Global InformationHomeopathy information
| Alternative medicine | |
|---|---|
| Homoeopathy | |
 Samuel Hahnemann, originator of homeopathy | |
| Pronunciation |
|
| Claims | "Like cures like", dilution increases potency, disease caused by miasms |
| Related fields | Alternative medicine |
| Original proponents | Samuel Hahnemann |
| Subsequent proponents |
|
| MeSH | D006705 |
| See also | Humorism, heroic medicine |
| This article is part of a series on |
| Alternative medicine |
|---|
 |
Homeopathy or homoeopathy is a pseudoscientific[1] system of alternative medicine. It was conceived in 1796 by the German physician Samuel Hahnemann. Its practitioners, called homeopaths or homeopathic physicians,[2] believe that a substance that causes symptoms of a disease in healthy people can cure similar symptoms in sick people; this doctrine is called similia similibus curentur, or "like cures like".[3] Homeopathic preparations are termed remedies and are made using homeopathic dilution. In this process, the selected substance is repeatedly diluted until the final product is chemically indistinguishable from the diluent. Often not even a single molecule of the original substance can be expected to remain in the product.[4] Between each dilution homeopaths may hit and/or shake the product, claiming this makes the diluent "remember" the original substance after its removal. Practitioners claim that such preparations, upon oral intake, can treat or cure disease.[5]
All relevant scientific knowledge about physics, chemistry, biochemistry and biology contradicts homeopathy.[6] Homeopathic remedies are typically biochemically inert, and have no effect on any known disease.[7][8][9] Its theory of disease, centered around principles Hahnemann termed miasms, is inconsistent with subsequent identification of viruses and bacteria as causes of disease. Clinical trials have been conducted and generally demonstrated no objective effect from homeopathic preparations.[10][11][12]: 206 [13] The fundamental implausibility of homeopathy as well as a lack of demonstrable effectiveness has led to it being characterized within the scientific and medical communities as quackery and fraud.[14][15][16]
Homeopathy achieved its greatest popularity in the 19th century. It was introduced to the United States in 1825, and the first American homeopathic school opened in 1835. Throughout the 19th century, dozens of homeopathic institutions appeared in Europe and the United States. During this period, homeopathy was able to appear relatively successful, as other forms of treatment could be harmful and ineffective. By the end of the century the practice began to wane, with the last exclusively homeopathic medical school in the United States closing in 1920. During the 1970s, homeopathy made a significant comeback, with sales of some homeopathic products increasing tenfold. The trend corresponded with the rise of the New Age movement, and may be in part due to chemophobia, an irrational aversion to synthetic chemicals, and the longer consultation times homeopathic practitioners provided.
In the 21st century, a series of meta-analyses have shown that the therapeutic claims of homeopathy lack scientific justification. As a result, national and international bodies have recommended the withdrawal of government funding for homeopathy in healthcare. National bodies from Australia, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and France, as well as the European Academies' Science Advisory Council and the Russian Academy of Sciences have all concluded that homeopathy is ineffective, and recommended against the practice receiving any further funding.[17][18][19][20] The National Health Service in England no longer provides funding for homeopathic remedies and asked the Department of Health to add homeopathic remedies to the list of forbidden prescription items.[21][22][23] France removed funding in 2021,[24][25] while Spain has also announced moves to ban homeopathy and other pseudotherapies from health centers.[26]
- ^
- Tuomela, R (1987). "Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience". In Pitt JC, Marcello P (eds.). Rational Changes in Science. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 98. Springer. pp. 83–101. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4. ISBN 978-94-010-8181-8.
- Mukerji N, Ernst E (September 14, 2022). "Why homoeopathy is pseudoscience". Synthese. 200 (5). doi:10.1007/s11229-022-03882-w. eISSN 1573-0964. S2CID 252297716.
- Baran GR, Kiana MF, Samuel SP (2014). "Science, Pseudoscience, and Not Science: How do They Differ?". Healthcare and Biomedical Technology in the 21st Century. Springer. pp. 19–57. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8541-4_2. ISBN 978-1-4614-8540-7.
within the traditional medical community it is considered to be quackery
- Ladyman J (2013). "Chapter 3: Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience". In Pigliucci M, Boudry M (eds.). Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp. 48–49. ISBN 978-0-226-05196-3.
Yet homeopathy is a paradigmatic example of pseudoscience. It is neither simply bad science nor science fraud, but rather profoundly departs from scientific method and theories while being described as scientific by some of its adherents (often sincerely).
- Tuomela, R (1987). "Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience". In Pitt JC, Marcello P (eds.). Rational Changes in Science. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 98. Springer. pp. 83–101. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4. ISBN 978-94-010-8181-8.
- ^ "Homeopathic Physician Licensure". OLR Research Report. Retrieved November 25, 2023.
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
Hahnemannwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ "Homeopathy". Royal Pharmaceutical Society. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
- ^ "Homeopathy". nhs.uk. October 18, 2017. Retrieved November 10, 2019.
- ^
- Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy". The Lancet. 366 (9487): 726–32. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2. PMID 16125589. S2CID 17939264.
- Ernst, E. (December 2012). "Homeopathy: a critique of current clinical research". Skeptical Inquirer. 36 (6).
- "Homeopathy". American Cancer Society. Archived from the original on March 16, 2013. Retrieved October 12, 2014.
- UK Parliamentary Committee Science and Technology Committee. "Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy"
- Grimes, D.R. (2012). "Proposed mechanisms for homeopathy are physically impossible". Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies. 17 (3): 149–55. doi:10.1111/j.2042-7166.2012.01162.x.
- "Homeopathic products and practices: assessing the evidence and ensuring consistency in regulating medical claims in the EU" (PDF). European Academies' Science Advisory Council. September 2017. p. 1. Retrieved October 1, 2017.
... we agree with previous extensive evaluations concluding that there are no known diseases for which there is robust, reproducible evidence that homeopathy is effective beyond the placebo effect.
- Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. (1842). Homoeopathy and its kindred delusions: Two lectures delivered before the Boston Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge. Boston. as reprinted in Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. (1861). Currents and counter-currents in medical science. Ticknor and Fields. pp. 72–188. OCLC 1544161. OL 14731800M.
- Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias (2005). "Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy". The Lancet. 366 (9487): 726–32. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2. PMID 16125589. S2CID 17939264.
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
shangwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Ernst, E. (2002). "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy". British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 54 (6): 577–82. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2125.2002.01699.x. PMC 1874503. PMID 12492603.
- ^ "Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy – Science and Technology Committee". British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. February 22, 2010. Retrieved April 5, 2014.
- ^ Caulfield, Timothy; Debow, Suzanne (2005). "A systematic review of how homeopathy is represented in conventional and CAM peer reviewed journals". BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 5: 12. doi:10.1186/1472-6882-5-12. PMC 1177924. PMID 15955254.
- ^ Gorski, David (October 13, 2008). "Fun with homeopaths and meta-analyses of homeopathy trials". Science-Based Medicine. Retrieved November 9, 2019.
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
Sheltonwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Ernst, E. (2010). "Homeopathy: What does the "best" evidence tell us?". Medical Journal of Australia. 192 (8): 458–60. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb03585.x. PMID 20402610. S2CID 42180344.
- ^ Baran GR, Kiana MF, Samuel SP (2014). "Science, Pseudoscience, and Not Science: How do They Differ?". Healthcare and Biomedical Technology in the 21st Century. Springer. pp. 19–57. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8541-4_2. ISBN 978-1-4614-8540-7.
within the traditional medical community it is considered to be quackery
- ^ Collins, Nick (April 18, 2013). "Homeopathy is nonsense, says new chief scientist". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on April 20, 2013. Retrieved September 9, 2013.
- ^ Paul S. Boyer (2001). The Oxford companion to United States history. Oxford University Press. p. 630. ISBN 978-0-19-508209-8. Retrieved January 15, 2013.
After 1847, when regular doctors organized the American Medical Association (AMA), that body led the war on "quackery", especially targeting dissenting medical groups such as homeopaths, who prescribed infinitesimally small doses of medicine. Ironically, even as the AMA attacked all homeopathy as quackery, educated homeopathic physicians were expelling untrained quacks from their ranks.
- ^ Musgrave, I (April 8, 2014). "No evidence homeopathy is effective: NHMRC review". The Conversation. Retrieved January 10, 2015.
- ^ "Swiss make New Year's regulations". Swiss Info. January 2012. Retrieved December 16, 2015.
- ^ "Homeopathic remedies are 'nonsense and risk significant harm' say 29 European scientific bodies". The Independent. September 23, 2017. Retrieved October 10, 2017.
- ^ "Memorandum #2. Homeopathy as pseudoscience". Commission on Pseudoscience. February 7, 2017. Retrieved June 25, 2019.
- ^ "NHS to ban homeopathy and herbal medicine, as 'misuse of resources'". Daily Telegraph. July 21, 2017. Archived from the original on January 11, 2022. Retrieved July 21, 2017.
- ^ Donnelly, Laura (June 5, 2018). "High Court backs NHS decision to stop funding homeopathy". Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on January 11, 2022. Retrieved August 26, 2018.
- ^ Gallagher, James (November 13, 2015). "Homeopathy 'could be blacklisted'". BBC News. Retrieved December 5, 2017.
- ^ "France to stop reimbursing patients for homeopathy". The Guardian. Agence France-Presse. July 10, 2019. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved July 30, 2019.
- ^ "Homéopathie: 2021 signe la fin du remboursement". France Info. January 2021. Retrieved November 18, 2023.
- ^ Güell, Oriol (November 14, 2018). "Spain moves to ban pseudo-therapies from universities and health centers". El País. ISSN 1134-6582. Retrieved July 30, 2019.