Is homeopathy a pseudoscience? It is one of the most hotly discussed and controversial topics of complementary medicines. The scientific community received a lot of negative coverage over the years. But many people say that it has changed their health for the better.
Samuel Hahnemann invented homeopathy over 200 years ago. It is based on a theory that likes cures. He believed that a drug that induces symptoms of an illness in healthy people would cure similar symptoms in ill people. It also follows the idea that the lower the dosage of medication, the more effective it is. Some homeopathic products are so diluted that there are no molecules of the original substance remaining.
The main controversy appears to arise from the lack of robust scientific evidence for homeopathy. It is not possible to explain how a product containing little or no active ingredient may have any benefit in scientific terms. Our current medical model focuses on the scientific knowledge of the body. It uses treatments that are successful by scientific research. When we can not see or measure something, it is known to have insufficient scientific evidence. There is no robust scientific evidence to prove that Homeopathy can cause clinical effects so, we usually consider them as pseudoscience or quackery.
Homeopathy – there’s no scientific evidence- So, is it a pseudoscience?
Just because scientists can’t observe and ‘prove’ it doesn’t mean that homeopathy doesn’t work. We can conclude that this has a positive effect on certain people’s health. Homeopathy Research Institute says that 10% of people in the UK use homeopathy. Homeopathy is the basis for medical treatment in some countries. India is one of those nations.
In India, 100 million people depend entirely on homeopathy for their medical treatment. There are over 200,000 registered homeopathic doctors. Doctors in India have successfully used it to treat big diseases such as cancer. In one study, researchers treated 21,888 patients with malignant tumors with homeopathy. Medical reports show that tumors have completely reduced in 19 percent cases. And it also stabilized or improved in 21 percent of patients. Researchers followed those people for between two and ten years to monitor the improvement.
Is homeopathy a placebo?
Simon Stevens described homeopathy as “at best placebo and misuse of scarce national health funds.”
He also reported that homeopathic remedies do not work better than placebo. The founding principles of homeopathy are “scientifically implausible.
Homeopathy is one of the most common complementary therapies used by people with cancer. People claim they feel better about homeopathy. But, there is no research to prove that it helps with any health problem. Scientists think that it has a placebo effect.
So the main causes of concern are:
- The poor use of taxpayers’ money
- The lack of scientific data
- The placebo effect
Why homeopathy a pseudoscience?
Homeopathy is not a medicine at all. Homeopathy is a persistent belief system, not a scientific approach to healing. We can not accept it as part of naturopathy or medicine.
Homeopathy is not to be given a special status. Homeopathy has not been able to prove that it works better than placebo. It survives in the German healthcare system. There is no need for objective evidence of the effectiveness of homeopathic remedies. So, we should abolish such dual-standard.
Patients and clinicians should recognize their self-deception. Homeopathic therapies may ease symptoms and have other therapeutic effects. But they are not attributable to dilution and super dilution. Instead, any effectiveness derives from placebo and human interactions between the patient and therapist. Most homeopathic practitioners and patients are likely unaware of the existence and power of suggestion. And also, they do not know about the placebo effects. But this does not change the fact that their results on homeopathy are wrong. Even it can be dangerous.
Embrace the science. The scientific theory can’t explain everything. But let us prove that no one can explain homeopathy scientifically. For instance, media politicians and complementary medicine companies promote trust in homeopathy. So, it should not be a justification for its use as a medical practice.
Criticism of homeopathy is not aimed at people who use this complementary therapy. Instead, it is aimed at schools of homeopathy and health care organizations who should have long acknowledged the nonsensical nature of homeopathy but have opted not to do so.
Homeopathy isn’t even science: What about pseudoscience?
The scientific method focuses on checking the truth of the hypotheses. It rigorously tests them in such a way that they can be disproved or confirmed. But at the same time, it ensures to exclude all other confounding factors. It uses large enough data sets so that any random differences become insignificant. So, this evidence base is what clinical medicine is mostly based on.
The method of homeopathy focuses on the following principles:
- It should be cured like-a substance that induces “similar” effects to one’s symptoms.
- The dilution of said curing agent increases the efficacy of its effects.
- The water has a “memory.” This belief in water’s memory extends to the “remembering” of water, such as exposure to X-rays or sunlight, before dilution. Sometimes also the homeopath’s dreams of preparing the dilution!
- Selecting a form based on a person’s history of life, a balance of irony, and even a star sign
Do any of these seem to be the application of the scientific method? Or even the theories established by the scientific method? That should be your answer straight away.
Unfortunately, some reports find that the only data supporting homeopathy is of poor quality. This indicates that we can not show the effects of homeopathy to be distinguishable from uncontrolled factors or placebo.
The evidence is clear: Homeopathy is a sham
The research community is monolithic against homeopathy. Many research, books, and investigations have proven that this type of therapy is fake. There is so much evidence of homeopathy’s failure to help people. Researchers have argued that it is time to stop spending government research money on this medicine.
The most thorough analysis of the evidence for homeopathy has yet come from the Australian Government.
The conclusion
This treatment doesn’t work. And people should avoid spending their time, resources, and money on what amounts to junk science.
The Australians have found several problems with homeopathy research. To begin with, the methods of many of the experiments were poor. They did not have enough participants:
- To provide meaningful results
- So the researchers failed to limit bias
- To control the confounding factors
However, even high-quality studies have not shown that homeopathy was better than placebo. It is also not better than any other available treatment for a variety of health conditions, including:
- Asthma
- Insomnia
- Chronic fatigue syndrome
- Colds
- Ulcers
The studies that claimed homeopathy had some health benefits were so flawed and poorly designed. These studies were not accurate.
This means that not only did homeopathy therapies perform no better than other drugs, but they also refused to perform sugar pills. Most homeopathic tablets and potions are essentially sugar pills and drops.
