15 'arguments' for homeopathy
The other day, I received a request from THE GUARDIAN: could I write a piece on homeopathy in relation to the Australian report which had just come out; they gave me ~700 words and all of 3 hours to do it. I had an extremely busy day, but accepted the challenge nevertheless. My article was published the next day and the 'headliner' at THE GUARDIAN had elected to call it There is no scientific case for homeopathy: the debate is over. What followed was a flurry of debate - well over 2200 comments - which was more than a little ironic, considering the headline. Essentially, my article had repeated the well-rehearsed arguments which have so often been made on this blog and elsewhere: • Our trials failed to show that homeopathy is more than a placebo. • Our reviews demonstrated that the most reliable of the 230 or so trials of homeopathy ever published are also not positive. • Studies with animals confirmed the results obtained on humans. • Surveys and case reports suggested that homeopathy