Homeopathy as an effective treatment? Even without any active ingredient? This is a scientifically proven fact our friend said. Even if it failed on me, she said, it served her fine after all. This made me curious about how this proof was established. Is it possible, that something could be shown to work which is impossible by any scientific standard? What is wrong? Physics or this evidence? How do you know that some remedy is effective anyway?
This triggered me to consider homeopathy, its claims and evidence with the eyes of an engineer. The results of my review found their way into a book and a blog, where I try to show in detail how invalid the evidence really is. It is based on errors in design and performance of clinical studies, in data assessment and evaluation or simply on a lack of logic or an unclear description. You cannot help and check for the tenets themselves in their context. You realise the high claims of homeopathy and the methods deployed to avoid to provide any proof. Health insurance companies, universities, medical chambers, politics, all promote homeopathy instead to focus on a medicine based on science and evidence and to fight deceptions and quackery as would be their obligation.
Because I do not consider this development to be a positive one I strive to share information about homeopathy to the public. It should be understood as what it really is: a long since outdated teaching whose basics are unsupported by modern science and that could be subject for study as a feature of the history of medicine – if at all. I am running a blog “Beweisaufnahme in Sachen Homöopathie” (“Taking on evidence in homeopathy”) with a few articles in English.
Write to me at email@example.com