Homeopathy and the new fundamentalism: a critique of the critics.
Though in use for over 200 years, and still benefiting millions of people worldwide today, homeopathy is currently under continuous attacks for being "unscientific." The reasons for this can be understood in terms of what might be called a "New Fundamentalism," emanating particularly but not exclusively from within biomedicine, and supported in some sections of the media. Possible reasons for this are discussed. New Fundamentalism's hallmarks include the denial of evidence for the efficacy of any therapeutic modality that cannot be consistently "proven" using double-blind, randomized controlled trials. It excludes explanations of homeopathy's efficacy; ignores, excoriates, or considers current research data supporting those explanations incomprehensible, particularly from outside biomedicine: it is also not averse to using experimental bias, hearsay, and innuendo in order to discredit homeopathy. Thus, New Fundamentalism is itself unscientific. This may have consequences in the future for how practitioners, researchers, and patients of homeopathy/complementary and alternative medicine engage and negotiate with primary health care systems.
Milgrom
Lionel R
LR
The Homeopathy Research Institute, London, United Kingdom. lionel.milgrom@hotmail.com
D035843:Biomedical Research; D000529:Complementary Therapies; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006705:Homeopathy / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008402:Mass Media; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000458:organization & administration*; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D013222:State Medicine; D006113:United Kingdom