Nobel Prize Winner Supports Homeopathy

Luc Montagnier, who won a Nobel Prize for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), has come out in support of homeopathy. I will give a brief quotation and then link to the article.

 

"In a remarkable interview published in Science magazine of December 24, 2010, (1) Professor Luc Montagnier, has expressed support for the often maligned and misunderstood medical specialty of homeopathic medicine. . . .

 

"Most clinical research conducted on homeopathic medicines that has been published in peer-review journals have shown positive clinical results,(3, 4) especially in the treatment of respiratory allergies (5, 6), influenza, (7) fibromyalgia, (8, 9) rheumatoid arthritis, (10) childhood diarrhea, (11) post-surgical abdominal surgery recovery, (12) attention deficit disorder, (13) and reduction in the side effects of conventional cancer treatments. (14) In addition to clinical trials, several hundred basic science studies have confirmed the biological activity of homeopathic medicines. One type of basic science trials, called in vitro studies, found 67 experiments (1/3 of them replications) and nearly 3/4 of all replications were positive. (15, 16)

 

"In addition to the wide variety of basic science evidence and clinical research, further evidence for homeopathy resides in the fact that they gained widespread popularity in the U.S. and Europe during the 19th century due to the impressive results people experienced in the treatment of epidemics that raged during that time, including cholera, typhoid, yellow fever, scarlet fever, and influenza.

 

"Montagnier, who is also founder and president of the World Foundation for AIDS Research and Prevention, asserted, 'I can't say that homeopathy is right in everything. What I can say now is that the high dilutions (used in homeopathy) are right. High dilutions of something are not nothing. They are water structures which mimic the original molecules.' . . .

 

"Montagnier concluded the interview when asked if he is concerned that he is drifting into pseudoscience; he replied adamantly: 'No, because it's not pseudoscience. It's not quackery. These are real phenomena which deserve further study.' "

 

[For the entire article]