Hopff W H
Pharmakologisches Institut der Universität Zürich.
Z Arztl Fortbild (Jena). 1996 Apr;90(2):91-6.
As for generally accepted therapeutic methods, the "special methods" may appear to be effective due to spontaneous recovery provided by nature. A great number of sceptical physicians are aware of this fact. The pharmacologist works continuously to differentiate effects directly caused by medical treatments - mainly drugs - from effects resulting from spontaneous recovery. This is one of the most difficult problems in medical treatment. As a representative example of all "special methods", we concentrate here on the history of homeopathy. As is generally known, there is no conformity in homeopathy, for example monotherapy versus therapy with complex homeopathic products; refusing the simile-rule; treatment with high potencies versus treatment with low potencies; classic versus scholastic homeopathy. The number of homeopathies really equals the number of homeopathic physicians. For this reason, instruction in homeopathy on the academic level is impossible. In addition, we have to forget all natural laws only to prove that "potentiation" may be true. Therapeutic success due purely to chance may be explained rationally and is occasionally seen in all other "special methods". The theories of homeopaths for the action with homeopathic products are neither in accordance with our natural laws nor comply with a rational philosophy.
至于普遍接受的治疗方法，“特殊方法”可能由于自然提供的自愈而显得有效。许多持怀疑态度的医生都知道这一事实。药理学家不断努力区分由医疗手段——主要是药物——直接引起的效果与自愈产生的效果。这是医疗中最困难的问题之一。作为所有“特殊方法”的一个典型例子，我们在此聚焦顺势疗法的历史。众所周知，顺势疗法并不统一，例如单一疗法与使用复方顺势疗法产品的疗法；拒绝相似法则；高药力治疗与低药力治疗；古典顺势疗法与学术顺势疗法。顺势疗法的种类实际上与顺势疗法医生的数量一样多。因此，在学术层面上进行顺势疗法教学是不可能的。此外，我们必须摒弃所有自然法则才能证明“增效作用”可能是真实的。纯粹出于偶然的治疗成功可以得到合理的解释，并且在所有其他“特殊方法”中偶尔也会出现。顺势疗法医生关于顺势疗法产品作用的理论既不符合我们的自然法则，也不符合理性的理念。
