The Theory of Homeopathy Everything has a "vital force." This vital force exists beyond the "thing" that it is associated with, and, with proper care, it can be isolated independently of the thing it is associated with. For example, honey has a vital force of "honey-ness", and with proper preparation, I can have the "essence of honey" without any honey.

Preparation of a solution that contains the "vital force" of something, without the something, involves repeated dilutions and shakings. For example, you take some honey, and dilute it 100 to 1. You shake and tap it to imprint the "vital force" onto the solution, and then you dilute it again 100 to 1. You continue to do this to the desired "potency." I put potency in quotes because, in traditional chemistry, concentration determines potency. In homeopathy, the reverse is true -- homeopathic medicines become more potent the more you dilute it. In other words, the lower the concentration, the more potent the medicine is.

A critique of this theory There is a fundamental flaw with the theory of homeopathy. Many skeptics will point at the whole "vital force" aspect of the theory. This isn't actually as ridiculous as it sounds. Just because there isn't a single shred of evidence for the "vital force" is no reason to dismiss it. Look at String Theory in physics. String Theory is the most hotley debated and controversial topics in science today, but even its advocates admit that, as beautiful as the mathematics are, there isn't a single shred of evidence of the existence of "strings."

No, the fundamental flaw is this: There is no such thing as a pure solution of anything. Oh, if you have some really big, expensive chemistry equipment, you may be able to get a micro-drop of "pure water" or "pure alcohol", but really, every glass of water, ever drop of alcohol out here in the real world has hundereds, if not thousands of chemicals in it at the parts-per-billion and parts-per-trillion level.

Take our honey example. You dilute some honey 100-1 and then "shake and tap" the vial to distribute the vital force. But you aren't just distributing the vital force of honey, are you? No, there are hundreds of other substances in the water (or in the honey) that are being "enhanced" by this process as well. By the time you are finished your multiple dilutions, you have something that, assuming the theory is correct, contains the essence of hundreds or even thousands of various, unknown, things. Further, doesn't water (or sometimes alcohol) have a vital force as well? Wouldn't the vital force of the water or alcohol overpower the vital force of whatever you are trying to "enhance".

Believe it or not, I can come up with a rationale that would explain away the above discrepancies. Here it is: The impurities in the water (or alcohol) are not being diluted, since they are present in the same concentration at each step. Therefore, the impurities, and the water provide a neutral, unhanced "background" to the dilution process. In other words, if I added an equal amount of honey at each dilution step, the honey wouldn't be enhanced either.

Pretty good, huh? I just made that up. And that is the problem with the theory. Any idiot (like me) can come up with a theory, but how can you prove it to be true? In homeopathy, you can't. The advocates of homeopathy continue to insist that "We don't know how it works, it just does." That's fine, but why keep pushing unsupported, unprovable hypotheses ("the vital force" and the "dilution equals potency") as the basis for homeopathy? At least with string theory, there are predictions that can be made, and those predictions hold up remarkably well in simulations. But "vital force" and "dilution equals potency" theories, make no testable predictions, and the "dilution" theory actually flies in the face of all observable phenomenon.

Conclusion

Homeopathy has not been proven to be any more effective than a placebo. But homeopaths should take heart. There are plenty of medicines on the market, backed by traditional science, that are in the same boat. And besides, what if the only effect of homeopathy is the placebo effect? The placebo effect has been shown to be extremely effective at curing a wide range of problems. If people believe that it cures their pains, and it actually does cure their pains, then what is the harm in it?

The harm is in the bad science it advocates. I believe that homeopaths should drop the whole "vital force" and "dilution equals potency" theories. They should stick with the honest line of: "We don't know how it works, it just does." And let the healing begin.