Homeopathy鈥檚 claims fail scientific analysis
I can understand how M Aitken and Neville Gay (Letters, March) extol homeo颅pathy in the light of their experiences. When Samuel Hahne颅mann invented homeopathy in the late 18th century it saved hundreds of lives and achieved startling success.
There was a simple reason. At that time conventional doctors were killing more than they cured. They used ineffective and dangerous treatments like purges, blistering, tobacco smoke enemas, bleeding etc.
Hahnemann used harmless remedies, basically water with a good dose of propaganda. He used the great healers, Mother Nature and Father Time, and took all credit. I can鈥檛 comment on the cases quoted but they are typical of accounts of homeopathy believers.
What is impressive in the medical world these days is the accumulating evidence that homeopathy, when subjected to controlled studies and with reviews of randomised controlled studies, cannot be viewed as an evidence-based form of treatment.
The National Health Service has at last come to its senses and will no longer pay for homeopathic treatments.
William Larkworthy,Vaucluse
