Homeopathy is a threat: what does it teach us?

Homeopathy is a threat: what does it teach us?                                            

Homeopathy is an “alternative medicine” that has never proven his effectiveness so far. Like all the so called “alternative medicine”, it is not a substitute for scientific medicine, indeed it is sometimes a threat to the credibility of the effectively proven medicine. Between pseudo-science and manipulation of figures and opinion, the laboratories that produce homeopathy are super-beneficiary. The production of these small sugar pills costs almost nothing and these labs turnovers can be boosted by thealth policies in some countries. Indeed, since 1984 and until 2019, French social security has been reimbursing homeopathy prescribed by the medical profession, as if it were real and effective medicine. But after all these years of flirting between the labs and the “Haute Autorité de Santé” (HAS), reason and science finally took over the scam. Medicine doesn't care about the treatment as long as it cures. If a new revolutionary and misunderstood treatment method proved his effectiveness in healing people, medicine would not care about his functioning, as long as it heals. To be precise, science would study it hard in order to better understand the way we can cure and potentially prevent side effects or try to extract new treatments. But the way it works, the physical hypotheses it involves would have no impact on the decision whether to use it or not.

Homeopathy, in addition to raising hypotheses that call into question all the physical and chemical theories of matter to date, in particular through the presupposition of "water memory" and the superdilution of the active ingredient, it also and above all never proven its effectiveness. Without a proven effect on public health shown by epidemiological surveys, it is impossible to defend rationality and science while defending the reimbursement of homeopathy. The problem is that the disinformation of the industrial leader in homeopathy and powerful lobbyist Boiron, through his TV ads and his omnipresence in the French pharmacies, leaded this political action to be very unpopular among the population. But if homeopathy was an unnecessary state expense that mainly benefited the pharmaceutical lobby, it has to teach us some lessons about medicine.

The main problem of the scientific medicine and most importantly general medicine as it is practised is the lack of education and implication of the patient in the understanding and the follow up of his treatment. Homeopathy does not treat but responds to a need, a need to control his treatment, a need to spend time with the homeopath, a vital time that unfortunately cannot necessarily be given by a general practitioner. Delisting homeopathy is a necessity in term of coherence but is not enough to fight against “fake meds” or “anti vax” movement, that plagues the credibility of medicine and sometimes leads patient to endanger themselves, or their children health, by following unproven medicine. The main problem is the lack of general medicine practisers in the daily life of French people, and it is a fundamental problem with many implications like the administrative difficulties, the working condition or the evolution of the job, that is not attractive anymore to young graduates.

We should redefine our standards for general medicine. It is of public health to make it more human and understanding than ever before, giving doctors the administrative and financial capacity to spend more time for medical education and discussion with the patient, and allowing the patient to enjoy a more human relationship with medicine in general. Only in this way will the population regain confidence in medicine, only in this way we will be able to fight against the more massive than ever waves of non-vaccinations that threaten the lives of all French people.

...