Science is defined by Wikipedia as being from the Latin word ’scientia’ meaning knowledge; ‘an effort to discover and increase human understanding of how the physical world works’. It makes reference to the words phenomenon - any occurrence that is observable and simulation - the imitation of some real thing, state of affairs or process.

So far so good; looks like Homoeopathy should fit as a science given that it aims to increase our understanding of the effects of substances and how a simillimum remedy aims to restore the individual to a healthy state.

Pseudoscience is defined by Wikipedia as ‘a body of knowledge methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific or made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific status’. So now the truth is revealed. The definition of science alone is not enough to call something scientific; it must pass the ultimate test - the scientific method.

It appears that science has conditions, is not free form and is biased towards methodologies that are narrow and contradictory. Of course, there’s no point arguing about it. Science and their converts can have their scientific method; it won’t change the power of Homoeopathy. And it won’t change the things they can’t explain.

A professor of pharmacology once put homoeopathy to the test by placing a rat’s intestine into a fluid culture medium containing atropine, a poison from the Atropa Belladonna plant. The poison is known to cause severe stomach cramps. The intestine started to display symptoms of shrinkage and strong traction. Upon adding the homoeopathically prepared Belladonna 90x potency (prepared from fresh juice of the whole plant), the intestine displayed less traction and relaxed, responding to the dosage. Despite the professor’s goal of disproving homoeopathy, she discovered that ‘homoeopathy is effective in the absence of any material substance’. This was despite the the potency of the homoeopathic product (90x) being well beyond 10C (Avogadro’s number) and substances in this case would have no material substance or effect.

Here’s a little excerpt from the Quantum website giving a clear distinction on the difference of homoeopathic potencies. Please note: The placement of the ‘X’ and ‘C’ before or after the numerical amount are interchangeable and retain the same meaning.

• X potencies are diluted at the ratio of 1:10 and shaken 10 times. A X1 is thus created by using 1 drop of the original tincture plus 9 drops of the alcohol-water solution and shaking it 10 times. A X2 by 1 drop of X1 plus 9 drops, etc. . . .
• C potencies are diluted at the ratio of 1:100 and shaken 10 times.
• LM potencies are diluted at the ratio of 1:50,000 and shaken 100 times, with the added specialty that the original substance is a specially produced C 3 potency instead of the original tincture.

References: 1. Quantec.ch; 2. ‘Materia Medica Pura’ Vol. I, S. Hahnemann