The gift in the curse of the movement against Homeopathy

Any cause will have an effect and any action will have a reaction and that includes forces we perceive as negative. There is no doubt that the uninformed and prejudiced views of the anti-Homeopathic movement reflects more on them than it ever will on Homeopathy, but there is also no doubt that Homeopathy can benefit from responding wisely to the challenge instead of reacting to it as a perceived threat.

It is easy enough to counter the charges which are laid against Homeopathy and tedious as well. Some countering is of course important otherwise the prejudice and ignorance will hold more substance, despite it being propaganda, than it otherwise would or could. But beyond that, the movement against Homeopathy needs to be seen as an opportunity; in other words, see the gift in the curse.

But just to go through a few of the more common charges:

1. Allopaths don't like Homeopathy. 

Then why are there so many MD's who have also trained as Homeopaths?

It also needs to be remembered that the first Homeopaths were all trained MD's and this remained the case for more than 100 years. Non medically trained Homeopaths began to appear after campaigns began, particularly in the US, to discredit Homeopathy; campaigns pushed by pharmaceutical companies and profit-driven medicine.

Many MD's frustrated with the ineffectiveness and damage done by Allopathy have and still do, turn to Homeopathy. Many of them drop Allopathy all together and focus on Homeopathy. Clearly if your field is surgery, an area which by its nature is mechanistic and materialistic, then this is not likely, but in most other areas of Allopathic medicine there is no doubt that Homeopathy is more effective and less dangerous.

Although there are surgeons who utilise Homeopathic remedies to reduce trauma and aid healing after surgery.

2. Homeopaths like to talk about the medical treatments of the time when Hahnemann developed Homeopathy when it has no relevance to today's world.

Homeopaths do not like to talk about how it was better than the
alternatives of the day, they merely cite the historical fact that
Homeopathy was developed because of the barbarism of the medical
practices of the day. Interestingly, those Allopathic doctors who decide
to train as Homeopaths today, some then give up Allopathic medicine (but not
all) and concentrate on Homeopathy, do so because of the barbarism and
ineffectiveness, not to mention the destructive nature, of so much of
what is called modern medicine.

What Homeopaths like to talk about is a world where all medical
methodologies are utilised and a world where Homeopathy works alongside
the best of Allopathy. I say the best because much of Allopathy is not
just ineffective it is destructive if not deadly. But no-one would deny
its usefulness in materialistic and mechanistic terms, i.e. in a crisis
or where your body has been seriously injured and requires surgery to
be repaired or restored.

3. Hahnemann coined the term Allopathy as a derogatory name for conventional medicine.
Hahnemann did not coin Allopathy as a derogatory term. He coined it to differentiate between the two systems of medicine.
And, for what it is worth, many medical practitioners don't have a
problem with the name either and Allopathy has become increasingly used
to label what we call modern medicine.

 It is useful to understand the meaning of Allopathy - from the Greek,' allos', meaning other, as opposed to Homeopathy, from the Greek meaning,' homeos', the same. Homeopathy uses 'like treats like', ergo, the same and Allopathy uses that which is other, or the opposite.

As Steven Goldsmith, MD, points out in his book, The Healing Paradox, while Allopathy has been accepted as a label by mainstream medicine, a better term would be Antipathic medicine from the Greek meaning, 'against,' because mainstream medicine takes an adversarial approach as one can see in words like: antibiotic, anti-inflammatory; antihypertensives; anti-arrhythmics; anticonvulsives; antacids and so on and so forth with its militaristic and mechanistic approach.

Goldsmith also makes the point that Allopathy is not just mechanistic and materialistic in its approach, but it is moralistic and militaristic.

I would take these two terms and define them as,  moralistic – according blame to the patient for his or her behaviour which ‘results’ in disease; adding guilt, regret and more fear to the equation,  and militaristic -seeing disease as an enemy and the treatment of disease as a war and the body of the patient as the battlefield. We all know in war there is a great deal of collateral damage and that even as battles can be won, wars can be lost.


It is very clear that Allopathy takes an antagonistic and 'anti' approach to disease and to the body. The body is seen as enemy for creating the disease and condemned as such. The treatment is seen as a battle or war to defeat the 'enemy' and bring the body under the control of the doctor and his equipment. The patient is often forgotten in this process and only plays a part by submitting to the power of the doctor and his or her 'tools' and becoming a 'guard' for his or her body; ever watchful, never trusting, always suspicious and eternally fearful.

Such a militaristic approach where body is the enemy, the 'bad' component for misbehaving and getting sick and where doctors and medicine are the 'good' and the ones who will defeat evil and destroy the disease - well, they don't often destroy disease as temporarily contain it, and they do often destroy the body in the process - creates enormous levels of anxiety if not terror and has led to the development of what can only be called Fear-based medicine.

Common sense suggests that Fear is only ever destructive in physiological, psychological and emotional terms and fear inhibits healing, it does not contribute to healing. But Fear is the basis upon which modern medicine stands with its tests, tools, drugs and procedures which more often than not, as research has begun to reveal, takes a healthy person and turns them into a sick one - often a chronically sick one who will never be well again.

Homeopathy on the other hand does not fear the body or the disease or the symptom. It sees the symptoms as the language the body uses for the individual to make them aware that something is out of balance, there is dis-ease - there is no generic cause of disease and no 'one pill fits all.' A dozen people with the same condition, say hayfever, may each get a completely different remedy. There are thousands of homeopathic remedies and the task of the Homeopath, often not an easy one particularly with chronic illness, is to find the right one - the 'signature' remedy which will trigger a healing reaction in the body - which will 'cancel out' illness as two soundwaves of the same frequency will cancel each other out.

Homeopathy is medicine which works at the molecular/atomic levels - energy medicine in essence - where the remedy acts to re-tune the system so that it re-balances and heals itself. Allopathy on the other hand seeks to over-ride the body and its wisdom and to destroy the symptom. Homeopathy works with the body; Allopathy works against the body.

4. Homeopathy is ineffective and has no use.

Homeopathy has been healing without harm for more than two centuries. If it had no use it would have disappeared long ago. Human beings do not bother with things that do not work. Homeopathy has consistently demonstrated that it does work and it has done so to patients and that is why it is still here today and growing in use around the world.

Allopathy by comparison to traditional medicine is young. It can be very effective in certain areas but it is the most dangerous medical methodology by far. The third biggest killer in the world today is Iatrogenic - doctor or medical induced - that's right, Heart disease,Cancer and then Allopathy is what kills people.  On a positive note, one of the biggest growth areas in Allopathy is the field of Integrative Medicine.

And within integrative medicine of course you find Homeopathy. We are
all fortunate that the ignorance and prejudice toward Homeopathy is not
shared by most people in the world, and increasingly, is being
discarded by Allopathic doctors, who, after all, do want to heal but are
limited by the materialistic, mechanistic (I would add moralistic and
militaristic) profit and fear driven approach of what is called modern
medicine.

The simple reality is that Homeopathy will come into its own when there is no longer an antibiotic to fight bacterial infection and we are getting closer to that day. Science/medicine has abused this resource in ways which are criminal and when the day comes when antibiotics are useless, then even the naysayers will turn to Homeopathy. Needs must is often the way that humanity changes course for the better.


There is no doubt that when the body is subject to serious disease the task is greater, whether Homeopathic or Allopathic, and there is no doubt that Allopathy is useful in crisis or mechanistic (when something needs to be surgically repaired) situations, but the point of Homeopathy is always healing. Homeopathy sensibly takes the position that dealing with minor symptoms (as opposed to repressing or removing them which is what Allopathy does) as they arise means that disease does not become major. Studies have shown that people who see a professional Homeopath regularly, and that may be every couple of years or less, experience less serious disease.

5. The 'like treats like' concept of Homeopathy is ludicrous.

Except it exists in Allopathy. Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy both cause cancer and are used to treat cancer. 

Ritalin, used to treat hyperactivity causes the same symptoms in healthy people: Digoxin, used by cardiologists has the same effect in that it causes in healthy people the same symptoms it treats in unhealthy ones. These are but two of a long list.

The difference however is that the Allopathic method is synthetic, and administered in very high doses, and can do harm or cause death while the Homeopathic treatment is gentle, harmless and more effective.

N.B. Homeopathic provings are done by giving healthy people a remedy. Just as something like Ritalin causes the symptoms it is used to treat, in healthy people, so a Homeopathic remedy triggers the symptoms it will be used to treat, in healthy people.

6. Homeopaths refuse to study the research done.

Professional homeopaths study all research carefully and ponder scientific objections carefully as well but the reality is that the science/medical system is mechanistic and materialistic and limited in its nature. It simply is not able to research something like Homeopathy because of the prejudice inherent in its paradigm.

That will change, but until it does, the way science/medicine currently tests runs counter to the philosophy and system on which Homeopathy is founded.

7. Double blind tests show Homeopathy does not work.

Running conventional 'double blind' tests on Homeopathic remedies can only ever be partially successful even when it takes into account the basis on which Homeopathy works - and mostly it doesn't.

However, Homeopathy has been shown to be effective even with some double-blind testing.

8. Hahnemann encouraged enmity between Homeopaths and doctors.

 Hahnemann did not seek to encourage enmity; he was horrified by the barbarism of the medicine of this time and would be horrified by a lot of the barbarism of medicine of this time. He looked for an alternative.

In Hahnemann's day and for the next hundred years or so, ALL homeopaths were also medically trained doctors. Hardly an argument that he encouraged enmity. Such a theory runs counter to the facts and logic regarding those facts.

9. Science/medicine rejects it  because it knows it cannot work and science is always right.
a. if rejection were based on supposing something should work most of scientific research would stop tomorrow.

b. categorically saying it cannot work because it does not fit the mechanistic/materialistic paradigm which has trapped science for a few hundred years would have meant that quantum physics would never have developed and neither would the research into cellular biology.
Science/medicine managed to get past its prejudice and ignorance in regard to bacteria - after killing a lot of people - so no doubt it will in time get past its prejudice and ignorance in regard to the Homeopathic process.

Homeopathy does work and it was and is a part of medicine. It is just less a part of medicine because of ignorance, bigotry, the power of the drug companies and the limited paradigm of science/medicine. It really is that simple.

And, if it did work, or rather when science can understand how it works,  then science would need to be rewritten. Not all of it, but some of it. There is a place for the mechanistic in science, which is why this website works, but only a fool would think that is all there is to this world. It is patently clear, which is why quantum physics was developed in the first place, that there is far, far, far more to this world than the materialistic and mechanistic.

10. Homeopathy is just a placebo effect.
Medical journals including The Lancet have published results showing that Homeopathy is effective and it most definitely is not just a placebo effect. All medical treatments have a placebo effect, something Allopathy admits and some have a nocebo effect, something Allopathy recognises.

Results are influenced if not prejudiced by the materialistic/mechanistic paradigm which controls and limits science/medicine and therefore limits its ability to understand a medical methodology which is far more advanced.

11. Homeopaths are charlatans and crooks.
Medicine has always had its charlatans and incompetents and still does or iatrogenic, doctor or medical induced, would not be the third biggest killer in the world today. No-one ever got it all right.

And Allopathic charlatans and crooks cause death and injury in ways Homeopathy cannot and does not.

12. Homeopathy has to prove that it works to science.

The reality is that Homeopathy does not have to prove their techniques work and never did. Efficacy, as in results, is enough and that proof is constantly demonstrated. The issue science has, is that it does not understand how it works because it is locked within a materialistic and mechanistic paradigm and Homeopathy works in ways beyond that narrow mindset.

Given the limitations of knowledge at the current time neither can Homeopathic practitioners state categorically how it works but there are a number of theories and the answers will emerge in time. Given that much of science is theoretical it is difficult to see what gives science the right to reject theory in others.

There is much of the 'one rule for us and another for you' in the position science takes to Homeopathy. Take gravity for instance. Science does not fully understand what it is or why and how it works but it understands its effects because they are demonstrated and works with gravity accordingly by observing its behaviour. Homeopaths do not completely understand what, why or how in regard to remedies but they see the effects demonstrated and work with it accordingly. by observing the behaviour of remedies. What is the difference? There is no difference.

Science is a system and systems drive behaviour and profit and peers and careers rest on the paradigms and Homeopathy, when it can be explained, will cause a radical rethink and rewrite of much of the scientific system and so will profit and careers be diminished. Of course, there will be new ones developing, for that is the way of it, but people fear change and never more so than when their ego is threatened.

But here is the simple reality, science may demand that it is the arbiter but it isn't. Science may rage for as long as it likes that Homeopathy cannot work because it does not fit the materialistic/mechanistic system which underpins science today, but, most people don't care. Homeopathy has continued to grow in use for more than two centuries because it works. Human beings only care if something works - they don't care how it works. Most people spend their lives making use of things with no understanding of how it works, and no ability to understand even if someone tried to explain it to them - and they don't care.

Most of the people in the world do not care what science thinks or says about Homeopathy and the fanatics who have taken on the 'role' of defending the position of science, represent no more than fleas on the back of an elephant. Such is the way of things.

13. Evidence for Homeopathy is anecdotal.

Much of medical evidence is also anecdotal and all human beings make decisions based upon their own experiences, which is, of course, anecdotal. Does that make it less powerful? No. When a doctor listens to what a patient tells him or her that is a doctor using anecdotal information to diagnose and prescribe. If people saw Allopathy as effective as it claims to be then billions would not be turning to other medical methodologies.

Anecdotal evidence is the foundation for many academic systems and is instrumental in scientific and medical research. Anecdotal is also instrumental in people forming opinions and beliefs which influence their decisions. We have our own personal anecdotal evidence and if it fits with the anecdotal evidence of others then we feel it adds weight to our beliefs. That is not just logical, it is common sense.

In the past five years I have watched eight people,  make their own decisions in regard to treatment for cancer - all chose the Allopathic route and all bar one died, with a great deal of suffering. As a failure rate that is astronomical.  The one survivor could be put down to luck more than good treatment. More importantly, these were people who had the best treatments Allopathy could offer in a First World country. They were also people who had previously lived lives which could only be considered sensible in terms of health. None of them had the 'factors' by which modern medicine regularly 'blames' people for their illness: poor diet, smoking, alcoholism or obesity.

All lasted about 18 months and all experienced minimal or no quality of life during that time. It is therefore hardly surprising that a number of studies done into what treatments doctors would choose when facing the same disease, show more than 80% would reject Allopathic treatments. I put the anecdotal evidence of my own experience together with what amounts to anecdotal evidence from studies of doctors and reach conclusions. That is logical. And that is what more and more people are doing, hence the turn to what are called alternative therapies, but which are in essence simply different medical methodologies.

14. Homeopathy exploits helpless people.

If you want to talk exploitation, which is a charge often levelled at non-Allopathic medicine, you have only to look at chemotherapy which has a failure rate so high that no other product would ever be considered marketable with the same failure rate - and yet medicine sells it because people are desperate. Even worse, read the data, and most doctors have little or no faith in it, which is why they admit they would not accept it for themselves,  but they have nothing else.

That is conscious exploitation and akin to witch-doctors dancing around a fire because it might heal the typhus outbreak - although the witch-doctors may well have a greater success rate because they believe in what they are doing and the placebo rate is powerful. Allopathic doctors are prescribing massively expensive and essentially barbaric treatments which cause enormous suffering, on the basis that they do not know what else to do and while it will probably fail, it might, just might work!

There are more Allopaths prescribing treatments and procedures in which they have little faith than there are Homeopaths or practitioners of Traditional Chinese Medicine or Herbal Medicine doing the same.

But perhaps the greatest indictment of Allopathy is the massive increase in societies of not just chronic but serious disease. In 1900 one in ten people got cancer; now it is one in two. Childhood cancer has increased massively. Not only has Allopathy failed to cure most of the serious or chronic diseases it has utterly failed to do that which is more important - keep people well.

Only a fool keeps doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Hence the massive turn by people, around the world, to other medical methodologies, with Homeopathy at the forefront.

In times to come people will look back and see Allopathic Medicine as the biggest experiment in human history, and possibly the most destructive. Even now the path of what is called modern medicine is littered with discarded theories, treatments, procedures and medications which at best have proved to be ineffective and at worst, to be deadly if not catastrophic like Thalidomide.

Much of Allopathy remains experimental. We do not know what long-term impact vaccination, pharmaceuticals, invasive tests, elective C-sections, IVF and even many surgeries will have on human beings. But we are beginning to find out. With more people suffering from chronic ill health and serious disease; more allergies and asthma; more behavioural and learning difficulties in children and more mental illness than has ever been seen before in history, it is very, very clear that Allopathic Medicine has not made for healthier people and less disease and suffering, but quite the opposite.

The counter to it all is the claim that people live longer. But do they? The figures are skewed in past times by higher infant and child mortality and those deaths have certainly declined. But they did not begin to dramatically decline with the advent of Allopathic Medicine, they began to decline with improved sanitation and nutrition. And both history and archeology show that well nourished human beings living in healthy environments have always lived long lives.

But let Allopathy wave the longevity flag even if it is sourced more in manipulated data than any reality because what people care about most of all is not how long they live but how well they live. Modern medicine may prolong some lives, but who wants to live in a state of chronic ill health, subjected to pain, suffering and little quality of life? Not many people. Allopathy has failed the most important test of all - proving that it offers health and therefore, an improved quality of life. It may do for a few, at least temporarily, and for a very few permanently, but it does not for most and that is the petard on which it will fall.

In the meantime there is more important work for those practising other forms of medicine, such as Homeopathy.  In every 'curse' there is a gift. One often overlooked fact is that the anti-Homeopathy brigade is actually doing Homeopathic Medicine an enormous favour because it is pushing the system to improve.

Any system, particularly any medical system requires professionalism and professionalism requires regulation. That does not mean that there will not still be charlatans, incompetents, mistakes and unprofessionalism as Allopathic Medicine so consistently demonstrates, but it does mean there are regulations in place which contribute to greater professionalism in general and the highest standards in general.

Regulation is required in all fields, as the banking/economic fiasco in the US some years ago so clearly demonstrated. And that is because without regulation you are relying on the best of human nature and the 'best' of human nature, without regulation, will always be pulled down to the worst of human nature because that will be the baseline which is set, or to which things are reduced in the name of profit. There are always people who will rort any system for profit, whether literal or metaphorical, and only regulations can keep them in check and maintain high standards of behaviour and operation.

The better regulated and more professional Homeopathic Medicine is, the better it is for practitioners and of course patients. With such a brilliant and advanced medical methodology, one which is going to be crucial to human health in the future as chronic illness increases due to Allopathic treatments, and Allopathic treatments fail because of abuse and overuse of antibiotics first and foremost,  but also because of procedures and interventions in general, it is absolutely vital that the profession and the system in which it functions operates to the very highest standards.

While most of what the opposers put forward is sourced more in ignorance and propaganda than any sort of fact, and that is easily recognised by anyone who knows something about Homeopathy and by ordinary people with good levels of common sense, the reality is that while Homeopathy is excellent, the system in which it is practised is in need of improvement.

Through reacting and responding to the negativity and the movement which seeks to discredit Homeopathy, the methodology, profession and system can only improve and that is to the benefit of all. And that will place Homeopathy in the best position to meet the needs of a failing Allopathic system and the failing health of billions of people around the world.

It will also put it in the best position to be seen as the medicine of the future - a form of energy medicine developed far ahead of its time, but a methodology which will be embraced by Allopathy, as it must be, and play a vital role in re-writing and re-working the understanding and approach of science/medicine in general.

I believe it is very important that Homeopaths, and those who support the system,  do not get caught up in personal battles with the naysayers, but use the impetus which such challenge brings, to make Homeopathy, methodology and practice, the best that it can be. The movement against Homeopathy cannot hurt it; the only 'hurt' it can bring is if Homeopaths are distracted by it and allow their focus to be on the anti-homeopathy movement and not on Homeopathy and its future.