Of course. For example, one such remedy was white willow bark; it worked wonders to reduce pain and inflammation. This is because it contains salicin. When ingested this converts to salicylic acid. This may sound familiar to you since it's the active ingredient in aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid.)I really dislike these elitist blanket prejudicial statements. Native tribes have used natural remedies for thousands of years.
It worked because it contained an active ingredient in sufficient quantities to have a therapeutic benefit. Reduce the amount of salicin and the benefit is diminished and eventually disappears. This is basically the opposite philosophy that homeopathy takes.
Absolutely. And those natural medicines work because they have substances that, at sufficient concentrations, have a therapeutic effect. Again, the opposite of the homeopath's approach.Some medicine men have an equivalent knowledge of natural medicines than any modern doctor.
Nope. The homeopathic version of a vaccine would remove all the active ingredients of that vaccine, and then inject you with the water that once contained them. The water, according to homeopaths, then contains the "memory" of the vaccine.Let's not forget that vaccination against viruses is a homeopathic remedy.
Yep. And more importantly, significant quantities of those natural resources.Are we just dismissing that some 70 % of all medicine is based on natural resources.
We can (and should) test any such potential remedy.Of course we can test homeopathic remedies if we wanted to. It is what we do with all artificial drugs and remedies. Are you declaring that there are potential medicinal molecules we cannot test? Really?
If you had been following the above conversation, you would have realized that it is primarily an argument between two groups - one group (myself included) demanding valid and accurate test results before any new treatment is approved, and the other (Kumar) protesting that you can't test homeopathic drugs, because they are not amenable to such testing. Kumar himself claimed that "double blind studies in science are not valid to study homeopathic remedies."
He has claimed that the patient's feelings and beliefs are critical to having homeopathic remedies work, which means they act the same way that placebos act. It is the belief of the patient rather than the effectiveness of the remedy that is important.