At the beginning of "The Organon of the Medical Art," the text that forms the foundation of homeopathic medicine, Samuel Hahnemann, M.D., writes that the conventional medicine of his day had "long-lasting, not infrequently terrible effects." Hahnemann designed homeopathy as an antidote to the inherent dangers of blood-letting, mercury ingestion and other toxic treatments that he was taught in medical school. However, over 200 years later, homeopathy itself has come under fire for being dangerous, and some people question its efficacy.
Not a Substitute for Convetional Medicine
In a 2007 letter to the editor of the journal "Chest," a pharmacist berated the journal for allowing the publication of a controlled clinical trial using a homeopathic medicine. The letter stated that "[recommending homeopathy] for seriously ill patients...is downright dangerous." His objection was not that the homeopathic medicine could do harm, but that administering a "placebo" medicine could keep a patient from seeking other medicine that may actually work. The British government issued a similar complaint against the use of homeopathy in February of 2010.
An example of this negative effect of homeopathy is a London doctor who, in 2003, was found guilty of "serious professional misconduct and banned from practicing medicine for three months" after treating patients with homeopathy. Some of her patients, who were not given any other treatment options, went on to develop more serious illnesses that required treatment with conventional pharmaceuticals.
Not Effective
The March 2010 rebuttal by the British Homeopathic Association of its government's allegations against homeopathy provides a good summary of the clinical research on homeopathy. Of the 87 placebo-controlled clinical trials that have been published, 37 show homeopathic medicines to be clinically effective. Of the other 50, "2 are negative, and 47 are inconclusive," according to the British Homeopathic Association's 2010 report.
Interestingly, the published clinical trial that was attacked by the U.K. pharmacist mentioned above actually demonstrates a large difference between the homeopathic treatment group and the placebo group. The pharmacist's criticisms were based on the fact that no one knows exactly how homeopathy works, not that it hasn't ever been shown to work. However, as the large number of inconclusive studies demonstrate, homeopathy hasn't been shown to work consistently enough to satisfy its critics.
Adverse Effects
Besides the cost of giving a medicine that may not work, homeopathy does not have any adverse effects. For example, a March 1999 study by M. Adler in the journal "Advanced Therapeutics" demonstrated the effectiveness of a homeopathic medicine on 119 patients with sinusitis. In this study, not everyone got better, but no adverse effects were reported.
It seems that the only dangers with homeopathy are due to what may not be given, rather than anything attributable to the homeopathic medicines themselves.
References
- "Chest"; Treating Critically Ill Patients With Sugar Pills; To The Editor; D. Colquhoun; February 2007
- British Parliament: Homeopathy Evidence Check
- "Advance Therapeutics"; Efficacy And Safety Of A Fixed-Combination Homeopathic Therapy For Sinusitis; M. Adler; March 1999
- British Homeopathic Association: Summary of Evidence Rebuttal
- "Chest"; Influence of Potassium Dichromate on Tracheal Secretions in Critically Ill Patients; M. Frass, et al.; March 2005
Member Comments