The reluctant and the envious: Therapeutic subalternity and the practice of homeopathy in North America.

This work presents a neo-Gramscian theorization of therapeutic hegemony and subalternity, deployed with reference to the practice of homeopathy in North America by two increasingly-professionalized but unorthodox health occupational groups: Homeopaths and Naturopaths. Despite both occupations' contemporary sociopolitical subordination to dominant biomedicine, the continent's Homeopaths have been less successful in their professionalization efforts, owing partly to homeopathy-their primary therapeutic modality-being widely considered incommensurable with biomedical science. For Naturopaths, who increasingly align themselves with biomedical evidentiary norms, homeopathy represents but one among several central therapeutic modalities. Using survey (n = 588) and interview (n = 31) data from an empirical case involving Homeopaths and Naturopaths in Ontario, Canada-a jurisdictional outlier in which both groups are regulated by the state-the author employs the theory of therapeutic subalternity to illuminate the internal struggles faced by homeopathy-practising occupations in a biomedically-dominant context. Despite their regulated standing, Homeopaths' negative media characterization and ongoing lack of access to third-party insurance reimbursement contribute to ongoing frustration among practitioners, expressed as displaced envy toward the province's more elite, homeopathy-practising Naturopaths. However, while most Naturopaths express appreciation for homeopathy's clinical merits, many appear increasingly reluctant to use or discuss the practice to prevent compromise to their profession's therapeutic legitimation.