Salvatore Chirumbolo

Homeopathy: bias, mis-interpretation and other

J Med Pers, 2013, 11 (1), 37-44

cover/cover_JMedPers.gif

Recently reported literature about the presumptive efficacy of high diluted plant extracts in anxiety [1] has raised a debate about bias and mis-interpretation in homeopathy [2–7]; Gelsemium sempervirens extracts, homeopathically prepared and diluted to 5CH, 9CH and even 30CH showed efficacy in reducing anxiety in mice by using classical behavioural tests such as the open field test and light–dark box test [1, 7]. Critical comments were addressed [2–6] but they did not elicit any serious reappraisal [6]. A summarizing paper underlines previous results by means of speculative comments and a posteriori statistics [7]. Doubts and criticism about reliability and effectiveness of this complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) are quite frequent within the research community, as this aspect can be summed up as ‘‘do homeopathic remedies really work? ’’, which represents a very frequently questioned issue.