Warp wrote:
>   Some people argue that since homeopathic substances amount to placebos in
> practice, the entire phenomenon of homeopathy is more or less innocuous
> (unless you count people spending money on it for nothing).
> 
>   Not so:
http://www.news.com.au/national/babys-eczema-death-was-parents-fault/story-e6frfkvr-1225708504277

Actually, homeopathy did have one enormous benefit in the past.

Until around 170 years ago, allopathy (what we recognize as conventional 
medicine) was still stuck in the quackery that characterized medicine 
during the Dark Ages; Mark Twain mentions in one of his essays that the 
shift from the ancient quackery to modern competence took place during 
his lifetime.  Most of the success that allopathy appeared to have back 
then was due to the placebo effect, and some of the treatments did more 
harm than good.

Then along came homeopathy.  Allopathy was so ineffective (and in some 
cases, downright harmful) that homeopathy was usually as effective, and 
often better.  This prompted allopathic practitioners to put aside their 
Galen-worship and conduct some actual research, leading to the discovery 
of the new, effective treatments that replaced the old, dangerous ones.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message