Just as was done with Acupuncture, the denialists
will look at one or two research Homeopathy research
tests that failed and immediately draw the sweeping
conclusion that it does not work or is no better
than placebo.  "Just expensive little sugar pills"
they will say... except, HERE is what the National
Institute of Health web site has to say about
REAL RESEARCH regarding Homeopathy
(see LINK and sample research below)

Note a couple of failed examples, Homeopathy does not
work for everything, but why should we ignore the
successes - to keep big pharma happy?  Note
that in some of the tests, Homeopathy remedies
performed as WELL as standard medications too.

from:
http://nccam.nih.gov/health/homeopathy/

Vickers and Smith, 200234          The homeopathic remedy oscillococcinum
appears safe and effective in reducing the duration of influenza, but
has no effect on prevention.

Lewith et al., 200228     Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled
trial of 242 participants aged 18 to 55 years.     Trial compared an oral
homeopathic treatment to placebo in asthmatic people allergic to house
dust. Authors found the homeopathic treatment "no better than
placebo." They noted "some differences between the homeopathic
immunotherapy and placebo for which we have no explanation."

Oberbaum et al., 200135     Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-
controlled trial in 32 children; 30 completed the study.     Traumeel S,
a homeopathic skin cream, may significantly reduce the severity and
length of pain and inflammation of the tissues lining the inside of
the mouth from chemotherapy in children being treated with bone marrow
transplantation.

Taylor et al., 200036     Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled
trial of 51 participants aged 17 years or older (50 completed the
study).     Team tested the hypothesis that homeopathy is a placebo by
examining effects of an oral homeopathic preparation in patients with
perennial allergic rhinitis. They found a "significant objective
improvement in nasal airflow" compared with the placebo group.

However, both groups reported subjective improvement in "nasal
symptoms" (with no statistically significant difference between
groups). Authors concluded that the objective evidence supports that
"homeopathic dilutions differ from placebo."

Jacobs et al., 200037      Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled
trial of 126 children; 116 completed the study.      Individualized
homeopathic treatments improved digestive problems in children with
acute childhood diarrhea. Results are consistent with findings of a
previous study.

Weiser et al., 199938     Randomized, double-blinded trial of 146 people.
    For the treatment of hay fever, a homeopathic nasal spray is as
efficient and well tolerated as a conventional therapy, cromolyn
sodium.

Rastogi et al., 199939     Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled
trial of 100 people between 18 and 50 (71 percent male/29 percent
female).     A subgroup of patients with HIV in the symptomatic phase,
receiving treatment, had increased levels of CD4 cells at the end of
the trial; the placebo subgroup did not.

Vickers et al., 199840     Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled
trial of 519 people; 400 completed the study.     Homeopathic remedies,
including arnica, are not effective for muscle soreness following long-
distance running.

Weiser et al., 199841     Randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial of
119 people; 105 completed the study.     The homeopathic treatment
vertigoheel, and the standard treatment of betahistine, are equally
effective in reducing the frequency, duration, and intensity of
vertigo attacks.

Citizen Jimserac