None of this relates to homeopathy.
The patient has the right to not choose to go to a homeopath , but often do as 'the last resort' when conventional medicine has failed them.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Homeopaths do not make close to enough money to survive and often they are extremely caring people who want the best for their patients.
The road to hell can be paved by good intentions. Homeopaths struggling to make a living does not give anyone a free pass to ignore scientific inquiry and scrutiny.
In south Africa we study for 7 years and have to do a masters dissertation , it is the only country where homeopaths are trained in diagnostics, pathology (By Medical Doctors as lecturers) and do a premed, including 2 years of human dissection. It is thanks to some weirdos who use machines and pendulums that have given homeopaths a bad name, and regulations needs to be strict.
Agreed, it needs to be so strict homeopathy is not allowed to be practised until it can deliver scientific evidence. Machines and pendulums have about the same amount of evidence going for them as homeopathy, so why hate on them?
Homeopathy has a long way to go in proving itself scientifically, and i think it shouldn't make ridiculous claims until it can rightfully prove so, since, if science cant prove it, it doesn't work right?.
So, how many more hundreds of years do you think homeopathy needs to deliver that evidence? Scientific fields of medicine can often deliver that evidence in a decade or two, why is homeopathy still found lacking? Even after all this inquiry is there no evidence for it?
The way in which homeopaths and naturopaths view diseases is important, they look at the entire picture not just a symptom, which is, for me, the healing factor itself, medical doctors can learn a thing a two from this.
What is preventing those folks from becoming fully-qualified MD’s themselves then and transforming the medical profession from within? If they are so concerned about the wellbeing of patients why do they stick to non-evidence based medicine instead of choosing techniques that are proven to make their patients better? Don’t they care enough to enquire? Don’t they care enough to prove that their medicine works before applying it?
P.S. lets not forget the title 'Doctor' means 'To teach' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title) , therefore doctors should be teaching and educating their patients on medications, health and disease not just handing out prescriptions. So whether it be a homeopathic 'doctor' or a medical doctor, if they take the title it is their duty to effectively inform patients which unfortunately doctors just don't do enough because they think we are stupid.
This is true, but be careful not to paint the entire profession with the same brush. I’ve had MD’s that I’ve abandoned because they wanted to write a script and escourt me out before explaining what was wrong with me. My current MD I’ve chosen specifically because he listens, tries to figure out causes instead of treating symptoms, and explains to me what is happening. It’s folly to act like the entire medical profession doesn’t do this.