‘WORLD HOMEOPATHY DAY’ is upon us and the Internet is awash with pro-homeopathy comments, e.g.:
- World Homeopathy Day is observed annually on April 10th to commemorate the birth anniversary of Samuel Hahnemann, a prominent figure in the development of homeopathy. This day celebrates the principles and practices of homeopathy, an alternative medicinal approach that emphasizes treating ailments by utilizing natural substances and stimulating the body’s inherent healing abilities.
- The theme for World Homeopathy Day 2024 is ‘Empowering Research, Enhancing Proficiency: A Homeopathy Symposium”. This theme underscores the significance of continuous research in homeopathy and the need to upgrade capability in its training to give better medical care results.
Even slightly less biased sources cannot bring themselves to a more realistic approach, e.g.:
The significance of the World Homeopathy Day is said to be as follows:
- Raising Awareness: World Homeopathy Day has successfully brought homeopathy to the forefront of public attention, generating dialogue and interest in its principles and practices.
- Bridging Communities: The Day serves as a platform for bringing together homeopaths, practitioners, researchers, and individuals interested in alternative medicine, fostering collaboration and knowledge exchange.
- Focus on Education: World Homeopathy Day emphasizes the importance of education and ethical practices within the field, promoting responsible usage and informed choices for individuals seeking homeopathic care.
World Homeopathy Day is about understanding and exploring the potential of this alternative medicine system while keeping an open mind and prioritizing evidence-based healthcare practices.
So, let me try to counter-balance these texts by showing you what my recently published 7 key points about homeopathy tell us:
Homeopathy is popular, particularly in India, Germany, France and parts of South America. It was invented more than 200 years ago and still divides opinions like few other subjects in alternative medicine.
- Homeopathy was invented by the German physician, Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843). At the time, our understanding of the laws of nature was woefully incomplete, and therefore Hahnemann’s ideas seemed less implausible than today. The conventional treatments of this period were often more dangerous than the disease they were supposed to cure. Consequently, homeopathy was repeatedly shown to be superior to ‘allopathy’ (a term coined by Hahnemann to denigrate conventional medicine) and Hahnemann’s treatments were an almost instant, worldwide success.[1]
- Many consumers confuse homeopathy with herbal medicine; yet the two are fundamentally different. Herbal medicines are plant extracts that contain potentially active ingredients. Homeopathic remedies are based on plants or any other material and they are typically so dilute that they contain not a single molecule of the substance advertised on the bottle. The most frequently used dilution (homeopaths call them ‘potencies’) is a ‘C30’; a C30-potency has been diluted 30 times at a ratio of 1:100. This means that one drop of the staring material is dissolved in 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 drops of diluent (usually a water/alcohol mixture)—and that equates to less than one molecule of the original substance per all the molecules of the universe.
- Homeopaths claim that their remedies work via some ‘energy’ or ‘vital force’ and that the process of preparing the homeopathic dilutions (it involves vigorous shaking the mixtures at each dilution step) transfers this ‘energy’ or information from one to the next dilution. They also believe that the process of diluting and agitating their remedies, which they call potentisation, renders them not less or not more potent. Homeopathic remedies are usually prescribed according to the ‘like cures like’ principle: if, for instance, a patient suffers from runny eyes, a homeopath might prescribe a remedy made of onion, because onion make a healthy person’s eyes water. This and all other assumptions of homeopathy contradict the known laws of nature. In other words, we do not fail to comprehend how homeopathy works, but we understand that it cannot work unless the known laws of nature are wrong.
- According to Hahnemann’s classical homeopathy, homeopaths are focussed on the symptoms and characteristics of the patient. They conduct a lengthy medical history, and they show little or no interest in a physical examination of their patient or other diagnostic procedures. Once they are confident to have all the information they need, they try to find the optimal homeopathic remedy. This is done by matching the symptoms with the drug pictures of homeopathic remedies. Any homeopathic drug picture is essentially based on what has been noted in homeopathic provings where healthy volunteers take a remedy and monitor all that symptoms, sensations and feelings they experience subsequently. Thus, the optimal homeopathic remedy can be seen as a diagnosis which makes homeopathy also a diagnostic method.[2]
- Today, around 500 clinical trials of homeopathy have been published. The totality of this evidence fails to show that homeopathic remedies are more than placebos.[3] Numerous official statements from various countries confirm the absurdity of homeopathy, for instance:
- “The principles of homeopathy contradict known chemical, physical and biological laws and persuasive scientific trials proving its effectiveness are not available” (Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia)
- “Homeopathy should not be used to treat health conditions that are chronic, serious, or could become serious. People who choose homeopathy may put their health at risk if they reject or delay treatments for which there is good evidence for safety and effectiveness.” (National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia)
- “Homeopathic remedies don’t meet the criteria of evidence-based medicine.” (Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungary)
- “The incorporation of anthroposophical and homeopathic products in the Swedish directive on medicinal products would run counter to several of the fundamental principles regarding medicinal products and evidence-based medicine.” (Swedish Academy of Sciences, Sweden)
- “There is no good-quality evidence that homeopathy is effective as a treatment for any health condition” (National Health Service, England)
- Yet, many patients undeniably do get better after taking homeopathic remedies. The best evidence available today clearly shows that this improvement is unrelated to the homeopathic remedy per se. It is the result of a lengthy, empathetic, compassionate encounter with a homeopath, a placebo-response or other factors which experts often call ‘context effects’.[4]
- Whenever homeopaths advise their patients (as they often do) to forgo effective conventional treatments, they are likely to do harm. This phenomenon is best documented in relation to the advice of many homeopaths against immunisations.[5]
I do not expect fans of homeopathy to be impressed by my evidence-based assessment of their cult. In fact, just looking what is currently being posted on ‘X’ today about the ‘WORLD HOMEOPATHY DAY’ seems to justify my expectation. Here are the 10 first postings that appeared on my screen about an hour ago:
- Today, on #WorldHomeopathyDay, we celebrate the birth anniversary of Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy. Let’s embrace the principles of natural healing and holistic well-being.
- On #WorldHomeopathyDay President #DroupadiMurmu to inaugurate 2-day Homeopathic Symposium at Yashobhoomi Convention Centre Dwarka, New Delhi. Organized by Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH) based on theme of ‘Empowering Research, Enhancing Proficiency.’
- Dr. Ashvini Kumar Dwivedi, Member, Scientific Advisory Board, Central Council for Research in Homeopathy, Ministry of Ayush, Government of India, and #ASSOCHAM Ayush task force member, underlined the significance of #WorldHomeopathyDay, observed on April 10th each year
- Today, we celebrate #WorldHomeopathyDay 2024, embracing the gentle healing power of nature.
- Happy #WorldHomeopathyDay! Let’s celebrate the holistic approach to health that homeopathy offers, honoring its contributions to alternative medicine and its focus on individualized care. Here’s to exploring natural remedies and supporting wellness for all! #HolisticHealth
- Happy World Homeopathy Day Embracing the gentle yet powerful healing of homeopathy, let’s cherish its holistic essence, promoting balance and well-being worldwide. Here’s to the harmony it brings to mind, body, and spirit.
- #WorldHomeopathyDay: President #DroupadiMurmu to inaugurate 2-day Homeopathic Symposium at Yashobhoomi Convention Centre Dwarka, New Delhi. Organized by Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH) based on theme of ‘Empowering Research, Enhancing Proficiency.’
- Celebrate #WorldHomeopathyDay with us & enter to win these two enlightening reads by renowned homeopath Dr. Mukesh Batra. What inspired you to explore homeopathy? Share your story in the comments section & get a chance to win a copy of #HealWithHomeopathy and #FeelGoodHealGood!
- #WorldHomeopathyDay is celebrated on April 10th, promoting awareness of the principles and benefits of homeopathic medicine. It aims to address the whole body, including hereditary predispositions and disease history, and encourages people to pursue homeopathy as a profession.…
- On World Homeopathy Day, we celebrate Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, the pioneer of homeopathy. His gentle remedies, made from natural substances, have helped countless people heal without side effects.
_______________________
In view of this volume of pure BS, I encourage everyone to post (here, or on ‘X’, or elsewhere) some evidence-based comments on homeopathy, Hahnemann and the ‘World Homeopathy Day’.
Let me make a start:
Homeopaths are as deluded as their remedies are diluted
11 Responses to Yes, today is ‘WORLD HOMEOPATHY DAY’ (and Homeopaths are as deluded as their remedies are diluted)
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Samuel Hahnemann, MD, was granted honorary membership into the Medical Society of the County of New York in 1832. However, a few years later, the society rescinded his membership when they determined that homeopathy’s growth represented an “ideological and financial threat.”
Nicholas Von Hoffman, a columnist for the Washington Post, wrote: “Although this German physician never visited the U.S., for 70 years or more his ideas tore up and divided American medicine. No other single individual caused the settled and comfortable structures of this profession the trouble Hahnemann did, and even now many of the questions he raised have not been answered” (Von Hoffman, 1971).
Many of homeopathy’s most severe critics have actually had kind words for Samuel Hahnemann. Morris Fishbein, executive director of the American Medical Association, wrote: “The influence of Hahnemann was, on the whole, certainly for the good. He emphasized the individualization of the patient in the handling of disease … and he demonstrated the value of testing the actual virtues of a drug by trial” (Fishbein, 1925, 37).
https://danaullman.substack.com/p/samuel-hahnemann-md-the-only-monument
Morris Fishbein. (1932). Fads and Quackery in Healing: An Analysis of the Foibles of the Healing Cults. New York: Covici Friede.
https://archive.org/details/1932FishbeinFadsAndQuackeryInHealing/page/n5/mode/2up
I recommend:
• III. THE RISE AND FALL OF HOMEOPATHY p19
• IV. THE END OF ECLECTICISM p30
@Dana Ullman
In all fairness, Hahnemann indeed deserves some credit and even praise. He started out with the very best intentions, as he correctly perceived that orthodox medicine at the time (1790s) was not much good at all. And instead of conforming to those poor medical practices, he turned his back on medicine and set out to find better ways to treat patients.
He also can’t really be blamed for believing that homeopathy worked much better – which in a way it did: doing nothing and letting nature take its course (i.e. homeopathy) often produced much better outcomes than many of the regular medical interventions of the day. This approach of ‘wait and see’ while reassuring the patient and treating symptoms(!) is still one of the most important principles in medicine today. The trick of course is to know when doing nothing is the best course of (in?)action – and that is where modern medicine has made huge progress, and why homeopathy has become fully obsolete.
And about the (im)plausibility of homeopathy: biology, chemistry and medical science were still in their infancy, and Hahnemann simply could not know where the limits of his dilutions lay, nor were studies done in a rigorous enough manner to produce viable outcomes.
Still, the man absolutely had his flaws, most notably arrogance – like modern-day homeopaths, he found it inconceivable that he could be wrong, and rejected all studies and observations from people who noticed that homeopathic preparations produced the same results as plain water. But even his arrogance and rejection of unwelcome study outcomes may perhaps be forgiven, as it is very human indeed for people to stick with what they think is a revolutionary idea, come hell or high water. Even today, many eminent scientists (both real scientists and pseudoscientists) fall into this trap.
However, huge scientific progress over the past 200 years has shown homeopathy to be completely wrong in every single aspect. No trace of a ‘law of similars’ has ever been found, nor does diluting substances increase any effects they have; and the whole idea of ‘proving’ was pretty stupid in Hahnemann’s day already: if you want to know if a particular concoction can help sick people, then you test it on sick people, not on healthy people.
Only by fooling himself about the universal applicability of his ‘Law of Similars’ could Hahnemann justify his belief that administering dilutions to healthy people would provide any information about its effects in sick people.
And, of course, in all those 228 years, not a single homeopathic preparation 12C+ has ever been found to produce clear and consistent effects, other than placebo effects.
So summarized, homeopathy has taught us some important lessons about medicine and how it is often better to take a step back and do nothing, even though Hahnemann never realized it himself. Homeopathy also helps illustrating the interesting concepts of placebo and nocebo effects. This is why homeopathy, obsolete as it may be, deserves to be remembered as an important part of the history of medicine. It is also why Hahnemann could not really have known how wrong he was, his good intentions notwithstanding.
But any and all homeopaths today really, really should know better. You too.
Hahnemann was also responsible for the carrying out of the first well-conducted large-scale controlled and blinded clinical trial – the Nuremberg Salt Trial which, like all subsequent similar well-conducted trials, showed homeopathy to have no effects.
the trial happened but without Hahnemann’s input, I think.
My poor wording – Hahnemann’s outlandish claims for the efficacy of shaken water were responsible for Wilhelm von Hoven conducting the trial.
correct!
Lenny, You don’t get the science right…and you are even worse at history!
Here are the facts of the Nuremberg Salt Trial:
1835, Nuremberg, Germany
One of the earliest known double-blind studies was conducted as early as 1835, a double-blind proving using potentized doses of Natrum muriaticum in liquid, with distilled water used as a control. A homeopath or an allopath didn’t do this study; a journalist performed it. However, reports about the study suggest that it resembled a séance rather than a sober scientific experiment.
Yawn yawn Dana.
There were all sorts of flaws in the trial any and all of which can rightly be criticised by modern methodologists. You seem oblivious to the obvious one – the trials were carried out on people sceptical of homeopathy. Bias would be a huge problem. But you’re an idiot who couldn’t recognise the genuine flaws in trials if we paid you.
Historically, the value of the trial is in the principles it set out. The organizers called on others and, in particular, on the homeopaths themselves, to perform and repeat similar trials, with different dilutions, and to make the results public. They stressed once more the crucial element – one must avoid anything that might enable the participants and those responsible for the trial to guess whether the actual medicine was given or not.
You should be proud that it was homeopathy that was responsible for establishing the foundations of evidence-based medicine but of course you don’t want to talk about it because EBM has repeatedly shown homeopathy to be utter bunk.
There’s a description of it here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1676327/
It doesn’t seem to have been performed by a journalist, although those conducting it were “supported by George Löhner, the owner and editor of the daily Allgemeine Zeitung von und für Bayern, who later compiled the trial report”. It seems to have been conducted by a group of people including doctors and pharmacists, and the remedy was prepared according to the instructions of a homeopath.
Happy arrogance day!