2019, Number S1
Homeopathy and osteoarthritis
Full text
Language: Spanish
References: 28
Page:
PDF size: 251.59 Kb.
ABSTRACT
The present work collects the most important antecedents in the development of homeopathy as a therapeutic method, from the first medical practices carried out by Hippocrates, 440 years BC. to Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), who gave it its name and expanded its principles at the end of the 18th century to the present day. This includes, therefore, opinions of important personalities regarding this therapeutic method, both those of its opponents or detractors and those of those who have defended and promoted it. At the same time, the foundations and antecedents of the use of homeopathy in osteoarthritis or osteoarthritis are exposed, particularly the results obtained and described by a number of authors, which undoubtedly justify the need to continue deepening and expanding research in this direction. Currently there are various treatments of allopathic medicine to address this disease, including multiple medications, physical therapies and even surgery, depending on the stage in which the patient is. However, in general these treatments only focus on counteracting the symptoms, disabilities and deformities of the disease, for which supposedly alternative therapies are claimed with more force, among these homeopathy, given its integrality in the management of the patient. In our country, with a comprehensive health system, where the interests of pharmaceutical transnationals do not apply and where the use of traditional medicine is driven by our socialist state, homeopathy could enrich the therapeutic arsenal of many specialties.REFERENCES
Hahnemann, Samuel (1833). The Homoeopathic Medical Doctrine, or "Organon of the Healing Art". Dublin: W.F. Wakeman. pp.iii, 48–49. «Observation, reflection, and experience have unfolded to me that the best and true method of cure is founded on the principle, similia simili buscurentur. To cure in a mild, prompt, safe, and durable manner, it is necessary to choose in each case a medicine that will excite an affection similar (ὅμοιος πάθος) to that against which it is employed.»Translator: Charles H. Devrient, Esq.
Baran GR, Kiana MF, Samuel SP (2014). «Chapter 2: Science, Pseudoscience, and Not Science: How Do They Differ?». Healthcare and Biomedical Technology in the 21st Century (Springer). pp.19-57. ISBN 978-1-4614-8540-7. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-8541-4_2. «within the traditional medical community it is considered to be quackery».
Ladyman J (2013). «Chapter 3: Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience». En Pigliucci M; Boudry M. Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. pp.48-49. ISBN 978-0-226-05196-3. «Yet homeopathy is a paradigmatic example of pseudoscience. It is neither simply bad science nor science fraud, but rather profoundly departs from scientific method and theories while being described as scientific by some of its adherents (often sincerely).»
Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias (2005), «Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy», The Lancet366 (9487): 726-732, PMID 16125589, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2
Paul S. Boyer. The Oxford companion to United States history. ISBN 9780195082098. Consultado el 15 de enero de 2013. «After 1847, when regular doctors organized the American Medical Association (AMA), that body led the war on "quackery", especially targeting dissenting medical groups such as homeopaths, who prescribed infinitesimally small doses of medicine. Ironically, even as the AMA attacked all homeopathy as quackery, educated homeopathic physicians were expelling untrained quacks from their ranks.»