Science is represented by facts and nothing but facts. Instead of providing narative arguments regarding homeopathy, the author should come up with real data and provide the evidence related to the efficacy of homeopathy. And remember Evidence of absence is not always absense of evidence and vice versa. In summary lets replace the beliefs and faith with facts and data. Thanks
You may be right that the people might not be qualified enough to run a homeopathy trials, but we have to keep in mind that any decipline of medicine aims for the same thing, to improve the medical condition and paramters has to be same with regards to improvement in the condition. I have read that article and also many others. In fact UI myself have conducted some experiments and I am sorry to say that it realy was no better than placebo. I am now a firm beliver that it dose not work, not because other people say so, but because I myself in 3 years could not find it better than placebo.
Homoeopathy is indeed a beautiful way of treating patients.Particularly some chronic diseases.But in India how many Homoeopath practitioner are seriously practicing this branch. More than 90% Homoeopaths in Mumbai practice Allopathy.So they are away from this wounderful branch i.e. Homoeopathy.How they practice Allopathy without having studied Allopathy is another question of reasearch.Simple logics are flatly bypassed knowingly for quick & wrong Financial gains.What is the purpose of treating patient is to cure the disease,but when intentions change "Anyhow Earn money" The beauty is damaged to irreperable level.Who is responsible for lost fame of "Homoepathy"is Homoeopaths themself.It's O.K. in India where people are more generous or Unaware of reality.Lot of patients even don't know what is difference between Allopathy/Ayurveda/Homoepathy/Unani.They just think Doctor next to God.But God never plays foul games with his believers.Thats difference "We are fast Money Makers only".Dedicated Homoeopaths do have role in what ever respect Homoeopath is having.May God save Souls of conscious Practioners.Amen....
Homeopathy is junk with *no* basis whatsoever in sciences. This article was supposed to defend Homeopathy. But where is the defence ? Oh yes I should have guessed it - how can you defend illogical things with logic after all...
I totally agree with you that the Lancet Report could be due to faulty data and carelessly drawn conclusions. The results of homeopathic cure are best studied in-viva. In-vitro studies miss the benefit of vital amplification of 'individual-specific' neuro signals generated by the medicine in 'properly selected' receptors. Good conclusive studies can only be conducted by a multidisciplinary team of scientists, physicists, & physiologists led by homeopaths. The in-viva investigations would also mean identification of multiple parameters to be recorded which can form the signature of drug action. Correlation of parameter based drug-picture with materia medica will begin another discipline: that of Correlated-homeopathic-drug-pictures and will be an equally potent tool in the hands of modern day homeopaths. In this short note I can only add that some of the chronic diseases could indeed be incurable by mere symptomatology. Added complications can come through dynamics of incompatible medicines. Modern science definitely has a role to play in unravelling many mysteries of homeopathy.
Its indeed a very strong & a valid article by a learned man and a doctor.Like many others,even I have found Homoeopathy to be quite effective since the last 14 years.I also prescribe and administer homoeo drugs & continuing to do inspite of quailifying as a Engg graduate.This i continue to do so under the guidance of my Doctor Guide,a resident of Bangalore and himself in his late 70s and by profession a KnowledgeableProfessor in English Literature. It is rather unfortunate that the article in the"The Lancet" projected such a news about a wonderful holistic science.Such article can be only an act by mischief mongers who havent ventured to explore this field themselves & comment blatantly.Also,it seems that those persons indulged in such ghastly act are those who have had at their end losing patients who have turned towards homoeopathy and other alternative routes such as Nature Cure & Ayurveda. Just as an exmaple,Dont we find Allopathic doctors resorting to surgery when there is no absolute need for them to do so?Also these are even performed on small tender babies who have hardly entered their second year!Is that so necessary?Is it not a Market & a Business?Any Answers?-SP
what utter crap! homeopathy has no place in the pantheon of Science. therefore its practictioners are nothing but quacks. It has no firm basis or rooting in any science, and has no relevance to one with the scientific temper. The results of The Lancet are absolutely spot on, and what's more they are not just shooting from the mouth. They have verified what they are talking about.
Sir, Unfortunately, this article worsens the case for Homeopathy. It is full of immature assertions than scientific arguments. There are better arguments at the same scientific or methodological plane as in the Lancet, that could have enhanced the confidence of the followers of Homeopathy. We wonder what the students get taught in colleges that have Professors with no scientific temper to structure their reasoning and arguments better. Ramakrishna
I would have been happy if Dr. Praful would have strongly argued for his profession by giving the positives of Homeopathy rather that speaking ill about the practitioners in India and abroad.
His statements like: "I would like to ask a simple question to the detractors. Was the founder, Dr Samuel Hahneman, a fool to start homeopathy?" shows that he is debating emotionally and not rationally.
History shows that, beliefs and even 'science' have changed over times. There is a chance that what Dr Samuel Hahneman believed in more than 150 years ago might get proved as unworthy tomorrow at the same time there is also a chance that people who are non-believers of homeopathy today might practice it tomorrow.
Thank you Dr. for your spirited defence for Homoeopathy. If homoeo has not worked it only goes to show the method of testing, trials and the so called doctors who conducted the tests are not qualified. If an alopathic medicine has not worked it is only the doctor to be blamed Not the Doctrine. It is as foolish as to say till X-ray machine was invented,there was no x-rays. The theories which are not explainable only means our incapacity to explain and not the non existance of such things. It is as good as to say since i do not have any means to see the GOD , so GOD is non existant.The cures shall speak for Homoeopathy. Not the tests.
I am a follower of Homoeopathy for years, though i do not have any degree in Homoeopathy. I have taken the path of Homoeo after experiencing the miraculas results of it. Your books on Theory of Suppression, Theory of acutes and Miasms which have been my guides and helped me to further dive into this master subject. Once again thank you sir, for your piece of publication against the rude remarks on Homoeopathy.
