The homeopathy lie?

The doctor and homeopath Curt Kösters to "The homeopathy lie: How dangerous is the doctrine of the white beads"

29/09/2012

„The Homeopathy Lie: So dangerous is the doctrine of the white globules“, under this title appears in October the new book of the authors Nicole hot man of the "star"and Christian Weymayr from the GWUP. Although review copies of the publication by Piper-Verlag are not yet published, but the title and the announcement of the book leave no doubt about the thrust of the authors. The basis of the book's argument is the stubbornly rumored claim that homeopathy is „without any scientific proof“. On the one hand, the authors ignore a whole series of positive studies on homeopathy which correspond to the so-called gold standard - ie double-blind and placebo-controlled. On the other hand, Weymayr and Heißmann studies from health services research - by definition, the research of healing methods under everyday practical conditions - apparently not relevant to science. Especially in chronic diseases, health services research confirms the effectiveness of homeopathy. The statement of fact that homeopathy is without any scientific proof is thus simply wrong and gives the title of the book „The homeopathic lie“ a very special meaning.

Fight of ideologies? - A sham debate
Weymayr and Heißmann exaggerate the homeopathy debate on a war of worldviews: „But above all, the white globules undermine a thinking based on rational criteria - anyone who considers homeopathy to be possible must consider everything possible“. The lack of scientific plausibility of the mechanism of action of homeopathic high potencies becomes a deadly stroke argument here: „An active ingredient that is diluted to nonexistence can not work“. Data from clinical research and basic research, which just prove this, then do not fit into the picture.

The selective perception of the study data, their knowledge-based and science-theoretically amusing Palmström logic, the entire line of argumentation of the authors and also the heroic self-stylization „The science journalists Christian Weymayr and Nicole Heißmann face in this courageous book against a very powerful lobby“, All this comes from the arsenal of the so-called „scientific skepticism“. These self-appointed „skeptic“ already consider the pure existence of homeopathy as an elementary threat to the scientific worldview. Amazingly, these are exactly what they are „skeptic“ at the same time vehemently opposed to the further research of homeopathy - and have thereby prominent support.

Professor Jürgen Windeler, head of the highly influential Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG): „You do not even have to continue researching, the matter is done“ (Spiegel Online July 12, 2010). So much for the increasingly powerful lobby of homeopathy. Professor Jürgen Windeler is a member of the GWUP (Society for the Scientific Investigation of Parasitic Sciences), the OPUS DEI of Scientific Belief - as well as the Co-author of the „Homeopathy Lie“ Christian Weymayr. The GWUP is the organization of „skeptic“ and sees himself as the last bastion of the endangered scientific worldview. The misconception that science is neither a religion nor a substitute for religion, they require no dogmas and no holy Inquisition; Heresies work themselves out or become part of the prevailing doctrine at some point; Moreover, the natural sciences are by no means threatened by their social acceptance and relevance.

The star as a henchman of a GWUP campaign
Coming soon in the star an article about the promotion of „Homeopathy Lie“. The thrust should hardly differ. It is to be regretted that as part of this campaign, large print media like the star to make a henchman of an ideological concern. Most of all, however, this is to be regretted for the authors: the offer for a differentiated and often critical examination of the phenomenon of homeopathy was made, but unfortunately not taken up by the authors. A presentation that differentiates homeopathy and research into homeopathy and considers the journalistic commandment of speech and counter-speech, could have been interesting for all sides. The method Holzhammer promises but probably a higher circulation.

In summary, it can be stated that once again a chance has been given to deal objectively with the phenomenon of homeopathy and thus to move forward on the path of knowledge, instead the book fits seamlessly into the one-sided coverage of the topic. We, as scientifically thinking homeopathic doctors, deeply regret this.

About the author of the article:
Curt Kösters is a general practitioner, homeopath and co-founder of the Scientific Society for Homeopathy (WissHom).