Talk:Homeopathy
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Homeopathy Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
| Template:Search box |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Template:ArbComPseudoscience Template:FAQ Template:Trolling Script error: No such module "Unsubst". Template:TmboxTemplate:Talk other Template:British English Oxford spelling Template:Canvass warning Template:ArticleHistory Template:WikiProject banner shell Template:Reliable sources for medical articles Template:Press User:MiszaBot/config User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2024
Template:Collapse top Template:Edit semi-protected This critique of homeopathy focuses on the system's funding, pseudo-scientific aspects, and the flaws in its purported benefits, rather than providing an objective overview of the system itself. It targets and undermines the supporters of homeopathy, leading me to question Wikipedia's reliability. For instance, some people assert that vaccines are scientifically proven to be beneficial, while others, presenting genuine cases of side effects, argue against them. If I were to present only one-sided arguments on Wikipedia, how would the extensive research in this field be valued? My concern is that Wikipedia should not provide a platform for biased views to propagate. The sheer number of references does not necessarily validate the claims, as opposing viewpoints are often supported by numerous sources as well. If Wikipedia lacks the ethical standards to prevent the publication of content without considering the writer's bias or without an editorial board to set boundaries, readers like me may lose trust in the platform. Template:Collapse bottom 118.148.126.228 (talk) 09:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Notdone Please use this template for precise editing requests on matters where consensus has been achieved. Bon courage (talk) 09:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Homeopathy
Research on homeopathy has been mixed, with proponents citing anecdotal success stories, while critics argue that clinical trials have failed to demonstrate any efficacy beyond the placebo effect. Homeopathic remedies, often prepared using plant, animal, or mineral substances, are prescribed based on the principle of “like cures like.” YeeloHomeopathy (talk) 06:47, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
- See the notes at the header of this page and consider providing reliable sources for your claims. Koshuri (グ) 07:56, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
Homeopathy a Threat to Organised Drug Interests
Template:Atop Homeopathy is scientifically proven to work. See the Bern University website in Switzerland which gives over 600 provings of various remedies. There is also a huge body of empiracle evidence to prove its efficacy. This article on Wikipedia is ill thought out and frankly wrong. It supports the establishment view that homeopathy is a pseudo science and placebo, but this biased opinion has come about because homeopathy is a threat to organised drug industry interests, both for humans and animals. Homeopathy is incredibly effective, cheap and side effect free. This is why the drug establishment continues to run it down, so they can keep their profits high selling allopathic medicines which are often harmful and toxic. 37.169.54.3 (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- See Q7 of the FAQ at the top of the page and provide a specific link to a vetted paper. —C.Fred (talk) 14:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think this statement might set a Wikipedia record for the greatest percentage of false statements per word written. Well done. Black Kite (talk) 14:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)