Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Plausibility and evidence: the case of homeopathy

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Homeopathy is controversial and hotly debated. The conclusions of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials of homeopathy vary from ‘comparable to conventional medicine’ to ‘no evidence of effects beyond placebo’. It is claimed that homeopathy conflicts with scientific laws and that homoeopaths reject the naturalistic outlook, but no evidence has been cited. We are homeopathic physicians and researchers who do not reject the scientific outlook; we believe that examination of the prior beliefs underlying this enduring stand-off can advance the debate. We show that interpretations of the same set of evidence—for homeopathy and for conventional medicine—can diverge. Prior disbelief in homeopathy is rooted in the perceived implausibility of any conceivable mechanism of action. Using the ‘crossword analogy’, we demonstrate that plausibility bias impedes assessment of the clinical evidence. Sweeping statements about the scientific impossibility of homeopathy are themselves unscientific: scientific statements must be precise and testable. There is growing evidence that homeopathic preparations can exert biological effects; due consideration of such research would reduce the influence of prior beliefs on the assessment of systematic review evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguejouf, O., F.X. Eizayaga, V. Desplat, P. Belon, and C. Doutremepuich. 2008. Prothrombotic and hemorrhagic effects of aspirin. Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostas. doi:10.1177/1076029608319945.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellavite, P., R. Ortolani, F. Pontarollo, V. Piasere, G. Benato, and A. Conforti. 2006. Immunology and homeopathy. 4. Clinical studies-part 1. Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 3: 293–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Belon, P., J. Cumps, M. Ennis, P.F. Mannaioni, M. Roberfroid, J. Sainte-Laudy, and F.A.C. Wiegant. 2004. Histamine dilutions modulate basophile activation. Inflammation Research 53: 181–188.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bewley, S. 2011. Authors’ reply to Fisher and 47 colleagues. British Medical Journal 343: d6693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, R.A. 2001. Is paradoxical pharmacology a strategy worth pursuing? Trends in Pharmacological Science 22: 273–276.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese, E.J., J. Staudenmayer, and E.J. Stanek. 2006. Drug development and hormesis. Changing conceptual understanding of the dose response creates new challenges and opportunities for more effective drugs. Current Opinion in Drug Discovery & Development 9: 117–123.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese, E.J., and R. Blain. 2005. The occurrence of hormetic dose responses in the toxicological literature, the hormesis database: An overview. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 202: 289–301.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chirumbolo, S., Brizzi, M., Ortolani, R., Vella, A., Bellavite, P. 2009. Inhibition of CD203c membrane upregulationin human basophils by high dilutions of histamine: A controlled replication study. Inflammation Research. doi:10.1007/s00011-009-0044-4.

  • Cucherat, M., M.C. Haugh, M. Gooch, and J.P. Boissel. 2000. Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy—A meta-analysis of clinical trials. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 56: 27–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • De Gendt, T., Desomer, A., Goossens, M., Hanquet, G., Léonard, C., Mertens, R., Piérart, J., Robays, D. Roberfroid, O., Schmitz, I. Vinck, L.K. 2011. Stand van zaken van de homeopathie in België. Health Services Research (HSR). Brussel: Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg (KCE). KCE Reports 154A. D/2011/10.273/12.

  • Early Day Motion 908, session 2009-10. www.parliament.uk/edm/2009-10/908. Accessed 30 January 2012.

  • Eizayaga, F.X., O. Aguejouf, V. Desplat, P. Belon, and C. Doutremepuich. 2007. Modifications produced by indomethacin and L-NAME in the effect of ultralow-dose aspirin on platelet activity in portal hypertension. Pathophysiology Haemostasis Thrombosis 35: 357–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endler, P.C., K. Thieves, C. Reich, P. Matthiessen, L. Bonamin, C. Scherr, and S. Baumgartner. 2010. Repetitions of fundamental research models for homeopathically prepared dilutions beyond 10−23. Homeopathy 99: 25–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ezzo, J., B. Bausell, D.E. Moerman, B. Berman, and V. Hadhazy. 2001. Reviewing the reviews. How strong is the evidence? How clear are the conclusions? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 17: 457–466.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Guedes, J.R.P., C.M. Ferreira, H.M.B. Guimaraes, P.H.N. Saldiva, and V.L. Capelozzi. 2004. Homeopathically prepared dilution of Rana catesbeiana thyroid glands modifies its rate of metamorphosis. Homeopathy 93: 132–137.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haack, S. 1998. Manifesto of a passionate moderate. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, K., and K. Kappel. 2012. Pre-trial beliefs in complementary and alternative medicine: Whose pre-trial belief should be considered? Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15(1): 15–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, K., and K. Kappel. 2010. The proper role of evidence in complementary/alternative medicine. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35: 7–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. 2010. Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy. Fourth Report of Session 2009–10. London: The Stationery Office Ltd.; 22 February 2010. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4502.htm. Accessed 30 January 2012

  • Jacobs, J., L. Jimenez, S. Gloyd, F. Casares, M. Gaitan, and D. Crothers. 1993. Homoeopathic treatment of acute childhood diarrhoea: a randomized clinical trial in Nicaragua. British Homeopathic Journal 82: 83–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J., L.M. Jimenez, S.S. Gloyd, J.L. Gale, and D. Crothers. 1994. Treatment of acute childhood diarrhea with homeopathic medicine: A randomized clinical trial in Nicaragua. Pediatrics 93: 719–725.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J., L.M. Jimenez, S. Malthouse, E. Chapman, D. Crothers, M. Masuk, et al. 2000. Homeopathic treatment of acute childhood diarrhea: Results from a clinical trial in Nepal. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 6: 131–139.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen, J., P. Knipschild, and G. ter Riet. 1991. Clinical trials of homeopathy. British Medical Journal 302: 316–323.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Linde, K., N. Clausius, G. Ramirez, D. Melchart, F. Eitel, L.V. Hedges, and W.B. Jonas. 1997. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 350: 834–843.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lancet editor. 2005. The end of homeopathy. Lancet 336: 690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linde, K., M. Scholz, G. Ramirez, N. Clausius, D. Melchart, and W.B. Jonas. 1999. Impact of study quality on outcome in placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1999(52): 631–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lüdtke, R., and A.L.B. Rutten. 2008. The conclusions on the effectiveness of homeopathy highly depend on the set of analyzed trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 61: 1197–1204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marian, F., K. Joost, K.D. Saini, K. von Ammon, A. Thurneysen, and A. Busato. 2008. Patient satisfaction and side effects in primary care: an observational study comparing homeopathy and conventional medicine. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 8: 52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Passalacqua, G., P.J. Bousquet, K.H. Carlsen, J. Kemp, R.F. Lockey, B. Niggemann, et al. 2006. ARIA update: I—Systematic review of complementary and alternative medicine for rhinitis and asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 117: 1054–1062.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, D.T., M.A. Taylor, C. McSharry, and T. Aitchison. 1986. Is homeopathy a placebo response? Controlled trial of homeopathic potency with pollen in hay fever as model. Lancet 2(8512): 881–886.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Riley, D., M. Fischer, B. Singh, M. Haidvogl, and M. Heger. 2001. Homeopathy and conventional medicine: An outcomes study comparing effectiveness in a primary care setting. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 7: 149–159.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rutten, A.L.B., and C.F. Stolper. 2008. The 2005 meta-analysis of homeopathy: The importance of post-publication data. Homeopathy 97: 169–177.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rutten, A.L.B. 2008. How can we change beliefs? A Bayesian perspective. Homeopathy 97: 214–219.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rutten L., Lewith, G., Mathie, R., Fisher, P. 2010. Homeopathy in upper respiratory tract infections? The impact of plausibility bias. WebmedCentral, 1(11):WMC001126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sainte Laudy, J., and P. Belon. 2009. Inhibition of basophil activation by histamine: A sensitive and reproducible model for study of biological activity of high dilutions. Homeopathy 98: 186–197.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, K.F., I. Chalmers, R.J. Hayes, and D. Altman. 1995. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 273: 408–412.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sehon, S., and Stanley, D. 2010. Evidence and simplicity: Why we should reject homeopathy. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16: 276–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shang, A., D. Huwiler-Müntener, L. Nartey, P. Jüni, S. Dörig, J.A.C. Sterne, and M. Egger. 2005a. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 366: 726–732.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shang, A., P. Jüni, J.A.C. Sterne, D. Huwiler-Müntener, and M. Egger. 2005b. Author’s reply. Lancet 366: 2083–2085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterne, J.A.C., M. Egger, and G. Davey Smith. 2001. Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. British Medical Journal 323: 101–105.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, M.Z. 2007. Bronchodilators, fatal asthma, rebound effect and similitude. Homeopathy 96: 135–137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, M.Z. 2011. Rebound acid hypersecretion after withdrawal of gastric acid suppressing drugs: New evidence of similitude. Homeopathy 100: 148–156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenbroucke, J.P., and A.J.M. de Craen. 2001. Alternative medicine: A “mirror image” for scientific reasoning in conventional medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine 135: 507–513.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenbroucke, J.P. 2001. In defense of case reports and case series. Annals of Internal Medicine 134: 330–334.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenbroucke, J.P. 1998. Medical journals and the shaping of medical knowledge. Lancet 352: 2001–2006.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Welles, S.U., E. Suanjak-Traidl, S. Weber, W. Scherer-Pongratz, M. Frass, P.C. Endler, H. Spranger, and H. Lothaller. 2007. Pretreatment with thyroxine (10e-8) and the effect of homeopathically prepared thyroxin (10-30) on highland frogs—A multi-researcher study. Res Compl Med/Forsch Komplementärmed 14: 353–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witt, C.M., M. Bluth, H. Albrecht, T. Weißhuhn, S. Baumgartner, and S.N. Willich. 2007. The in vitro evidence for an effect of high homeopathic potencies—a systematic review of the literature. Complimentary Therapy Medicine 15: 128–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witt, C., R. Lüdtke, N. Mengler, and S. Willich. 2008. How healthy are chronically ill patients after eight years of homeopathic treatment?—results from a long term observational study. BMC Public Health 8: 413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aard 10, 4813 NN, Breda, The Netherlands

    Lex Rutten

  2. British Homeopathic Association, Hahnemann House, 29 Park Street West, Luton, LU1 3BE, UK

    Robert T. Mathie

  3. Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine, London, UK

    Peter Fisher

  4. Department of General Practice, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, ACHG-KULeuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, Blok J, bus 7001, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Maria Goossens

  5. Unit of Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

    Maria Goossens

  6. Belgian Homeopathic Medicines Registration Commission (AFMPS), Chée de Bruxelles, 128/5, 1190, Brussels, Belgium

    Michel van Wassenhoven

Authors
  1. Lex Rutten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert T. Mathie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Goossens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michel van Wassenhoven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lex Rutten.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rutten, L., Mathie, R.T., Fisher, P. et al. Plausibility and evidence: the case of homeopathy. Med Health Care and Philos 16, 525–532 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-012-9413-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-012-9413-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation