dustyp
I doubt very much that a homeopathic treatment will stop me from having another stroke 
The hypothesis that flower remedies are associated with effects beyond a placebo response is not supported by data from rigorous clinical trials.
It's really OT for this Forum so apologies to readers, but I would like to make one response to (hopefully) set the record straight.
Firstly Bach Flower remedies are not homeopathic, instead they use the energy inherent in plants & flowers to positivise a persons emotional outlook thus allowing the body to heal itself. They are a unique form of treatment available in the world.
Secondly your choice of health treatment is a personal decision, my advice was just a suggestion for your consideration & wellbeing.
Thirdly I would not believe everything you read on wikipedia etc, as there is much wrong information & opinionated views published.
AFAIK any clinical trials have been far from rigorous.
The problem with quoting a negative reference to clinical studies that you have found on the Internet, is that there has been NO substantive clinical trial conducted on Bach Flower remedies, to the best of my knowledge.
Therefore a handful of very small observational trials & tests is then given high value, as that is the only main stream data available.
Such data is therefore quoted as being "gospel", & considered fully conclusive by casual readers or observers, or even more serious medical researchers.
Online literature even acknowledges it uses a small unreliable sampling (see below).
Far better in this case to read testimonials of practitioners & end users as that is a source of better information.
There are many Google search results you can read. The Dr Bach Centre in England is the best authority on the topic.
A thorough clinical trial that medical journals would accept for professional publication, would require the sponsor to provide funding in the order of millions of dollars, as is done by major drug companies when introducing a new drug for approval.
The low key Bach Centre in Oxford, England, who produce the stock remedies for supply to commercial distributors, does not have the financial resources to do this, so there is a catch 22 situation here, where even some doctors say there is no published data to substantiate the effectiveness of Bach Remedies so therefore other doctors conclude the remedies are not effective, just as you have done ! It's like someone who knows nothing about a subject, professing to be an expert on the subject.
I have 30 years experience prescribing Bach Remedies, & was trained by a person who had 15 years clinical experience prior to that, so I can attest to the effectiveness of the remedies when used for a wide range of medical, health & emotional issues. There are cases where the Bach Remedies were more effective than what the best specialists using the latest very expensive drug treatments could offer. Even children with attention deficit disorders responded very well, where medical treatment had failed them.
In the case of the specific Rescue Remedy combination, it has a well proven track record in practical usage & is ideally suited for situations involving shock, trauma, accidents, pain, grief, panic etc & is used for it's pre & post operative prophalactic & healing qualities. It is indeed the very thing I would reach for were I having a heart attack & using it could well avert a full blown attack. I have used it on many people in hospital, following surgery, with a resultant more rapid healing, compared to other patients with similar surgical procedures who were not taking the remedies. This has been commented upon & observed by the nurses attending to those patients on numerous occasions. Other patients personally unknown to me, even ask if they can have some of what the patient I am treating is having, as they observe the improved demeanor & more rapid healing in the person taking the remedies.
This is all a form of anecdotal evidence (albeit recorded in my treatment records) which is unfortunately treated as hearsay by the medical profession & medical publications & disbelievers.
Members of the British Royal family including the current Queen Elizabeth use Bach Flower remedies, I'm sure they are not stupid & being hoodwinked by false claims. Also I am aware of a number of medical doctors & dentists that prescribe/use Bach Flower remedies. Dr Oz the American TV show doctor also recommends them. So despite the "lack of published evidence", there is accepted wide spread usage around the world. There are thousands of other Bach Flower practitioners around the world (Naturopaths etc) who use these remedies successfully in their practices, a handful of whom I know personally. They cannot all be wrong & their patients would not tolerate ineffective treatments. Going back 10 years or so, the remedies were only available from Natural health product wholesale suppliers, but since then they have become commonly available in chemist shops or pharmacies, a strong sign of their acceptance by the general public. No shop will stock a product that does not sell, & people will not buy a product if it does not work, simple as that !
I can only say to you & others reading this, that the Dr Bach Flower Remedies & the Rescue Remedy combination work very well & are effective in achieving the claims made of them, & this belief is based on my own experience over the last 30 years of usage. Of course everyone is different & responses can very between individuals, such is the variability of human nature.
This is not theory, this is a recorded & scientifically observed cause & effect situation (ie interview, prescribe, observe & record response), which could be done by anybody with a little reading & training. It does indeed fit the rigours of scientific process & observation. This is a very valuable form of treatment provided to us by mother nature & one which we should not disregard or derride (due to lack of knowledge or personal perception), but instead encourage others to use, as one of the many tools available for the gradual healing of mankind. Those who can make use of the remedies in their own personal lives will be drawn towards them.
Here is a quote of some comments which I believe demonstrate the point(s) I am making (ie lack of trials, strength of available evidence is very low, most evidence is biased, effectiveness is unproven in two specific tests thus concluding ineffectiveness, and also no treatment risk):
"RESULTS: Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and two additional retrospective, observational studies were identified and included in the review. Three RCTs of BFRs for students with examination anxiety, and one RCT of BFRs for children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) showed no overall benefit in comparison to placebo. Due to the number and quality of the studies the strength of the evidence is low or very low. We did not find any controlled prospective studies regarding the efficacy of BFRs for pain. Only four of the six studies included for safety explicitly reported adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Most of the available evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of BFRs has a high risk of bias. We conclude that, based on the reported adverse events in these six trials, BFRs are probably safe. Few controlled prospective trials of BFRs for psychological problems and pain exist. Our analysis of the four controlled trials of BFRs for examination anxiety and ADHD indicates that there is no evidence of benefit compared with a placebo intervention."
Note: My personal experiences over a many year period differ significantly from those comments quoted above, & I find the remedies very effective in most cases.
17 Replies
2393 Views