Articles

Homeopathic Thuggery

There have been many cases now of big companies or organizations, or wealthy individuals, threatening to sue or actually suing a blogger for libel. The most famous case is that of Simon Singh who was sued by the British Chiropractic Association over comments he made in an article. Simon braved through the expensive and exhaustive legal process (which is especially onerous in England), but he is not just a lone blogger. He is a successful author and was writing for the Guardian. Eventually the BCA was forced to drop the case – but only after the blogging community rallied behind Simon, magnifying his criticisms of the BCA by orders of magnitude. By all accounts it was a PR disaster.

The blogging community as a whole is rather passionate about this issue. We exist on the premise of free and open public discourse about important issues. At SBM we take on many controversial issues and we don’t pull our punches when criticizing what we see as pseudoscience in medicine. So of course we take notice when a large company tries to bully a blogger to silence their legitimate criticism.

According to the BMJ this has happened yet again – this time the international homeopathy producer, Boiron, is threatening a lone Italian blogger because he dared to criticize their product, Oscillococcinum. The blogger, Samuele Riva, wrote two articles on his blog, blogzero.it, criticizing what our own Mark Crislip has called “oh-so-silly-coccinum.”  The blog is entirely in Italian, but he is maintaining a page in English with updates on the Boiron vs Blogzero affair.

Criticizing homeopathy is always fun, because it is at the extreme absurd end of the silly pseudoscience spectrum, even among some stiff competition. But now homeopathy has a corporate face in Boiron – a large multinational corporation based in France. Boiron is the largest manufacturer of homeopathic products in the world and the second largest manufacturer of over-the-counter products in France.

What they are doing to this small blogger, in my opinion, is nothing less than corporate thuggery. They are using their resources and their corporate lawyers to try to silence completely legitimate criticism of their pseudoscientific products. Of course, they will only succeed in magnifying that criticism.

For example, Riva suggested that Boiron’s oscillococcinum has no active ingredient. Well, let’s see- the company lists the active ingredient in this product as “Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200CK HPUS.” The “200C” means that the listed ingredient was diluted with a 1:100 dilution 200 times. Serial dilution is a funny thing – a 200c dilution is the equivalent of diluting 1ml of original ingredient into a volume of water that is the size of the known universe. This is far far beyond the point where there is any reasonable chance of there being even a single molecule of original ingredient left.

So Riva was completely justified (as have many other critics) in saying that Boiron’s 200c product has no active ingredient. In fact it is deceptive to list something that has been diluted 200C as an “active ingredient.”

Not that it matters in this case, because the original ingredient is a pseudoscience unto itself. Mark Crislip gives the full details, here is his summary:

In the 1919 flu epidemic a physician who did not understand that artifacts on the slide, probably bubbles, move randomly due to Brownian motion. Looking at the tissues of flu patients with a microscope, he found what he thought was not only the cause of influenza, but the cause of all diseases: small cocci (round balls) that oscillated under the microscope. He found these wiggling bubbles in all the tissues of all the ill people he examined and thought he discovered the true cause of all disease. Sigh. Yet another cause of all illness. He is the only person, before or since, to see these oscillating cocci. Hence the name.

That’s right, oscillococcinum does not even exist – essentially Boiron takes fairy dust and then dilutes it out of (non)existence. The “anas barbariea hepatis” is basically duck liver, which is supposed to contain the most concentrated nonexistent oscillococcinum. It’s a pseudoscience trifecta.

Boiron claims that their product treats the symptoms of flu. What does the evidence show? (Yes, there is evidence – someone bothered to test whether diluted fairy dust actually works)? Well, this is yet another  interesting story. Oscillococcinum was at the center of another embarrassing controversy, this one involving the Cochrane Collaboration. They published a Cochrane review of Oscillococcinum for the flu, and the authors concluded:

Though promising, the data were not strong enough to make a general recommendation to use Oscillococcinum for first-line treatment of influenza and influenza-like syndromes. Further research is warranted but the required sample sizes are large. Current evidence does not support a preventative effect of Oscillococcinum-like homeopathic medicines in influenza and influenza-like syndromes.

This review became the poster child for what is wrong with Cochrane’s particular application of evidence-based medicine (EBM). Notice that the evidence is essentially negative, but with some positive studies – which is what we expect when studying a fancy placebo because of researcher and publication bias. But the authors concluded that the treatment is “promising” and “further research is warranted.” An SBM review of the same data would come to a very different conclusion – the data is what we would expect from an ineffective treatment. Further, the highly implausible nature of the treatment (on several levels) warrants a conclusion that it does not work, it holds no promise, and not another dime of precious research money should be wasted chasing this fantasy.

Eventually the Cochrane review was withdrawn. We interpreted this as a minor victory for SBM, although we have no way of knowing what role, if any, our criticism played in the decision to withdraw the review.

Conclusion

I hope Boiron does draw a line in the sand over their oscillococcinum product, and that it becomes the center piece of a broader public discussion about homeopathy. Most of the public does not understand what homeopathy actually is. They think it means “natural” or “herbal” medicine. They have no idea that homeopathy is about taking fanciful ingredients with a dubious connection to the symptoms in the first place, and then diluting them into oblivion, then placing a drop of the pure water that remains and placing it on a sugar pill. The resultant pill is then supposed to contain the magic vibrations of the original substance.

This rank pseudoscience, which has no place in 21st century medicine, is the business of Boiron. Let’s see them try to defend themselves and their products. Let’s see them harass bloggers and those who are just trying to expose the public to the truth. Let’s see them argue in public how air bubbles in duck liver fantastically diluted can treat the flu.

Posted in: Homeopathy

Leave a Comment (64) ↓

64 thoughts on “Homeopathic Thuggery

  1. GShelley says:

    To me, the most interesting thing about Oscillococcinum is that it is not even homeopathy in the traditional sense of being something that causes symptoms used to treat the same symptoms. Instead, it is something that was once (wrongly) thought by one person to be a symptom. I don’t think it even went through the “proving” that most other treatments have.
    Surprisingly, we rarely see homeopaths agreeing with skeptics on this one, and telling the public that there is no reason to believe this product is effective.

  2. mdcatdad says:

    It’s curious they didn’t go after a big target like the Canadian Broadcasting Company, which did an expose on homeopathy (that’s on YouTube in 2 parts), including a correspondent going to Boiron HQ and asking tough questions

  3. AllieP says:

    Count me as one of those non-scientist members of the public who, until recently, had NO idea what homeopathy was. In fact, that’s how I first found skeptical blogs, because I was informed by someone more educated on the subject that homeopathy did not mean “home remedy” like I thought, and I looked it up.

    I thought it meant “home remedy” — thinking the “home” was English and not the Greek “homo” — and so was similar to, say, using ginger for nausea or chamomile and lemon juice to highlight your hair. My bad.

    Thanks for getting the word out. To me even more scary than the fact that people are taking water and expecting it to be effective is when homeopaths accidentally put toxic levels of poisons in their products, such as the homeopathic infant teething pills that had nightshade belladonna in them: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm230761.htm

  4. windriven says:

    @mdcatdad

    “It’s curious they didn’t go after a big target like the [CBC]”

    I suspect that libel laws in the EU are more plaintiff friendly than in Canada. It would be interesting for someone with international legal experience to weigh in. Also, CBC could mount a serious legal defense. Some schlupp in Italy … not so much.

  5. cervantes says:

    Rather than Boiron having a cause of action, it seems to me that they are committing fraud. Were I a prosecutor, they would be facing criminal charges. It’s actually rather curious that this does not happen.

  6. Being unable to make their case through science, homeopaths love to sue. The Academy of Veterinary Homeopathy (AVH) is currently suing the American Association of Veterinary State Boards (AAVSB). The AAVSB has begun requiring that the subject matter of continuing education courses for veterinarians have at least some basis in science, and has therefore denied approval to a number of courses on homeopathy. The AVH wisely hasn’t even bothered to try and argue that homeopathy can meet these standards, they’ve just decided to sue and to form their own organization to certify continuing education offerings, which they are lobbying state veterinary boards to accept as legitimate (the details can be found at these links: http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2011/05/failing-to-make-their-case-through-science-veterinary-homeopaths-choose-to-sue/
    http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2011/08/academy-of-veterinary-homeopathy-lawsuit-update/)

    I have also been threatened with legal action for criticising homeopathy. When I wrote a detailed rebuttal on my blog of a lecture called “The Science of Homeopathy,” I was told that my references to the original presentation constituted copyright infringment. No actual suit has yet been filed, but nothing illustrates more clearly the fundamentally anti-science ideology of homeopathy than the practice of responding to substantive criticizing not with evidence but with lawyers.
    http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2011/04/the-science-of-homeopathy/

  7. clare_hendry says:

    Homeopathic remedies are really big business. The irony is that science-based medicine is accused of being in big business’ pockets.

    In South Africa, the general public (including those who are educated) is completely unaware of what homeopathic remedies are. Pharmacies dispense and recommend them with absolutely no explanation or disclaimers. We’ve got to start naming and shaming, because of the claims made for serious diseases as well as the way people are being fleeced.

  8. Watcher says:

    Would a counter-suit be applicable then?

  9. cervantes says:

    I should think that anyone who has ever paid for their products could sue them, sure. Why not a class action?

  10. windriven says:

    @cervantes

    Where is the fraud under US law? Tom Harkin and Orrin Hatch – both crazier than beagles in a vacuum factory – have ensured the safety of snake oil sales in this country. Are the laws in the EU different? Given the ubiquity of homeopathic remedies in Europe I doubt it.

  11. DVMKurmes says:

    In related news the Academy of Veterinary homeopathy is suing over loss of accreditation for their “continuing education” courses;
    http://www.veterinarypracticenews.com/vet-breaking-news/2011/07/15/homeopathy-group-sues-over-denial-of-ce-credit.aspx

    as usual, with no real scientific evidence to support their nonsense, they resort to lawsuits.

  12. David Gorski says:

    It’s curious they didn’t go after a big target like the Canadian Broadcasting Company, which did an expose on homeopathy (that’s on YouTube in 2 parts), including a correspondent going to Boiron HQ and asking tough questions

    My guess: The CBC has lawyers who work for it, and these lawyers probably vetted every claim made in the show before the show aired to make sure that there were no grounds for any sort of libel suit. Also, Boiron knows that the CBC would be able to field a very competent legal team to defend any attempt at a libel suit. A little, itty-bitty blogger in Italy? Not so much.

  13. 200C, very impressive.

    The expected concentration of such a dilution would be 1 particle in 10E400 particles, which is about 311 orders of magnitude more than the total number of fundamental particles in the visible universe.

    It would seem that all Boiron needs to do to prevail is provide an independent chemical assay of a random sample of their remedy that shows the following:

    A.) Their “remedy” does contain the active ingredient claimed
    B.) It contains it in the concentration claimed

    I don’t know how the law works in Italy, but Boiron’s burden of proof would seem to be impossible to meet. If their labeling is accurate, they cannot hope to prove their “remedy” contains any trace of the claimed ingredient.

  14. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

    Who’s the biggest manufacturer if it’s not Boiron?

  15. ConspicuousCarl says:

    “I can’t help but notice,” observes Mr. Chan, “that though I pay you for protection, I have observed no decrease in the shoplifting and burglaries which plague my store.”

    “You callin’ me a liar?” asks the gangster.

  16. cervantes says:

    If they make the specific claim that this product relieves symptoms of influenza, I’d say that can be proved to be fraudulent. Why not?

  17. DavidCT says:

    I describing how this “medication” is prepared you used to standard 1/100 ratio serial dilutions done 200 times. In the 200C preparation this would require magical shaking between dilutions. According to legend it is this shaking that imparts the “memory” to the water. This is supposed to be done in conjunction with a leather glove or Bible and is labor intensive. The preparation of the oscillococcinum by Boiron is clearly labeled 200CK which is a much more efficient way of doing the dilution. One starts with the first 1/100 dilution and then simply pours it out and refills the container. This is repeated 200 times.

    Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to how the memory is retained by the water using this modification. Maybe it is some kind of quantum effect.

    @ cervantes

    I notice that homeopathic products are not required to carry the Quack Meranda label and make overt claims. Apparently the laws for homeopathic remedies offer even less protection than those for other useless and sometimes harmful alternative “medicine”.

  18. JPZ says:

    @windriven

    Homoeopathic remedies were written into US law in 1938. Orrin Hatch was 4 years old and Tom Harkin was born in 1939. ;)

  19. BKsea says:

    I have always felt that the potential class-action suit could be made against the big box stores who place the homeopathic garbage on the same shelves next to the real medicines. This certainly strikes me as a careless if not fraudulent disregard for customers who are unlikely to be able to distinguish the two.

  20. jay.sweet says:

    Most of the public does not understand what homeopathy actually is. They think it means “natural” or “herbal” medicine.

    You got that right. When I told my wife what homeopathy was, she told me I was completely full of it. Some of her friends used homeopathic remedies, and they couldn’t possibly think that could work — could they?

    So she checked it out on Wikipedia and was completely shocked to discover that my description was more or less accurate (actually, she said I didn’t make it sound silly enough). Since then, she has made a point of making sure her friends actually know what it is — she won’t say, “And that can’t possibly work!” like I might, but just to make sure they know the insane idea behind it.

  21. DBonez5150 says:

    MedTek said:

    “There already appears to be a class action lawsuit.

    http://www.topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/1309–boiron-oscillococcinum-class-action-lawsuit

    Wow, that’s fantastic! It’s right here in good ol’ liberal California too. I live in northern CA – about two-hours north of San Francisco (AKA – WooVille). It’s disgusting to see how much pseudo-scientific, faith-based crap is promoted in that area.

    But that lawsuit is a breath-of-fresh-air. It’s well-reasoned, scientific, clear, and accurate. I’m surprised it’s based in CA, but thrilled too! Maybe there’s a chance for this state to join the modern world after all.

    Thank you for sharing that!

  22. windriven says:

    @JPZ

    Yes, And Harkin and Hatch still seem to live in a 1938 time warp. They have been the bobsy twins of medical woo in the US Senate. They didn’t invent woo. But they have defended it long past its expiration date. ;-)

  23. windriven says:

    @cervantes

    “If they make the specific claim that this product relieves symptoms of influenza, I’d say that can be proved to be fraudulent.”

    I hope that you’re right and that someone sues. But I suspect that the devil is in the details. I’m sure that any given snake oil outfit can put together a group of people who claim that their product “relieves symptoms of influenza.” Science and law are different. Proving this nonsense to be scientifically laughable is different from proving that it violates some specific law.

    Perhaps someone who has actually been to law school could weigh in here.

  24. pmoran says:

    In the 1919 flu epidemic a physician who did not understand that artifacts on the slide, probably bubbles, move randomly due to Brownian motion —

    Not likely air bubbles, at least not any that I have ever seen under the microscope. Dust, or tiny bits of cellular debris. Just about any biological slide will display the phenomenon.

  25. ConspicuousCarl says:

    AllieP on 17 Aug 2011 at 9:51 am

    Count me as one of those non-scientist members of the public who, until recently, had NO idea what homeopathy was.

    The only comparison to the shock of first hearing the truth about “homeopathy” is when Rowdy Roddy Piper first dons the special sunglasses in the movie They Live.

  26. ConspicuousCarl says:

    MedTek on 17 Aug 2011 at 4:06 pm

    There already appears to be a class action lawsuit.

    http://www.topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/1309–boiron-oscillococcinum-class-action-lawsuit

    Check out page 5 of the official document… they have the actual non-exponent ratio of duck liver listed with nearly 6 lines full of zeros:
    http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/08/05/SnakeOil.pdf

    They hit all of the major points. The dilution, the lack of evidence for the product, deceptive translation of the simple fact that it is duck parts, and the fact that duck liver/heart in general are not recognized as having useful effects on humans.

  27. LMA says:

    I just hope there are several wealthy, experienced lawyers out there who are as much in arms as doctors are about this whole SCAM industry who’ll be willing to defend this and other victims of SLAP suits pro bono. Maybe some really big class action suits would help bring a higher profile to the lies of the “alternative medicine” industry — seems like TV “news” channels like to talk to lawyers a lot more than they do to physicians, and people seem to respond with more outrage to victims of bad business than to appeals to “mere” reason.

  28. CC says:

    Those six lines of zeroes made me smile. I hope this opens the door to smacking alt-med everywhere with truth in advertising laws – and also lots of other companies outside that field who choose to play fast and loose with their claims, even if they don’t make them up out of whole cloth the way alt-med does.

  29. roadfood2 says:

    “It would seem that all Boiron needs to do to prevail is provide an independent chemical assay of a random sample of their remedy that shows the following:

    A.) Their “remedy” does contain the active ingredient claimed
    B.) It contains it in the concentration claimed

    I don’t know how the law works in Italy, but Boiron’s burden of proof would seem to be impossible to meet. ”

    Ah, but homeopathy doesn’t work that way, haven’t you heard: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MUsg23WDBY

    From Bruce Lipton, we learn that molecules carry information. At about 1:30, we learn that 98% of the available energy for information is dissapated as heat during a chemical reation. But when you use vibrational signaling, you get 100% of the transfer.

    At about 2:15, the offscreen interviewer rephrases this as meaning that modern science is now saying that it’s the information that counts and that the chemical substance is irrelevant. And therefore that science is saying that homeopathy is the thing and pharmaceutical medicine is unscientific. And then Bruce launches into how pharmaceutical medicine is actually lethal.

    At about 5:15 we learn about “quantum biophysics”. And at about 5:35 is the real answer: homeopathy works by way of quantum entanglement. Oh, and harmony and resonance, which is really the primary mechanism of molecular movement.

    So you see, your test is not the proper way to test a homeopathic remedy. You need to test it to see if it is still quantumly entangled with the original active ingredient. Once we have a way to run that test, then you can bring Boiron to court.

    Just in case it’s not obvious, I think everything in that clip I cited is the height of nonsense. In fact, I think Bruce Lipton deserves some kind of award for the most utter nonsense spewed per minute.

  30. daedalus2u says:

    I posted a blog with links to add to the pile-on.

    http://daedalus2u.blogspot.com/2011/08/pathologic-and-disingenuous.html

    I also posted an instant comment at BMJ. That may take longer to appear.

  31. JPZ says:

    @windriven

    “Yes, And Harkin and Hatch still seem to live in a 1938 time warp. They have been the bobsy twins of medical woo in the US Senate. They didn’t invent woo. But they have defended it long past its expiration date.”

    Many years ago, when I was in my first year or so of industry work, I met a staffer of Tom Harkin at a dietary supplement conference. At the time, I had no idea about Harkin’s role in DSHEA, so I proceeded to make an emphatic case that DSHEA was hurting the dietary supplement industry because consumers could not tell efficacious products from ineffective ones. The look on her face… you would have thought I was strangling a puppy in front of her. Well, that is my one funny story about Tom Harkin and dietary supplements! :)

  32. Khym Chanur says:

    Surprisingly, we rarely see homeopaths agreeing with skeptics on this one, and telling the public that there is no reason to believe this product is effective.

    There are some homeopaths who hold that all homeopathic remedies must be individualized, and thus criticize Oscillococcinum. It would be interesting to know how many homeopaths think that over-the-counter remedies can work, but still criticize Oscillococcinum because there’s no such thing as vibrating bacteria.

  33. Sil says:

    The English wiki of Esowatch.com has now an article about Boiron too:

    http://esowatch.com/en/index.php?title=Boiron

    French pharmaceutical company Boiron is the world largest manufacturer of homeopathic products. Branches of the listed company exist in 59 countries. However, Boiron has no presence in German speaking countries.

    In 2009, Boiron had a turnover of 526 million Euros (91 million euro profit). In 2004, it employed a workforce of 2,779 persons. The majority of shares is held by the Boiron family, the managing director also is a member of this family .

    In June 2005 Dolisos Laboratories, another manufacturer of homeopathic products, was bought by Boiron.

    Their range of articles include classic homeopathic preparations according to Hahnemann as well as so called “poly”-preparations from homeopathic combination remedies. …

    The project Esowatch is mostly in German. It´s a antiquack-Wikipedia without editwars.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esowatch

  34. DW says:

    >There are some homeopaths who hold that all homeopathic remedies must be individualized, and thus criticize Oscillococcinum

    Yes, homeopathy is like any field, it’s got factions and bitter schisms, orthodox and heretics etc. “Classical” homeopaths are horrified at over-the-counter remedies. But that’s because, of course, “individualized” treatment is far more expensive than buying little bottles at the health food store (as if that weren’t expensive enough).

  35. BillyJoe says:

    Another reason why Bioron does not pursue the CBC is that they know that the public has a short memory and that the expose by CBC will have a short term effect only.

    On the other hand, bloggers tend to go on and on about the nonsense that is homoeopathy and keep the facts in the public eye. The Italian blogger is probably meant as a warning to all other bloggers to beware.

    The solution is for all bloggers to do likewise – as Steven Novella has done here both with the title of his article and its content.

  36. Thuggery and bullying is right. A few weeks ago I heard that a site built by ISSCR* to inform patients on clinics making fraudulent stem cell therapy claims was dealing with multiple lawsuits from those SCAM clinics.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43760409/ns/health-health_care/#.Tk0AaaN5mK0

    the site is.
    closerlookatstemcells.org/Stem_Cell_Treatment.

    *International Society For Stem Cell Research

  37. tmac57 says:

    If Boiron is smart,they will quietly withdraw their action,and hope everyone forgets about it. After all, it seems to make very little difference to the true believers of homeopathy,what the science shows,because it “works for them”. Boiron will be perceived by the public for being the bully that they are,in picking on some small time blogger, and if the skeptic community rallies around this cause like they did in the Simon Singh case,then Boiron had better consider the ultimate blow back. I for one am ready to contribute to the defense,if necessary,as I did in the Singh case.Skeptics may be small in number,but we are large enough to make a difference when it counts.

  38. Pete says:

    Has anyone else experienced that much of the public seems to think that herbs fall under the category of homeopathy? I don’t know how/why this has happened. In this case at least the remedy was indeed homeopathic. If people really believe that herbs can fall under the category of homeopathic remedies and some herbs actually do have an effect (maybe not what is being claimed but they can do something) then I can see why homeopathic remedies are perceived by people to have an effect.

  39. Jann Bellamy says:

    @ MedTekon: “There already appears to be a class action lawsuit.”

    Great! The plaintiffs’ bar is catching on.

    The defendants have 30-45 days to respond by either admitting or denying, or claiming they don’t have enough info to admit or deny, the allegations of the complaint. It will be most interesting to see what they have to say.

    It will be interesting also if it gets to the point where defendants must prove the claims made for Oscillococcinum are true. (California doesn’t follow the Daubert rule on admission of expert scientific evidence.)

    As for CAM as fraud in general:

    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/is-cam-fraud/

  40. tmac57 says:

    Pete- Yes,almost everyone that I know,who thinks that homeopathy has some validity,thinks it is some sort of “natural/herbal” remedy.The preparations do often use herbs in them,but what people don’t know about, are the extreme dilutions to the point of them being merely water.That was the goal of the 10:23 campaign,to let people know that ” There’s nothing in it”.

  41. Khym Chanur says:

    Oh, and harmony and resonance, which is really the primary mechanism of molecular movement.

    Wait, does he mean that Brownian motion is caused by harmony/resonance? Or that molecular movement isn’t Brownian?

  42. roadfood2 says:

    “Wait, does he mean that Brownian motion is caused by harmony/resonance? Or that molecular movement isn’t Brownian?”

    Well, he doesn’t mention Brownian motion at all. He mentions an editorial in Nature talking about a paper by two authors, Popfristic (sp?) and Goodman, and an article by Winehold (it’s unclear which of those sources he’s actually referring to) and he says, “If you want to understand how life works (that’s essentially what he means by if you understand how molecules move) you won’t find the answers in organic chemistry . . . allopathic medicine’s perception is totally skewed and flawed because it does not incorporate the role of quantum entanglement, and the roles of vibrational energies in what are called constructive and destructive interference patterns. So it’s like harmony and resonance is really the primary mechanism of molecular movement, not postive and negative charges or regional charges which are like Newtonian mechanisms.”

    So it’s clear to me that his grasp of physics is extremely tenuous. He’s just throwing out the typical quantum woo as a way of saying that organic chemistry, allopathic medicine and even Newtonian physics are inadequate for understand homeopathy.

    I mean, really, he uses “harmony and resonance” in the typical new-age, meaningless way, and then throws in quantum entanglement. He’s got a PhD in biology, so he has to know the truth of there being absolutely no trace of any active ingredient in homeopathic water. So the “memory” of the ingredient must be due to quantum entanglement. It’s the perfect way to explain it. At least to someone whose sum-total knowledge of that term is “spooky action at a distance”.

  43. myroxylon says:

    As for Boiron’s exploits where I live, days ago we had a decision of state Office of Competition and Consumer Protection here in Poland, concerning Boiron’s appeal against Polish Head Medical Council.
    The council dared to issue a statement about Homeopathy being ineffective and unethical. The council dared to threaten MDs to suspend their licences if found prescribing homeopathy. Boiron followed this with an appeal to Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, claiming that the Council did impair competition on the pharmaceutical market.
    And now we’ve had STATE Office of Competition and Consumer Protection fine our Head Medical Council (an office responsible for issuing MD licenses, issuing therapeutical guidelines etc.)
    about 15000 dollars for making statements about homeopathy, and it’s medical value.

Comments are closed.