Walach H, Haag G
Universität Freiburg, Rehabilitationspsychologie, D-79 085 Freiburg.
Schmerz. 1996 Jun 17;10(3):156-62. doi: 10.1007/s004829600045.
Homeopathy as an alternative to conventional therapy is becoming increasingly popular. Although interest is rising, little is known about the real effectiveness of homeopathic therapy in headaches. Three studies addressing this question are discussed: an Italian migraine study, the London migraine study and our own, the Munich headache trial. While the first one reported very high effects, the best ones known in the literature, the results of the other two trials do not endorse this first finding. The London trial did not show any effect other than placebo, although a different time trend was reported. The Munich study failed to show any difference between homeopathy and placebo whatsoever. The merits and shortcomings of these studies are discussed. At present, we do not have any evidence that homeopathic therapy has any effect other than a placebo effect. However, this can be very impressive sometimes. We do not know which variables are correlated with placebo effectiveness, and we do not have any data on real-type homeopathy outside a trial setting, as there are no data available.
顺势疗法作为传统疗法的替代方法正变得越来越流行。尽管人们对此的兴趣在上升，但对于顺势疗法治疗头痛的实际效果却知之甚少。本文讨论了三项针对这个问题的研究：一项意大利偏头痛研究、伦敦偏头痛研究以及我们自己的慕尼黑头痛试验。第一项研究报告了非常高的疗效，是文献中已知的最佳疗效，但其他两项试验的结果并未支持这一最初发现。伦敦试验除了安慰剂效应外未显示出任何效果，尽管报告了不同的时间趋势。慕尼黑研究未能显示顺势疗法与安慰剂之间有任何差异。本文讨论了这些研究的优缺点。目前，我们没有任何证据表明顺势疗法除了安慰剂效应外还有任何效果。然而，有时这种安慰剂效应可能会非常显著。我们不知道哪些变量与安慰剂效果相关，而且由于没有可用数据，我们也没有关于试验环境之外真正的顺势疗法的数据。
