[Media and homeopathy : Reporting between proximity to lobbyism and distance from science]

Homeopathy-A lively relic of the prescientific era

Homeopathy was first postulated by the German physician Samuel Hahnemann in 1796 and 220 years later homeopathy is the most popular and widespread alternative medicine. Partly, it is also part of the national healthcare and insurance systems but homeopathy is not without controversy within the medical and healthcare community. Its implausible basic assumptions, some of which contradict natural laws, do not lead us to expect that its remedies have any specific effect. In fact, there is no study or systematic review to date that reliably certifies homeopathy to have an effect beyond the placebo effect and other context effects. In this respect it must be disconcerting how widely homeopathy is applied and represented in therapeutic practice. It indeed claims a role within scientific (evidence-based) medicine but cannot substantiate this claim. It displays clear characteristics of pseudoscience [1]. This implies a lot of problems, such as misleading people and tackling medical ethics up to scientific publication practices. Furthermore, it turns out that quite a few people do not know exactly what homeopathy is, which may lead them to make wrong decisions for their personal health. This article summarizes the information about homeopathy and its problematic implications and serves as a general introduction to this topic and its unacceptable role in today's medicine.The medical irrelevance of the sham method of homeopathy has been proven with more than sufficient probability [2]. As a major testimonial, the statement "Homeopathic products and practices" of the European (EASAC 2017) can be regarded. The primary aim of this brief report is therefore not to take another look at homeopathy from a medical scientific perspective, but rather focus attention on the implications of the still continuous and largely uncritically accepted existence of this method in medical practice, in the medical scientific sphere and in the judgement of the general public.

Bund katholischer Ärzte: Homeopathic Conversion Therapists in 21st Century Germany

Even in modern Germany of the 21st century there is still homophobia and other intolerances towards different sexualities and genders. These are also evident in the presence of so-called conversion therapies, which are still offered although there are already legal efforts. Among those groups, the Bund katholischer Ärzte (Association of Catholic Doctors) is a unique curiosity. Although this group is no longer really active, it is currently moving into the German focus again due to criminal charges and reporting in the tabloid press. The aim of this publication is to bring the Bund katholischer Ärzte not only into a more scientific but also into a more international focus. Furthermore, it is an ideal example to show what strange effects homophobia can produce.

[Homeopathy-a therapeutic option for medical practice? : An evaluation from the perspective of evidence-based medicine]

Many publications declare homeopathy to be "controversial." However, based on the findings of extensive research on homeopathy, there has long been a broad scientific consensus that there is no reliable evidence of specific medical effectiveness. Overall, the evidence clearly denies effects beyond those of placebo and context. All the more must it be seen as a phenomenon that homeopathy is still the subject of medical and therapeutic practice. This may lie largely in the fact that the homeopathic scene appropriates medical research and the concept of evidence in a way that is suitable to maintain the appearance that there is still a scientifically relevant discourse to dispute. The following article aims to justify that this is not the case, and that homeopathy is, therefore, obsolete as a therapeutic option, even according to the principles of contemporary medical ethics.