|Alternative medicine / fringe therapies|
Samuel Hahnemann, originator of homeopathy
|Claims||"Like cures like", dilution increases potency, disease caused by miasms.|
|Related fields||Chemistry, Medicine|
|Original proponents||Samuel Hahnemann|
|Subsequent proponents||James Tyler Kent, Royal S. Copeland, George Vithoulkas|
|See also||Humorism, heroic medicine|
|Previous NCCAM domains|
Homeopathy i// (also spelled homoeopathy or homœopathy; from the Greek ὅμοιος hómoios "like-" and πάθος páthos "suffering") is a system of alternative medicine created in 1796 by Samuel Hahnemann, based on his doctrine of like cures like, according to which a substance that causes the symptoms of a disease in healthy people will cure similar symptoms in sick people. Homeopathy is considered a pseudoscience, and its remedies have been found to be no more effective than placebos.
Hahnemann believed the underlying causes of disease were phenomena that he termed miasms, and that homeopathic remedies addressed these. The remedies are prepared by repeatedly diluting a chosen substance in alcohol or distilled water, followed by forceful striking on an elastic body. Dilution usually continues well past the point where no molecules of the original substance remain. Homeopaths select remedies by consulting reference books known as repertories, and by considering the totality of the patient's symptoms, personal traits, physical and psychological state, and life history.
Homeopathy lacks biological plausibility and the axioms of homeopathy have been refuted for some time. The postulated mechanisms of action of homeopathic remedies are both scientifically implausible and not physically possible. Although some clinical trials produce positive results, systematic reviews reveal that this is because of chance, flawed research methods, and reporting bias. Overall there is no evidence of efficacy. Continued homeopathic practice, despite the evidence that it does not work, has been criticized as unethical because it increases the suffering of patients by discouraging the use of real medicine, with the World Health Organisation warning against using homeopathy to try to treat severe diseases such as HIV and malaria. The continued practice, despite a lack of evidence of efficacy, has led to homeopathy being characterized within the scientific and medical communities as nonsense, quackery, or a sham.
The British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has stated: "In our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebos. The Government shares our interpretation of the evidence."
- 1 History
- 2 Remedies and treatment
- 3 Evidence and efficacy
- 3.1 Plausibility
- 3.2 Efficacy
- 3.3 Explanations of perceived effects
- 3.4 Effects in other biological systems
- 3.5 Ethics and safety
- 4 Regulation and prevalence
- 5 Public opposition
- 6 See also
- 7 References
- 8 External links
Homeopaths claim that Hippocrates may have originated homeopathy around 400 BC, when he prescribed a small dose of mandrake root to treat mania, knowing it produces mania in much larger doses. In the 16th century, the pioneer of pharmacology Paracelsus declared that small doses of "what makes a man ill also cures him." Samuel Hahnemann (1755–1843) gave homeopathy its name and expanded its principles in the late 18th century. At that time, mainstream medicine used methods like bloodletting and purging, and administered complex mixtures, such as Venice treacle, which was made from 64 substances including opium, myrrh, and viper's flesh. These treatments often worsened symptoms and sometimes proved fatal. Hahnemann rejected these practices – which had been extolled for centuries – as irrational and inadvisable; instead, he advocated the use of single drugs at lower doses and promoted an immaterial, vitalistic view of how living organisms function, believing that diseases have spiritual, as well as physical causes.
The term "homeopathy" was coined by Hahnemann and first appeared in print in 1807.
Hahnemann conceived of homeopathy while translating a medical treatise by the Scottish physician and chemist William Cullen into German. Being skeptical of Cullen's theory concerning cinchona's use for curing malaria, Hahnemann ingested some of the bark specifically to investigate what would happen. He experienced fever, shivering and joint pain: symptoms similar to those of malaria itself. From this, Hahnemann came to believe that all effective drugs produce symptoms in healthy individuals similar to those of the diseases that they treat, in accord with the "law of similars" that had been proposed by ancient physicians. An account of the effects of eating cinchona bark noted by Oliver Wendell Holmes, and published in 1861, failed to reproduce the symptoms Hahnemann reported.:128 Hahnemann's law of similars is a postulate rather than a scientific law.
Subsequent scientific work shows that cinchona cures malaria because it contains quinine, which kills the Plasmodium falciparum parasite that causes the disease; the mechanism of action is unrelated to the symptoms of cinchonism.
Hahnemann began to test what effects substances produced in humans, a procedure that would later become known as "homeopathic proving". These tests required subjects to test the effects of ingesting substances by clearly recording all of their symptoms as well as the ancillary conditions under which they appeared. A collection of provings was published in 1805, and a second collection of 65 remedies appeared in his book, Materia Medica Pura, in 1810.
Because Hahnemann believed that large doses of drugs that caused similar symptoms would only aggravate illness, he advocated extreme dilutions of the substances; he devised a technique for making dilutions that he believed would preserve a substance's therapeutic properties while removing its harmful effects. Hahnemann believed that this process aroused and enhanced "the spirit-like medicinal powers of the crude substances". He gathered and published a complete overview of his new medical system in his 1810 book, The Organon of the Healing Art, whose 6th edition, published in 1921, is still used by homeopaths today.
Miasms and disease
In The Organon of the Healing Art, Hahnemann introduced the concept of "miasms" as "infectious principles" underlying chronic disease. Hahnemann associated each miasm with specific diseases, and thought that initial exposure to miasms causes local symptoms, such as skin or venereal diseases; if however these symptoms were suppressed by medication, the cause went deeper and began to manifest itself as diseases of the internal organs. Homeopathy maintains that treating diseases by directly opposing their symptoms, as is sometimes done in conventional medicine, is ineffective because all "disease can generally be traced to some latent, deep-seated, underlying chronic, or inherited tendency". The underlying imputed miasm still remains, and deep-seated ailments can be corrected only by removing the deeper disturbance of the vital force.
Hahnemann originally presented only three miasms, of which the most important was psora (Greek for "itch"), described as being related to any itching diseases of the skin, supposed to be derived from suppressed scabies, and claimed to be the foundation of many further disease conditions. Hahnemann believed psora to be the cause of such diseases as epilepsy, cancer, jaundice, deafness, and cataracts. Since Hahnemann's time, other miasms have been proposed, some replacing one or more of psora's proposed functions, including tuberculosis and cancer miasms.
The law of susceptibility implies that a negative state of mind can attract hypothetical disease entities called "miasms" to invade the body and produce symptoms of diseases.[dead link] Hahnemann rejected the notion of a disease as a separate thing or invading entity, and insisted it was always part of the "living whole". Hahnemann coined the expression "allopathic medicine", which was used to pejoratively refer to traditional Western medicine.
Hahnemann's miasm theory remains disputed and controversial within homeopathy even in modern times. The theory of miasms has been criticized as an explanation developed by Hahnemann to preserve the system of homeopathy in the face of treatment failures, and for being inadequate to cover the many hundreds of sorts of diseases, as well as for failing to explain disease predispositions, as well as genetics, environmental factors, and the unique disease history of each patient.:148–9
19th century: rise to popularity and early criticism
Homeopathy achieved its greatest popularity in the 19th century. Dr. John Franklin Gray (1804–1882) was the first practitioner of homeopathy in the United States, beginning in 1828 in New York City. The first homeopathic school in the U.S.A. opened in 1835, and in 1844, the first U.S. national medical association, the American Institute of Homeopathy, was established and throughout the 19th century, dozens of homeopathic institutions appeared in Europe and the United States. By 1900, there were 22 homeopathic colleges and 15,000 practitioners in the United States. Because medical practice of the time relied on ineffective and often dangerous treatments, patients of homeopaths often had better outcomes than those of the doctors of the time. Homeopathic remedies, even if ineffective, would almost surely cause no harm, making the users of homeopathic remedies less likely to be killed by the treatment that was supposed to be helping them. The relative success of homeopathy in the 19th century may have led to the abandonment of the ineffective and harmful treatments of bloodletting and purging and to have begun the move towards more effective, science-based medicine. One reason for the growing popularity of homeopathy was its apparent success in treating people suffering from infectious disease epidemics. During 19th century epidemics of diseases such as cholera, death rates in homeopathic hospitals were often lower than in conventional hospitals, where the treatments used at the time were often harmful and did little or nothing to combat the diseases.
From its inception, however, homeopathy was criticized by mainstream science. Sir John Forbes, physician to Queen Victoria, said in 1843 that the extremely small doses of homeopathy were regularly derided as useless, "an outrage to human reason". James Young Simpson said in 1853 of the highly diluted drugs: "No poison, however strong or powerful, the billionth or decillionth of which would in the least degree affect a man or harm a fly." 19th-century American physician and author Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. was also a vocal critic of homeopathy and published an essay in 1842 entitled Homœopathy and Its Kindred Delusions. The members of the French Homeopathic Society observed in 1867 that some of the leading homeopathists of Europe not only were abandoning the practice of administering infinitesimal doses but were also no longer defending it. The last school in the U.S. exclusively teaching homeopathy closed in 1920.
Revival in the 20th century
According to Paul Ulrich Unschuld, the Nazi regime in Germany were fascinated by homeopathy, and spent large sums of money on researching its mechanisms, but without gaining a positive result. Unschuld further argues that homeopathy never subsequently took root in the United States, but remained more deeply established in European thinking.
In the United States the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (sponsored by Royal Copeland, a Senator from New York and homeopathic physician) recognized homeopathic remedies as drugs. In the 1950s, there were only 75 pure homeopaths practicing in the U.S. However, by the mid to late 1970s, homeopathy made a significant comeback and sales of some homeopathic companies increased tenfold. Some homeopaths give credit for the revival to Greek homeopath George Vithoulkas, who performed a "great deal of research to update the scenarios and refine the theories and practice of homeopathy" beginning in the 1970s, but Ernst and Singh consider it to be linked to the rise of the New Age movement. Whichever is correct, mainstream pharmacy chains recognized the business potential of selling homeopathic remedies.
Bruce Hood has argued that the increased popularity of homeopathy in recent times may be due to the comparatively long consultations practitioners are willing to give their patients, and to an irrational preference for "natural" products which people think are the basis of homeopathic remedies.
Remedies and treatment
Homeopathic practitioners rely on two types of reference when prescribing remedies: materia medica and repertories. A homeopathic materia medica is a collection of "drug pictures", organised alphabetically by "remedy,". These entries describe the symptom patterns associated with individual remedies. A homeopathic repertory is an index of disease symptoms that lists remedies associated with specific symptoms.
Homeopathy uses many animal, plant, mineral, and synthetic substances in its remedies. Examples include arsenicum album (arsenic oxide), natrum muriaticum (sodium chloride or table salt), Lachesis muta (the venom of the bushmaster snake), opium, and thyroidinum (thyroid hormone). Homeopaths also use treatments called "nosodes" (from the Greek nosos, disease) made from diseased or pathological products such as fecal, urinary, and respiratory discharges, blood, and tissue. Homeopathic remedies prepared from healthy specimens are called "sarcodes".
Some modern homeopaths have considered more esoteric bases for remedies, known as "imponderables" because they do not originate from a substance, but from electromagnetic energy presumed to have been "captured" by alcohol or lactose. Examples include X-rays and sunlight. Today, about 3,000 different remedies are commonly used in homeopathy. Some homeopaths also use techniques that are regarded by other practitioners as controversial. These include "paper remedies", where the substance and dilution are written on pieces of paper and either pinned to the patients' clothing, put in their pockets, or placed under glasses of water that are then given to the patients, as well as the use of radionics to prepare remedies. Such practices have been strongly criticised by classical homeopaths as unfounded, speculative, and verging upon magic and superstition.
In producing remedies for diseases, homeopaths use a process called "dynamisation" or "potentisation", whereby a substance is diluted with alcohol or distilled water and then vigorously shaken by 10 hard strikes against an elastic body in a process homeopaths call "succussion". Hahnemann advocated using substances that produce symptoms like those of the disease being treated, but found that undiluted doses intensified the symptoms and exacerbated the condition, sometimes causing dangerous toxic reactions. He therefore specified that the substances be diluted, due to his belief that succussion activated the "vital energy" of the diluted substance and made it stronger. To facilitate succussion, Hahnemann had a saddle-maker construct a special wooden striking board covered in leather on one side and stuffed with horsehair. transcript). Insoluble solids, such as quartz and oyster shell, are diluted by grinding them with lactose ("trituration").
Three logarithmic potency scales are in regular use in homeopathy. Hahnemann created the "centesimal" or "C scale", diluting a substance by a factor of 100 at each stage. The centesimal scale was favored by Hahnemann for most of his life. A 2C dilution requires a substance to be diluted to one part in 100, and then some of that diluted solution diluted by a further factor of 100. This works out to one part of the original substance in 10,000 parts of the solution. A 6C dilution repeats this process six times, ending up with the original substance diluted by a factor of 100−6=10−12 (one part in one trillion or 1/1,000,000,000,000). Higher dilutions follow the same pattern. In homeopathy, a solution that is more dilute is described as having a higher potency, and more dilute substances are considered by homeopaths to be stronger and deeper-acting remedies. The end product is often so diluted as to be indistinguishable from the dilutant (pure water, sugar or alcohol). There is also a decimal potency scale (notated as "X" or "D") in which the remedy is diluted by a factor of 10 at each stage.
Hahnemann advocated 30C dilutions for most purposes (that is, dilution by a factor of 1060). In Hahnemann's time, it was reasonable to assume the remedies could be diluted indefinitely, as the concept of the atom or molecule as the smallest possible unit of a chemical substance was just beginning to be recognized. The greatest dilution reasonably likely to contain even one molecule of the original substance is 12C.
Critics and advocates of homeopathy alike commonly attempt to illustrate the dilutions involved in homeopathy with analogies. Hahnemann is reported to have joked that a suitable procedure to deal with an epidemic would be to empty a bottle of poison into Lake Geneva, if it could be succussed 60 times. Another example given by a critic of homeopathy states that a 12C solution is equivalent to a "pinch of salt in both the North and South Atlantic Oceans", which is approximately correct. One-third of a drop of some original substance diluted into all the water on earth would produce a remedy with a concentration of about 13C. A popular homeopathic treatment for the flu is a 200C dilution of duck liver, marketed under the name oscillococcinum. As there are only about 1080 atoms in the entire observable universe, a dilution of one molecule in the observable universe would be about 40C. Oscillococcinum would thus require 10320 more universes to simply have one molecule in the final substance. The high dilutions characteristically used are often considered to be the most controversial and implausible aspect of homeopathy.
Not all homeopaths advocate extremely high dilutions. Remedies at potencies below 4X are considered an important part of homeopathic heritage.
Many of the early homeopaths were originally doctors and generally used lower dilutions such as "3X" or "6X", rarely going beyond "12X". The split between lower and higher dilutions followed ideological lines. Those favoring low dilutions stressed pathology and a stronger link to conventional medicine, while those favoring high dilutions emphasised vital force, miasms and a spiritual interpretation of disease. Some products with such relatively lower dilutions continue to be sold, but like their counterparts, they have not been conclusively demonstrated to have any effect beyond that of a placebo.
A homeopathic proving is the method by which the profile of a homeopathic remedy is determined.
At first Hahnemann used undiluted doses for provings, but he later advocated provings with remedies at a 30C dilution, and most modern provings are carried out using ultradilute remedies in which it is highly unlikely that any of the original molecules remain. During the proving process, Hahnemann administered remedies to healthy volunteers, and the resulting symptoms were compiled by observers into a "drug picture". The volunteers were observed for months at a time and made to keep extensive journals detailing all of their symptoms at specific times throughout the day. They were forbidden from consuming coffee, tea, spices, or wine for the duration of the experiment; playing chess was also prohibited because Hahnemann considered it to be "too exciting", though they were allowed to drink beer and encouraged to exercise in moderation. After the experiments were over, Hahnemann made the volunteers take an oath swearing that what they reported in their journals was the truth, at which time he would interrogate them extensively concerning their symptoms.
Provings have been described as important in the development of the clinical trial, due to their early use of simple control groups, systematic and quantitative procedures, and some of the first application of statistics in medicine. The lengthy records of self-experimentation by homeopaths have occasionally proven useful in the development of modern drugs: For example, evidence that nitroglycerin might be useful as a treatment for angina was discovered by looking through homeopathic provings, though homeopaths themselves never used it for that purpose at that time. The first recorded provings were published by Hahnemann in his 1796 Essay on a New Principle. His Fragmenta de Viribus (1805) contained the results of 27 provings, and his 1810 Materia Medica Pura contained 65. For James Tyler Kent's 1905 Lectures on Homoeopathic Materia Medica, 217 remedies underwent provings and newer substances are continually added to contemporary versions.
Though the proving process has superficial similarities with clinical trials, it is fundamentally different in that the process is subjective, not blinded, and modern provings are unlikely to use pharmacologically active levels of the substance under proving. As early as 1842, Holmes noted the provings were impossibly vague, and the purported effect was not repeatable among different subjects.
Physical, mental, and emotional state examination; repertories
Homeopaths generally begin with detailed examinations of their patients' histories, including questions regarding their physical, mental and emotional states, their life circumstances and any physical or emotional illnesses. The homeopath then attempts to translate this information into a complex formula of mental and physical symptoms, including likes, dislikes, innate predispositions and even body type.
From these symptoms, the homeopath chooses how to treat the patient. A compilation of reports of many homeopathic provings, supplemented with clinical data, is known as a "homeopathic materia medica". But because a practitioner first needs to explore the remedies for a particular symptom rather than looking up the symptoms for a particular remedy, the "homeopathic repertory", which is an index of symptoms, lists after each symptom those remedies that are associated with it. Repertories are often very extensive and may include data extracted from multiple sources of materia medica. There is often lively debate among compilers of repertories and practitioners over the veracity of a particular inclusion.
The first symptomatic index of the homeopathic materia medica was arranged by Hahnemann. Soon after, one of his students, Clemens von Bönninghausen, created the Therapeutic Pocket Book, another homeopathic repertory. The first such homeopathic repertory was Georg Jahr's Symptomenkodex, published in German (1835), which was then first translated to English (1838) by Constantine Hering as the Repertory to the more Characteristic Symptoms of Materia Medica. This version was less focused on disease categories and would be the forerunner to Kent's later works. It consisted of three large volumes. Such repertories increased in size and detail as time progressed.
Some diversity in approaches to treatments exists among homeopaths. "Classical homeopathy" generally involves detailed examinations of a patient's history and infrequent doses of a single remedy as the patient is monitored for improvements in symptoms, while "clinical homeopathy" involves combinations of remedies to address the various symptoms of an illness.
The list of ingredients seen on remedies may confuse consumers into believing the product actually contains those ingredients. According to normal homeopathic practice, remedies are prepared starting with active ingredients that are often serially diluted to the point where the finished product no longer contains any biologically "active ingredients" as that term is normally defined.
James Randi and the 10:23 campaign groups have demonstrated the lack of active ingredients in homeopathic products by taking large overdoses. None of the hundreds of demonstrators in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the US were injured and "no one was cured of anything, either".
While the lack of active compounds is noted in most homeopathic products, there are some exceptions such as Zicam Cold Remedy, which is marketed as an "unapproved homeopathic" product. It contains a number of highly diluted ingredients that are listed as "inactive ingredients" on the label. Some of the homeopathic ingredients used in the preparation of Zicam are galphimia glauca, histamine dihydrochloride (homeopathic name, histaminum hydrochloricum), luffa operculata, and sulfur. Although the product is marked "homeopathic", it does contain two ingredients that are only "slightly" diluted: zinc acetate (2X = 1/100 dilution) and zinc gluconate (1X = 1/10 dilution), which means both are present in a concentration that contains biologically active ingredients. In fact, they are strong enough to have caused some people to lose their sense of smell, a condition termed anosmia. This illustrates why taking a product marked "homeopathic", especially an overdose, can still be dangerous because it may contain biologically active ingredients, though as discussed previously, most homeopathic preparations contain no active ingredients. Because the manufacturers of Zicam label it as a homeopathic product (despite the relatively high concentrations of active ingredients), it is exempted from FDA regulation by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA).
Related treatments and practices
Isopathy is a therapy derived from homeopathy invented by Johann Joseph Wilhelm Lux in the 1830s. Isopathy differs from homeopathy in general in that the remedies, known as "nosodes", are made up either from things that cause the disease or from products of the disease, such as pus. Many so-called "homeopathic vaccines" are a form of isopathy.
Flower remedies can be produced by placing flowers in water and exposing them to sunlight. The most famous of these are the Bach flower remedies, which were developed by the physician and homeopath Edward Bach. Although the proponents of these remedies share homeopathy's vitalist world-view and the remedies are claimed to act through the same hypothetical "vital force" as homeopathy, the method of preparation is different. Bach flower remedies are prepared in "gentler" ways such as placing flowers in bowls of sunlit water, and the remedies are not succussed. There is no convincing scientific or clinical evidence for flower remedies being effective.
The idea of using homeopathy as a treatment for other animals, termed "veterinary homeopathy", dates back to the inception of homeopathy; Hahnemann himself wrote and spoke of the use of homeopathy in animals other than humans. The FDA has not approved homeopathic products as veterinary medicine in the U.S. In the UK, veterinary surgeons who use homeopathy may belong to the Faculty of Homeopathy and/or to the British Association of Homeopathic Veterinary Surgeons. Animals may be treated only by qualified veterinary surgeons in the UK and some other countries. Internationally, the body that supports and represents homeopathic veterinarians is the International Association for Veterinary Homeopathy. The use of homeopathy in veterinary medicine is controversial; the little existing research on the subject is not of a high enough scientific standard to provide reliable data on efficacy. Other studies have also found that giving animals placebos can play active roles in influencing pet owners to believe in the effectiveness of the treatment when none exists.
Electrohomeopathy is a treatment devised by Count Cesare Mattei (1809–1896), who proposed that different "colors" of electricity could be used to treat cancer. Popular in the late nineteenth century, electrohomeopathy has been described as "utter idiocy".
Evidence and efficacy
The low concentration of homeopathic remedies, which often lack even a single molecule of the diluted substance, has been the basis of questions about the effects of the remedies since the 19th century. Modern advocates of homeopathy have proposed a concept of "water memory", according to which water "remembers" the substances mixed in it, and transmits the effect of those substances when consumed. This concept is inconsistent with the current understanding of matter, and water memory has never been demonstrated to have any detectable effect, biological or otherwise. Pharmacological research has found instead that stronger effects of an active ingredient come from higher, not lower doses.
Homeopathy is a pseudoscience and its effects are no more than those of placebo. Outside of the Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) community, scientists have long considered homeopathy a sham, and the mainstream medical community regards it as quackery. There is an overall absence of sound statistical evidence of therapeutic efficacy, which is consistent with the lack of any biologically plausible pharmacological agent or mechanism. Abstract concepts within theoretical physics have been invoked to suggest explanations of how or why remedies might work, including quantum entanglement, quantum nonlocality, the theory of relativity and chaos theory. However, the explanations are offered by nonspecialists within the field, and often include speculations that are incorrect in their application of the concepts and not supported by actual experiments.:255–6 Several of the key concepts of homeopathy conflict with fundamental concepts of physics and chemistry. The use of quantum entanglement to explain homeopathy's purported effects is "patent nonsense", as entanglement is a delicate state which rarely lasts longer than a fraction of a second. While entanglement may result in certain aspects of individual subatomic particles acquiring linked quantum states, this does not mean the particles will mirror or duplicate each other, nor cause health-improving transformations.
The proposed mechanisms for homeopathy are precluded from having any effect by the laws of physics and physical chemistry.
The extreme dilutions used in homeopathic preparations often leave none of the original substance in the final product. The modern mechanism proposed by homeopaths, water memory, is considered erroneous since short-range order in water only persists for about 1 picosecond. Existence of a pharmacological effect in the absence of any true active ingredient is inconsistent with the observed dose-response relationships characteristic of therapeutic drugs (whereas placebo effects are non-specific and unrelated to pharmacological activity). The proposed rationale for these extreme dilutions – that the water contains the "memory" or "vibration" from the diluted ingredient – is counter to the laws of chemistry and physics, such as the law of mass action.
The extremely high dilutions in homeopathy preclude a biologically plausible mechanism of action. Homeopathic remedies are often diluted to the point where there are no molecules from the original solution left in a dose of the final remedy. Homeopaths contend that the methodical dilution of a substance, beginning with a 10% or lower solution and working downwards, with shaking after each dilution, produces a therapeutically active remedy, in contrast to therapeutically inert water. Since even the longest-lived noncovalent structures in liquid water at room temperature are stable for only a few picoseconds, critics have concluded that any effect that might have been present from the original substance can no longer exist. No evidence of stable clusters of water molecules was found when homeopathic remedies were studied using nuclear magnetic resonance.
Furthermore, since water will have been in contact with millions of different substances throughout its history, critics point out that water is therefore an extreme dilution of almost any conceivable substance. By drinking water one would, according to this interpretation, receive treatment for every imaginable condition. For comparison, ISO 3696: 1987 defines a standard for water used in laboratory analysis; this allows for a contaminant level of ten parts per billion, 4C in homeopathic notation. This water may not be kept in glass as contaminants will leach out into the water.
Practitioners of homeopathy hold that higher dilutions — described as being of higher potency — produce stronger medicinal effects. This idea is inconsistent with the observed dose-response relationships of conventional drugs, where the effects are dependent on the concentration of the active ingredient in the body. This dose-response relationship has been confirmed in myriad experiments on organisms as diverse as nematodes, rats, and humans.
"since the least amount of a substance in a solution is one molecule, a 30C solution would have to have at least one molecule of the original substance dissolved in a minimum of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 [or 1060] molecules of water. This would require a container more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth."
Park is also quoted as saying that, "to expect to get even one molecule of the 'medicinal' substance allegedly present in 30X pills, it would be necessary to take some two billion of them, which would total about a thousand tons of lactose plus whatever impurities the lactose contained".
The laws of chemistry state that there is a limit to the dilution that can be made without losing the original substance altogether. This limit, which is related to Avogadro's number, is roughly equal to homeopathic potencies of 12C or 24X (1 part in 1024).
Scientific tests run by both the BBC's Horizon and ABC's 20/20 programs were unable to differentiate homeopathic dilutions from water, even when using tests suggested by homeopaths themselves.
One of the earliest double blind studies concerning homeopathy was sponsored by the British government during World War II in which volunteers tested the efficacy of homeopathic remedies against diluted mustard gas burns.
No individual preparation has been unambiguously shown by research to be different from placebo. The methodological quality of the primary research was generally low, with such problems as weaknesses in study design and reporting, small sample size, and selection bias. Since better quality trials have become available, the evidence for efficacy of homeopathy preparations has diminished; the highest-quality trials indicate that the remedies themselves exert no intrinsic effect.:206 A review conducted in 2010 of all the pertinent studies of "best evidence" produced by the Cochrane Collaboration concluded that "the most reliable evidence – that produced by Cochrane reviews – fails to demonstrate that homeopathic medicines have effects beyond placebo."
Publication bias and other methodological issues
The fact that individual randomized controlled trials have given positive results is not in contradiction with an overall lack of statistical evidence of efficacy. A small proportion of randomized controlled trials inevitably provide false-positive outcomes due to the play of chance: a "statistically significant" positive outcome is commonly adjudicated when the probability of it being due to chance rather than a real effect is no more than 5%—a level at which about 1 in 20 tests can be expected to show a positive result in the absence of any therapeutic effect. Furthermore, trials of low methodological quality (i.e. ones which have been inappropriately designed, conducted or reported) are prone to give misleading results. In a systematic review of the methodological quality of randomized trials in three branches of alternative medicine, Linde et al. highlighted major weaknesses in the homeopathy sector, including poor randomization.
A related issue is publication bias: researchers are more likely to submit trials that report a positive finding for publication, and journals prefer to publish positive results. Publication bias has been particularly marked in complementary and alternative medicine journals, where few of the published articles (just 5% during the year 2000) tend to report null results. Regarding the way in which homeopathy is represented in the medical literature, a systematic review found signs of bias in the publications of clinical trials (towards negative representation in mainstream medical journals, and vice-versa in complementary and alternative medicine journals), but not in reviews.
Positive results are much more likely to be false if the prior probability of the claim under test is low.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of efficacy
Both meta-analyses, which statistically combine the results of several randomized controlled trials, and other systematic reviews of the literature are essential tools to summarize evidence of therapeutic efficacy. Early systematic reviews and meta-analyses of trials evaluating the efficacy of homeopathic remedies in comparison with placebo more often tended to generate positive results, but appeared unconvincing overall. In particular, reports of three large meta-analyses warned readers that firm conclusions could not be reached, largely due to methodological flaws in the primary studies and the difficulty in controlling for publication bias. The positive finding of one of the most prominent of the early meta-analyses, published in The Lancet in 1997 by Linde et al., was later reframed by the same research team, who wrote:
The evidence of bias [in the primary studies] weakens the findings of our original meta-analysis. Since we completed our literature search in 1995, a considerable number of new homeopathy trials have been published. The fact that a number of the new high-quality trials ... have negative results, and a recent update of our review for the most "original" subtype of homeopathy (classical or individualized homeopathy), seem to confirm the finding that more rigorous trials have less-promising results. It seems, therefore, likely that our meta-analysis at least overestimated the effects of homeopathic treatments.
In 2002, a systematic review of the available systematic reviews confirmed that higher-quality trials tended to have less positive results, and found no convincing evidence that any homeopathic remedy exerts clinical effects different from placebo.
In 2005, The Lancet medical journal published a meta-analysis of 110 placebo-controlled homeopathy trials and 110 matched medical trials based upon the Swiss government's Program for Evaluating Complementary Medicine, or PEK. The study concluded that its findings were compatible with the notion that the clinical effects of homeopathy are placebo effects.
A 2006 meta-analysis of six trials evaluating homeopathic treatments to reduce cancer therapy side-effects following radiotherapy and chemotherapy found that there was "insufficient evidence to support clinical efficacy of homeopathic therapy in cancer care".
A 2007 systematic review of homeopathy for children and adolescents found that the evidence for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and childhood diarrhea was mixed. No difference from placebo was found for adenoid vegetation, asthma, or upper respiratory tract infection. Evidence was not sufficient to recommend any therapeutic or preventative intervention, and the delay in medical treatment may be harmful to the patient.
In 2012, a systematic review evaluating evidence of homeopathy's possible adverse effects concluded that "homeopathy has the potential to harm patients and consumers in both direct and indirect ways". One of the reviewers, Edzard Ernst, supplemented the article on his blog, writing: "I have said it often and I say it again: if used as an alternative to an effective cure, even the most 'harmless' treatment can become life-threatening."
The Cochrane Library found insufficient clinical evidence to evaluate the efficacy of homeopathic treatments for asthma dementia, or for the use of homeopathy in induction of labor. Other researchers found no evidence that homeopathy is beneficial for osteoarthritis, migraines  or delayed-onset muscle soreness.
Health organisations such as the UK's National Health Service, the American Medical Association, and the FASEB have issued statements of their conclusion that there is "no good-quality evidence that homeopathy is effective as a treatment for any health condition."
Clinical studies of the medical efficacy of homeopathy have been criticised by some homeopaths as being irrelevant because they do not test "classical homeopathy". There have, however, been a number of clinical trials that have tested individualized homeopathy. A 1998 review found 32 trials that met their inclusion criteria, 19 of which were placebo-controlled and provided enough data for meta-analysis. These 19 studies showed a pooled odds ratio of 1.17 to 2.23 in favor of individualized homeopathy over the placebo, but no difference was seen when the analysis was restricted to the methodologically best trials. The authors concluded "that the results of the available randomized trials suggest that individualized homeopathy has an effect over placebo. The evidence, however, is not convincing because of methodological shortcomings and inconsistencies." Jay Shelton, author of a book on homeopathy, has stated that the claim assumes without evidence that classical, individualized homeopathy works better than nonclassical variations.:209
In a 2012 article published in the Skeptical Inquirer, Edzard Ernst reviewed the publications of the research group that has published most of the clinical studies of homeopathic treatment from 2005 to 2010. A total of 11 articles, published in both conventional and alternative medical journals, describe three randomized clinical trials (one article), prospective cohort studies without controls (seven articles) and comparative cohort studies with controls (three articles). The diseases include a wide range of conditions from knee surgery, eczema, migraine, insomnia to "any condition of elderly patients". Ernst's evaluation found numerous flaws in the design, conduct and reporting of the clinical studies. Examples include: little detail of the actual homeopathic treatment administered, misleading presentation of controls (comparison of homeopathic plus conventional treatment with conventional treatment, but presented as homeopathic versus conventional treatment); and similar data in multiple articles. He concluded that the misinterpreted weak data made the homeopathy appear to have clinical effects which can be attributed to bias or confounding, and that the "casual reader can be seriously misled".
Explanations of perceived effects
Science offers a variety of explanations for how homeopathy may appear to cure diseases or alleviate symptoms even though the remedies themselves are inert::155–167
- The placebo effect — the intensive consultation process and expectations for the homeopathic preparations may cause the effect
- Therapeutic effect of the consultation — the care, concern, and reassurance a patient experiences when opening up to a compassionate caregiver can have a positive effect on the patient's well-being
- Unassisted natural healing — time and the body's ability to heal without assistance can eliminate many diseases of their own accord
- Unrecognized treatments — an unrelated food, exercise, environmental agent, or treatment for a different ailment, may have occurred
- Regression toward the mean — since many diseases or conditions are cyclical, symptoms vary over time and patients tend to seek care when discomfort is greatest; they may feel better anyway but because of the timing of the visit to the homeopath they attribute improvement to the remedy taken
- Non-homeopathic treatment — patients may also receive standard medical care at the same time as homeopathic treatment, and the former is responsible for improvement
- Cessation of unpleasant treatment — often homeopaths recommend patients stop getting medical treatment such as surgery or drugs, which can cause unpleasant side-effects; improvements are attributed to homeopathy when the actual cause is the cessation of the treatment causing side-effects in the first place, but the underlying disease remains untreated and still dangerous to the patient.
Effects in other biological systems
While some articles have suggested that homeopathic solutions of high dilution can have statistically significant effects on organic processes including the growth of grain, histamine release by leukocytes, and enzyme reactions, such evidence is disputed since attempts to replicate them have failed.
In 1987, French immunologist Jacques Benveniste submitted a paper to the journal Nature while working at INSERM. The paper purported to have discovered that basophils, a type of white blood cell, released histamine when exposed to a homeopathic dilution of anti-immunoglobulin E antibody. The journal editors, skeptical of the results, requested that the study be replicated in a separate laboratory. Upon replication in four separate laboratories the study was published. Still sceptical of the findings, Nature assembled an independent investigative team to determine the accuracy of the research, consisting of Nature editor and physicist Sir John Maddox, American scientific fraud investigator and chemist Walter Stewart, and sceptic James Randi. After investigating the findings and methodology of the experiment, the team found that the experiments were "statistically ill-controlled", "interpretation has been clouded by the exclusion of measurements in conflict with the claim", and concluded, "We believe that experimental data have been uncritically assessed and their imperfections inadequately reported." James Randi stated that he doubted that there had been any conscious fraud, but that the researchers had allowed "wishful thinking" to influence their interpretation of the data.
Ethics and safety
The provision of homeopathic remedies has been described as unethical. Michael Baum, Professor Emeritus of Surgery and visiting Professor of Medical Humanities at University College London (UCL), has described homoeopathy as a "cruel deception".
Edzard Ernst, the first Professor of Complementary Medicine in the United Kingdom and a former homeopathic practitioner, has expressed his concerns about pharmacists who violate their ethical code by failing to provide customers with "necessary and relevant information" about the true nature of the homeopathic products they advertise and sell:
- "My plea is simply for honesty. Let people buy what they want, but tell them the truth about what they are buying. These treatments are biologically implausible and the clinical tests have shown they don't do anything at all in human beings. The argument that this information is not relevant or important for customers is quite simply ridiculous."
Some homeopathic remedies involve poisons such as Belladonna, arsenic, and poison ivy which are highly diluted in the homeopathic remedy, only in rare cases are the original ingredients present at detectable levels. This may be due to improper preparation or intentional low dilution. Serious adverse effects such as seizures and death have been reported or associated with some homeopathic remedies. Instances of arsenic poisoning have occurred after use of arsenic-containing homeopathic preparations. Zicam Cold remedy Nasal Gel, which contains 2X (1:100) zinc gluconate, reportedly caused a small percentage of users to lose their sense of smell; 340 cases were settled out of court in 2006 for 12 million U.S. dollars. In 2009, the FDA advised consumers to stop using three discontinued cold remedy products manufactured by Zicam because it could cause permanent damage to users' sense of smell. Zicam was launched without a New Drug Application (NDA) under a provision in the FDA's Compliance Policy Guide called "Conditions Under Which Homeopathic Drugs May be Marketed" (CPG 7132.15), but the FDA warned Zicam via a Warning Letter that this policy does not apply when there is a health risk to consumers.
Lack of efficacy
The lack of convincing scientific evidence supporting its efficacy and its use of remedies without active ingredients have led to characterizations as pseudoscience and quackery, or, in the words of a 1998 medical review, "placebo therapy at best and quackery at worst." The Chief Medical Officer for England, Dame Sally Davies, has stated that homeopathic remedies are "rubbish" and do not serve as anything more than placebos. Jack Killen, acting deputy director of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, says homeopathy "goes beyond current understanding of chemistry and physics." He adds: "There is, to my knowledge, no condition for which homeopathy has been proven to be an effective treatment." Ben Goldacre says that homeopaths who misrepresent scientific evidence to a scientifically illiterate public, have "...walled themselves off from academic medicine, and critique has been all too often met with avoidance rather than argument." Homeopaths often prefer to ignore meta-analyses in favour of cherry picked positive results, such as by promoting a particular observational study (one which Goldacre describes as "little more than a customer-satisfaction survey") as if it were more informative than a series of randomized controlled trials.
Referring specifically to homeopathy, the British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has stated:
In our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebos. The Government shares our interpretation of the evidence.
In the Committee's view, homeopathy is a placebo treatment and the Government should have a policy on prescribing placebos. The Government is reluctant to address the appropriateness and ethics of prescribing placebos to patients, which usually relies on some degree of patient deception. Prescribing of placebos is not consistent with informed patient choice - which the Government claims is very important - as it means patients do not have all the information needed to make choice meaningful.
Beyond ethical issues and the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship, prescribing pure placebos is bad medicine. Their effect is unreliable and unpredictable and cannot form the sole basis of any treatment on the NHS.
The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine of the United States' National Institutes of Health states:
Homeopathy is a controversial topic in complementary medicine research. A number of the key concepts of homeopathy are not consistent with fundamental concepts of chemistry and physics. For example, it is not possible to explain in scientific terms how a remedy containing little or no active ingredient can have any effect. This, in turn, creates major challenges to rigorous clinical investigation of homeopathic remedies. For example, one cannot confirm that an extremely dilute remedy contains what is listed on the label, or develop objective measures that show effects of extremely dilute remedies in the human body.
In lieu of standard medical treatment
On clinical grounds, patients who choose to use homeopathy in preference to normal medicine risk missing timely diagnosis and effective treatment, thereby worsening the outcomes of serious conditions. Critics of homeopathy have cited individual cases of patients of homeopathy failing to receive proper treatment for diseases that could have been easily diagnosed and managed with conventional medicine and who have died as a result and the "marketing practice" of criticizing and downplaying the effectiveness of mainstream medicine. Homeopaths claim that use of conventional medicines will "push the disease deeper" and cause more serious conditions, a process referred to as "suppression". Some homeopaths (particularly those who are non-physicians) advise their patients against immunisation. Some homeopaths suggest that vaccines be replaced with homeopathic "nosodes", created from biological materials such as pus, diseased tissue, bacilli from sputum or (in the case of "bowel nosodes") feces. While Hahnemann was opposed to such preparations, modern homeopaths often use them although there is no evidence to indicate they have any beneficial effects. Cases of homeopaths advising against the use of anti-malarial drugs have been identified. This puts visitors to the tropics who take this advice in severe danger, since homeopathic remedies are completely ineffective against the malaria parasite. Also, in one case in 2004, a homeopath instructed one of her patients to stop taking conventional medication for a heart condition, advising her on 22 June 2004 to "Stop ALL medications including homeopathic", advising her on or around 20 August that she no longer needed to take her heart medication, and adding on 23 August, "She just cannot take ANY drugs – I have suggested some homeopathic remedies ... I feel confident that if she follows the advice she will regain her health." The patient was admitted to hospital the next day, and died eight days later, the final diagnosis being "acute heart failure due to treatment discontinuation".
In 1978, Anthony Campbell, then a consultant physician at the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital, criticised statements by George Vithoulkas claiming that syphilis, when treated with antibiotics, would develop into secondary and tertiary syphilis with involvement of the central nervous system, saying that "The unfortunate layman might well be misled by Vithoulkas' rhetoric into refusing orthodox treatment". Vithoulkas' claims echo the idea that treating a disease with external medication used to treat the symptoms would only drive it deeper into the body and conflict with scientific studies, which indicate that penicillin treatment produces a complete cure of syphilis in more than 90% of cases.
A 2006 review by W. Steven Pray of the College of Pharmacy at Southwestern Oklahoma State University recommends that pharmacy colleges include a required course in unproven medications and therapies, that ethical dilemmas inherent in recommending products lacking proven safety and efficacy data be discussed, and that students should be taught where unproven systems such as homeopathy depart from evidence-based medicine.
In an article entitled "Should We Maintain an Open Mind about Homeopathy?" published in the American Journal of Medicine, Michael Baum and Edzard Ernst – writing to other physicians – wrote that "Homeopathy is among the worst examples of faith-based medicine... These axioms [of homeopathy] are not only out of line with scientific facts but also directly opposed to them. If homeopathy is correct, much of physics, chemistry, and pharmacology must be incorrect...".
In 2013, Sir Mark Walport, the new UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser and head of the Government Office for Science, had this to say about homeopathy: "My view scientifically is absolutely clear: homoeopathy is nonsense, it is non-science. My advice to ministers is clear: that there is no science in homoeopathy. The most it can have is a placebo effect – it is then a political decision whether they spend money on it or not." His predecessor, Professor Sir John Beddington, referring to his views on homeopathy being "fundamentally ignored" by the Government, said: "The only one [view being ignored] I could think of was homoeopathy, which is mad. It has no underpinning of scientific basis. In fact all of the science points to the fact that it is not at all sensible. The clear evidence is saying this is wrong, but homoeopathy is still used on the NHS."
Regulation and prevalence
Homeopathy is fairly common in some countries while being uncommon in others; is highly regulated in some countries and mostly unregulated in others. It is practised worldwide and professional qualifications and licences are needed in most countries. Regulations vary in Europe depending on the country. In some countries, there are no specific legal regulations concerning the use of homeopathy, while in others, licences or degrees in conventional medicine from accredited universities are required. In Germany, to become a homeopathic physician, one must attend a three-year training program, while France, Austria and Denmark mandate licences to diagnose any illness or dispense of any product whose purpose is to treat any illness. Some homeopathic treatment is covered by the public health service of several European countries, including France, the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Luxembourg. In other countries, such as Belgium, homeopathy is not covered. In Austria, the public health service requires scientific proof of effectiveness in order to reimburse medical treatments and homeopathy is listed as not reimbursable, but exceptions can be made; private health insurance policies sometimes include homeopathic treatment. The Swiss government, after a 5-year trial, withdrew homeopathy and four other complementary treatments in 2005, stating that they did not meet efficacy and cost-effectiveness criteria, but following a referendum in 2009 the five therapies are to be reinstated for a further 6-year trial period from 2012.
The Indian government recognises homeopathy as one of its national systems of medicine, it has established AYUSH or the Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy under the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. The Central Council of Homoeopathy was established in 1973 to monitor higher education in homeopathy, and National Institute of Homoeopathy in 1975. A minimum of a recognised diploma in homeopathy and registration on a state register or the Central Register of Homoeopathy is required to practice homeopathy in India.
In the United Kingdom, MPs inquired into homeopathy to assess the Government's policy on the issue, including funding of homeopathy under the National Health Service and government policy for licensing homeopathic products. The decision by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee follows a written explanation from the Government in which it told the select committee that the licensing regime was not formulated on the basis of scientific evidence. "The three elements of the licensing regime (for homeopathic products) probably lie outside the scope of the ... select committee inquiry, because government consideration of scientific evidence was not the basis for their establishment," the Committee said. The inquiry sought written evidence and submissions from concerned parties.
In February 2010 the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee concluded that:
... the NHS should cease funding homeopathy. It also concludes that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) should not allow homeopathic product labels to make medical claims without evidence of efficacy. As they are not medicines, homeopathic products should no longer be licensed by the MHRA.
The Committee concurred with the Government that the evidence base shows that homeopathy is not efficacious (that is, it does not work beyond the placebo effect) and that explanations for why homeopathy would work are scientifically implausible.
The Committee concluded – given that the existing scientific literature showed no good evidence of efficacy – that further clinical trials of homeopathy could not be justified.
In the Committee's view, homeopathy is a placebo treatment and the Government should have a policy on prescribing placebos. The Government is reluctant to address the appropriateness and ethics of prescribing placebos to patients, which usually relies on some degree of patient deception. Prescribing of placebos is not consistent with informed patient choice – which the Government claims is very important – as it means patients do not have all the information needed to make choice meaningful.
Beyond ethical issues and the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship, prescribing pure placebos is bad medicine. Their effect is unreliable and unpredictable and cannot form the sole basis of any treatment on the NHS.
The Committee also stated:
We conclude that placebos should not be routinely prescribed on the NHS. The funding of homeopathic hospitals – hospitals that specialise in the administration of placebos – should not continue, and NHS doctors should not refer patients to homeopaths.
In July 2010 the newly appointed UK Secretary of State for Health deferred to local NHS on funding homeopathy. A nineteen-page document details the Government's response, and it states that "our continued position on the use of homeopathy within the NHS is that the local NHS and clinicians, rather than Whitehall, are best placed to make decisions on what treatment is appropriate for their patients - including complementary or alternative treatments such as homeopathy - and provide accordingly for those treatments." The response also stated that "the overriding reason for NHS provision is that homeopathy is available to provide patient choice". by February 2011 only one third of PCTs still funded homeopathy.
In 2012, in the United Kingdom, Derby University dropped its homeopathy program, and the University of Westminster ceased enrolling new homeopathy students. Salford University had dropped its homeopathy program the previous year. In 2013 the UK Advertising Standards Authority concluded that the Society of Homeopaths were targeting vulnerable ill people and discouraging the use of essential medical treatment while making misleading claims of efficacy for homeopathic products.
Mock "overdosing" on homeopathic preparations by individuals or groups in "mass suicides" have become more popular since James Randi began taking entire bottles of homeopathic sleeping pills before giving lectures. In 2010 The Merseyside Skeptics Society from the United Kingdom launched the 10:23 campaign encouraging groups to publicly overdose as groups. In 2011 the 10:23 campaign expanded and saw sixty-nine groups participate, fifty-four submitted videos. In April 2012, at the Berkeley SkeptiCal conference, over 100 people participated in a mass overdose, taking caffea cruda which is supposed to treat sleeplessness.
The non-profit, educational organizations Center for Inquiry (CFI) and the associated Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) have petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), criticizing Boiron for misleading labeling and advertising of Oscillococcinum. CFI in Canada is calling for persons that feel they were harmed by homeopathic products to contact them.
In August 2011, a class action lawsuit was filed against Boiron on behalf of "all California residents who purchased Oscillo at any time within the past four years." The lawsuit charges that it "is nothing more than a sugar pill," "despite falsely advertising that it contains an active ingredient known to treat flu symptoms."
CBC News reporter Erica Johnson for Marketplace conducted an investigation on the homeopathy industry in Canada, her findings were that it is "based on flawed science and some loopy thinking". Center for Inquiry (CFI) Vancouver skeptics participated in a mass overdose outside an emergency room in Vancouver, B.C., taking entire bottles of "medications" that should have made them sleepy, nauseous or dead, after 45 minutes of observation no ill effects were felt. Johnson asked homeopaths and company representatives about cures for cancer and vaccine claims. All reported positive results but none could offer any science backing up their statements, only that "it works". Johnson was unable to find any evidence that homeopathic preparations contain any active ingredient. Analysis performed at the University of Toronto's chemistry department found that the active ingredient is so small "it is equivalent to 5 billion times less than the amount of aspirin... in a single pellet". Belladonna and ipecac "would be indistinguishable from each other in a blind test."
The American College of Medical Toxicology and the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology recommend that no one use homeopathic treatment for disease or as a preventive health measure. These organizations report that no evidence exists that homeopathic treatment is effective, but that there is evidence that using these treatments produces harm and can bring indirect health risks by delaying conventional treatment.
- Hahnemann, Samuel (1833). The Homœopathic Medical Doctrine, or "Organon of the Healing Art". Dublin: W.F. Wakeman. pp. iii, 48–49. "Observation, reflection, and experience have unfolded to me that the best and true method of cure is founded on the principle, similia similibus curentur. To cure in a mild, prompt, safe, and durable manner, it is necessary to choose in each case a medicine that will excite an affection similar (ὅμοιος πάθος) to that against which it is employed." Translator: Charles H. Devrient, Esq.
- Tuomela R (1987). "Chapter 4: Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience". In Pitt JC, Marcello P. Rational Changes in Science: Essays on Scientific Reasoning. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 98 (Springer). pp. 83–101. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4. ISBN 978-94-010-8181-8.
- Smith K (2012). "Homeopathy is Unscientific and Unethical". Bioethics 26 (9): 508–512. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01956.x.
- Baran GR, Kiana MF, Samuel SP (2014). "Chapter 2: 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"
- 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.
- 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): 726–732, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2, PMID 16125589
- Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy - Science and Technology Committee, British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, 22 February 2010, retrieved 2014-04-05
- Hahnemann S (1921), The Organon of the Healing Art (6th ed.), aphorism 128, ISBN 0-87983-228-2
- "Dynamization and Dilution", Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Creighton University Department of Pharmacology, archived from the original on 2002-08-26, retrieved 2009-03-24
- Hahnemann S (1833), The Organon of the Healing Art (5th ed.), aphorisms 5 and 217, ISBN 0-87983-228-2
- Ernst, Edzard (December 2012). "Homeopathy: A Critique of Current Clinical Research". Skeptical Inquirer 36 (6).
- Atwood, Kimball (January 11, 2008). "Homeopathy and Evidence-Based Medicine: Back to the Future – Part II". Science Based Medicine. Retrieved September 18, 2013.
- UK Parliamentary Committee Science and Technology Committee - "Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy"
- Grimes D R (2012), "Proposed mechanisms for homeopathy are physically impossible", FACT 17 (3): 149, doi:10.1111/j.2042-7166.2012.01162.x
- Cucherat, M; Haugh, MC; Gooch, M; Boissel, JP (2000), "Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy. A meta-analysis of clinical trials. HMRAG. Homeopathic Medicines Research Advisory Group", European journal of clinical pharmacology 56 (1): 27–33, PMID 10853874
- 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
- Kleijnen, J; Knipschild, P; Ter Riet, G (1991), "Clinical trials of homoeopathy", BMJ 302 (6772): 316–23, doi:10.1136/bmj.302.6772.316, PMC 1668980, PMID 1825800
- Shaw, D. M. (2010). "Homeopathy is where the harm is: Five unethical effects of funding unscientific 'remedies'". Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (3): 130–131. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.034959. PMID 20211989.
- Mashta, O. (24 August 2009). "WHO warns against using homoeopathy to treat serious diseases". BMJ 339 (aug24 2): b3447–b3447. doi:10.1136/bmj.b3447.
- "Homeopathy is nonsense, says new chief scientist". Daily Telegraph. 18 Apr 2013. Retrieved September 9, 2013.
- Paul S. Boyer. The Oxford Companion to United States History. ISBN 9780195082098. 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."
- James Randi (1995). An encyclopedia of claims, frauds, and hoaxes of the occult and supernatural. St. Martin's Press. ISBN 9780312109745. Retrieved January 15, 2013.
- "Supported by science?: What Canadian naturopaths advertise to the public". Retrieved January 15, 2013. "Within the non-CAM scientific community, homeopathy has long been viewed as a sham"
- Hemenway, Henry Bixby (1894), "Modern Homeopathy and Medical Science", JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association (11): 367, doi:10.1001/jama.1894.02420900001001
- "Paracelsus (German-Swiss physician)", Britannica Online Encyclopedia, Encyclopædia Britannica, retrieved 2009-03-24
- Hodgson B (2001), In the Arms of Morpheus: The Tragic History of Morphine, Laudanum and Patent Medicines, Firefly Books, p. 18, ISBN 1-55297-540-1
- Griffin, J. P. (2004), "Venetian treacle and the foundation of medicines regulation", British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 58 (3): 317–25, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02147.x, PMC 1884566, PMID 15327592
- "British Medical Journal", BMJ 1 (533), 1871: 283–4, doi:10.1136/bmj.1.533.283
- Kaufman M (1971), Homeopathy in America: The rise and fall of a medical heresy, The Johns Hopkins University Press, ISBN 978-0-8018-1238-5[page needed]
- Edzard Ernst; Singh, Simon (2008), Trick or Treatment: The Undeniable Facts about Alternative Medicine, New York: W. W. Norton, ISBN 0-393-06661-4
- Lasagna L (1970) , The doctors' dilemmas, New York: Collier Books, p. 33, ISBN 978-0-8369-1669-0
- W. Steven Pray (1 August 2003). a History of Nonprescription Product Regulation. Psychology Press. p. 192. ISBN 978-0-7890-1538-9. Retrieved 21 January 2013.
- Dean ME (2001), "Homeopathy and "the progress of science"" (PDF), Hist Sci 39 (125 Pt 3): 255–83, PMID 11712570, archived from the original on April 7, 2008, retrieved 2009-03-31
- Robert W. Ullman; Judyth Reichenberg-Ullman (1 October 1994). The Patient's Guide to Homeopathic Medicine. Picnic Point Press. pp. 1–2. ISBN 978-0-9640654-2-0. Retrieved 24 January 2013.
- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1842), Homoeópathy 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
- The Dental Cosmos: A Monthly Record of Dental Science, Editor Edward C. Kirk, D.D.S., Vol. XXXVI, p. 1031-1032
- Atwood, Kimball (January 4, 2008). "Homeopathy and Evidence-Based Medicine: Back to the Future". Science Based Medicine. Retrieved September 9, 2013.
- Richard Haehl (1922). Samuel Hahnemann: His Life and Work : Based on Recently Discovered State Papers, Documents, Letters, Etc. B. Jain Publishers. p. 101. ISBN 978-81-7021-693-3. Retrieved 24 January 2013.
- Anne Taylor Kirschmann (2004). A Vital Force: Women in American Homeopathy. Rutgers University Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-8135-3320-9. Retrieved 28 January 2013.
- Hahnemann S (1833), The Organon of the Healing Art (5th ed.), aphorism 269, ISBN 0-87983-228-2. Hahnemann S (1842), The Organon of the Healing Art (6th ed.) (published 1921), aphorism 270, ISBN 0-87983-228-2
- "History of Homeopathy", Creighton University Department of Pharmacology, archived from the original on 2007-07-05, retrieved 2007-07-23
- J. H. Clarke; John Henry Clarke (1 January 2001). Homeopathy Explained. Nanopathy. pp. 22–. GGKEY:JWCD56EF80T. Retrieved 12 January 2013.
- King S, "Miasms in homeopathy", Classical homeopathy, archived from the original on 2009-03-07, retrieved 2009-03-25
- Ward JW, "Taking the History of the Case", Pacific Coast Jnl of Homeopathy, July 1937, retrieved 2007-10-22
- "Cause of Disease in homeopathy", Creighton University Department of Pharmacology, retrieved 2007-07-23
- Hahnemann S (1828), Die chronischen Krankheiten, ihre eigenthümliche Natur und homöopathische Heilung [The chronic diseases, their specific nature and homoeopathic treatment], Dresden and Leipzig: Arnoldische Buchhandlung[page needed]
- "Cause of disease", Creighton University School of Medicine, archived from the original on 2009-12-31, retrieved 2009-07-31
- Hahnemann S (1833/1921), The Organon of the Healing Art (5th/6th ed.), ISBN 0-87983-228-2 [page needed]
- Whorton JC (2004), Nature Cures: The History of Alternative Medicine in America, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 18, 52, ISBN 0-19-517162-4
- Shelton, Jay W. (2004), Homeopathy: How it Really Works, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, ISBN 978-1-59102-109-4
- Winston J (2006), "Homeopathy Timeline", The Faces of Homoeopathy, Whole Health Now, ISBN 0-473-05607-0, retrieved 2007-07-23
- Toufexis A, Cole W, Hallanan DB (25 September 1995), "Is homeopathy good medicine?", Time
- Ernst, E.; Kaptchuk, TJ (1996), "Homeopathy revisited", Archives of Internal Medicine 156 (19): 2162–4, doi:10.1001/archinte.156.19.2162, PMID 8885813
- Coulter HL (1973), Divided Legacy, Berkeley: North Atlantic, pp. II:544–6; III:267–70, 298–305, OCLC 9538442
- Death rates in conventional hospitals were typically two- to eight-fold higher than in homeopathic hospitals for patients with these infectious diseases; see Bradford TL (2007) , The logic of figures or comparative results of homeopathic and other treatments, Kessinger, ISBN 1-4304-8892-1[page needed]
- Forbes J (1846), Homeopathy, allopathy and young physic, London
- Simpson JY (1853), Homoeopathy, its tenets and tendencies, theoretical, theological and therapeutical, Edinburgh: Sutherland & Knox, p. 11
- Allen JA, ed. (1867), "Homœopathists vs homœopathy", Chic Med J (A.B. Case.) 24: 268–269
- Paul Ulrich Unschuld (9 August 2009). What Is Medicine?: Western and Eastern Approaches to Healing. University of California Press. p. 171. ISBN 978-0-520-94470-1. Retrieved 7 September 2013.
- "Homeopathic Hassle", Time, 1956-08-20
- Rader WM (1985-03-01), Riding the coattails of homeopathy's revival, FDA Consumer Magazine
- Jonas, WB; TJ Kaptchuk; K Linde (2003-03). "A critical overview of homeopathy.". Annals of internal medicine 138 (5): 393–399. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-5-200303040-00009.
- Lockie, Andrew (2000). Encyclopedia of Homeopathy (1st ed.). New York City, NY: Dorling Kindersley. p. 19. ISBN 978-0-7566-1871-1.
- O'Hara M (2002-01-05), "A question of health or wealth?", The Guardian (London)
- Bruce M. Hood (7 April 2009). SuperSense. HarperCollins. p. 157. ISBN 978-0-06-186793-4. Retrieved 7 September 2013.
- Jones K, "Materia medica: remedy information", retrieved 2007-07-24
- Bellavite, Paolo; Conforti, Anita; Piasere, Valeria; Ortolani, Riccardo (2005), "Immunology and Homeopathy. 1. Historical Background", Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2 (4): 441–52, doi:10.1093/ecam/neh141, PMC 1297514, PMID 16322800
- Lee J, Thompson E (2007), "X-ray drug picture", The Homeopath (Northampton: Society of Homeopaths) 26 (2): 43–48, ISSN 0263-3256
- Lee J, Thompson E (2007), "Postironium - the vastness of the universe knocks me off my feet", The Homeopath (Society of Homeopaths) 26 (2): 49–54, ISSN 0263-3256
- Shah R, "Call for introspection and awakening" (PDF), Life Force Center, archived from the original on 2007-02-02, retrieved 2007-07-24
- Barwell B (2000), "The wo-wo effect", Homoeopathica 20 (3), retrieved 2009-04-02
- Stephen Barrett, M.D., Homeopathy: The Ultimate Fake, retrieved 2011-05-26
- Kayne SB (2006), Homeopathic pharmacy: theory and practice (2 ed.), Elsevier Health Sciences, p. 53, ISBN 978-0-443-10160-1
- In standard chemistry, this produces a substance with a concentration of 0.01%, measured by the volume-volume percentage method.
- "Glossary of Homeopathic Terms", Creighton University Department of Pharmacology, retrieved 2009-02-15
- Smith T (1989), Homeopathic Medicine, Healing Arts Press, pp. 14–15
- "Similia similibus curentur (Like cures like)", Creighton University Department of Pharmacology, retrieved 2007-08-20
- For further discussion of homeopathic dilutions and the mathematics involved, see Homeopathic dilutions.
- Bambridge AD (1989), Homeopathy investigated, Kent, England: Diasozo Trust, ISBN 0-948171-20-0
- Andrews P (1990), "Homeopathy and Hinduism", The Watchman Expositor (Watchman Fellowship) 7 (3)
- A 12C solution produced using sodium chloride (also called natrum muriaticum in homeopathy) is the equivalent of dissolving 0.36 mL of table salt, weighing about 0.77 g, into a volume of water the size of the Atlantic Ocean, since the volume of the Atlantic Ocean and its adjacent seas is 3.55×108 km3 or 3.55×1020 L : Emery KO, Uchupi E (1984), The geology of the Atlantic Ocean, Springer, ISBN 0-387-96032-5
- The volume of all water on earth is about 1.36×109 km3: "Earth's water distribution", Water Science for Schools, United States Geological Survey, 28 August 2006, ISBN 0-07-825402-7
- Gleick PH, Water resources, In Schneider SH, ed. (1996), Encyclopedia of climate and weather 2, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 817–823
- Robert L. Park (2008), Superstition: Belief in the Age of Science, Princeton University Press, pp. 145–146, ISBN 0-691-13355-7
- Fisher, P (2007), "The Memory of Water: a scientific heresy?", Homeopathy 96 (3): 141–2, doi:10.1016/j.homp.2007.05.008, PMID 17678808
- van Haselen, R. (Nov 2005). "To which extent should potency choice in homeopathy be "regulated": has European legislation gone too far?". Wien Med Wochenschr. 155 (21-22): 479–81. doi:10.1007/s10354-005-0231-z. PMID 16425107.
- Wheeler CE (1941), Dr. Hughes: Recollections of some masters of homeopathy, Health through homeopathy
- Bodman F (1970), The Richard Hughes memorial lecture, BHJ, pp. 179–193
- "HeadOn: Headache drug lacks clinical data", ConsumerReportsHealth.org, Consumers Union, retrieved 2009-03-25
- "Analysis of Head On", James Randi's Swift, retrieved 2006-07-27
- Dantas, F; Fisher, P; Walach, H; Wieland, F; Rastogi, D; Teixeira, H; Koster, D; Jansen, J; Eizayaga, J (2007), "A systematic review of the quality of homeopathic pathogenetic trials published from 1945 to 1995", Homeopathy 96 (1): 4–16, doi:10.1016/j.homp.2006.11.005, PMID 17227742
- Kayne SB (2006), Homeopathic pharmacy: theory and practice (2 ed.), Elsevier Health Sciences, p. 52, ISBN 978-0-443-10160-1
- Cassedy JH (1999), American Medicine and Statistical Thinking, 1800–1860, iUniverse, ISBN 978-1-58348-428-9[page needed]
- Fye WB (1986), "Nitroglycerin: a homeopathic remedy" (PDF), Circulation 73 (1): 21–9, doi:10.1161/01.CIR.73.1.21, PMID 2866851
- Hahnemann S (1796), "Versuch über ein neues Prinzip zur Auffindung der Heilkräfte der Arzneisubstanzen, nebst einigen Blicken auf die bisherigen", Hufelands Journal (in German) II (3)
- Hahnemann S (1805), Fragmenta de Viribus medicamentorum Positivis (in Latin), Leipzig
- Hahnemann S, Stapf E, Gross G, de Brunnow EG (1826–1828), Materia medica pura; sive, Doctrina de medicamentorum viribus in corpore humano sano observatis; e Germanico sermone in Latinum conversa (in Latin), Dresden: Arnold, OCLC 14840659
- Are the principles of Homeopathy scientifically valid?, Creighton University School of Medicine
- Stehlin I (1996), "Homeopathy: Real medicine or empty promises?", U.S. Food and Drug Administration, retrieved 2007-10-01
- Boger CM, von Bönninghausen CMF, Bradford TL (1999), Boenninghausen's characteristics, materia medica & repertory : with word index (reprint ed.), New Delhi: B. Jain, ISBN 81-7021-207-3, OCLC 46785916
- Mathur KN (2003), Prinzipien der homöopathischen Verschreibung: Synopsis weltweiter klinischer Erfahrungen (in German), Georg Thieme Verlag, pp. 122–123, ISBN 3-8304-9021-6, OCLC 76518035
- Ernst, E (2005), "Is homeopathy a clinically valuable approach?", Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 26 (11): 547–8, doi:10.1016/j.tips.2005.09.003, PMID 16165225
- Sagar, SM (2007), "Homeopathy: Does a teaspoon of honey help the medicine go down?", Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 14 (4): 126–7, PMC 1948865, PMID 17710203.
- Sam Jones, "Homeopathy protesters to take 'mass overdose' outside Boots", The Guardian, 29 January 2010>
- Coghlan A (1 February 2010). "Mass drug overdose – none dead". New Scientist. Retrieved 2012-04-20.
- Label data
- Teut, Michael; Dahler, JÖrn; Schnegg, Christoph (2008), "A Homoeopathic Proving of Galphimia glauca", Forschende Komplementärmedizin / Research in Complementary Medicine 15 (4): 211–7, doi:10.1159/000148825
- Description of Histaminum Hydrochloricum
- Luffa operculata L. COGN Sponge Cucumber
- Harris, Gardinier (June 16, 2009). "FDA Warns Against Use of Zicam". New York Times.
- Hoff D, "Isopathy", Classical homeopathy information, homeoinfo.com, retrieved 2009-03-26
- Kayne SB (2006), Homeopathic pharmacy: theory and practice (2 ed.), Elsevier Health Sciences, p. 171, ISBN 978-0-443-10160-1
- Vanhaselen, R (1999), "The relationship between homeopathy and the Dr Bach system of flower remedies: A critical appraisal", British Homoeopathic journal 88 (3): 121–7, doi:10.1054/homp.1999.0308, PMID 10449052
- Ernst, E (2002), ""Flower remedies": a systematic review of the clinical evidence", Wiener klinische Wochenschrift 114 (23–24): 963–6, PMID 12635462
- Saxton, J (2007), "The diversity of veterinary homeopathy", Homeopathy 96 (1): 3, doi:10.1016/j.homp.2006.11.010, PMID 17227741
- Hektoen, L (2005), "Review of the current involvement of homeopathy in veterinary practice and research", Veterinary Record 157 (8): 224–9, PMID 16113167
- Alternative pet remedies: Government clampdown
- Kempf, EJ (1906). "European Medicine: A Résumé of Medical Progress During the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries". Medical library and historical journal 4 (1): 86–100. PMC 1692573. PMID 18340908.
- "When to believe the unbelievable", Nature 333 (6176), 1988: 787, Bibcode:1988Natur.333Q.787., doi:10.1038/333787a0, PMID 3386722
- Maddox, J.; Randi, J.; Stewart, W. (1988). ""High-dilution" experiments a delusion". Nature 334 (6180): 287–291. Bibcode:1988Natur.334..287M. doi:10.1038/334287a0. PMID 2455869.
- "Issues surrounding homeopathy", National Health Service, retrieved 2011-09-11
- Rose Shapiro (30 September 2010). Suckers: How Alternative Medicine Makes Fools of Us All. Random House. pp. 97–. ISBN 978-1-4090-5916-5.
- "Homeopathy: An Introduction". NCCAM. Retrieved 25 March 2014.
- Orzel, Chad (2009). How to Teach Physics to Your Dog. Simon and Schuster. pp. 221–3. ISBN 141657901X.
- Teixeira, J (2007), "Can water possibly have a memory? A sceptical view", Homeopathy 96 (3): 158–62, doi:10.1016/j.homp.2007.05.001, PMID 17678811
- Levy, G (1986), "Kinetics of drug action: An overview", Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 78 (4 Pt 2): 754–61, doi:10.1016/0091-6749(86)90057-6, PMID 3534056
- Ernst, E (2007), "Placebo: new insights into an old enigma", Drug Discovery Today 12 (9–10): 413–8, doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2007.03.007, PMID 17467578
- Milgrom, L (2007), "Conspicuous by its absence: the Memory of Water, macro-entanglement, and the possibility of homeopathy", Homeopathy 96 (3): 209–19, doi:10.1016/j.homp.2007.05.002, PMID 17678819
- Teixeira, José; Luzar, Alenka; Longeville, Stéphane (2006), "Dynamics of hydrogen bonds: how to probe their role in the unusual properties of liquid water", Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 18 (36): S2353–62, Bibcode:2006JPCM...18S2353T, doi:10.1088/0953-8984/18/36/S09
- Weissmann, G (2006), "Homeopathy: Holmes, Hogwarts, and the Prince of Wales", The FASEB Journal 20 (11): 1755–8, doi:10.1096/fj.06-0901ufm, PMID 16940145
- Anick, David J (2004), "High sensitivity 1H-NMR spectroscopy of homeopathic remedies made in water", BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 4: 15, doi:10.1186/1472-6882-4-15, PMC 534805, PMID 15518588
- Randi J (29 November 2002), "Horizon's homeopathic coup, Cuzco's altitude, more funny sites, the clangers, overdue, Orbito nabbed in Padua, Randi a zombie?, Stellar guests at amazing meeting, and great new Shermer books!", Swift, Online Newsletter of the JREF, James Randi Educational Foundation, retrieved 2006-09-20
- ISO 3696: 1987
- e.g. Dana Ullman, MPH. Essential Homeopathy: What It Is and What It Can Do for You. New World Library, Novato. California, January 2002. ISBN 1-57731-206-6. p. 41: "Classical homeopaths usually use high-potency medicines (200, 1M, 10M, 50M, and higher; "M" refers to the Roman numeral for one thousand, meaning that they were diluted either 1:10 or 1:100 one thousand times) more than low-potency remedies (3, 6, or 12)."
- e.g. Dana Ullman, MPH. Essential Homeopathy: What It Is and What It Can Do for You. New World Library, Novato. California, January 2002. ISBN 1-57731-206-6. p. 62: "Homeopaths often simply prescribe one dose of one high-potency remedy, and these more powerful remedies tend to be more susceptible to being neutralized than lower-potency medicines."
- Boyd, Windy A; Williams, Phillip L (2003), "Comparison of the sensitivity of three nematode species to copper and their utility in aquatic and soil toxicity test", Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 22 (11): 2768–74, doi:10.1897/02-573, PMID 14587920
- Goldoni, Matteo; Vittoria Vettori, Maria; Alinovi, Rossella; Caglieri, Andrea; Ceccatelli, Sandra; Mutti, Antonio (2003), "Models of Neurotoxicity: Extrapolation of Benchmark Doses in Vitro", Risk Analysis 23 (3): 505–14, doi:10.1111/1539-6924.00331, PMID 12836843
- Yu, Hsin-Su; Liao, Wei-Ting; Chai, Chee-Yin (2006), "Arsenic Carcinogenesis in the Skin", Journal of Biomedical Science 13 (5): 657–66, doi:10.1007/s11373-006-9092-8, PMID 16807664
- Barrett S (28 December 2004), "Homeopathy: the ultimate fake", Quackwatch, Quackwatch, retrieved 2007-07-25
- Faziola L, "Dynamization and dilution", Homeopathy Tutorial, Creighton University School of Medicine, retrieved 2007-07-24
- Williams N (26 November 2002), "Homeopathy: The test", Horizon (BBC), retrieved 2007-01-26 (transcript).
- Stossel J (2008), "Homeopathic remedies – can water really remember?", 20/20 (ABC News), retrieved 2008-01-22
- Dean, M.E. (2014), The mustard gas experiments done by the British Homoeopathic Society for the Ministry of Home Security, 1941-42, James Lind Library
- Questions and answers about homeopathy, National Institute of Health, retrieved 2008-02-08
- Linde, K; Scholz, M; Ramirez, G; Clausius, N; Melchart, D; Jonas, WB (1999), "Impact of Study Quality on Outcome in Placebo-Controlled Trials of Homeopathy", Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 52 (7): 631–6, doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00048-7, PMID 10391656
- Ernst, E. (2010). "Homeopathy: What does the "best" evidence tell us?". Medical Journal of Australia 192 (8): 458–460. PMID 20402610.
- Sterne, J. A C; Davey Smith, G (2001), "Sifting the evidence---what's wrong with significance tests? Another comment on the role of statistical methods", BMJ 322 (7280): 226–31, doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7280.226, PMC 1119478, PMID 11159626
- Linde, K.; Jonas, WB; Melchart, D; Willich, S (2001), "The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of homeopathy, herbal medicines and acupuncture", International Journal of Epidemiology 30 (3): 526–31, doi:10.1093/ije/30.3.526, PMID 11416076
- Sackett, David L. (1979), "Bias in analytic research", Journal of Chronic Diseases 32 (1–2): 51–63, doi:10.1016/0021-9681(79)90012-2, PMID 447779
- Rosenthal, Robert (1979), "The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results", Psychological Bulletin 86 (3): 638–41, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638
- Jeffrey D. Scargle (2000), "Publication Bias: The "File-Drawer Problem" in Scientific Inference", Journal of Scientific Exploration 14 (2): 94–106
- Ioannidis, John P. A. (2005), "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False", PLoS Medicine 2 (8): e124, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124, PMC 1182327, PMID 16060722
- Goldacre, Ben (2007), "Benefits and risks of homoeopathy", The Lancet 370 (9600): 1672–3, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61706-1, PMID 18022024
- Liberati, A.; Altman, D. G.; Tetzlaff, J.; Mulrow, C.; Gøtzsche, P. C.; Ioannidis, J. P. A.; Clarke, M.; Devereaux, P. J.; Kleijnen, J.; Moher, D. (2009). "The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration". PLoS Medicine 6 (7): e1000100. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100. PMC 2707010. PMID 19621070.
- Linde, K.; Hondras, M.; Vickers, A.; Ter Riet, G.; Melchart, D. (2001). "Systematic reviews of complementary therapies - an annotated bibliography. Part 3: Homeopathy". BMC complementary and alternative medicine 1: 4. doi:10.1186/1472-6882-1-4. PMC 45586. PMID 11527508.
- Linde, K; Clausius, N; Ramirez, G; Melchart, D; Eitel, F; Hedges, L; Jonas, W (1997), "Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials", The Lancet 350 (9081): 834–43, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02293-9, PMID 9310601
- Milazzo, S; Russell, N; Ernst, E (2006), "Efficacy of homeopathic therapy in cancer treatment", European Journal of Cancer 42 (3): 282–9, doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.09.025, PMID 16376071
- Altunc, U.; Pittler, M. H.; Ernst, E. (2007), "Homeopathy for Childhood and Adolescence Ailments: Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials", Mayo Clinic Proceedings 82 (1): 69–75, doi:10.4065/82.1.69, PMID 17285788, "However, homeopathy is not totally devoid of risks… it may delay effective treatment or diagnosis"
- Posadzki, P.; Alotaibi, A.; Ernst, E. (2012). "Adverse effects of homeopathy: A systematic review of published case reports and case series". International Journal of Clinical Practice 66 (12): 1178–1188. doi:10.1111/ijcp.12026. PMID 23163497.
- Edzard Ernst, MD, PhD, FMedSci, FSB, FRCP, FRCPEd. "The risks of homeopathy?". Retrieved December 2012.
- McCarney, Robert W; Linde, Klaus; Lasserson, Toby J (2004), "Homeopathy for chronic asthma", in McCarney, Robert W, Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1): CD000353, doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000353.pub2, PMID 14973954
- McCarney, Robert W; Warner, James; Fisher, Peter; Van Haselen, Robbert (2003), "Homeopathy for dementia", in McCarney, Robert W, Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1): CD003803, doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003803, PMID 12535487
- Smith, Caroline A (2003), "Homoeopathy for induction of labour", in Smith, Caroline A, Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (4): CD003399, doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003399, PMID 14583972
- Long, L; Ernst, E (2001), "Homeopathic remedies for the treatment of osteoarthritis: a systematic review", British Homoeopathic journal 90 (1): 37–43, doi:10.1054/homp.1999.0449, PMID 11212088
- Ernst, E (1999), "Homeopathic prophylaxis of headaches and migraine? A systematic review", Journal of pain and symptom management 18 (5): 353–7, doi:10.1016/S0885-3924(99)00095-0, PMID 10584459
- Walach, H; Lowes, T; Mussbach, D; Schamell, U; Springer, W; Stritzl, G; Haag, G (2001), "The long-term effects of homeopathic treatment of chronic headaches: one year follow-up and single case time series analysis", The British homoeopathic journal 90 (2): 63–72, doi:10.1054/homp.1999.0473, PMID 11341459
- Whitmarsh, TE; Coleston-Shields, DM; Steiner, TJ (1997), "Double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study of homoeopathic prophylaxis of migraine", Cephalalgia 17 (5): 600–4, doi:10.1046/j.1468-2982.1997.1705600.x, PMID 9251877
- "Health A-Z -- Homeopathy". National Health Service. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
- AMA Council on Scientific Affairs (1997). "Alternative Medicine: Report 12 of the Council on Scientific Affairs (A–97)". American Medical Association. Archived from the original on 2009-06-14. Retrieved 2009-03-25.
- "Homoeopathy's benefit questioned". BBC News. 2005-08-26. Retrieved 2009-01-09.
- Linde, Klaus; Melchart, Dieter (1998), "Randomized Controlled Trials of Individualized Homeopathy: A State-of-the-Art Review", The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 4 (4): 371–88, doi:10.1089/acm.1998.4.371, PMID 9884175
- Ernst, Edzard (2012). "Homeopathy: A Critique of Current Clinical Research". Skeptical Inquirer (Center for Inquiry) 36 (November/December): 39–42.
- Kolisko L (1959), Physiologischer und physikalischer Nachweis der Wirksamkeit kleinster Entitäten [Physiological and physical evidence of the effectiveness of the smallest entities] (in German), Stuttgart
- Walchli, Chantal; Baumgartner, Stephan; Bastide, Madeleine (2006), "Effect of Low Doses and High Homeopathic Potencies in Normal and Cancerous Human Lymphocytes: An In Vitro Isopathic Study", Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 12 (5): 421–7, doi:10.1089/acm.2006.12.421
- Walach, H; Köster, H; Hennig, T; Haag, G (2001), "The effects of homeopathic belladonna 30CH in healthy volunteers — a randomized, double-blind experiment", Journal of Psychosomatic Research 50 (3): 155–60, doi:10.1016/S0022-3999(00)00224-5, PMID 11316508
- Hirst, S. J.; Hayes, N. A.; Burridge, J.; Pearce, F. L.; Foreman, J. C. (1993), "Human basophil degranulation is not triggered by very dilute antiserum against human IgE", Nature 366 (6455): 525–7, Bibcode:1993Natur.366..525H, doi:10.1038/366525a0, PMID 8255290
- Ovelgönne, J. H.; Bol, A. W. J. M.; Hop, W. C. J.; Wijk, R. (1992), "Mechanical agitation of very dilute antiserum against IgE has no effect on basophil staining properties", Experientia 48 (5): 504–8, doi:10.1007/BF01928175, PMID 1376282
- Witt, Claudia M.; Bluth, Michael; Hinderlich, Stephan; Albrecht, Henning; Ludtke, Rainer; Weisshuhn, Thorolf E.R.; Willich, Stefan N. (2006), "Does Potentized HgCl2 (Mercurius corrosivus) Affect the Activity of Diastase and -Amylase?", Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 12 (4): 359–65, doi:10.1089/acm.2006.12.359
- Guggisberg, A; Baumgartner, S; Tschopp, C; Heusser, P (2005), "Replication study concerning the effects of homeopathic dilutions of histamine on human basophil degranulation in vitro", Complementary Therapies in Medicine 13 (2): 91–100, doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2005.04.003, PMID 16036166
- Sullivan W (1988-07-27), "Water That Has a Memory? Skeptics Win Second Round", The New York Times, retrieved 2007-10-03
- Benveniste defended his results by comparing the inquiry to the Salem witch hunts and asserting that "It may be that all of us are wrong in good faith. This is no crime but science as usual and only the future knows."
- Hilly Janes (September 6, 2008), "The Lifestyle 50: The top fifty people who influence the way we eat, exercise and think about ourselves", The Times, archived from the original on 2011-07-27
- Memorandum submitted by Edzard Ernst HO 16 to the House of Lords
- Boseley S (21 July 2008), "The alternative professor", The Guardian (London)
- "Complementary therapies: The big con?", The Independent (London), 2008-04-22, archived from the original on 2010-04-17, retrieved 2010-05-04
- Sample I (21 July 2008), "Pharmacists urged to 'tell the truth' about homeopathic remedies", The Guardian (London)
- Malik, Imtiaz A.; Gopalan, Sethuraman (2002), "Use of CAM results in delay in seeking medical advice for breast cancer", European Journal of Epidemiology 18 (8): 817–22, doi:10.1023/A:1025343720564, PMID 12974558, "CAM use [in the developing countries this study solely considered] was associated with delay in seeking medical advice (OR: 5.6; 95% CI: 2.3, 13.3) and presentation at an advanced stage of disease"
- "Hyland’s Teething Tablets: Recall - Risk of Harm to Children". Food and Drug Administration. 23 October 2010. Retrieved August 2013.
- Chakraborti, D; Mukherjee, SC; Saha, KC; Chowdhury, UK; Rahman, MM; Sengupta, MK (2003), "Arsenic toxicity from homeopathic treatment", Journal of toxicology. Clinical toxicology 41 (7): 963–7, doi:10.1081/CLT-120026518, PMID 14705842
- Barrett S (4 November 2003), "Zicam marketers sued", Homeowatch.org, retrieved 2007-10-25
- Boodman S (31 January 2006), "Paying through the nose", This Week in Health & Science, Washington Post, retrieved 2007-10-25
- Julianne Pepitone (2009-06-16), "Zicam may damage sense of smell - FDA", CNNMoney.com
- Information on Zicam Cold remedy Nasal Gel, Zicam Cold remedy Nasal Swabs, and Zicam Cold remedy Swabs, Kids Size, FDA, 2009-06-16
- Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. AKA Zicam LLC 6/16/09. Warning letter, FDA, 2009-06-16
- Adler J (2004-02-04). "No way to treat the dying". Newsweek.
- Wahlberg, A (2007), "A quackery with a difference—New medical pluralism and the problem of 'dangerous practitioners' in the United Kingdom", Social Science & Medicine 65 (11): 2307–16, doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.07.024, PMID 17719708
- National Science Board (2002), "Science Fiction and Pseudoscience", Science and engineering indicators 2002, Arlington, Virginia: National Science Foundation Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences
- Atwood, K. C. (2003), ""Neurocranial Restructuring" and Homeopathy, Neither Complementary nor Alternative", Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery 129 (12): 1356–7, doi:10.1001/archotol.129.12.1356, PMID 14676179
- Ndububa, VI (2007), "Medical quackery in Nigeria; why the silence?", Nigerian journal of medicine 16 (4): 312–7, PMID 18080586
- Ernst, E.; Pittler, MH (1998), "Efficacy of Homeopathic Arnica: A Systematic Review of Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials", Archives of Surgery 133 (11): 1187–90, doi:10.1001/archsurg.133.11.1187, PMID 9820349
- Rosa Silverman. "Homeopathy is 'rubbish', says chief medical officer". The Daily Telegraph (London: TMG). ISSN 0307-1235. OCLC 49632006. Retrieved 24 January 2013.
- "Homeopathy: An Introduction". National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. April 2012. Retrieved January 2013.
- Ernst, E; White, AR (1995), "Homoeopathy and immunization", The British journal of general practice 45 (400): 629–30, PMC 1239445, PMID 8554846
- Jones M (2006-07-14), "Malaria advice 'risks lives'", Newsnight (BBC Television), retrieved 2009-03-24
- Case of Baby Gloria, who died in 2002:
- Alastair Neil Hope, State Coroner, Coroner's inquest into the death of Penelope Dingle. Ref No: 17/10
- Schmukler AV (2006), Homeopathy: An A to Z Home Handbook, Llewellyn Worldwide, p. 16, ISBN 978-0-7387-0873-7
- Ernst, E. (1997), "The attitude against immunisation within some branches of complementary medicine", European Journal of Pediatrics 156 (7): 513–5, doi:10.1007/s004310050650, PMID 9243229
- Ernst, E (2001), "Rise in popularity of complementary and alternative medicine: reasons and consequences for vaccination", Vaccine 20: S90–3; discussion S89, doi:10.1016/S0264-410X(01)00290-0, PMID 11587822
- Pray WS (1996), "The Challenge to Professionalism Presented by Homeopathy", American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 60: 198–204
- Pray WS (1992), "A challenge to the credibility of homeopathy", Am J Pain Management (2): 63–71
- English, J (1992), "The issue of immunization", British Homoeopathic journal 81 (4): 161–3, doi:10.1016/S0007-0785(05)80171-1
- Jha A (14 July 2006), "Homeopaths 'endangering lives' by offering malaria remedies", The Guardian (London)
- Starr, M. (2000), "Malaria affects children and pregnant women most", BMJ 321 (7271): 1288, doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7271.1288
- Coffman, Becky. A Cautionary Tale: The Risks of Unproven Antimalarials. Centers for Disease Control
- Bunyan N (2007-03-22), Patient died after being told to stop heart medicine, "Daily Telegraph", The Daily Telegraph (London), retrieved 2007-10-15
- "Fitness To Practise panel hearing on Dr Marisa Viegas", General Medical Council (via archive.org), June 2007, archived from the original on 2007-12-22, retrieved 2009-01-25
- "The Science of Homoeopathy, by G. Vithoulkas" 67. British Homoeopathic Journal. October 1978. Retrieved 2 October 2013.
- Birnbaum NR, Goldschmidt RH, Buffett WO (1999), "Resolving the common clinical dilemmas of syphilis", Am Fam Physician 59 (8): 2233–40, 2245–6, PMID 10221308
- Pray WS (2006), "Ethical, scientific, and educational concerns with unproven medications", Am J Pharm Educ 70 (6): 141, PMC 1803699, PMID 17332867
- Baum, Michael; Ernst, Edzard (2009), "Should We Maintain an Open Mind about Homeopathy?", The American Journal of Medicine 122 (11): 973–4, doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2009.03.038, PMID 19854319, "Homeopathy is among the worst examples of faith-based medicine… These axioms [of homeopathy] are not only out of line with scientific facts but also directly opposed to them. If homeopathy is correct, much of physics, chemistry, and pharmacology must be incorrect… To have an open mind about homeopathy or similarly implausible forms of alternative medicine (e.g., Bach Flower remedies, spiritual healing, crystal therapy) is, therefore, not an option"
- Nick Collins, Science Correspondent. Homeopathy is nonsense, says new chief scientist. The Telegraph, 18 Apr 2013
- Richard Gray, Science Correspondent, Homeopathy on the NHS is 'mad' says outgoing scientific adviser. The Telegraph, 09 Apr 2013
- Legal Status of Traditional Medicine and Complementary/Alternative Medicine: A Worldwide Review, World Health Organization, 2001, ISBN 978-92-4-154548-8
- Hauptverband der österreichischen Sozialversicherungsträger (31 March 2004), "Liste nicht erstattungsfähiger Arzneimittelkategorien gemäß § 351c Abs. 2 ASVG (List of treatments not reimbursable by social service providers in Austria)", (German)
- Rechtssatz (legal rule), RS0083796 (German) (Oberster Gerichtshof OGH - Austrian supreme court 28 February 1994).
- The Lancet (2005), "The end of homoeopathy", The Lancet 366 (9487): 690, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67149-8
- Dacey J (14 January 2011), Alternative therapies are put to the test, swissinfo.ch, retrieved 2011-01-17
- "Alternative System of Health Care", Government of India, archived from the original on 2010-01-02, retrieved 2010-01-15
- "AYUSH". Government of India. website.
- "Professional Councils". University Grants Commission (UGC) website.
- "The Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973, s. 15 and Sch. II", Central Council of Homeopathy, India, retrieved 2010-01-18
- News in brief: Homeopathic assessment, Times Higher Education, 29 October 2009, timeshighereducation.co.uk
- Evidence check: Homeopathy, House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, 20 October 2009, parliament.uk
- Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy, Fourth Report of Session 2009–10, House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, 20 October 2009, parliament.uk
- Secretary of State for Health Government Response to the Science and Technology Committee report 'Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy', July 2010 ISBN 978-0-10-179142-7
- "Third of NHS trusts fund homeopathy". BBC News. 19 Feb 2011. Retrieved September 7, 2011.
- Bevanger, Lars (January 18, 2012). "UK universities drop alternative medicine degree programs". Deutsche Welle. Retrieved February 5, 2012.
- "ASA adjudication on Society of Homeopaths". ASA. 3 July 2013. Retrieved 4 July 2013.
- "James Randi's fiery takedown of psychic fraud". TED. Retrieved 2012-05-08.
- Randi, James. "James Randi Speaks Homeopathy Week 2010". JREF.
- Randi, James. "James Randi Lecture @ Caltech - Homeopathy". California Institute of Technology. Retrieved 2012-05-09.
- Randi, James. "James Randi's Challenge to Homeopathy Manufacturers and Retail Pharmacies". JREF. Retrieved 2012-05-09.
- "The 10:23 Challenge 2011 Gallery". Merseyside Skeptics Society. Retrieved 2011-04-11.
- Munger, Kel. "Drugs, not bugs". Sacramento News Review. Retrieved 2012-05-04.
- "Mixing Homeopathic "Remedies" for 2011 San Francisco 10:23 "Overdose"". 10:23 campaign. Retrieved 2012-05-09.
- "Harmed by Homeopathy? CFI Wants to Hear from You". Center for Inquiry. 18 April 2012. Retrieved 2012-05-04.
- "Suit Targets Homeopathic Flu Remedy Claims". Casewatch. 18 August 2011. Retrieved 2012-05-05.
- "Boiron Oscillococcinum Class Action Lawsuit". Top Class Actions. 8 August 2011. Retrieved 2011-09-24.
- Johnson, Erica. "CBC Marketplace - Homeopathy: Cure or Con? Part 1 of 2". CBC News. Retrieved 2012-06-26.
- Johnson, Erica. "CBC Marketplace - Homeopathy: Cure or Con? Part 2 of 2". CBC News. Retrieved 2012-06-26.
- -->American College of Medical Toxicology; American Academy of Clinical Toxicology (February 2013), "Five Things Physicians and Patients Should Question", Choosing Wisely: an initiative of the ABIM Foundation (American College of Medical Toxicology and American Academy of Clinical Toxicology), retrieved 5 December 2013, which cites Woodward, KN (May 2005). "The potential impact of the use of homeopathic and herbal remedies on monitoring the safety of prescription products.". Human & experimental toxicology 24 (5): 219–33. PMID 16004184.
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Homeopathy.|
|Wikinews has related news: Parents prosecuted after homeopathic treatment leads to daughter's death|
|Wikisource has the text of the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article Homoeopathy.|