Thoughts on Homeopathic Drug Provings

Homeopathy 2007; 96(04): 231-232
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2007.09.001

Guest Editorial

David Riley

Verantwortlicher Herausgeber dieser Rubrik:

References
1 Dantas F, Fisher P, Walach H, et al. A systematic review of the quality of homeopathic pathogenetic trials published from 1945 to 1995. Homeopathy 2007; 96: 4–16.
2 Kienle G.S. The Placebo Effect: Illusion, Fact, and Reality. New York, NY: Schattauer Verlag GmbH; 1995.
3 Glynn RJ, Buring JE, Hennekens CH, et al. Concerns about run-in periods in Randomized Trials. JAMA 1998; 279: 1526–1527.
4 Walach H, Sherr J, Schneider R, Shabi R, Bond A, Rieberer G. “Homeopathic proving symptoms: result of a local, non-local, or placebo process? A blinded, placebo-controlled pilot study”. Homeopathy 2004; 93: 179–185.
5 Beecher H.K. The powerful placebo. JAMA 1955; 159: 1602-1606.
6 Riley D. Original Research—veronica officinalis. BHJ 1995; 84: 144-148.
7 Riley D. Extracting symptoms from Homeopathic drug provings. BHJ 1997; 86: 225-228.
8 Signorini A, Lubrano A, Manuele G, et al. Classical and new proving methodology: provings of plumbum metallicum and piper methysticum and comparison with a classical proving of plumbum metallicum. Homeopathy 2005; 94(3): 164–174.
9 Walach H., Sherr J., Schneider R., Shabi R., Bond A., Rieberer G. “Homeopathic Proving Symptoms: result of a local, non-local, or placebo process? A blinded, placebo-controlled pilot study”. Homeopathy 2004; 93: 179-185.