Hopff W H
Pharmakologisches Institut der Universität Zürich.
Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 1990 May 8;79(19):593-6; discussion 596-7.
Homeopathy has been disputed from the early beginning. The rational basis of homeopathy neither can be established by philosophy nor by natural sciences. On one hand homeopathy is supported by so-called 'empirical physicians', but on the other hand it is usually heavily criticized by physicians who are basing their criticism on natural sciences. 'Healing' is meant to prove the hypothesis of all paramedical people, it can however be easily explained on a rational basis. It is indisputable that paramedical manipulations not only may act by placebo effect but also can appear successful due to the remarkable power of our body for self-healing. If latter plays an important role, especially when there is no time limit for healing. We never tried to convince paramedical ideologists, who are already heavily engaged in paramedical treatment, but it is our aim to reassure with solid arguments colleagues, who have so far been overwhelmed by irrational journalism.
顺势疗法从一开始就备受争议。顺势疗法的理论基础既无法通过哲学确立，也无法通过自然科学确立。一方面，顺势疗法得到了所谓“经验派医生”的支持，但另一方面，它通常受到那些基于自然科学进行批评的医生的严厉批评。“治愈”旨在证明所有辅助医疗人员的假设，然而，它可以很容易地从理性角度进行解释。无可争议的是，辅助医疗操作不仅可能通过安慰剂效应起作用，而且由于我们身体强大的自我修复能力，也可能看起来很成功。如果后者发挥重要作用，尤其是在没有治愈时间限制的情况下。我们从未试图说服那些已经深度参与辅助医疗治疗的辅助医疗理论家，但我们的目标是用确凿的论据让那些迄今为止被非理性的新闻报道弄得不知所措的同事安心。
