Orac is the pseudonym of an American surgeon/scientist who has an informative blog. He’s currently visiting London, and had to see the Royal London Homeopathic Hospital for himself. He is, as you might expect, no fan of homeopathy, and uses this blog entry to flense the criticisms of homeopaths to Richard Dawkins recent look at homeopathy on The Enemies of Reason. Very entertaining.
Oh, and while we’re on the subject of homeopathy, there’s a new book coming out next month, The Homeopathic Revolution, written by Dana Ullman MPH. One thing that is intriguing is Ullman’s claim that:
"Charles Darwin could not have written Origin of Species without the homeopathic treatment that he received from Dr. Gully (based on Darwin’s own letters!)."
It sounds almost as though Darwin was helped by homeopathy, doesn’t it? And that’s the spin that is already being put on it by some homeopaths. Unfortunately, the truth is somewhat different. Darwin was skeptical of homeopathy – and this is seen in his letters (which are online). The tipping point, as pointed out by Andy Lewis over at The Quackometer, may have been related to homeopathy, but not in a good way:
The truth is that homeopathy may have played a pivotal role, but only in its utter failure to save the life of Darwin’s precious daughter. Darwin was torn with doubts whilst working on his theory about the effect it would have on his wife, who was devout, and on the religious authority and structures in society in general. Having his own faith ripped away was an important removal of a barrier to publication.
If Ullman is going to claim in his forthcoming book that Charles Darwin was helped by homeopathic medicines to overcome the illnesses that plagued him for much of his life so that he could write Origin of Species, then this would seem to be yet another example of homeopaths cherry-picking the evidence to prove their case. They may think they are arguing a posteriori when in fact they are simply demonstrating a priori reasoning.
Geoff Coupe's Blog 
Leave a comment