Prof. George Vithoulkas’ response to an article in the International Journal of Clinical Practice that claimed that homoeopathic treatment has side effects.
To the Editor: International Journal of Clinical Practice
Sir,
I wish to comment on the paper “Adverse effects of homoeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series” by Posadzki et al.” 1
The efficacy of homoeopathy has always been denied with the argument that the remedies were inactive and therefore the curative results were due to placebo effect. In this study becomes apparent that there is actually a strong biological effect upon the human organism, something that was maintained all along by homoeopaths (initial aggravation in serious diseases, proving symptoms etc.).
The well-researched article by Posadzki et al giving evidence of the adverse effects of homoeopathic remedies upon the human organisms, proves clearly that this fact cannot be denied any more. This was previously denied by many sceptics and allied scientists 2 between them Prof. Ernst who signs this study and who, for many years, has denied the efficacy of homoeopathy 3.
I believe that this paper is a good starting point for discussions between the two approaches: homoeopathy and conventional medicine in order to be discovered each other’s strengths and weaknesses.
1 Posadzki P, Alotaibi A, Ernst E, Adverse effects of homoeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series. Int J Clin Pract. 2012 Dec;66(12):1178-88.
2 Sehon S, Stanley D, Evidence and simplicity: why we should reject homoeopathy. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010 Apr;16(2):276-81 and Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L, Juni P, Dorig S, Sterne JA, et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet. 2005;366:726–32.
3 Ernst E, Homeopathy in severe sepsis. Homoeopathy. 2011 Jul;100(3):195; author reply 196-7 and Ernst E, Homeopathy, non-specific effects and good medicine. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011 Jun;50(6):1007-8. The Journal denied publishing this response !!
Source: 
