The British Homeopathic Association Undermine Public Confidence in Medicine

404px-New_York_City_school_children._2_girls_with_shining_faces,_opening_dayYou know, having asked David Bellamy earlier in the week to use his influence as Patron of the British Homeopathic Association, to urge them to unequivocally condemn those lay homeopaths who travel to Africa to treat HIV, malaria and TB with sugar pills, you might be surprised to learn that I am not expecting any sort of answer.

Then again, you might not.

I used to think that medical doctors who practiced homeopathy were hopefully using it as a way of delivering an elaborate placebo ritual. You might argue that there are classes of patients where the best you can do is provide a convincing placebo, and that homeopathy might be seen as a very effective framework in which you might do that. You might disagree with that, but at least there is an honest debate to be had there.

But it would appear that the doctors, many of them employed by the NHS, who use this 19th Century superstitious simulacra of medicine, are True Believers and are incapable of having a rational debate about the role of placebos in medical care.

As Autumn and the new educational year begins, the BHA are advertising their sugar pills for those starting University and for children on their first day of school.

What we see here is not just some paternalistic advice regarding using a placebo to satisfy a need for medical action when none is indicated, but an expression of fundamental homeopathic philosophy.

Dr Jenifer Worden, a GP from the New Forest, tells us that children can be classified homeopathically according to behavioural traits and given a particularly named sugar pill in order to ‘treat’ them. She is exploiting the normal reaction of a child on their first weeks of school to promote her pseudoscientific beliefs in homeopathy. Instead of seeing the standard anxieties and fears of a child going to school for the first time as a normal part of this life stage, she is medicalising these reactions according to homeopathic philosophy, and telling worried parents that they need to buy ‘remedies’ for these emotions.

We are told that ‘Calcarea carbonica’ is for children who might be ‘misjudged academically’ and spend time with jigsaw puzzles. That Pulsatilla is for ‘clingy children’ who like ice cream. ‘Natrum muriaticum’ is for children who keep their rooms tidy but have few friends. Sulphur is for ‘show off’ children who might be happy wearing mismatched socks. ‘Phosphorus’ for kids who are afraid of ghosts and like to suck ice-cubes. “Tuberculinum bovum” is for children with long eye lashes who might do naughty things and then act all innocent.

What Worden is doing here is adhering the homeopathic belief that we all can be matched to a ‘constitutional remedy’, a particular homeopathic product that is based on our personality. And that personality can be adversely affected by an imbalance in our ‘vital force’, or a ‘miasm’. This miasm can be corrected by the appropriately chosen remedy. It is pure superstitious nonsense from the pre-scientific era.

Supporters of alternative medicine like to claim that pharmaceutical companies medicalise normal aspects of our lives and they invent illnesses and drugs to treat them. The irony here is that this homeopathic doctor is doing just that on a grand scale. Indeed, homeopathy itself is based on an all encompassing medicalisation of normal emotions, symptoms and experiences in its mantra that the ‘whole person’ needs to be taken into account when prescribing. That is why you will never visit a homeopath and walk away without being advised to buy some sugar pills. We are all affected by one miasm or another and our unique constitutional remedy can solve our deepest life problems.

Would that Jenifer Worden stick to fantasy medicine. But the advice also stems into real childhood illnesses. She recommends that “Belladonna 30c” can be given every four to six hours for a high temperature, and that “Spongia” can be given for ‘cough with spasms so severe that the child ends up vomiting’

Remember, Dr Jenifer Worden could be your GP.

This is nothing sort of insanity. The GMC, the body charged with regulating doctors, take a somewhat offhand approach to all of this. The blogger Majikthyse tells us of a recent conversation with the GMC about its policy on evidence-based practice. The GMC say that doctors are expected to “provide effective treatments based on the best available evidence’ (paragraph 3c of Good Medical Practice)”.

However, in order to not stifle ‘innovation’ a doctor “who believed that treatment, which would generally be regarded as outside the boundaries of conventional practice” should “seek advice from at least one experienced colleague or ask a colleague to provide a second opinion”.

In the case of homeopathy, the BHA and their sister organisation, The Faculty of Homeopathy, provide a list of ‘phone a friend’ doctors who will undoubtedly be happy to endorse that ‘Sulphur’ should be given to children with odd socks.

The GMC regulations appear to take no account that within the medical profession there are small cult like groups who share common delusions and are prepared to reinforce each other. Homeopathy is not “outside the boundaries of conventional practice”; it is absurd nonsense based on superstitious thinking and discredited and surpassed views of health and biology.

As a patient, this is all rather alarming. How can I know that my GP is acting with reason, insight, circumspection and evidence when advising me on various courses of treatments? I do not want my GP happily promoting bogus nonsense to the patient in front of me and then hopefully stepping back from Narnia and into the real world when I present my rational worldview to them. Frankly, I would argue that a GP that is prepared to believe that children have homeopathic constitutions that need correcting with sugar pills is systematically incompetent and should not be practicing. That they do undermines the foundations of trust that should exist between the pubic and health professionals.

It does appear that homeopathic prescribing is in catastrophic free-fall within the NHS with an eightfold reduction in prescriptions over the last ten tears. It may well disappear within a very short space of time. That will be good. But I would rather it was as a result of unequivocal action from the regulators over the minority of homeopathic cultists rather than through slow abandonment. That way, we can be more confident that there are not too many other pockets of delusion amongst our GPs and that a trip to them is not a lottery of rationality.

60 Comments on The British Homeopathic Association Undermine Public Confidence in Medicine

  1. Not only does the GMC (para 3c) require a doctor to act on best available evidence, but also to ensure the patient gives properly informed consent to treatment.

    That means the doctor is obliged to advise patients of the lack of scientific evidence for any particular treatment they propose.

    If this GP fails on either or both counts, her fitness to practice is indeed called into question.

    Any concerned patient should write to the Fitness to Practice Committee, GMC, manchester (details on web site).

    At once. What else is this doctor capable of?

  2. My daughter starts school on Monday. Heaven forbid she’s a bit nervous for the first weeks before she settles in.

    As she likes jigsaw puzzles and ice cream, the odd cuddle, has a tidy room, four friends (is that classed as “few?), shows off from time to time, is never seen without mismatched socks, cried on the ghost train at Blackpool Pleasure beach, grabs the ice-cubes out of my drinks (once within seconds of stroking next door’s filthy dog), has long eye lashes and would at times test the patience of a saint, can anyone tell me whether it would be safe to take all the pills this cretin recommends without any side effects?

    Does any 4 year old not fit into all of these groups from time to time?

    A final point, when homeopaths try to get all scientific and insist all medications they recommend are based on ‘provings’, surely the provings for this nonsense should be available or at least evidence that they took place should exist. If not (as I suspect) it just goes to show once more that they don’t even live by their own rules and basically admit they make this stuff up.


  3. Hello Andy

    David Bellamy is a very busy man with lots of projects on the boil. It is rather conceited of you to imagine that he will waste his time on your nonsense. His professional life is far more successful than yours.
    You remind me rather of Robin Cooper who is famous for the ‘Timewaster Letters’ books. I recommend them esp the first, and maybe you could get some extra tips if you peruse them.
    Hope you are well. It seems Canard family life in the backwaters of Aylesbury is not keeping you busy enough.

    • “His professional life is far more successful than yours”.

      Why? Because he appeared on TV a lot. If that’s your definition of success I suppose he must be more successful than most. If you consider science as his profession he wasn’t anything out of the ordinary. No world changing, Nobel prize nominated research as far as I’m aware.

      Homeopathy is still a load of old pseudomagic (not even proper magic).

  4. Stuart,

    As a homeopathic bookseller, you too might have some influence in the community of homeopaths. Would you be prepared to speak out against homeopaths who use their sugar pills to treat HIV, malaria and TB, or do you support their actions?


    • Thank you for your reply. No responsible homeopath that I know would interfere with a patient taking orthodox treatment for HIV, malaria or TB. I think this is esentially mischief and propaganda from the sceptics. TB is a notifiable disease and it would in truth be criminal to interfere
      Regarding Malaria, this kills countless people about the world and undermines their health once they have recovered (assuming they do). Everybody knows this and it is certainly not established that all people respond to homeopathic remedies and it can’t be assumed that the correct one will always be chosen so no sensible homeopath would place their head on a block.
      There is a 300 page book entitled ‘Malaria and Homoeopathy’ by a Dr Hitesh Shah but I assure you that none of my customers buy it. Even in this book I can find no advice regarding avoidance of orthodox medication. I really do think you are fighting a false battle.

      • Stewart McOwan said:

        No responsible homeopath that I know would interfere with a patient taking orthodox treatment for HIV, malaria or TB.

        What about, say, tetanus or polio?

        By the way, I take it you missed Newsnight last February?

      • Stewart

        Let’s have a straight answer please. What do you propose to do about the Abha Light Foundation and Jeremy Sherr?

        I think this is esentially mischief and propaganda from the sceptics

        Are you saying that Abha Light and Jeremy Sherr do no exist?

        No mucking about. Simple direct answers, please.

      • Stewart – it is difficult to know how to take your response.

        You claim that ‘No responsible homeopath’ would interfere with patient’s medication and that such claims are ‘mischief and propaganda’. This is just not a credible reply.

        Let me point out some facts – correct me if I am wrong:

        1) Homeopathy was founded by Hahnemann as a complete system of medicine and theory of health and that this was superior to all other philosophies on health and medicine.
        2) Hahnemann believed other forms of treatment were ‘suppressive’ and an actual cause of disease – if not the biggest cause of disease. So, a homeopaths’ duty was to minimise treatments from ‘allopaths’ and counter their bad effects if necessary.
        3) This original and fundamentalist view of homeopathy is alive and well today. And I would suggest is even mainstream. Just look at the Registrar of the Alliance of Registered Homeopath’s blog ( It is a rant against mainstream medicine and its supposed dangers – all to promote homeopathy.
        4) Anti-medical views are mainstream within the UK homeopathic community – look at their views on immunisations for example on any chat board or blog.
        5) Hahnemann’s first experiments in homeopathy were on malaria – it is the archetype of homeopathy – not some fringe idea.
        6) Abha Light in Kenya have been selling anti-malaria homeopathic drops for years and treating HIV and TB. An undercover investigation by a Kenyan reporter in association with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and the Independent Newspaper recorded a homeopath there advising a person with HIV to stop taking their ARVs and to rely on homeopathy.
        7) Jeremy Sherr in Tanzania has similar clinics. His promotional material for HIV and malaria treatment tells people that homeopathy is superior to mainstream medicine without any side effects. This stance falls foul of the Society of Homeopaths code of conduct. But instead of denouncing what he does, he is invited as guest of honour and key-note speaker at their conferences.

        Of course, it is a simple truth that no responsible homeopath would be involved in such things – as you say. But there is ample evidence of plenty of irresponsible homeopaths doing such things and a disturbing lack of evidence for any homeopaths prepared to speak out against these serious wrong-doings. Where are the responsible homeopaths?

        So, Stewart, I cannot make out if you are a) ignorant about homeopathy and homeopaths (which seams unlikely as you run a homeopathic bookshop, b) have your head buried deeply in the sand or c) practice that cult-like behaviour where you deny all internal wrong doing, blame your accusers, and do not admit any weaknesses or your true beliefs to the outside world.

        Can you enlighten me?

        And will you condemn those homeopaths travelling to Africa to use homeopathy for HIV, malaria and TB.

    • Regarding the comment by Alan Henness. Does he seriously imagine that a homeopath with suspected polio would refuse to go to the hospital? It can move very fast and paralyse for life.
      The problem here is skeptics who seem to have never met real homeopaths and then start making ridiculous assumptions. There is a complete absence of objectivity regarding homeopaths on this site. We see here instead total prejudice. There is a fuss about homeopathy in the NHS when is takes approx 0.001% of the budget according to last week’s Telegraph. Try tackling the brown envelope culture which is rampant and implement proper competitive tendering in the NHS and trim 15% easily. Start reviewing multiple drug prescriptions of old people and save hundreds of millions. Unfortunately the people here, some who are doctors would rather worry about the ‘waste’ of homeopathy.

      • Just wondering where that response was to the very simple question. Do you condemn the likes of Abha Light and Jeremy Sherr?

      • Stewart

        Considering the immoral activities of the homeopaths Le Canard Noir has highlighted, yes, I can seriously imagine homeopaths telling their customers to shun proper medical care and ‘prescribing’ sugar pills instead.

        What about malaria prophylaxis? Have you watched that video I linked to yet?

      • “Does he seriously imagine that a homeopath with suspected polio would refuse to go to the hospital? It can move very fast and paralyse for life.”

        Your honour, I present as evidence the torture endured by Penelope Dingle at the behest of her homeopath, and rest my case – without even mentioning Gloria Sam (Thomas).

    • Yes, Alan I did watch the link with the party song in Tanzania. I’m assuming (hoping) that is what it is – a party song. A flattering happy OTT song of praise written for a visitor from overseas. It is an African tradition to make up glorifying songs. It is part of the hospitality. Hopefully that is all it is and not to be taken too seriously.
      I don’t consider ‘homoeopathic prophylaxis’ to be homoeopathy as it is a prescription for something that hasn’t even happened yet and may never do so. Some homeopathic pharmacies have found it hard to refuse customers when offered money for ‘Malaria Co’ as you may know. Obviously such medicines should come with a warning on the bottle that nothing has been proved.

      • Stewart

        I have no idea what ‘party song’ you’re on about. I didn’t actually link to the video, but you can find it here.

        I’m glad you have no faith in homeopathic prophylaxis for malaria. It’s just a pity there are homeopaths who don’t share your enlightened views. And I hope you don’t expect me to feel sorry for the poor pressured pharmacists unable to resist selling sugar pills for malaria prevention. Do you agree that the ethical thing for pharmacists and homeopaths to do would be to tell their customers in no uncertain terms that there is not a jot of evidence for the prevention of malaria using homeopathy and that they must consult a properly qualified medical practitioner?

      • I think Stewart means we should regard this

        video as just a ‘party song’. A happy, jolly, party song. We shouldn’t take it seriously. It’s just a ‘part song’. When it keeps repeating that homeopathy is “very good medicine with no side effects”.

        I’m sure that creating professional videos of songs, editing, subtitling and posting them on YouTube is a sure sign we are not supposed to take them literally.

        Disingenuous?? Peut-etre, un petit.

  5. The idea that David Bellamy is more successful (by whatever criteria) than the Duck is of course beside the point, and is a classic example of ad hominem.

    Let’s have rational debate, please.

  6. This is yet another amazing example of the bizzare dichotomy of pre-scientific and postmodernist ideation that is homeopathy! The homeopath’s NO-science and “quantum” pseudo-science is combined with relativistic evaluations gleaned from shallow behavioral analyses to culminate in astounding non sequiturs that are somehow used to “prescribe” magic water homeopathic nostrums. I refuse to call them medicines.

  7. “I used to think that medical doctors who practiced homeopathy were hopefully using it as a way of delivering an elaborate placebo ritual.”

    I think naive because if they wanted a placebo why would they opt for a homoeopathic one? There would have to be some prior preference for homoeopathic placebo over the others or some evidence to prefer homoeopathic placebos over other placebos.

    The evidence such as it is suggests surgery, acupuncture or sham devices be preferred over pills for best placebo effect, although it could be condition dependent.

    I don’t think there was ever a point in history when the evidence suggested homoeopathic remedies were the most effective placebos. As such the decision to use homoeopathy could never have been both informed and rational, unless it was preferred because of questions of availability or practicality. Although I suspect a rare doctors practice that doesn’t have some equipment that could pass as a sham medical device to the uninitiated for the purposes of placebo.

      • Very good point.

        A high probability Stewart is right on this.

        But still a very high probability, virtually certain, the homeopathic remedies themselves have no effect beyond the placebo.

        I see his latest contribution is signed off as ‘Pillock’. Is that stewart’s nickname or nom-de-plume, and would he like us to use it?

      • The fact that the patient is encouraged to discuss their entire life history…

        Do they do this over a cupfull of liquid that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea?

        Or do they just get the sugar pill?

  8. It has been pointed out that that the GMC is a bit wooly when it comes to woo. And guess who is president of the so called “college of medicine” . None other than Sir Graeme Catto, past president of the GMC

  9. Stewart McOwan displays usual pattern for a homeopath; dodge the simple direct questions.

    Come on, Stewart, let’s have an honest, straight non-weaselly answer

    Do you condemn the likes of Abha Light and Jeremy Sherr?

  10. I am afraid BSM that Stewart McOwan appears no different from any other supporter of homeopathy. He came on here to be rude to me – not address the issue. When asked a simple and direct question, he refused to answer and instead denied all knowledge of the problem. When this was pointed out as not credible, he ignored the response and was rude to commenters. And when repeatedly asked the simple challenge, has now run away.

    McOwan is stuck. He must either retract his original statement and condemn the homeopaths – but if he does, the customers of his bookstore will not be at all happy. Better just to be rude and slink off.

    I thought homeopaths were the nice people?

    • If Andy expects me to ‘condemn’ Jeremy Sherr or Adha Light when the Tanzanian and Kenyan Governments seem to have no problems with them then I will have to disappoint him. They are far better placed to see what is really going on.
      I have to be sceptical of the undercover Kenyan journalist as I know personally that content of some African newspapers is not always rigorously vetted. Anybody could have written it.

      • This is fascinating. Here we have clear evidence of Jeremy Sherr foisting ineffective treatments on vulnerable, ill educated people with deadly diseases. I don’t think I need an African government employee to tell me that this is basically, well, evil.
        And Stuart, who probably thinks of himself as one of the good guys, cannot bring himself to admit this, even though he knows homeopathy is useless for AIDS.
        Stuart, I know your commercial interests must make this difficult. But how can you live with yourself?

      • Now, here, you don’t seem to know what Sherr is up to, yet you defend him. Instead what you do is rely on the competence of the doubtless highly scientifically and medically literate governments of Tanzania and Kenya.

    • Apologies Andy for the lack of considered reply to your message with endless points but Sunday was yet another birthday plus this is a busy time of year. You have been rude to me in the past so I don’t feel guilty. Trust even you may understand.
      I will plough through the endless points when I can squeeze the time in. Money comes before your hurt feelings,

  11. If any of these folks/organizations use Facebook, many people could try to friend and then write true statements on their wall, being careful to not slander them. Sort of a Facebo effect

  12. <blockquoteDoes he seriously imagine that a homeopath with suspected polio would refuse to go to the hospital?

    I don’t know. Perhaps we should ask the homeopath parents of dead child Gloria Thomas for their opinions. Can Stewart contact the prisons they in which they are being held?

      • Indeed. As has been said in the past, there are no brave surgeons, only brave patients. Homeopaths aggravate this by pissing in the patient’s ear rather than at least wielding a scalpel to uncertain benefit.

        You may well, be right that there are few Western fans of homeopathy who will suffer to the end of their own illness comforted only by little sugar pills.

  13. It may get a lost if I post it further up this thread, but here is an interview with Jeremy Sherr.

    Compare this with what Stewart wants us to regard as a ‘party song’ whose content we should just not take seriously.

    Does Sherr think treating AIDS with homeopathy is just a harmless bit of fun?

    Let’s not forget who supports him in his endeavours.


    “We don’t get any bucks from the big institutions. So…you know…It’s the homeopaths have been supporting us all the way”

    So, Stewart, it’s back to those questions again.

    Do you condemn the likes of Abha Light and Jeremy Sherr?

    What about the UK homeopaths who support him?

    • Nowhere in this interview does Jeremy Sherr state that he is encouraging patients to go off orthodox treatments so what is your problem? The problem is that you don’t like homeopathy and that is all. It is simply YOUR personal problem with it and your prejudice.
      Jeremy Sherr was my tutor for a year at college and I know the guy. He is very well-known for magnificent results with his patients. I find him far more credible than a sceptic who has probably never even bothered to check out a real-life homeopath. If he was after money, material comforts and fame why go to Tanzania? If he was a money-grabbing quack he would be in Los Angeles etc

      • So, Stewart, tell us clearly if you are shown evidence of Sherr advising homeopathy instead of antiretrovirals or other conventional medication, what would you say then?

      • No, let’s turn it around. Let’s say Sherr says he never takes a patient off antiretrovirals.

        That raises a whole load of interesting questions. Here’s an obvious one.

        He adamantly practises “classical” homeopathy. Not much scope for conventional medicines there. They just “suppress” disease. Does Sherr not really think homeopathy works? It’s very easy to claim success if all he ever does is piggy-back his sugar pills on people using real medication.

        I don’t have a “personal” problem with homeopathy. Homeopathy is objectively a problem. It is nothing but a threat to health being exploited by grief tourists in Africa for their own self-aggrandisement.


        I think we have our answer.

        “As you know we do not take anyone off ARVs”

        Well that’s all right then. But is it really? Read a little further and pay attention to what is being said.

        ” Not everyone is on ARVs; some refuse to take them, others will not go to the clinics due to the stigma attached, and many have too high a CD4 count to justify medication. ”

        So, it looks like Sherr is there giving homeopathy to people on ARVs, in whom he does not have them stop their ARVs, but also to those who cannot or will not take ARVs. Of course, it’s those last two groups where we have the problem.

        Homeopathic clinics feed the fantasy that there is some magic solution to AIDS. Any effort and resources expended on this just leads down the disastrous path which South Africa took. With no supervision by competent authorities who knows how the decisions are made that any particular patient will have to give up with ARVs and go solely onto homeopathic sugar.

      • Also, let’s not forget. These people have malaria. They have TB. They have real diseases of many sorts. They may not have access to much in the way of effective medication but what good is being done by a homeopath handing out sugar pills instead of medicine?

        That was not a rhetorical question. Answer, please, Stewart.

        Let me remind you what Dr Peter Fisher said about homeopathy and malaria;

        The hospital’s Director Peter Fisher told Newsnight “I’m very angry about it because people are going to get malaria – there is absolutely no reason to think that homeopathy works to prevent malaria and you won’t find that in any textbook or journal of homeopathy so people will get malaria, people may even die of malaria if they follow this advice.”

        The same money and resources could be spent on small scale nursing clinics or similar where any benefit would be genuine not an illusion.

      • BSM quotes from Dr Fisher- was it from 2006 or 2007

        The hospital’s Director Peter Fisher told Newsnight “I’m very angry about it because people are going to get malaria – there is absolutely no reason to think that homeopathy works to prevent malaria and you won’t find that in any textbook or journal of homeopathy so people will get malaria, people may even die of malaria if they follow this advice.”

        However go to:

        You will see Dr Fisher saying the following about the Cuba Leptospirosis study- 2009 or 2010?

        “This is a very large study and its results, if confirmed, have huge potential impact. We need more research into the effectiveness of homeopathic preparations in preventing infectious diseases, complications, and the economic viability of a homeopathic approach.”

        He seems to be either contradicting himself or he has changed his opinion.

      • I think for homeopaths the word truth sits right next to the word expediency in the dictionary.

        They say whatever they can get away with given the current audience. Of course, in their wake they leave a trail of contradictions and inconsistencies that we can pick over. Unfortunately it’s hard ever to confront the buggers with the evidence of their slipperiness.

  14. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that “Tuberculinum bovum” is “prescribed” (ahem, slight cough) for children with long eye lashes who might do naughty things and then act all innocent because cows have long eyelashes.

    They also do naughty things in fields and stand around fluttering their long eyelashes and looking all innocent. (I know that for a fact because I have trodden in their “naughty things”.)

    Such is the ludicrous basis of like cures like that they base this nonsense on.

  15. Limericks for the occasion:

    In Seventeen Hundred Ninety Six,
    S. Hahnemann made the very first mix,
    By the Law of Similars,
    Then dilution by swindlers,
    Was the start of these deceitful tricks.

    Placing just one drop on a sugar pill,
    Gives it a potency of just about nill,
    No better than a placebo,
    But may act as a nocebo,
    Without proper treatment it just might kill.

    In Africa AIDS
    And other bad plagues,
    They say it will cure,
    One hopes it’ll secure
    A quick trip to Hades.

  16. The world has heard and seen it all before – the witch hunts, the pogroms, the inquisitions, the crusades, the concentration camps, the frenzied hunt for the Albigensians, the destructions of indigenous populations in the name of God and “civilization”, the killing of a young Iraqi in custody under suspicion of terrorism by members of the British army – to name the most recent casualty caused by the hate of “the other”.

    What has your emotive language got to do with science? When will we find the word “vermin” being used in connection with homeopaths? When will the call come to smash their shop windows, to send the inquisitors in, to put a littel yellow star, red sickle, white cross or the word “quack” on their doors and websites – in the name of science and to “protect” the public?

    You should all be ashamed of yourselves throwing the spittle sodden language of a dog affected by rabies at people in the name of truth, science and medicine! What you are fighting is your own doubt, fear, broken hope and failure – no difference to the people who – at different times in different places – did all the stuff I mentioned above.
    “The first casualty of war is truth” – had you noticed you were at war? And is it a holy war? I am afraid so.

    • Gosh!
      I follow this site as a quiet observer, convinced that homoeopathy is a complex application of a placebo applied by generally agreeable, sympathetic and listening practitioners. While this may suffice for the “worried-well” of UK, often with good outcomes, it can’t be right to assert its application to rabid and serious inflictions.

      There has always been some sort of defence along the lines, “If it makes people feel better, then why can’t they buy it?” In places where HIV/AIDS & Malaria are rampant? Obviously not.

      I am genuinely and sincerely shocked at the last post. I feel that its tone is so out of place on this blog. I am more than well-prepared to read evidence, such as it is, and consider the debate but I feel that the comments above are well outside what intelligent thoughtful people should allow.

  17. I follow this site as a quiet observer, convinced that homoeopathy is a complex application of a placebo applied by generally agreeable, sympathetic and listening practitioners.

    Look out for the many challenges from homoeopaths for skeptics to carry out “provings” of particular remedies. They invariably seem to choose remedies that they think wil cause particularly unpleasant symptoms. These are not nice people.

  18. If any of these skeptics would bother actually reading Kent and Hahnemann……..
    Also what Stewart said above is true, no good homeopath would interfere with an AIDS treatment, since there is no homeopathic treatment for AIDS.

  19. I have read these texts and they are obvious nonsense. The ramblings of a pre-scientific quack.

    And I would agree with you that no good homeopath would treat AIDS. But that is because there are no good homeopaths – only the delusional or fraudulent.

  20. Have you heard of Hering? The German medical student that set out to disprove homeopathy and ended up being one of the greatest homeopaths ever?
    FYI, I have a family member that was just cured from diagnosed ALS by an homeopath…….

  21. Yes of course I have heard of Hering. That he fell for the illusion of homeopathy says nothing about homeopathy, but lots about his critical thinking.

    ALS like symptoms can be caused by a variety of conditions. Secondary diagnosis is required. You should ensure your ‘cure’ is fully written up.

3 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Notes On ‘Trick Or Treatment’- Chapter 3- Homeopathy by Ernst & Singh. « Loftier Musings
  2. Homeopathy Miasms: Fundamental Cause of Stupid « Short and Spiky
  3. The Faculty of Homeopaths strikes back « Short and Spiky

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.