Opponents of homeopathy take public overdose

United Kingdom: Opponents of homeopathy take public overdose

Initiated the action „10.23 Homeopathy- There´s nothing in it“ the so-called „Merseyside Skeptics Society“. Self-proclaimed skeptics call homeopathy an unscientific and absurd pseudoscience. The trigger was probably a hearing in November 2009. In the health committee of the British Parliament, allowed a homoeopathic physician to explain the potentiation, the manufacturing process of homeopathic remedies, and an employee of the pharmacy chain „boots“ expressed positive opinion about the sale of homeopathic remedies. That prompted the organizers of „10:23“, according to their own information about their action. The unusual time goes back to the Italian chemist and physicist Amedeo Avogadro. He created the so-called Avogadro constant. In this appears the number 10.23. His hypothesis formulated in 1811 states that gases contain an equal amount of molecules under the same conditions.

Basics of homeopathy
In the blog "Homeopathy and Research" by Claus Fritzsche one learns even more about the backgrounds and motivations of the organizers from a critical point of view. Homeopathy was founded by the German physician Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843). He published a book in 1810 that has remained the theoretical tool of many homeopathic physicians until today „Organon of rational medicine“. Later editions, the title „Organon of the healing arts“ were significantly changed and revised compared to the first edition.

Already in 1796 Hahnemann formulated the „similars“, which he later in „Organon“ further elaborated: „By observation, reflection, and experience, I found that, in contrast to the old allopathy, the true, right, best cure was to be found in the sentence: choose to heal gently, quickly, surely and permanently, in every case of illness, a remedy can arouse a similar affliction as it should heal!“ This means similar is best treated by something similar. The preparation of the remedies in homeopathy then takes place by the substances being further diluted (potentiated).

Critics point out that in the means in part no trace of the original remedy provable and this is a reason for the lack of scientific evidence in the form of studies. Proponents of homeopathy usually refer to their own personal experiences. Furthermore, the acceptance of homeopathy in parts of established physicians and the sale in large chains of representatives of homeopathy is not only benevolent seen. They mock the reductionist view of homeopathy opponents and of representatives of purely economic interests on homeopathy. In their view, this is just the difference to conventional medicine, that homeopathy is more than pure biochemistry or just the gift of, for example, is from Globuli.

In a detailed anamnesis interview, the funds u.a. Individually determined according to mind and constitution and should give information to the body. This means that there can not be a basic homeopathic remedy for a headache - but that is happening at times in large-scale sales.

Naturopathy versus conventional medicine?
Background is thus again one of the major issues between naturopathy and modern medicine. Representatives of naturopathic view see as a treatment approach, the life force of those affected, which then has a different name in each system. In Chinese it is „Chi“ or „Qi“ and in craniosacral osteopathy it is the „Primary Respiratory rhythm“ (PRM), etc ...

The life force can not be influenced, but only obstacles can be removed. When it flows back into the human being, a return to the dynamic balance between illness and health is possible. They throw the purely scientific approach in dealing with diseases u.a. an attempt to preserve nature.
On the other hand, representatives of evidence-based medicine criticize the lack of verifiability of homeopathy and demand that they also have to be checked according to the usual criteria in medicine.

Hysteria and doggedness in the discussion
If you look at the many contributions from the Twitter account of „10:23“ and in the Forum of the Information Service „Telepolis“ to an article on the action of „skeptic“ look, then the topic seems to occupy many people. The form of action and the externally publicized appearance, given by the homoeopath opponents, is not designed for substantive discussion or mutual understanding. A little more calmness and polarization would certainly be good for the discussion, in the end to achieve the best decision for the well-being of the treated patients.

In the forum of Telepolis, one of the participants in the room asked whether the similarity principle in naturopathy would mean that you should eat a pig's leg in a broken fibula. And another participant named „choernchen“ offered new possibilities of using homeopathy: „Homeopathy also opens up completely new terrorist possibilities! You sunk a belladonna bush on the lower reaches of the Rhine! The subsequent dilution of the belladonna constituents in the entire Rhine water will be terribly far above the homeopathic dosages! All life on the Rhine, as we know it, will come to a standstill!“ It is to be hoped that there will be more such contributions, which will show the absurdity of the whole and bring a little more looseness and understanding in the discussion. (Thorsten Fischer, Naturopath Osteopathy, 31.01.2010)

What is naturopathy?
Posts in the forum of Telepolis and here.
The site of homeopathy opponents
Internet presence of the Association of Classical Homeopaths Germany