“Homeopathy research is poor quality, so you can’t trust the results.”
Only one study has compared the quality of homeopathy research with that of conventional medicine. Overall the homeopathy trials were found to be of higher quality than the conventional trials they were compared to.1
Researchers compared 110 homoeopathy trials and 110 matched conventional-medicine trials: 21 homeopathy trials and 9 conventional-medical trials were assessed as ‘higher quality’ (19% of homoeopathy trials and 8% of conventional-medicine trials).
This study shows that raising research standards is an ongoing issue for both homeopathy and conventional medicine.
It is also true that some homeopathy studies are poor quality, particularly those carried out some decades ago which fall short of today’s quality standards.
However it is clearly not true that all homeopathy studies are poor quality. There are good quality studies which have found that homeopathy is effective.
- Shang A, Huwiler-Muntener K, Nartey L, et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet, 2005; 366: 726–32 | PubMed