Homeopathy - the evidence doesn't add up

It fascinates me, doing the work that I do and my involvement on social media, just how much vitriol, negativity and, well, rudeness there is around something I love. And love it I do. I would consider myself to be reasonably well educated, not gullible, not brainwashed, and above all, relatively discerning of the truth in front of me.

I'll hold my hand up high and say I don't always get there first time. I still need to audit my practice (everytime I see Miranda Castro's books on my shelf or see her mentioned I think of it) but at a guess I'd say somewhere around 65-70% of people have made a significant improvement of their main complaint by their second follow up.

In fact, I consider in order to do my job well I need to be able to judge if a remedy has worked or not. I'm disinterested in someone skipping in to please me - it doesn't. Lay it on, tell me what's better, worse and not changed. It's the only way I can help you to move forwards.

So I see and judge the evidence all the time. Yet there is more, far bigger evidence than just little old me in my practice room, seeing clients. And, it may surprise you, there is a reasonable amount of it. Whether that be homeopathy used in depression, as a support for patients going through conventional cancer treatment or large scale epidemic studies in Cuba, 6 year hospital studies involving 6,500 people, there is evidence.

Homeopathy can be hard, it can be a journey and it's definitely a challenge at times. But without evidence? Nope that claim just doesn't add up.