Orac has just put up a post deconstructing various claims by a US homeopath. One of those claims really tickled my fancy:
The problem is that homeopathy is aimed at treating the individual with a single remedy, chosen specifically for him or her. It is not for treating masses of people with the same pill. Twenty people could have the "same" flu, but each one would need a different remedy (not necessarily Oscillococcinum) and be rightly cured because each one would manifest illness in a way that is utterly unique to him-/herself. We always treat the person, not the disease. As such it is exceedingly difficult, if not impossible to replicate homeopathic treatment the way pharmaceutical companies try to do in drug trials.
If this is the case, you really have to wonder why many pharmacies even bother to offer those rows of homeopathic ‘remedies’ on their shelves. After all, if our homeopath is correct, those commercial potions couldn’t possibly work…
(The article is well woth a read – the various metaphors this practitioner uses in attempts to explain the unexplainable are rather entertaining.)
Grant says:
“As such it is exceedingly difficult, if not impossible to replicate homeopathic treatment the way pharmaceutical companies try to do in drug trials.”
So, they’re trying to ‘wave away’ clinical trials that show homeopathy doesn’t work? It’s a extraordinary piece of self-delusion when you look at it that way (to my mind).
Alison Campbell says:
One of the commenters on Orac’s post said he wondered if this particular homeopath was teetering on the cusp of realizing that it’s all nonsense, because her self-justifications were almost desperate.
herr doktor bimler says:
On the other hand, she was previously a psychotherapist and therefore has had experience in ignoring the evidence of non-improvement.
Alison Campbell says:
ooh, unkind!