Bad Science and Homeopathy

[This picture is from the web site of the University of Westminster homeopathic medicine degree course. It's ironic that the picture is of a drop of water....because that is basically what you are getting in homeopathic medicine.]

Dr. Ben Goldacre, a British physician, writes a science column for the UK Guardian. Here is a link to a great commentary he wrote concerning homeopathy. Here are the first two paragraphs:

There are some aspects of quackery that are harmless - childish even - and there are some that are very serious indeed. On Tuesday, to my great delight, the author Jeanette Winterson launched a scientific defence of homeopathy in these pages. She used words such as "nano" meaninglessly, she suggested that there is a role for homeopathy in the treatment of HIV in Africa, and she said that an article in the Lancet today will call on doctors to tell their patients that homeopathic "medicines" offer no benefit.

The article does not say that, and I should know, because I wrote it. It is not an act of fusty authority, and I claim none: I look about 12, and I'm only a few years out of medical school. This is all good fun, but my adamant stance, that I absolutely lack any authority, is key: because this is not about one man's opinion, and there is nothing even slightly technical or complicated about the evidence on homeopathy, or indeed anything, when it is clearly explained.

Here is the link to the article called "The Benefits and Risks of Homeopathy" that Dr. Goldacre wrote for The Lancet.

I suggest that you read these articles and familiarize yourself with homeopathy. There are many "homeopathic" remedies currently being advertised on American TV.

Homeopathy is great if you believe that water can cure diseases.