Xref: utzoo sci.bio:1432 sci.misc:2268
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!rutgers!mcnc!rti!trt
From: trt@rti.UUCP (Thomas Truscott)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.misc
Subject: Re: Strange results in Nature article (fallout...)
Summary: Homeopathy: Not mere science, it is Big Business
Keywords: skepticism debunking
Message-ID: <2403@rti.UUCP>
Date: 2 Aug 88 05:10:57 GMT
References: <2366@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <1663@microsoft.UUCP> <4652@ut-emx.UUCP>
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC
Lines: 44


> You seem to forget (if indeed you ever knew) that the perpose of publication
> is to get scientific work out in community of scientists so that it can be
> tested, criticised and, perhaps, explained.

How about the "British Homeopathic Journal",
or the (mainstream) British medical journal "Lancet",
both of which have published positive homeopathic results?
In retrospect, at least, it obvious that "Nature" was a bad choice!

> A person with a new, revolutionary theory
> is in a very vulnerable position, ...

Homeopathic theory is at least two hundred years old.
In 1985 homeopaths did $50,000,000 worth of business in the U.S. *alone*,
and there were about 300 *licensed* practitioners.
(Homeopathy is more popular in England, France, and several other countries).
FDA officials regard homeopathy as relatively benign,
and politically dangerous to attack,
so it does not require homeopathic drugs to be effective or properly labelled.
The FDA permits homeopathic products such as "Arthritis Formula",
"Cardio Forte", and "Herpes",
but acts against "BHI Anticancer Stimulating"
and other products claimed to be effective against serious diseases.

New and revolutionary theories come along all the time
without anyone getting pilloried.
But homeopathy is not a new theory --
it is an old theory justifying a potentially harmful business.

Have the reputations of Benveniste et al. been harmed?
Time will tell, but I doubt it.  And now they are famous.

I think the major issue, probably being asked by
both authors for and readers of "Nature", is whether
this is any way for a publisher to treat an author.
	Tom Truscott

SUGGESTED READING
"Homeopathic Remedies", Consumer Reports, January 1987

"Homeopathy: is it Medicine?", Skeptical Inquirer, Fall 1987

Review of homeopathic research, A.M. Scofield, British Homeopathic Journal,
73:161-180 and 73:211-226, 1984.