but it is possible that I am missing something in recent biology research that I don't keep up with very much. That said, there are some common patterns of how people seem to screw up quoting or invoking quantum mechanics, and just vague hand waving that research exists doesn't distinguish one from that...

    47. Re:Sarcasm by plover · · Score: 1

      Lots of oddball "medicinal" practices have survived, not just homeopathy. For every disproving study of a nonsensical 'healing' practice, there is a quack profiting from it, and they don't want to lose their revenue stream. They scream loudly, they claim "persecution by the establishment", they hide behind tax havens or religious shelters, and they gather their flock.

      I think it's kind of interesting how many of these insane ramblings have survived and are still practiced today.

      --
      John
  2. Homeopothy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even though it's been diluted to the point where just about every single molecule has been replaced, it can somehow remember all the good stuff it used to contain.

    And yet, for some strange reason, it doesn't remember the fact that it used to contain bovine fecal matter and all sorts of other bad stuff.

    That's the bit I find curious, although maybe that's where the bovine fecal matter shines through :-)

    1. Re:Homeopothy ... by cyborg_zx · · Score: 1

      And yet, for some strange reason, it doesn't remember the fact that it used to contain bovine fecal matter and all sorts of other bad stuff.

      Only works when done in a pseudo-sciency way by a homeopathic practitioner - of course.

    2. Re:Homeopothy ... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Even though it's been diluted to the point where just about every single molecule has been replaced, it can somehow remember all the good stuff it used to contain.

      And yet, for some strange reason, it doesn't remember the fact that it used to contain bovine fecal matter and all sorts of other bad stuff.

      That's the bit I find curious, although maybe that's where the bovine fecal matter shines through :-)

      Fish urine.

    3. Re:Homeopothy ... by MiniMike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And yet, for some strange reason, it doesn't remember the fact that it used to contain bovine fecal matter

      This condition is transferred to the homeopathic practitioner.

      I've met a few, and the transfer is very effective.

    4. Re:Homeopothy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Water? I never drink the stuff. Fish fuck in it!

      -W.C. Fields

    5. Re:Homeopothy ... by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How come the homeopathic practitioners don't just row out into the sea and throw their goose livers in there? They could cure all diseases overnight. They must be mean capitalists if they're not doing things like that.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:Homeopothy ... by qazsedcft · · Score: 4, Funny

      And it's been drunk by at least one dinosaur too.

    7. Re:Homeopothy ... by cyborg_zx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How come the homeopathic practitioners don't just row out into the sea and throw their goose livers in there? They could cure all diseases overnight. They must be mean capitalists if they're not doing things like that.

      Where's the little glass bottles? Where's the shaking? Where's the successive titrations? You're not applying the true principles here, just a ludicrous caricature! That's why what you propse won't work. Not because it's a fundamentally incorrect Victorian era disease hypothesis.

    8. Re:Homeopothy ... by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 1

      I get a strong sense of the bovine fecal matter just from reading the texts on the packaging. That stuff is quite potent!

    9. Re:Homeopothy ... by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      For those who don't know, that comment is a direct lift from the lyrics of Tim Minchin's Storm. Listen at 6:05 to 6:15.

    10. Re:Homeopothy ... by nblender · · Score: 1

      So what happens if you make a 30x dilution of bull feces and administer it to someone who believes in Homeopathy?

    11. Re:Homeopothy ... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 2

      How come the homeopathic practitioners don't just row out into the sea and throw their goose livers in there? They could cure all diseases overnight. They must be mean capitalists if they're not doing things like that.

      Simple reason. It won't be diluted enough and thus not very potent. I mean you can't get that 1 part in 1.0x10^200 dilution by dumping a goose liver, and even if you could how would you manage to do that magic shake on an ocean full of water at once. Probably at best they could only manage a 1 part in 1.0x10^20 to 1 part in 1.0x10^30, which wouldn't be any where near strong enough, using that method.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    12. Re:Homeopothy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well you can pre-dilute it :/

    13. Re: Homeopothy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not a direct lift, more of a memory. But, yes, Storm was a brilliant beat poem by Tim, well worth watching.

    14. Re:Homeopothy ... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, homeopathy is not just about dluting the substances. You must also shake or strike the mixture after every dilution, so that water retains the vibrations of the original substance.

    15. Re:Homeopothy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the sake of argument, perhaps water transitions to water vapor it loses its "memory", so freshly precipitated water molecules have no "memory" of anything it has previously been in contact with.

    16. Re:Homeopothy ... by rosencreuz · · Score: 1

      You are missing the fundamental point of homeopathy: it provides personal solutions to personal problems. Therefore it cannot be scientific and you cannot apply same solution to everyone. Homeopathy doesn't have repeatable solutions, i.e. if a solution works for someone for some problem, it doesn't mean it will work for everyone (or even for the same person later again). Therefore you cannot apply scientific logic on it. You have to accept it will work on you, because otherwise it will not. So your idea about curing everyone altogether doesn't make any sense.

    17. Re:Homeopothy ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That seems to assume that water molecules last for ever. Do they? I'd have thought not.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. +5 Funny for TFS by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

    The subject line quite literally had me laughing out loud.
    Without doubt the funniest thing I've encountered this week, perhaps even this month.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:+5 Funny for TFS by Maria_Celeste · · Score: 5, Funny

      Agree. Sometimes the glass is 1/2^1,000,000 full.

      --
      The world is a stage, but the play is badly cast.
    2. Re:+5 Funny for TFS by hubie · · Score: 1

      It made me laugh out loud as well.

    3. Re:+5 Funny for TFS by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      As usual, the best jokes write themselves.

  4. News for Nerds? by Bigbutt · · Score: 1, Troll

    I'm not sure that the FDA recalling a Homeopathic "remedy" that claims to hold no antibiotics which actually does due to the manufacturing process, and could kill people who are allergic to penicillin is really a technical article that "nerds" would be all that interested in.

    Well other than the numerous chuckles at 'homeopathy' :shrug:

    [John]

    --
    Shit better not happen!
    1. Re:News for Nerds? by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      If it grew penicillin, I guess the water wasn't pure enough... ;)

    2. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure that the FDA recalling a Homeopathic "remedy" that claims to hold no antibiotics which actually does due to the manufacturing process, and could kill people who are allergic to penicillin is really a technical article that "nerds" would be all that interested in.

      Killing off people who believes in Homeopathy might not be that big of a deal.
      The big problem here is that they introduce a non-effective amount of antibiotics on a semi-large scale to a large flora of diseases.
      This is essentially a training camp for widespread antibiotic-resistance.

    3. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yah, because there are no nerds in organic chemistry, pharmacology, medicine, manufacturing, or qa..

      Go be old and crotchety some place else. Your narrow world view isn't needed any longer.

    4. Re:News for Nerds? by Sentrion · · Score: 1

      The big problem here is that they introduce a non-effective amount of antibiotics on a semi-large scale to a large flora of diseases.
      This is essentially a training camp for widespread antibiotic-resistance.

      You mean like what happens at industrial CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations)? Ground water near such a facility could likely have all sorts of traces of such antibiotics, and could easily find its way into products made with that water.

      Closer to densely populated cities, products made with ground water or reservoir water can have traces of all sorts of potent drugs, some with very long half lifes. Most unused medicine ends up in local landfills, and the rest tends to end up in waste water treatment plants that are not designed to monitor, filter or break down these complex chemical structures.

    5. Re:News for Nerds? by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      Well shit. Then this is a news for everyone on the planet. I expect everyone is nerdish about some things. How about an article on the proper methods of making moonshine.

      Dumbass.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    6. Re:News for Nerds? by cusco · · Score: 1

      I'd be interested in that article.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    7. Re:News for Nerds? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you have an article like that, please share it, I'm sure a lot of people here would find it very interesting.

      --
      Is 1563649 a prime number?
    8. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol powwwwwww. popcorn would be mad if u told everyone about his moonshine recipe.

  5. it's all fake by swschrad · · Score: 1

    this comment has been diluted 100,000 times to be politically correct.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  6. That's okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Diluted humor is funnier to those who actually get it.

    1. Re:That's okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Humoropathic remedies?

    2. Re:That's okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Whoosh fulfillment.

  7. First Post! Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    At least it would have been if all of the other posts before this one had been diluted enough.

  8. Tap Water by RichMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I believe "contains actual medicine" could be said of tap water.

    http://www.rsc.org/chemistrywo...

    1. Re:Tap Water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny thing is that there have been filters designed to take care of this for over 20 years - but nobody wants to pay for them.

      I remember reading about the new nano-filters back around '83 or '84 developed in Europe, possibly France, as it's been a while since I read the article in Scientific American.

      Funnier thing is that if they'd started to pay for them, they'd have gotten less expensive to manufacture.

  9. Wonder if there was a freak out. . . by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Funny

    by those who were using this quack remedy?

    I can almost hear the screams of terror when the news was announced:

    "WHAT?! There's REAL medicine in this? Holy shit, that stuff will kill me!"

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Wonder if there was a freak out. . . by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Maybe we should #AskJenny about that?

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Wonder if there was a freak out. . . by Barsteward · · Score: 2

      its a bad day for her, they've just worked out autism starts developing in the womb

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    3. Re:Wonder if there was a freak out. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I misread the last line: "Holy shit, that stuff will heal me!"

    4. Re:Wonder if there was a freak out. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      next anti-vax argument: vaccines dont cause autism, but they activate it! if not for the vaccines, it never would've activated and my child would've never become autistic!

  10. Homeopathic principles by Kinthelt · · Score: 2

    Shouldn't sea water be considered a wonder drug in homeopathy, because everything eventually makes its way into the ocean and gets ultra-diluted.

    --

    "Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

    1. Re:Homeopathic principles by Mjlner · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't sea water be considered a wonder drug in homeopathy, because everything eventually makes its way into the ocean and gets ultra-diluted.

      Well, I hear that diluted sea water is a very effective cure against drowning.

      --
      Lemon curry???
    2. Re:Homeopathic principles by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Shouldn't sea water be considered a wonder drug in homeopathy, because everything eventually makes its way into the ocean and gets ultra-diluted.

      No. A homeopathic remedy is typically diluted by a factor of one hundred, one hundred times. So one liter of original substance would be diluted by 1e200. All the world's oceans contain about 1.35e9 cubic km, or 1.35e21 liters. So diluting with the ocean would be shy by 179 orders of magnitude.

    3. Re:Homeopathic principles by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 0

      A "factor of one hundred, one hundred times" is just a fancy way of saying "10,000"

      No, 0.01^100.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    4. Re:Homeopathic principles by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Actually, no, you're diluting the substance by a factor of 100, then diluting the result by another factor of 100, and so on, 100 times. That's 100^100, or 1e200.

    5. Re:Homeopathic principles by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Those that get diluted get repeatedly diluted by a factor of TEN not HUNDRED.

      Both Wikipedia and The Society of Homeopaths state that the standard "C-scale" is based on dilutions of one hundred.

      And this is NOT repeated 100 times, the maximum AFAIK is 23.

      Nope. Some remedies go up to 200C which is 100^200 or 1e400. For instance the anti-flu drug Oscillococcinum uses a dilution of 200C.

    6. Re:Homeopathic principles by Ioldanach · · Score: 1

      That is wrong.

      First off all plenty of homeopathic medicals are not diluted at all.

      If they aren't diluted, they aren't homeopathic. Holistic, maybe.

      Those that get diluted get repeatedly diluted by a factor of TEN not HUNDRED.

      And this is NOT repeated 100 times, the maximum AFAIK is 23.

      Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate.

    7. Re:Homeopathic principles by arth1 · · Score: 1

      That is wrong.

      First off all plenty of homeopathic medicals are not diluted at all.

      Those that get diluted get repeatedly diluted by a factor of TEN not HUNDRED.

      Please, no-one mod the parent up, because this is disinformation or ignorance.

      There are two scales used in homeopathy. The traditional C scale is 1:100 per dilution and the X or D scale is 1:10 per dilution. Both are in use.

      And this is NOT repeated 100 times, the maximum AFAIK is 23.

      Samuel Hahnemann, who invented homeopathy, typically recommended 30 C dilutions. That's equivalent to 60 D.
      A fairly common homeopathic remedy is 200 C (or 400 D).

    8. Re:Homeopathic principles by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      the maximum AFAIK is 23

      That's six molecule per 18 grams of water.

    9. Re:Homeopathic principles by arth1 · · Score: 1

      That's six molecule per 18 grams of water.

      Less, because the homeopath does not start with a 100% concentration, but a Mother Tincture.
      The MT is already strongly diluted - just like a glass of perfume isn't 100% rose leaves.

    10. Re:Homeopathic principles by CauseBy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pfft. Whatevs. You guys both missed the point which is that homeopaths "tap the bottle". That's how it works, with the tapping. Sheesh, you guys are ignorant.

    11. Re:Homeopathic principles by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Then either wikipedia is wrong or the american homeopaths do it wrong.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:Homeopathic principles by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      If they aren't diluted, they aren't homeopathic. Holistic, maybe.
      Why don't you simply google for homeopathic medicals and check yourself?
      Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate.
       Then it is not a "homeopathic" medical but nonsense.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    13. Re:Homeopathic principles by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Samuel Hahnemann, who invented homeopathy, typically recommended 30 C dilutions. That's equivalent to 60 D.

      That is wrong, too.
      He recommended to do not more than 30C.

      C dilutions are not really used anymore ... as everyone knows: they don't contain the original element anymore.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    14. Re:Homeopathic principles by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or both.

      Question: How can a homeopath do it right?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    15. Re:Homeopathic principles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct and that is why I only eat sea salt. I feel so much better now, it has changed my life.

    16. Re:Homeopathic principles by wagnerrp · · Score: 2

      Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate. Then it is not a "homeopathic" medical but nonsense.

      Wait... are you suggesting that some of this bullshit actually isn't complete nonsense?

    17. Re:Homeopathic principles by Ioldanach · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If they aren't diluted, they aren't homeopathic. Holistic, maybe.

      Why don't you simply google for homeopathic medicals and check yourself?

      I'm well aware of the theoretical basis of homeopathic medicine, but even so I already refreshed my memory with google and a few sites both supporting and debunking it. I even included a link to wikipedia in my original. If you want to dispute my claim, provide a citation and not a "google it yourself" response.

      Homeopathy is based on the idea that a substance that causes the symptoms in normal quantities cures the symptoms in smaller quantities. Hence the dilution.

      Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate.

      Then it is not a "homeopathic" medical but nonsense.

      Quite a lot of homeopathic products use the C dilutions, in surprisingly high numbers. Of course, there are also a number of products that use small numbers of X (1/10th) dilutions as well. The 3X-6X dilutions do result in a product that contains the active ingredient. Of course, if I started with a 1g sample of a drug, say, tacrolimus, and performed a 3X dilution on it, I'd end up with a 1mg product. This isn't homeopathy, because that is well with in the dose-response curve for that drug and the drug at that level produces a direct and specific response in line with its properties.

    18. Re:Homeopathic principles by jc42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oscillococcinum, one of the most common of these quack remedies, typically comes in 200C dilution. A C dilution is a 1/100th dilution, so 200C is 1/(100^200) dilution rate.

      Of course, there are also a number of products that use small numbers of X (1/10th) dilutions as well. The 3X-6X dilutions do result in a product that contains the active ingredient.

      Funny example: Recently a (real ;-) doctor recommended a particular plant extract to my wife, to treat a minor skin condition that caused major itching and reddening. She found it at Whole Foods, and I noticed that it was labelled as "homeopathic", with a 1X dilution. So it was actually 10% the active ingredient.

      It actually worked quite well; the problem disappeared in a few days and hasn't recurred. Checking online showed that it's one of many "natural" ingredients that can be sole OTC, as long as no specific medical claims are made.

      So we might ask why they labelled it "homeopathic" when it has such a high fraction of active ingredient. Our guess is "marketing": The company that packages it wants to sell to the not-insignificant fraction of the population that believes in homeopathic cures. The doctors probably just grin, knowing that it's meaningless, but also knowing that a good number of traditional "folk" remedies are actually useful, as long as the problem is minor and precisely-measured medicine isn't required.

      Actually, years ago I was diagnosed with chronic "dry skin" by a doctor, who recommended olive oil. He did explain that it really isn't a medicine at all; it just slows down evaporation and lets the skin retain more of the water it gets from deeper tissues. It worked well enough that he said real medication wasn't needed. I've used it off and on ever since, mostly in winter when indoor air is typically very dry, and it works quite well. I wonder if such plant oils are ever labelled "homeopathic", perhaps at a 0X "dilution factor". ;-)

      (That doctor also joked about it being a medicine he learned from his Italian grandmother.)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    19. Re:Homeopathic principles by cusco · · Score: 1

      We have hairless dogs, and their skin gets quite dry in winter. Their ears can even crack, and one of them has a notched ear from it. Most of the time baby oil is enough, but we have to reapply every few days. Olive oil will last for a week or two, but I have to put it on them and then take them for a long walk to let it penetrate fully or it gets rubbed off on the furniture and bed clothes. When we go on vacation we slather them with Udder Butter, a cream dairy farmers use on chapped cattle teats. Greasy as all hell, but lasts for a couple of weeks so our dog sitters don't have to worry about it.

      The dogs really like getting oiled up, it must feel good. Plus they like to lick the excess olive oil off each other.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    20. Re:Homeopathic principles by Ioldanach · · Score: 1

      So we might ask why they labelled it "homeopathic" when it has such a high fraction of active ingredient. Our guess is "marketing": The company that packages it wants to sell to the not-insignificant fraction of the population that believes in homeopathic cures. The doctors probably just grin, knowing that it's meaningless, but also knowing that a good number of traditional "folk" remedies are actually useful, as long as the problem is minor and precisely-measured medicine isn't required.

      A "medicine" marked "homeopathic" is technically regulated by the FDA, but isn't tested for safety or effectiveness.

    21. Re:Homeopathic principles by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      You know, if you want to go down that road we should examine the number of atoms in the universe (~1e80) and determine that a 1e200 solution needs to tap the multiverse for another 1e120 universes to dilute down to an effective mixture. See, physics just hasn't caught up to homeopathy yet, but the cure to all our ills is just a multiverse away!

    22. Re:Homeopathic principles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C dilutions are not really used anymore ... as everyone knows: they don't contain the original element anymore.

      According to homeopathic "theory" they don't need to. The water remembers!

    23. Re:Homeopathic principles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C dilutions are not really used anymore ... as everyone knows: they don't contain the original element anymore.

      Some modern homeopathic products and people say that is the intended point. When understanding of atoms and molecules improved to the point of realizing insane dilutions removed all molecules of the active ingredient, instead of lowering the dilution many doubled down and tried to argue it is based on some sort of water memory effect and that you want to remove all of the original molecules.

    24. Re:Homeopathic principles by arth1 · · Score: 1

      C dilutions are not really used anymore ... as everyone knows: they don't contain the original element anymore.

      This list makes a liar out of your claim. Note that most of the preparations do indeed use the C scale. In quite high max dilutions too. Rather more than what you have claimed.

      Perhaps your quack isn't a traditionalist.

    25. Re:Homeopathic principles by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should read up what a 'liar' is.
      Wow you found a list with ... how many ? ... homeopathic medicals? 30? My 'drug store' around the corner has a few hundred if not thousands.
      A few of those you listed use the C scale, however you seem to miss the fact that one C is equal to two D.
      However many on your wikipedia list indeed go up to C200, perhaps a cultural issue? I have never seen C tinctures applied in RL.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    26. Re:Homeopathic principles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By sheer coincidence.

      Let's say I drink far too much and, even after throwing up, I still feel terrible. So I have a big mug of vodka (homeopathically prepared at 6C dilution) and immediately feel much better.

      Basically, whenever water happens the "cure" homeopathy does a good job.

    27. Re:Homeopathic principles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      however you seem to miss the fact that one C is equal to two D.

      But you previously had no issue making a distinction before:

      C dilutions are not really used anymore

      I hope you are not too shocked by Hahnemann's LM scale...

      And if you are going to call someone out as being an isolated cultural case and wrong, maybe you should clarify where you are coming from in case it turns out you are from an isolated, different from every one else place. Considering I've seen the C scale, both in mild and extreme cases where I live in Scotland and where most of my family lives in South Africa, I don't see this as an issue specific to the USA.

  11. It's time to fix this by meustrus · · Score: 2

    It's about damn time something was done to fix this homeopathic mess. Read the Wikipedia article on Homeopathy for a moment. The thing that struck me about it is not the "diluting makes it stronger" part. Everybody knows that. What struck me is that "homeopathic remedies" are basically always prescription-only.

    Why do we allow non-prescription drugs to bypass FDA inspection because they are labelled "homeopathic"? I mean, truly homeopathic drugs should not be any cause for concern, but then they should also only be taken by prescription. What we have instead is a menagerie of sham drugs claiming to be "homeopathic" to avoid drug testing. Nothing 1x or 2x diluted should ever seriously be sold as "homeopathic".

    It's about damn time to get rid of the special treatment altogether. Slapping a "homeopathic" label on a drug must not be enough to excuse it from proper testing. I could understand it it was diluted 10x, but then that only applies to the "active ingredient". What we have here is a drug with an "inactive ingredient" that happens to be penicillin (whether it was intentionally added or not - and excuse me, but what part of diluting a homeopathic drug involves "fermentation"?).

    Alternative medicine is one thing, but it's something else if the producers themselves mix the product with real medicine because they think it is actually snake oil.

    --
    I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
    1. Re:It's time to fix this by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      Homeopathic remedies are not 'prescription', if by that you mean an approval from a licensed Medical Doctor, Doctor of Osteopathy, Doctor of Medical Dentistry or Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (and some other practitioners depending on the state*.

      Homeopathic remedies are approved by the FDA because some Congresscritter decided it was a good idea for the FDA to follow the manufacturing practices of these 'pharmacies'. And that is exactly what the FDA did. They found that the level of manufacturing quality was way substandard. So substandard that the 'clean' water that was used as a diluent was contaminated with enough fungi to produce a detectable level of penicillin.

      So, in this respect, the system worked. Primum non nocere (first, do no harm).

      * As always, US centric. YMMV.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:It's time to fix this by meustrus · · Score: 1

      By 'prescription', I mean approval by a homeopath. Obviously there is no licensing set up to ensure such people to be legitimate. I considered suggesting to set one up, but since homeopathy is not a science it's not really possible to do so practically.

      What I would like to see is for homeopathic remedies to require the statement "these claims have not been approved by the FDA" and prevent them from using "Drug Facts" labels that make them look legitimate. This would not affect "real" homeopathy as far as I can tell; practitioners ought to be trusting the person concocting their prescription, not the drug companies. It would only affect the shams. And it shouldn't preclude the FDA from following the manufacturing processes either.

      --
      I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
    3. Re:It's time to fix this by plover · · Score: 1

      The label should be more clear: "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING. this bottle contains nothing of value, and will not be effective at treating any disease or illness."

      --
      John
    4. Re:It's time to fix this by meustrus · · Score: 1

      That's not true. A placebo is absolutely mildly effective at treating a wide variety of diseases. It will even work if you don't believe homeopathy is any better than a placebo!

      --
      I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
    5. Re:It's time to fix this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Homeopathic remedies are approved by the FDA

      No, not really. Homeopathic remedies are regulated by the FDA, but the FDA does not evaluate their efficacy.

      http://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy

  12. Effective against... penicillin poisoning? by Mjlner · · Score: 2

    Diluted enough times with pure water, though, maybe these traces would be even more powerful.

    According to the homeopathic principle, its efficacy would be directed at ailments caused by penicillin.

    --
    Lemon curry???
    1. Re:Effective against... penicillin poisoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone that is allergic to penicillin and has problems with it's derivatives, I can see the concern especially if it is NOT listed on the label. Not a good thing to take something that's supposed to be "good for you" only to wind up in the hospital or morgue

  13. FDA, why not FTC too? by davidwr · · Score: 2

    They were recalled for saying "no antibiotics" on the package but having measurable amounts of them in the product.

    In my dream world, this should have been a joint effort by the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:FDA, why not FTC too? by mr_mischief · · Score: 2

      In your dream world you'd involve two huge government bureaucracies when one accomplished the recall without the other? I can see handing off from one to the other if they were still causing the problem and the first agency was unable to change the behavior. Maybe we should think a bit before pulling in all the coordination costs up front though when they may not be necessary.

    2. Re:FDA, why not FTC too? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Didn't people see that report about seven different agencies having a finger in the regulation of gas cans? When seven dofferent committees got done, the thing wouldn't fit in the gas can holder on vehicles, so people just threw it in back.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re:FDA, why not FTC too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      would the FDA be concerned about the mouldy bread in my cupboard?

    4. Re:FDA, why not FTC too? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      would the FDA be concerned about the mouldy bread in my cupboard?

      If you tried to sell it by stating it had medicinal properties, yes.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  14. Oblig. Mitchell and Webb video by ilsaloving · · Score: 4, Funny

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  15. A Relevant Quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An ancient quote from Opiate-Want Medici: "If you dilute me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine."

  16. Antibiotic Resistance Training program. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God no, are those idiots working to destroying antibiotic resistance with their idiotic disproven psuedoscience acting as a bacterial training program! That is scary in a "monkeys with nuclear handgrenades" sense.

    Oddly Appropriate for Subject Captcha: gallons

  17. Diluted? by jennatalia · · Score: 0

    For her pleasure?

  18. Re:Oblig. Mitchell and Webb video by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    everyone should watch it.

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  19. Life imitating art again... by jolyonr · · Score: 1

    http://www.newsbiscuit.com/201...

    --


    Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
  20. This happens all the time by capedgirardeau · · Score: 2

    This happens all the time, some quack alt "medicine" is recalled because it actually contains a known effective drug. Most often it is "herbal" dick pills that contain the active ingredient in traditional ED medications.

    Getting on the "Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts for U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA)" email list can be very entertaining:

    http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ContactFDA/StayInformed/GetEmailUpdates/default.htm

    --
    Wax on, wax off baby!
  21. Many pharmacies carry these by Sir+Holo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I got marked troll last time I said this, but it is true.

    Several of my local pharmacies have "homeopathic cures" sections.

    A pretty clear violation of ethics, I would think.

    1. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      My local pharmacist carries these as well. I know them fairly well and this is a source of endless entertainment on my part (I'm a 'classic' MD). They do it for money. Plain and simple.

      And, to be fair, the stuff is generally less dangerous than the stuff I prescribe which fails to work a distressingly high percentage of the time.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what? Some stores sell normal food along with food more full of poisons than actual nutrients - alcohol, trans fats, HFCS, etc. etc.

      Some "homeopathic cures" are good for you. Most do nothing. Some are bad. Hell, how many are selling stimulants and other crap to fight "cold virus"?? Cold FX and others?

      If people want to buy BS at a pharmacy, then it's their problem. Let them burn their cash.

    3. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it sounds fancier than 'Placebo' sections.

    4. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by Guppy · · Score: 1

      I know them fairly well and this is a source of endless entertainment on my part (I'm a 'classic' MD)

      Oh hey, it's nice to bump into a physician on Slashdot. I'm about to start my internship, ok if I add you to my friend list?

    5. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You can cure homeopathy?

    6. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      they also carry multivitamins and herbal supplements.

      and also cigarettes.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    7. Re:Many pharmacies carry these by plover · · Score: 1

      The problem is the air of legitimacy they get by being next to actual medicine. Now, if they labeled the aisle with a sign that reads "you must be this stupid to enter", at least I'd have some people to laugh at.

      --
      John
  22. Amusing - But Contamination is Contamination by careysub · · Score: 2

    The fact that an inert placebo product is being contaminated by some random active pharmaceutical is funny, true, but contamination is contamination. A consumer product is contaminated with something it is not supposed to have; and low levels of antibiotic are actively harmful, not helpful. Since a safe product is rendered measurably unsafe, it is good that this was caught. Drug manufacturers regularly demonstrate that without monitoring and regulation bad products will enter the marketplace.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    1. Re:Amusing - But Contamination is Contamination by VibratoryDavid · · Score: 1

      The fact that an inert placebo product is being contaminated by some random active pharmaceutical is funny, true, but contamination is contamination. A consumer product is contaminated with something it is not supposed to have; and low levels of antibiotic are actively harmful, not helpful. Since a safe product is rendered measurably unsafe, it is good that this was caught. Drug manufacturers regularly demonstrate that without monitoring and regulation bad products will enter the marketplace.

      Nice to meet you, Sir Buzzkillington the third

  23. clear that up a bit by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    I think the article is making a slight mistake here. Yes, idiots make dilluted homeopathic bullshit with like 1 molecule of snake venom maybe on average or whatever. But technically Zicam is classified as homeopathic and that's scientifically proven in multiple lab tests to stop a cold by preventing viruses from attaching to cell walls. It actually contains zinc and says it contains zinc too. So technically "homeopathic" doesn't necessarily mean it's that 14th century alchemist watered down magic bullshit, it just means it could be.

    1. Re:clear that up a bit by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      Stop a cold?

      how do you prove that it stopped a cold? do you have the same subject subjected to the cold with and without the zinc treatment?

      how would you even prove this? dose the nasal cavities with zinc then dose with virus and test the blood for traces of the virus?

      Link to any studies?

      i call bullshit.

      BTW i used that zicam crap once and lost taste for three days afterwards...

    2. Re:clear that up a bit by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      You obviously didn't take basic human biology in high school:
      The review updates a previous Cochrane Systematic Review, carried out in 1999, with data from several new trials. In total, data from 15 trials, involving 1,360 people, were included. According to the results, zinc syrup, lozenges or tablets taken within a day of the onset of cold symptoms reduce the severity and length of illness. At seven days, more of the patients who took zinc had cleared their symptoms compared to those who took placebos. Children who took zinc syrup or lozenges for five months or longer caught fewer colds and took less time off school. Zinc also reduced antibiotic use in children, which is important because overuse has implications for antibiotic resistance.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...

      Another famous study around 2003-ish proved that the average duration of a cold was reduced to around 3 days as opposed to 9 with a placebo.

    3. Re:clear that up a bit by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      zicam is not homeopathic and it dangerous, they label it as homeopathic to try to bypass safety regulations. Using zicam can permanently damage your sense of smell, and the best-case studies showed a possible 1 day shorter duration on colds

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  24. HOLY SHIT THAt'S FUCKED UP.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't really believe these "remedies" work, but as someone who is very allergic to penicillin, HOLY SHIT!

  25. No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...because sea water is actually 95% fish pee. And that's just gross.

  26. So now everybody trusts gov't? by Jmc23 · · Score: 0
    Not one person has read the article and wondered how the agency determined contamination? Oh wait, they just said it 'may' be contaminated.

    What would be funny is if the product was working so well that they decided it just 'had' to have real antibiotics in it!

    I constantly wonder why people think 'science' driven pharmaceuticals are such wonder drugs. With percentages above placebo dropping, the enormous costs, and the constant discovery of undesirable side-effects. FFS the drug commercials are already >50% side effect lists and the amount of commercials for class action lawsuits for side-effects almost outweigh the drugs!

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    1. Re:So now everybody trusts gov't? by Fishchip · · Score: 1

      Well, I would presume they tested some samples and found traces of penicillin. Now, based on those test results, do you think it'd be appropriate for them to publicly announce every bottle has traces of penicillin?

      It's the same with food recalls and why they ask you to return these products; if you bought, say, chicken strips that were subsequently recalled due to possibility of listeria contamination (which just happened here in Canada), are you 100% guaranteed to have a bag of chicken listeria? Of course not. But you're sure as fuck returning it.

  27. Homeopathic Innovation! by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

    I have invented a homeopathic work-around for the concerned.

    I have just discovered a way to dilute the diluted water itself! Placing the homeopathic pure water solution into a crystal goblet near a west facing window during the week prior to and/or following the summer solstice will dilute the water with pure sunlight!

    Soon one will notice that the water itself has been completely diluted and is filled with the radioactive echo of the quantum entangled liquid. Be warned: You must drink the entire cup of sunlight energy & air diluted liquid; Resist the urge to take a small sip or else the dosage dilution in your body will be so powerful you may overdose on the potent hot air.

    DISCLAIMER: Consult a local fire station immediately at the first sign of smoke as it may blow up your ass!

    1. Re:Homeopathic Innovation! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strange, so many jokes about something that, at worse, might only be a trigger for the placebo effect (which actually isn't bad, considering that at least one third of all cures would still take place if the 'real medicine' and/or therapy would be replaced by sugar pills or fake surgery, etc...). Why is nobody here making jokes about the fact that 'real medicine' still uses the extremely poisonous chemo? Also no jokes about the fact that 'modern medicine' mainly treats symptoms, because they still have no idea what causes most of the diseases they're 'fighting' against... I guess it's easy to laugh with stuff that doesn't fit into your limited paradigm. Way to go guys and girls :-)

    2. Re:Homeopathic Innovation! by Fishchip · · Score: 1

      Fake surgery? Please expand.

  28. Oblig: Ben Goldacre: Homeopathy has side effects? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    Ben Goldacre at Nerdstock
    NSFW: language

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  29. I'm just curious by khelms · · Score: 1

    What's the homeopathic cure for dehydration?

    1. Re:I'm just curious by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      What's the homeopathic cure for dehydration?

      Probably a dilute form of something that causes dehydration. Take your pick what that is, dilute it a lot, and then drink it. Voila, cure for dehydration. Homeopathy works! [Not.]

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  30. Denier's Triumph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was a university Professor who considered ddt and other poisons to be harmless to humans. He would drink a small quantity in a plastic cup in front of his first class every year. He died in his 60s or 70s - of liver ( or was it pancreatic?) cancer.
    The best way to prove homeopathy doesn't work is to take something diluted 'beyond effectiveness' that would otherwise really do serious harm to the 'taker'.
    That said, acupuncture has absolutely no effect either. Specially topic electro-stim 'acupuncture'. Abdominal surgery anesthesia notwithstanding.

    1. Re:Denier's Triumph by plover · · Score: 1

      Acupuncture can cause harm. It can make you go blind. If you put the needles in your retinas...

      --
      John
  31. Ahhh, homeopathy by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    My constant reminder how diluted and deluded must somehow belong together.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  32. Homeopathic Bomb by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

    You may laugh, but the terrorists are all over that.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  33. what about "2x HPUS" products? by PJ6 · · Score: 2

    What I find more confusing is that I know of at least two products labelled "homeopathic" that actually work because they contain real medicine at resonable concentrations ("2x HPUS", or even "1xHPUS"). ZICAM contains zinc glycine glucconate, which had been proven in double-blind clinical trials to reduce the severity and length of a common cold (and I can attest to this from personal experience), and Arnica gel, which contains a powerful anti-inflammatory extracted from a plant. Another product that I know from personal experience that actually works pretty damn well.

    Can someone explain to me why the FDA thinks is OK to label real medicine "homeopathic"? And why would a company chose to label real medicine "homeopathic", when it's likely to put off people who know that homeopathy is bunk?

  34. anti-placebo? by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

    Maybe it was an experiment on an anti-placebo effect. Give people a real drug but tell them it will only work if you really, really believe it will.
    Then see if it fails at the same rate as most medicines and remedies do regardless of provenance.

  35. Arnica and other "real" herbal medicines by McFly777 · · Score: 1

    What I find more confusing is that I know of at least two products labelled "homeopathic" that actually work because they contain real medicine at resonable concentrations . . . and Arnica gel, which contains a powerful anti-inflammatory extracted from a plant. Another product that I know from personal experience that actually works pretty damn well.

    What I find difficult is why do some people feel the need for the FDA to "control" items which are actually effective, simply because they are effective? Not everything is dangerous, even if it does have some effect. I can think of several things which are effective, yet safe, herbal remedies.

    Ginger is good for settling the stomache. Motion sickness, and ginger's effect, was (non-scientifically) covered on a Mythbusters episode. I grew up in Michigan, where we drank Vernor's Ginger Ale when sick-to-vomiting. There were times that it was the only thing I could keep down.

    Some of our best medicines are plant derived. Statins are naturally present in a particular strain of rice. There was a grain seller who was sued and forced to stop selling that particular type of rice because it violated the patent on Statins, even though the rice pre-existed the drug. At least I think it was a patent issue, could have been FDA related, either way they were forced to stop selling it. (gee, one would think that there would be prior-art there.)

    For other items the FDA makes the manufacturer stop because the FDA determines that the effect isn't strong enough. My wife has mild psoriasis. One item which was effective for her was Tegrin ointment, which was either coal or pine tar based. The FDA did some studies and found that they could not show a statistically provable effect, so they forced all of the coal/pine tar (which ever it was) products off the market. There may be different types of psoriasis for all I know, and maybe it isn't effective for all of them, but it did help my wife. Yes, there are steroidal cremes which are potentially more effective, but they also have side effects on the areas treated with them, whereas the ___tar didn't. Recently, there are even "better" treatments advertised on TV, but if you listen to the small print (fast talker at the end of the commercial), they have potentially even worse side-effects, and are only advertised to fairly severe cases because of it. Regardless, a mild treatment which worked for my wife's mild case was removed from the market.

    --

    McFly777
    - - -
    "What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" -Marilyn Pittman