Homeopathy is nonsense, say UK doctors. They say it is nonsense to drive a point. They want the state to stop funding this pseudoscience because it is bogus, ‘witchcraft’, and ‘nonsense’. Almost anyone who has understood science the right way already knows that homeopathy is utter bogus, closer to magic than actual medicine. And yet, many people swear by homeopathy and continue to consume balls of sugar dipped in alcohol hoping and believing it is actually going to cure them.
Free societies should leave it up to people to choose what they want or don't, as long as their choices don't affect others. The point is, homeopathy has takers who, suffering chronic ailments, claim it helps them. Others say they prefer placebos to allopathy, believing these do less harm in terms of side effects. Still others turn to alternative medicine when all else fails. Reportedly, a survey in Britain's state-funded homeopathic hospitals shows 70 per cent of patients felt they were better off. Now, if consenting adults resort to homeopathy, ayurveda, naturopathy, acupuncture and the like, the decision is surely theirs.
If democratic societies go about banning everything not 'scientifically' backed, where would it end? Should we proscribe home-made remedies based on traditional knowledge systems because their efficacy hasn't been lab-tested? Must scientists play referee between herbal and chemical? Yoga and meditation are said to have genuine therapeutic uses. Western researchers being divided on this, should both be outlawed? Why, many pray to beat psychological anxiety. Should they be coerced into seeing shrinks instead? Science is as much about what we don't know hence it questions as about what we do. The last thing it needs is to be made an excuse for placing curbs on individual liberty.