Homeopathy: Science or Myth? [Paperback]

This book is written for the layperson and, with the possible exception of the chemistry discussion, should be accessible to any reader. Gray is the first author (that I know of) to present a plausible electrochemical mechanism for homeopathy, based largely on research in quantum electrochemistry in the last three years. But that shouldn't scare off the average reader, as most of the chapters explain research results in terms understandable to non-scientists.

Although Homeopathy has been producing dramatic and positive results for nearly two centuries, and in recent decades has undergone a growing body of double blind placebo tests which have produced positive results, it is a branch of medicine in the midst of controversy about the manner in which the Homeopathic mechanisms affecting a cure operate.

Dr. Bill Gray M.D. has written a book exploring these controversial issues, including easily understood discussions of the "Water Memory" question and of the astonishing research that begins to answer the question of how it might work.

In all discussions, Dr. Gray lists a long and impressive list of peer reviewed journals and the research supporting Homeopathy and/or giving positive results in double blind placebo controlled tests - specifically in the areas of asthma, childbirth, childhood diarrhea, dental neuralgic pain, hay fever and influenza.

The book has much more. Dr. Gray gives overview to the basic ideas of Homeopathy, the Law of Similars, and then mentions specific peer reviewed research that supports it - including detailed discussions of the proving experiments.

Likewise, Dr. Gray shares some of his own remarkable case histories, confessing that if he had not witnessed the results in some of these cases himself, he would have been skeptical.
These remarkable cases include the recovery of a person apparently brain damaged in a drowning accident, and an autistic child.

There have been recent, loud, condescending, even hysterical attacks against Homepathy such as the widely reported Goldacre article
that appeared in the British Guardian newspaper. Almost always, these attacks being with ridicule and high school chemistry arguments (those same arguments would render Einstein's theories to be utter nonsense but it is fruitless to remind them of this), ignore the Homepathic successes and then misrepresent research regarding Homeopathy.

This book lists plenty of research, goes beyond the high school chemistry arguments to outline what qualified modern scientific researchers are discovering and also give a good overview of Homeopathy itself.

The final chapter on Homeopathy is not yet written. The hysterical anti-Homeopathists will continue their irrational and misleading rants, and patients, desperate to try anything after the complete failure of "standard" medicine will continue to see Homeopathists and be cured.

The rational person will stop, read books such as this one by an established Homeopathic practitioner, and decide for themselves.
They will not be influenced by media organized hysteria, some of it issuing from entrenched interests who somehow feel threatened by the mere possibility that such a system of medicine as Homeopathy exists.

This book, then, constitutes and excellent information source and detailed discussion,
providing ammunition for those who will not so easily allow their medical opinions to be swayed, nor their right of choice of treatments to be restricted.

That this book was written by someone who believes in homeopathy is clear. And advancing his viewpoint, as an author, is certainly within his right. However, the book had an unfortunate flavor of bias. It seemed as if he presented the data that supported his assertion ("homeopathy works") but, as much as he could, left out that which did not. I often wondered, also, when we were told that results were positive and "statistically significant" -- but we were not told the actual results (!) -- why those results were omitted. Was it a 10% cure rate with the placebo group and a 11% rate with the homeopathic group?

A far worse criticism than a flavor of bias was the pervading sense that this book was not finished. A few mischosen words I understand. Sentences that lack a period on the end, numerous words that are spelled incorrectly (and *obviously* so), words that don'thaveaspacebetweenthem...those things I do not understand. Or at least have a hard time forgiving. A book like this is about establishing credibility and such things are very, very damaging to credibility. If he can't even get the spelling right, how am I supposed to believe he got the substantive (and complex) material of the book right?!

All those things said, however, it had some interesting material in it that was worth reading. I especially enjoyed some of the earlier anecdotes about amazing recoveries.

So close, and yet so far.

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 4 reviews  4.0 out of 5 stars