Homeopathy: A Credible Treatment

Theory of Fighting Pathogens with Pathogens Is Homeopathy A Credible Treatment?
Around 1790, Samuel Hahnmann, a German physician took in a certain amount of quinine from the bark of Cinchona sp. which was usually used to treat malaria (the main symptom is fever) and later he noticed some effects such as his body temperature raised. With further study, he concluded the theory that a substances cause disease symptom can also alleviate the disease which later developed to be “Homeopathy” treatment (Sharp). The term “Homeopathy” consists of two Greek words:”homoios” and “pathos” which mean “similar” and “disease” respectively. It’s an arguable treatment which was popular with many countries for a century. With the development of modern medicine
theory, homeopathy was on the wane due to its lack of scientific support (Lu). Although homeopathy theory is denied by the scientific realm, it is the most popular alternative medicine therapy according to statistics from WHO (World Health Organization). The question is: does homeopathy have any curative effect? Jie Lu, phD in Medicine in University of Tokyo, wrote an article for Southern Weekely about homeopathy, Homeopathy is disallowed: Hahnemann was thrilled by his discoveries by accident: he thought he had grasped the truth about medical science that no one had ever known.
(Lu) He concentrated on further study and proposed two principles as the theoretical foundation of homeopathy. He drew the general explanation: “Similia similibus curantur” (“Similar cures similar” in Latin) to state that the substances produce disease symptoms of the healthy human body can alleviate relative symptoms of the sick person (Sharp). Later he developed into the another notion law of infinitesimal which core stated that the effectiveness of treatment will increase along with the lower concentration of the medicine (Sharp). Hahnemann stated in his published book The Organon of the Healing Art that the substance needed to be ultra-diluted and shaken violently so that the homeopathic traits would be activated hence the curative efficacy would be strengthened. As he thought the large dose of agentia would aggravate the illness instead
(Hahnemann).
At that time, were still in savagery period in the medical realm, people had very superficial knowledge to pathological theory. Without an effective remedy, plus the faddish bloodletting treatment was much riskier; while homeopathy was harmless and economical, soon it was accepted and widely used in public. Up to early 20th century, many physicians still applied homeopathy. Homeopathy was taught in 22 medicine institutes in the United States, about 14,000 doctors prescribed homeopathic medicine enthusiastically (Lu). On the other hand, people who veto homeopathy have their explanations. It is believed that the cognitive bias including placebo effect and representativeness heuristic plays a role in homeopathy treatment. The authors of How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age, Schick and Vaughn discussed in hypothesis 2:”People taking homeopathic remedies feel better because of the placebo effect.” Namely, the patients think homeopathy works as advertised is due to the well-known power of placebo, as many people simply improved themselves by given a treatment known to be ineffective. This hypothesis is considered reasonable which is mostly favored by many medical experts. As the placebo effect is well-recorded treatment works frequently in medical cases (Schick & Vaughn 230). Furthermore, research shows the fact that homeopathy works no better than placebo; Science and technology committee in House of commons in the UK declared that: “We have set out the issue of efficacy and effectiveness at some length to illustrate that a non-efficacious medicine might, in some situations, be effective (patients feel better) because of the placebo effect. That is why we put more weight on evidence of efficacy than of effectiveness”. Also Schick and Vaughn explained that: “Personal experience alone generally cannot establish the effectiveness of a treatment beyond a reasonable doubt” with further reasons that some illnesses just improve on their own such as common cold (taking pills only alleviate the symptoms instead of curing the sickness); people improve being given an ineffective treatment (the placebo effect mentioned above); other factors may cause the improvement in a different patients’ physical condition (143). These points confirms that the medical records and case reports of patient as individual can neither prove the effectiveness of homeopathy nor to be viewed as scientific explanations.
Homeopathy may also commit the representativeness heuristic as a type of confirmative bias.
As Schick and Vaughn address in their book: the representativeness heuristic is simply described as assessing similarity of objects and organizing them based around the category prototype (e.g., the causes and effects should resemble each other). Namely, “Like goes with like.” Its influence is most apparent in the realm of medicine-for instance; in homeopathy treatment, patients with insomnia problem are prescribed stimulants like caffeine to counteract the sleep loss symptom that accords with the theory by giving yourself these corresponding diluted substances you will in fact become healthier (British Homeopathic
Association). Additionally, because of the development of modern science technology enables accurate detecting test of extremely dilute solutions of the medicine. In the lights of the drug formulation and pharmacokinetic, it failed to support the hypothesis that extremely dilute solutions of substances work more effective. In this circumstance, supporters of homeopathy tried to renovate Hamnmann’s principle:
Extending the first principle “Similia similubus curentur”, they compared it with vaccine which injects small amount of virus or germ into human body to prevent disease infection. However, vaccine activates human body’s immune system to produce antibody by vaccinating the germ in advance rather than using the germ to heal up. That is far different from homeopathy (Lu). Supporters also tried to reinterpret another principle “Law of infinitesimal” with water memory theory. They believed that during the process of dilution, the water would receive message from the medicine and form new construction. The more times it is diluted, the more effective the medicine (water) becomes. This is not accepted as well, because modern Chemistry clarifies that water is combined with Hydrogen and Oxygen whose construction would remain the sane no matter how it is vibrated and diluted. Afterward, they suggested that new nanoparticles with curative function may be produced during the dilution process which later proved to be the result of contamination during experiment.
To draw on conclusion, it is said homeopathy is just placebos; they are so diluted that it is basically water, hence they are mostly harmless and without side effect. Plus FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) listed in regulation that homeopathy is in drug administration scale which means it is authorized by the government as supplementary treatment (FDA). By conducting the research and processing my own thinking, my standpoint to view homeopathy is as a “non-believer”. That is, I choose to suspend my judgment: neither believe nor disbelieve it. In my opinion, patients with minor sickness or chronic disease can turn to homeopathic medicine as an option, but patients suffer from serious illness like cancer or physical wound should seek for qualified hospital and doctor.