Quote:

So that something works does not neccesarily mean it works as a result of anyting beyond expectation/hope/belief.I often use placebo theory conciously when trying to maximise the effect of medication (increasing belief in effect).

I would like to know how you apply the placebo effect to dogs. When one of my dogs was diagnosed with a spine problem the only option given to me was acupuncture for treatment. I didn't believe it would work but since there was no other choice, I tried it. After several weeks of treatments I was very surprised to see she started getting better. Suddenly she could jump in the car again after not being able to do it for a few months. There were times when I brought her in for a treatment that she was barely able to walk and she would walk out much better after the treatment. She had no idea she was getting acupuncture or that it was supposed to make her feel better and yet it clearly helped her. How do you explain that?

Bernt - anyone ever tell you that you use too many big words when you talk?

Ill believe information gained from experience ANY DAY over postulations from book learning. There are enough quacks out there writing books and doing BS studies (like that Koren PHD professor last year on cloning)

By the way - no one would EVER convince me that there is a PLACEBO effect in dogs.

Your right - stick to learning about Mals.

BERNT WROTE:
Iunderstand this debate is not wanted on Ed's forum. I will end my posts on the matter with this one. I do find it strange however that one may not discuss non-evidence based medicine when there is a whole forum allocated to the issue. Censoring opinions one does not agree with seems very un-american to a foreigner like me. Even if one owns the forums.

MY REPLY:
Bernt, discussion is welcome but STARTING A THREAD in the manner in which you did, is offensive to me.

You didn't reply with your opinion to someone else's post, you started a very condescending attack and haven't been very open to hearing or even acknowleding others experiences.

lest you forget, this is a dog forum and we are talking about these modalities in relation to dogs! I don't think you are anyone whose advice I would take regarding ANYTHING to do with dogs due to your lack of experience.

As other posters have mentioned, how in the world does one see a placebo effect in a dog???

I also come from a strong medical and scientific background, having been employed in the veterinary field for many years. My experience with allopathic medicine in relation to dogs probably equals the combined experience of a small town I don't like many of the practices (scientific or not) used by those schooled only by traditional science based medicine and my dog's overall well being was not being addressed. Symptoms were being surpressed but the real issues were still there. It's been a long journey in my search to do the best I possibly can for my dogs. If this means people like you are compelled to judge me, so be it. I chalk it up to your lack of experience concerning such things.

The part about this whole topic I don't understand is WHY you feel the need to spew your obvious lack of tolerance for this? What do you think it will accomplish?

There are many things I personally don't believe in that are posted on this and other web forums but I don't go on the attack. (feeding kibble, vaccinations,for example) Everyone needs to make their own way, and not have others ideas and belief system shoved down their throats.

I only hope people just beginning to explore ALL the options take what you say with a grain of salt. Make your own choices based on what makes sense and works for you! I know there are individuals practicing homeopathic and holistic methods that ARE quacks, just as there are those in every field of every profession! My sister has 2 PHDs in psychology and uses a combo of traditional and holistic/homepathic methods with her own dog. I only mention this because for some reason you felt like mentioning your degrees as if it adds extra credibility to make us all feel that we should accept your views as our own? He has a PHD so everything he says must be right? I don't think so.

I do use traditional medicine for my dogs when warranted, but I don't blindly accept things because someone tells me that it is the PROVEN and DOCUMENTED way. I am a thinking human being, not a sheep...

 Quote: Bernt Lundby

So that something works does not neccesarily mean it works as a result of anyting beyond expectation/hope/belief.

That's one option. The other option is that it works but we just don't know why yet. It COULD be that we don't have the tools to measure it, or are measuring the wrong thing.

To seriously paraphrase Einstein: It would be like trying to figure out how a watch works by only examining and testing the face.

Anyway, I repeat what everyone else says...dogs don't experience placebo effect. Whether you agree with animal testing or not, that's one of the reasons animals are used to test some of the anti-depressants you probably prescribe.

If your post is concerning vaccinosis or human grade raw diets for dogs, may I just say that there will probably not be any long term studies by major companies for quite awile, if ever. Can you imagine those companies shellling out the money it would cost to feed as many animals for as many years as a long term study would require?

The people I know who HAVE done long-term studies on this are people like Ed and Cindy...who are doing it to improve the quality of their dogs. What on earth would they have to gain by lying or trying to trick people? The healthier their dogs and puppies are, the stronger their business is. I have a feeling that Ed and Cindy are not secret buchers, profiting on the people they convince to go raw.

And as for the vaccinosis...even vets are starting to come around to this way of thinking. While not all medical studies support their findings (because no vaccination company will pay for a test that has results that will bring profits down), the long-term CASE studies are supporting it. Some vets are starting to notice this (my vet included) and some are starting to write about it in veterinary journals.

Sorry to continue this thread...but it seems to me that there are probably people who either agree or disagree with you about this as applied to human treatment and would like to debate it some more.

Since you're new, may I suggest you use the Private Message option when it comes to non-dog related topics?

 Quote: bernt lundby

..... I understand this debate is not wanted on Ed's forum. .... I do find it strange however that one may not discuss non-evidence based medicine when there is a whole forum allocated to the issue. Censoring opinions one does not agree with seems very un-american to a foreigner like me. Even if one owns the forums.....

It's 100% clear from your O.P. that no debate was sought. That was an attack out of the blue, unrelated to any discussion.

When you got a debate you called it censorship.

I don't believe you really want to return to the time when psychologists and psychiatrists were "alternative" and "mystical." It took some serious open-mindedness for the populace to accept your profession as serious.

It seems pretty clear that some of the theories now labelled "mystical" will end up just as mainstream as the "belief" in the the unconscious.

It's not difficult Bernt. One can simply use "homeopathic" treatments which have been shown to be effective via orthodox scientific rigor, or compelling personal experience.

Case in point: Sulphur. A common "homeopathic" treatment for skin disorders, but with a quick look at http://www.pubmed.gov one finds....

Gupta AK, Nicol K.
Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook And Women's College Health Science Center, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. agupta@execulink.com

Sulfur has antifungal, antibacterial, and keratolytic activity. In the past, its use was widespread in dermatological disorders such as acne vulgaris, rosacea, seborrheic dermatitis, dandruff, pityriasis versicolor, scabies, and warts. Adverse events associated with topically applied sulfur are rare and mainly involve mild application site reactions. Sulfur, used alone or in combination with agents such as sodium sulfacetamide or salicylic acid, has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of many dermatological conditions.

Or....

tumor tissues.Thangapazham RL, Rajeshkumar NV, Sharma A, Warren J, Singh AK, Ives JA, Gaddipati JP, Maheshwari RK, Jonas WB.
Department of Pathology, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland; Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, India.

Background: Increasing evidence suggests that the inability to undergo apoptosis is an important factor in the development and progression of prostate cancer. Agents that induce apoptosis may inhibit tumor growth and provide therapeutic benefit. In a recent study, the authors found that certain homeopathic treatments produced anticancer effects in an animal model. In this study, the authors examined the immunomodulating and apoptotic effects of these remedies.

Etc.

So, really it's a matter of taking remedy X and giving it thorough scrutiny, and not dismissing it wholesale because it's ever been mentioned in the context of "homeopathy."

I said it was my last post, but here goes

No, I did not call it censorship when I got a debate. I did when it was hinted that I would be booted from the boards if I continued writing outspoken negative posts on the subject. Just had to say that.

One may dismiss belief/expectation and the like in animals. But placebo can also be a accounted for as a conditioned reflex as explained here:

http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n09/mente/placebo1_i.htm

Animal placebo effects (as explained above) is well documented. Just google it!

Oh man.

I read your article. Here's a quote:

 Quote:

acetylcholine is injected in a dog. Hypotension (lowering of arterial blood pressure) is the dog's answer to acetylcholine. After several combinations of the sound with the injection, the dog will still show hypotension, even if we inject adrenaline instead of acetylcholine.

This demonstrates the principle of biological CONDITIONING not the placebo effect.

From Medicinenet.com

 Quote:

Definition of Placebo effect
Placebo effect: Also called the placebo response. A remarkable phenomenon in which a placebo -- a fake treatment, an inactive substance like sugar, distilled water, or saline solution -- can sometimes improve a patient's condition simply because the person has the expectation that it will be helpful.

Emphasis on "a FAKE treatment, an INACTIVE substance"!!Acetylcholine is neither FAKE nor INACTIVE. Injecting that into a dog along with a stimuli on multiple occasions and then removing the injection and still getting the response of the injection is an example of biological CONDITIONING! Remember Pavlov?

 Quote:

Definition of Pavlov conditioning
Pavlov conditioning:The Russian physiologist Ivan Petrovich Pavlov (1848-1936) conditioned dogs to respond in what proved to be a predictable manner, for example, by first ringing a bell before feeding them and then simply ringing the bell upon which stimulus they would begin to salivate as if they were about to eat.

Your needle prick in this case is the bell.

I'm sorry, but with your last post you are also misrepresenting good science, as well as condemning homeopathy.

Just FYI...most people who practice hollistic medicine on their pets are NOT first injecting them with a drug that lowers their blood pressure and THEN applying the hollistic medicine!!

It's impossible not to get sucked into this topic! HELP HELP HELP!

Yes.....the mechanism of placebo is defined as a conditioned reflex...that is the point of the article. This is how we can understand placebo effects in animals as well as humans. Read the heading of the article. It is written by two of the most well known neuroscientists in the world by the way.

In the article they show that they can get a paradoxal effect of drugs based on conditioning (the postulated placebo mechanism). Getting a placebo effect from the same procedure is of course a lot easier. They could just supply the dog with the same signal and a saline solution....

The neural mechanism of placebo-analgesia has now been uncovered. Experimental conditions:
#1: Administer petidine (morphine, a selective opioid agonist)
#2: Administer saline (placebo)
#3: Administer naloxone (opioid antagonist...opposite of morphine)

What they found is that the placebo effect dissappears in #3 where one administers an opoioid agonist. Hence the placebo mechanism for analgesia is mediated by the endogenous opioid system.

To me placebo is a tremendously exciting subject, but I brought it up only to point out that personal experience does not inform us of a substance or intervention having a spesific (non placebo) effect.

With animals we also face the problem of animal owners evaluating effect in their animals (which is often difficult), and one is of course subjected to the psychological mechanism of self justification after spending a lot of money on a treatment ("it must work or i have been stupid").

 Quote: Cindy Easton Rhodes

BERNT WROTE:
Iunderstand this debate is not wanted on Ed's forum. I will end my posts on the matter with this one. I do find it strange however that one may not discuss non-evidence based medicine when there is a whole forum allocated to the issue. Censoring opinions one does not agree with seems very un-american to a foreigner like me. Even if one owns the forums.

MY REPLY:
Bernt, discussion is welcome but STARTING A THREAD in the manner in which you did, is offensive to me. ... You didn't reply with your opinion to someone else's post, you started a very condescending attack and haven't been very open to hearing or even acknowleding others experiences. ..... I don't think you are anyone whose advice I would take regarding ANYTHING to do with dogs due to your lack of experience. .... I do use traditional medicine for my dogs when warranted, but I don't blindly accept things because someone tells me that it is the PROVEN and DOCUMENTED way. I am a thinking human being, not a sheep...

What she said.

The O.P. and the lack of response to most of the debate points are both far from I would hope to see in an open-minded scientist.

Long words or not -- too many of them are too broad, too undefined for me ... too unscientific to present a real debate premise, even with my current sugar rush. (Love holiday pie!)