Is Homeopathy Finally Debunked?

No area of "natural" medicine is more controversial than homeopathy. And let's be honest--homeopathy offers more than its share of ammunition for critics. First, it relies on "remedies" that are often so dilute they contain not even a single molecule of the "active" ingredient and then attempts to explain away this inconvenient fact by claiming that the active constituent is somehow "imprinted" on the remaining material during the manufacturing process. Throw in a few high-profile schisms within the homeopathic community and it's no wonder that the practice of homeopathy is controversial even among practitioners of natural medicine.

Now, a new study has ignited even more controversy by trying to explain the often dramatic differences between single-blind homeopathy studies, which routinely find the practice safe and effective, and double-blind homeopathy studies which almost always find the remedies no better than placebo. What researchers Trevor Thompson and Marjorie Weiss found will almost certainly shake the practice of homeopathy to its very core.

To fully appreciate the implications of this study, it's necessary to understand exactly what goes on at an appointment with an homeopathic practitioner. If you've been to a mainstream doctor's office lately, you know that you typically fill out a multi-page form by yourself while waiting in a reception area full of people you may not know and from whom you're trying not to pick up yet another "bug".

By contrast, when you see a homeopath, you may spend more than an hour talking directly to your practitioner. He or she typically fills out the form for you while asking you questions that may seem to have little to do with the ailment which brought you to his office in the first place.
Only after you've spend a significant amount of time discussing every aspect of your life do you receive a "remedy".

Could it be that just the act of "talking out" your problems is the reason you feel better? Researchers think so. Perhaps the "remedy" isn't in the bottle at all. Perhaps what makes homeopathy effective is the supportive environment-not the little brown bottle of diluted botanicals you're given at the end of your appointment.

So, does this mean that critics finally have the scientific proof they need to debunk the practice of homeopathy once and for all? Researchers aren't going quite that far but this study brings up some very important issues that everyone involved in homeopathy should think about.

References:

Thompson, T., Weiss, M. (2006) Homeopathy - what are the active ingredients? An exploratory study using the UK Medical Research Council's framework for the evaluation of complex interventions. Retrieved February 13, 2007 from http://http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/6/37 .