Is Homoeopathy, a science or an art?

_____________________________________________________

…or indeed neither… or both?

David Colquhoun Professor of Pharmacology University College London has a bee in his bonnet over this one...

Science degrees without the science

SUMMARY: Some UK universities offer science degrees in complementary medicine. David Colquhoun argues that these are not science but anti-science, and asks who is to blame.
David Colquhoun, Nature 446, 373 - 374 (22 Mar 2007)

This also appeared in The Guardian on the same day headlined:
Homeopathy science degrees 'gobbledygook'

The full article in The Guardian can be found at
http://education.guardian.co.uk/chooseadegree/story/0,,2040111,00.html

I suppose it’s important to first define science and art

Science: systemic study and knowledge of natural or physical phenomena; any branch of study concerned with observed material facts. Collins Gem English Dictionary 1983 edition.

Art: skill; human skill as opposed to nature, creative skill in painting, poetry, music etc.; any of the works produced thus; profession, craft, knack, contrivance, cunning, trick; system of rules – pl. certain branches of learning, languages, history etc., as distinct from natural science. Collins Gem English Dictionary 1983 edition.

My academic route to becoming a homoeopath was as follows –

Physics, Chemistry and Biology A-Level (all grade C)
Physiology and Pharmacology BSc, (Joint Honours), 2:1 from King’s College, University of London.

It’s interesting that when we learned physiology, we studied cells, tissues, organs, systems and then the whole organism and how the systems interact with each other, yet when we learned pharmacology we learned about crude medicines and how those affect lots of systems of the body, producing many side-effects - to the final years where we studied smaller and smaller aspects of receptors – how to block them, get them to stay open for longer.

As pharmacologists go, I wasn’t bad… I had research that I’d carried out, published in the British Journal of Pharmacology (Hay AJ Hamburger M Hostettmann K Hoult JR Toxic inhibition of smooth muscle contractility by plant-derived sesquiterpenescaused by their chemically reactive alpha- methylenebutyrolactone functions.In: Br J Pharmacol (1994 May) 112(1):9-12ISSN: 0007-1188)

…but I moved on…

I then studied homoeopathy at The College of Homoeopathy’s 3 year full-time vocational qualification leading to a Licentiate of The College of Homoeopathy (LCH) and subsequent registration with The Society of Homeopaths (RSHom).

Pharmacology – is that a science or an art? Well, it’s a science I hear you cry. My Rang and Dale’s pharmacology text book initially fuelled my curious mind by describing homoeopathy as ‘absurd’.

Dr. Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homoeopathy introduced his equivalent of clinical trials to pharmacology and then homoeopathy at a time when drilling into people’s skull’s, blood letting and the wide use of mercury or quicksilver were commonplace. I’m lead to believe that the term quackery actually comes from the widespread use of quicksilver in medicine when it was found to be pretty bad at healing people but some still practiced using it.

Unwittingly, two comments from a renowned pharmacologist, Dr Clive Page, now Professor Clive Page, an expert in allergies and asthma, fuelled yet more research into homoeopathic thinking by asking - “Why do you never find a person with asthma and eczema that’s getting worse at the same time?”

I don’t know whether he had the answer to this question or not, but pretty much all practicing homoeopaths I know would be able to answer this.

The next cracker he came out with was – “Why do we have fever…It’s our body’s defence… It’s our fight back. It’s our immune system fighting back.” I’d like to add, someone who’s dead with an infection won’t have a fever. He then posed what happens when we take an aspirin to reduce that fever… “you prolong the infection, you’re reducing your body’s fight back. Your body produced that fever as a defence to the infection.” – pure genius.

I feel he’d have made a great homoeopath!

Homoeopathy works with that fight back to health, our fight back is unique to each person, hence the homoeopathic medicine needs to be unique too…

Is that science or art?

Have you considered when someone is vaccinated, especially in children, it’s commonplace to give Calpol soon after that vaccination to reduce the mild fever that is produced. How does that affect the reaction your child has to the vaccine?

– is the application of Calpol after a vaccination science or art?

How a homoeopathic medicine is made from a substance and tested before use is science as defined above.

How that medicine is manufactured is science.

How we elicit symptoms from a client is essentially an art, although it is a skill learnt from observing expert homoeopaths, so it is learnt in a scientific way but perhaps not practiced thus.

Now, here’s something I’d like you to consider…

I have homoeopathic medicines made from sulphur, a snake venom, a daisy, the spit of a rabid dog and one made from gold.

Which one do you think is the most expensive?

Which one would I be likely to prescribe if I had a budget on my medicines that I prescribe?

What would happen if I was encouraged by the people who made sulphur to prescribe more of it?

Is that science or art?

Have a look at the definitions if you need to remind yourself :o)

You may be surprised to learn that in homoeopathy, the sulphur, the snake venom, the daisy, the rabid dog spit and the one made from gold all cost the same.

You may also be surprised to hear they are made by a pharmacist following a scientific procedure… and to be honest, if you wanted to buy a homoeopathic medicine, would you buy it from a chemist shop or an art shop?

My consultations include the price of homoeopathic medicines so it doesn’t influence what is given.

I am never encouraged to prescribe another homoeopathic medicine over another, apart from the principle that it’s the most appropriate one for healing the client as decided by myself and often the client too.

I read about new homoeopathic medicines in homoeopathic journals. This does influence me but this isn’t advertised to me, and the person who submits the articles aren’t paid, neither at the point it is submitted nor do they receive commission when I purchase the homoeopathic medicine for my clients.

Is that science or art?

In my heart of hearts, it doesn’t matter to me whether homoeopathy is classified as an art or science. I studied homoeopathy on a course that was dedicated to homoeopathy, neither BSc nor BA, it was a vocational qualification.

I practice homoeopathy to help people get well again. I do this through my consultations and homoeopathic medicines.

So, if you were going offer homoeopathy at a university, which faculty would you put it in?