To find out why the wild claims regarding homeopathy made by Fr. Ivo in the posts appended below are patently bogus, please read this article provided by a prominent British organization of scientists, promoting sense and science among lay people:
http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/pdf/SenseAboutHomeopathy.pdf Here are some relevant quotes from it: "The scientific evidence shows that homeopathy acts only as a placebo and there is no scientific explanation of how it could work any other way." "Homeopathic preparations have been diluted to such an extent that many do not contain a single molecule of the active ingredient....... Homeopaths believe that water can 'remember' the active ingredient. If water had this ability, it would also remember the other substances that have been diluted into it over time, such as human and animal waste, dead plants, bacteria and minerals; it would remember the test tube in which the homeopathic preparation was made." "Over 150 clinical trials have failed to show that homeopathy works. Some small-scale studies have yielded positive results, but this is due to poor methodologies or random effects. When all the evidence from many trials is pooled together, homeopathy is no better than a placebo. A recent Lancet paper compared 110 homeopathy trials with 110 conventional medicine trials. The authors found that the higher quality trials offered strong evidence that conventional medicines work and no evidence that homeopathic preparations work. In other words, the better the research, the less effective homeopathy appears. Over a dozen similar analyses have arrived at the same conclusion: that homeopathy does not perform any better than placebos." Cheers, Santosh P.S. BTW, No scientist or modern physician uses the outdated, meaningless term "allopathy". It was a word coined by Samuel Hahnemann to distinguish his own idiosyncratic practices from the idiosyncratic practices of other physicians. Neither him nor any of them was engaged in genuine evidence-based scientific medicine, which is only about 40 years old. --- On Thu, 4/16/09, Fr. Ivo C. de Souza <icso...@bsnl.in> wrote: > > Homeopathy has been tested by medical science. The problem > is not merely 'faith' in the physician, which is necessary, but is not > >enough. It is a system that works. I refer to those who really know the > principles, art and science of Homeopathy. It is not 'powder' (sugar of > >milk) given by a fake homeopath together with steroids..., but a drug > >homeopathically prepared. > ........................... > Allopaths who have practised both Allopathy and Homoepathy > have written about the superiority of Homeopathy over Allopathy in many > >diseases (you can read C.A.Madan, Homeopathy cures when Allopathy fails. > In fact, some allopaths have switched over from allopathy > to homeopathy (and studied in the medical homeopathic colleges), because > >they themselves have been cured of chronic diseases by homeopathy > >(Dr.S.R.Wadia). > There are allopaths who take homeopathic drugs for themselves in some > diseases. There are allopathic practitioners who recommend the > homeopathic treatment for their patients, for example, in the case of > >asthma, psoriasis, pemphigus vulgaris, Parkinson's disease (the cure > may not be total), IBS (Irritable Bowel Syndrome). Each medical system >has > its own merits and demerits. Medical responsibility should be there. > >The evidence is revealed in the practice of genuine > Homeopathy... Dr.Samuel Hanehmann, who was an allopath, has proved drugs > homeopathically and systematized it with his Organon of Rational > Medicine.. > --- On Thu, 4/16/09, Fr. Ivo C. de Souza <icso...@bsnl.in> wrote: > >Children do not have 'belief', yet they are cured by homeopathic >medicines. >Homoeopathic physicians get all the modern training in the >colleges. I would >like to hear from homeopathic practitioners. In fact, I >spoke to some of them >yesterday. May more light be shed on this issue. >