Tangen 1

Jeweliet Tangen
Professor Thiele
English 101
1 November 2015

Homeopathy and Conventional Medicine;

An Overview of Cancer Treatments
Since long before traditional medicine was around homeopathy has
been a part of many cultures all over the world. Only recently has the term
conventional medicine come to mean something other than homeopathy.
Nowadays it takes extensive testing, research, and many clinical trials for a
new drug to be released by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Opponents of homeopathy believe the method of action to be implausible
(Wayne et al. 5). However it is pointed out that the FDA have inserted
another scope to, at the very least, analyze homeopathy (Dockser), which
speaks to its relevance in the medical community today. It is evident that not
enough information has been conglomerated and presented to consider
homeopathy as a true, and regulated, cancer treatment: much less as a
viable option to cancer patients in U.S.
Traditionally chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery are the primary
options cancer patients seek to start their treatment. Proponents of
traditional cancer treatment point out its efficacy in killing cancer cells, and

Tangen 2

argue that if there was truly another cancer fighting agent it would be
approved by the FDA. However, studies from many published medical
journals have shown these proponents are typically cancer patients with
early stage cancer, have a good chance of survival, or have not endured any
traditional treatment (Rostock et al. 4). This verifies that patients are only
utilizing homeopathy as a last resort.87 Evenresort. Even though
hommeopathic treatments have grown at 25% annually in the United States,
it has not gained the same popularity as it did in other countries (Mosche 1).
Homeopathy in Cancer Care, regarding the principle of similars, suggests
many scientists do not accept that homeopathy has any true effects, and
conclude any positive results to be from the placebo effect (Mosche 1). A
lack of systematic researching has led to these controversies about
homeopathy, however, the positive proven resultspositive results that have
been proven cannot be ignored. Another article, A Critical Overview of
Homeopathy, says Kleunen and colleagueswould be ready to accept
homeopathy as efficacious if only the method of action were more plausible
(Wayne et al. 5).Though, it is not within good reasoning to provide only
plausibility as evidence that something is inefficacious.
As a studied discussed in Classical Homeopathy in the Treatment of
Cancer Patients, patients interested in homeopathy are those who have
already spent time in the conventional medicine system (Rostock et al. 8).

Tangen 3

This suggests that conventional medicine isnt fulfilling all the needs of
cancer patients, henceforth, other options should be explored. It is possible
that conventionally treated patients are looking for other results in their
treatment as well. Classical Homeopathy in the Treatment of Cancer
Patients states that the effects of homeopathy on quality of life in cancer
patients has been studied very rarely (Rostock et al. 2). Included in this
research essay was the results of an observational study, which stated that
639 patients were included in the study (4), all of whom actively chose
their treatments (2). This is the first time time an extended study has been
done on cancer patients under homeopathic treatment and compared to
those under traditional care (Rostock 5). Mainly, the focus of the study was
to see whether cancer patients under homeopathic care experience a
benefit in their quality of life (5), proving that conventional medicine is
lacking in those areas. Quality of life (QoL) was portrayed by the use of a
numerical, systematic test; which resulted in an average increase of QoL in
patients receiving homeopathic care, over the course of the study (4). While
those who were under conventional care remained, for all intents and
purposes, steady in their QoL tests (4). If a numerical test can demonstrate
QoL in cancer patients, and shows improvements of a tangible result, in one
treatment plan versus another: then it stands to reason that the improving

Tangen 4

results, and the treatments that implemented them, should receive

increasing interest in the medical community.
Currently the lack of research in homeopathy can often be attributed to
funding. Given that the National Institute of Health spends nearly $95 billion
dollars per year on medical research, and are thought to contribute only 28
percent of medical researching budgets in total, it is imperative to ask how
the money is being distributed. Cancer, being the second biggest cause
supported by the NIH, plays a significant role in the distribution of funds for
medical research. An article from NBC news quotes an essay from the
American Medical Association Journal by Dr. Hamilton Moses III, saying, The
imbalance between early stage and late stage research is growing Though
a seemingly disturbing study from the Alerion Institution to quote,
homeopathy is however primarily studied as long term effects, and the
quality of life of cancer patients using these methods. Interestingly, the NIH
does not quote any funding for research of the efficacy of homeopathy in any
respect. Drugs and treatments cannot go through the required trials, and
tests that is necessary to get approved by the FDA, or to establish its
efficacy, without funding. Therefore it is not reasonable to write off
homeopathy as inefficacious, or implausible, if the process of research is
merely in slow motion.

Tangen 5

In recent times, as demonstrated above, new aspects of treatments

have been highlighted; and even farther, regulations are changing in
response. In 2007 an article came out that said patients are becoming a
larger part of dug and treatment approval within the Food and Drug
Administration (Dockser 2). If this is the case, then studies such as the one in
Classical Homeopathy in the Treatment of Cancer Patients, are too,
becoming more relevant in medicine. It is said that typically a patients
mental, and physical well-being are secondary to the drugs target purpose,
such as eliminating cancer cells or symptoms. However, Cancer Patients
Gain Say in Drug Approvals; FDA and Drug Makers Add Reports from Trial
Participants to Traditional Measures such as Survival, Tumor Shrinkage
proposed that patient PROs may be more relevant to drug companies, that
often invest in drugs that fail, because they cant be proven to extend life
(Dockser 3). Therefore, providing, a better quality of life can be thought to
lead to drug approval, and henceforth more consumption from cancer
patients. PROs may be considered subjective to each patient, but the article
suggested that it is the consumers, that determine a drugs success or
failure. Being so simple, it seems irrelevant what patients say about certain
drugs, but perhaps this is most important part of medicine. Patients should
have the right to choose what treatments and drugs are appropriate for
them, and be provided with the resources to get that treatment. So, if the

Tangen 6

Food and Drug Administration are becoming more dependent on consumers

responses for drug approval, it demonstrates potential for the efficacy of
homeopathic treatments to be studied more in depth in cancer patients.
Classical Homeopathy in Cancer Care defines homeopathy, to put it
simply, as using diluted samples of agents already known to cause to cancer
symptoms as a counteractant (Frenkel 2). Despite misconceptions, this
article states that homeopathic medicine are, in fact, regulated by the FDA,
through Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the U.S (HPUS). Simply put, using
HPUS, the public can buy homeopathic medicines with a prescription as long
as there are no toxic substances. Then, this rejects an argument against
homeopathy in A Critical Overview of Homeopathy in Cancer Patients that
states the method of action is implausible (Wayne et al. 5). If the method of
action were not plausible ,plausible, then there would be no need to have a
sect of medicine designated to homeopathy., as it would not be an effective
treatment.
Homeopathy, though it has been known around the world for centuries,
is still a new medical concept in the U.S. It is not thought to be as effective
as modern conventional medicine in regards to cancer treatment; such that
it, and has a limited amount of elongated studies done about itwith it.
However, a few recent studies show a rise in the number of factorials
regarding drug and treatment approvals, allowing for new concepts to be

Tangen 7

prioritized in the FDA FDAfor drug approvals. With homeopathy shown to

improve quality of life, and for new potential prioritizations in the FDA,
homeopathic care in cancer treatment is a feasible study.

Works Cited
Jonas, Wayne B., Ted J. Kaptchuk, and Klaus Linde. "A Critical Overview of
Homeopathy." Annals of Internal Medicine 138.5 (2003): 393-9. ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct.
2015.
A detailed description of homeopathy, and the evolution of its productivity is the
outline of this article. It explains how homeopathy was discovered, and how it has
changed since the eighteenth century. Also included is a comparison of placebos and
homeopathy, not excluding common misconceptions surrounding both. The author does
well to provide evidence for and against the efficacy of homeopathy. Specific to this
article, homeopathy is referenced as a valid concept, but the mode of action is
implausible.
It was clear that this article was written for people based in or around the medical
field. The authors points were very clear, and formatted to find what you were looking
for easily. Since he provides data from many sources, it strengthens his research as
opposed to using a single source. I will refer to this article as I explain the status of
homeopathy treatments today versus when it was created. It will be helpful because, as it

Tangen 8

is common knowledge that the medical field is constantly advancing, so are methods for
homeopathy.
Amy, Dockser M. "Cancer Patients Gain Say in Drug Approvals; FDA and Drug Makers Add
Reports from Trial Participants to Traditional Measures such as Survival, Tumor
Shrinkage." Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition ed.Feb 13 2007. ProQuest.Web. 18 Oct.
2015 .
The synopsis of this article is based around the importance of feedback from
patients about drugs that target cancer. It is said that typically a patients mental, and
physical well-being are secondary to the drugs target purpose, such as eliminating cancer
cells or symptoms. The article proposed that patient PROs may be relevant to drug
companies that often invest in drugs that fail because they cant be proven to extend life.
Therefore, providing, a better quality of life can be thought to lead to drug approval, and
henceforth more consumption from cancer patients. Though it stated that patients PROs
can be considered subjective, the article presented that it is the consumers (cancer
patients), that determine a drugs success or failure.
Written for the Wall street Journal, this article was easy to comprehend, and to
evaluate its points. Many of which, such as the FDA acknowledging that a higher quality
of life can lead to drug approval, will provide my essay with a plethora of support in
establishing key points in cancer treatments. Another example I can extrapolate from this
selection is a test done in 2005 where short term radiation was tested for alleviating pain,
against tradition radiation treatment plans. Since it was reported that the short term lower
dosage treatment was just as effective as its long-term counterpart, it led to important

Tangen 9

clinical changes, and prevented patients from enduring more radiation treatments, and
eliminated pain faster.
Rostock, Matthias, et al. "Classical Homeopathy in the Treatment of Cancer Patients - a
Prospective Observational Study of Two Independent Cohorts." BMC Cancer 11 (2011):
19. ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
This article provided a background, method, results, and conclusion section to
easily portray the facts from the analysis of homeopathy and traditional medicine. In this
experiment they paired similar cases, under two cohorts of treatment, to test the efficacy
of both. In one year they assessed the differences of treatments between the homeopathic
treatments and the traditional ones. In addition, observations were made about the quality
of life and patient satisfaction in both sects. Finally, they wanted to relate the two
comparable patients as a feasible study of quality of life. Specifically, the essay answers
the second question and briefly summarizes the first and third.

As it states that it is reporting on an experiment, the selection was formatted as a

scientific write up. It is concerned with a larger issue regarding the effectiveness of
homeopathy in cancer, versus traditional care. Despite that it does not specially analyze
this point, it provides many observations from the study that support this idea. In a few
paragraphs the article discusses the demographics of patients entered in the study. To help
summarize that, a quote from the article says, This confirms the general impression of
homeopathic doctors that the patients decide to come for homeopathic treatment after

Tangen 10

having spent some time in the conventional medical system This shows the articles
concern more than one aspect of homeopathic medicine.

Frenkel, Moshe, M.D. "HOMEOPATHY IN CANCER CARE." Alternative Therapies in Health

and Medicine 16.3 (2010): 12-6.ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
This article defines homeopathy in great detail, and demonstrates its role with the
FDA. For example, it is said that homeopathic medicine are, in fact, regulated by the
FDA, through Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the U.S. Simply put, using HPUS, the
public can buy with a prescription as long as there are no toxic substances. It also
provided several case studies, collected from a variety of sources that discusses the
results of homeopathic treatments across the world.
The cited article was written in Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine
journal, which was intended for people in the medical field. Throughout the whole
selection there were references to specific drugs, cancers, and tests that the general public
would have a hard time deciphering. I will use this articles definition of homeopathy, to
easily display what the difference is compared to conventional medicine. Also this article
provides another perspective dealing with the controversy of homeopathy, and how it
violates natural law.
"US:US Considers Regulating Homeopathy." AAP General News Wire. Apr 22
2015. ProQuest. Web. 18 Oct. 2015 .
This short article outlined the use of homeopathy, its relevance, and concerns
surrounding it. It began with stating that the current regulations based around

Tangen 11

homeopathic medicines, may be irrelevant due the explosive growth in the industry.
Once, the FDA did not issue any regulations on homeopathic medicines as they did not
approve them for public use. However, because the community and its participants are
growing, issuing new regulations regarding homeopathy is thought to necessary.
In this article, there was an apparent bias that homeopathy needed to be highly
regulated by the FDA. The first sentence states that, US regulators assessing
homeopathic treatments' safety and efficacy could overhaul rules of the multi-billiondollar industry. This statement makes it clear that it is in popular opinion that
homeopathy needs to be reassessed for public use. In the conclusion of the article, the
author includes three quotes from a doctor in pharmacology, which demonstrates the
unease regarding homeopathic medicines. This supports the articles bias, and strengthens
its argument. Also included in the article, was an estimate from the CDPD on money
spent on homeopathic products, which I will include in my essay to demonstrate the
relevance of homeopathy in the medical community today.