Abstract
Homeopaths have played a crucial role in advancing the growth of medical specialties, most notably anesthesiology, cardiac surgery, urology, and ophthalmic surgery. Homeopathically trained physicians have left an enduring mark in psychiatry, and surgery has been enriched by the original work of many physicians who trained at homeopathic medical schools. In the realm of education and academic administration, three homeopathic graduates stand out. Many homeopathic physicians have been conspicuous agents of change in bringing the medical profession closer to fulfilling its core mission: to relieve suffering for all human beings, no matter what their station in life. Despite these positive attributes, homeopathy has failed to make overt inroads to medicine because it has forever been met with resistance and prejudice. Comprehensive reviews of homeopathy have been published in major medical journals. These reviews all examined whether homeopathy was superior to placebo in randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials. Research continues, and it is hoped that a better grasp on the important questions about homeopathy, including its efficacy, mechanisms, indications, and method of delivery will be achieved.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cameron CS. Homeopathy in retrospect. Trans Stud Coll Physicians Phila. 1959;27:28–33.
Bagwell CE. Nosokomia to sacred infirmary: legacy of the Knights Hospitaller and Chimbarazo Hospital in the evolution of hospitals from medieval to modern. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:e35–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.01.001.
Bagwell CE. “Respectful image”: revenge of the barber-surgeon. Ann Surg. 2005;241:872–88.
Watters WH. A pathologist’s view of homeopathy. N Engl Med Gazette. 1909;43:407–18.
Nicholls PA. Homoeopathy and the medical profession. New York: Croom Helm; 1988. p. 170–1.
Jablonski D. A milestone for osteopathic medicine – and the NCSB. Forum: North Carolina Medical Board. 2009;Winter:1–2.
Hawkes AE. Homeopathy in England – a letter from Alfred Edward Hawkes. Trans Am Inst Homeopath, 62nd Session. 1906;62:94–7.
Kleijnen J, Knipschild P, ter Riet G. Clinical trials of homeopathy. BMJ. 1991;302:316–23.
Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, Melchart F, Eitel F, Hedges LV, et al. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. Lancet. 1997;350:834–43.
Linde K, Scholz M, Ramirez G, Clausius N, Melchart D, Jonas WB. Impact of study quality on outcome in placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:631–6.
Linde K, Melchart D. Randomized controlled trials of individualized homeopathy: a state-of-the-art review. J Altern Complement Med. 1998;4:371–88.
Singh S, Ernst E. Trick or treatment: the undeniable facts about alternative medicine. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 2008. p. 135.
Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener D, Nartey L, Jüni P, Dörig S, Sterne JAC, et al. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy. Lancet. 2005;366:726–32.
Rutten L, Mathie RT, Fisher P, Goossens M, van Vassenhoven M. Plausibility and evidence: the case of homeopathy. Med Health Care Philos. 2013;16(3):525–32. doi:10.1007/s11019-012-9413-9.
Editorial. The end of homeopathy. Lancet. 2005;336:690.
Bornhoft G, Matthiesen PF, editors. Homeopathy in healthcare – effectiveness, appropriateness, safety, costs. Berlin: Springer-Verlag GmbH; 2011.
Shaw DM. The Swiss report on homeopathy: a case study of research misconduct. Swiss Med Wkly. 2012;142:W13594. doi:10.4414/smw.2012.13594.
Gurtner F. The report “Homeopathy in healthcare: effectiveness, appropriateness, safety and costs” is not a “Swiss report”. Counterstatement to Shaw D.M. The Swiss report on homeopathy: a case study of research misconduct. Swiss Med Wkly. 2012;142:w13594. doi:10.4414/smw.2012.13723.
Ezzo J, Bauzell B, Moerman DE, Berman B, Hadhazy V. Reviewing the reviews. How strong is the evidence? How clear are the conclusions? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17:457–66.
Ernst E. A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;54:577–82.
Lüdtke R, Rutten ALB. The conclusions on the homeopathy highly depend on the set of analyzed trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:1197–2004.
Meeks TW, Jeste DV. Neurobiology of wisdom. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2009;66:355–65.
Bell IR. Nanoparticles, adaptation and network medicine: an integrative theoretical framework for homeopathy [Internet] [Cited 2012 Dec 4]. HRI Research Article. 2012;17:1–2. Available from: www.homeoinst.org.
Brien S, Lachance L, Prescott P, McDermott C, Lewith G. Homeopathy has clinical benefits in rheumatoid arthritis patients that are attributable to the consultation process but not the homeopathic remedy: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Rheumatology. 2011;50:1070–82.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Davidson, J. (2014). Concluding Thoughts. In: A Century of Homeopaths. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0527-0_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0527-0_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-0526-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-0527-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)