The Concept of Homeopathy and the Scientific Domain - Essay Example

Philosophy Introduction Medication can be broadly be ified into two, the traditional medication and the modern medication. The difference between the two is simple; the traditional one was not hinged on any clear chronological account on how the concoction is able to reverse a physiological departure while the modern medication is fully encapsulated with resounding facts that gives reason why and how the medication works. The account for how the medication works is composed of the various chemical values that are included in it and how they relate to the body physiology. There position can be corroborated by other literature books and in this sense they satisfy the simplify principle not only because of science, but also for the sake of common sense. This kind of explanation was and is still lacking in the traditional medication though they are recognized to some extent in the contemporary medication. Generally, medication would be considered to be scientifically relevant. In science, there are three principles that must be fulfilled by any happening considered to be in it domain, the principle of obeying natural laws, that is the law of gravity, replication, and falsifiability (Ellis, 127). In simpler terms science dictates that it has no preference and do not behave differently in any place and when performed by anybody. This concept is clearly manifested in the way vaccines are used. Whether a vaccine is used in Kenya or in Canada for example, it will have the same effect on the individuals that have used it. That explains why vaccines have been used to get rid of disease like measles and small pox all over the world. There operation can be fathomed both in common science and in the scientific perspective. In the interest of understanding science both in fact and common sense, it is prudent that we unravel the following; Before a vaccine is made and licensed to be used publicly in the mitigation of a disease spread, it has to pass through a definite scientific sequence. From the initial proposed project, evaluation of the efficacy and feasibility, cost, animal trial, human clinical trial which is the last stage before licensing after having proven effective. This chronology justifies and attempts to answer all the possible questions that can be asked about vaccines. In addition to this, vaccines are not compound in nature, they are rather specific and do take care of only one infection. This is justified scientifically because every disease causing pathogen referred to as antigen do have specific vaccine target points known as paratopes (Lefebvre, 222). These antigenic points have different orientation in every antigens and it explains why vaccines are specific in nature. The same applies to the drugs, which target specific physiological repair to render normalcy. The kind of justification made above is conspicuously lacking in homeopathy, which is considered as a form of medication. Thesis statement Human physiological processes are identical and once subjected to any external treatment will behave more or less the same. There are no selective behavioral tendencies that can be exhibited by different individual subjected to same treatment based on the cultural or social orientation. In this regard, all substances that are used in the body to reverse a physiological departure expressly owes us the responsibility of unequivocally accounting for the logics behind the proposed effect, otherwise it will be a matter of taking jokes too far. In pursuit of the above statement, I refuse to believe in the efficacy of homeopathy as a way of medication. The justification is stated below. The concept of Homeopathy In the 18th century, Samuel Hahnemann discovered homeopathy. Its concert then and now remain absolutely the same, it proposes that if a substance is able to cause symptoms when occurs in large doses, the diluted concentration of the same substance do reverse the occurrence of the symptoms. A classical example is; when large dose of mycobacterium tuberculosis is able to cause the disease tuberculosis then the diluted content of the same will be able to clear the symptoms. This position is considered extremely vague in the face of science in many ways (Sehon and Stanley, 4). First, as stated above, no scientific preposition should antagonize another without substantial proof; the concert of homeopathy has absolutely crossed this line. It is a fact that when substances are diluted in water, the substance value in that water keeps on diminishing with increasing dilution. In that regard following Avogadro’s preposition, any substance that is diluted past the 1024 is considered to have no traces of the original substance that was intended to be diluted. In other words, we will be having the diluting factor, water instead (Sehon and Stanley, 4). Questions then begin to come from this point, how can water be offering medication? This is because having been diluted past the stated level; the substance becomes chemically indistinguishable from water (Sehon and Stanley, 4). The other question is; how can two chemically indistinguishable homeopathic substance demonstrates different results? Another question comes, what is the science behind increasing effectiveness of a substance with increasing dilution of its value content and why can’t the same philosophy work in other medication processes. Lastly, on what grounds is the solution able to identify the kind of impurities that will bring it the needed therapeutic effects? He questions that are asked about the homeopathy to this extent cannot be ignored. If the proponents of this form of medication are not able to give a justification on the questions then homeopathy stands a perfect chance to be disregarded as being able to give remedies. The argument here is also naive of the fact that some symptoms causing organisms do multiply and are able to achieve higher level of concentration and aggravates the condition of the individuals administered homeopathy. Considering the effect of mycobacterium tuberculosis, this pathogenic bacterium if inoculated into the body even in small quantities will multiply and eventually cause serious infection as opposed to the theory that they will be in a position to give remedy (Lefebvre, 234). It leaves an analytical individual to construe that the proponents of this medication considered possibilities skewed to serve their own interest and not to the interest of facts or science. Scientifically according to a renowned scientist Robert Koch and his much accepted postulates in the understanding and identification of pathogenic microbes, the homeopathic principles tend to give it deaf ears of simply ignore it. In the Koch’s postulates, he gives four characteristics of a symptoms causing organism; they can be isolated from the initial host serially diluted and inoculated into another healthy organism and cause the same symptoms where it can eventually be extracted again and be cultured (Hoboken, 145). The core concept here is the ability to be extracted, diluted and be inoculated to demonstrate the same symptoms. Homeopathy on the other side holds a contrary opinion without any explanation whatsoever. A good proposal should be given a strong back up more so if its conflicts with universal knowledge like the one occasioned by homeopathic. In any event, let us take for a moment that homeopathy can be effective, there will still be questioned coming from all direction. How is it effective? No one would want to construe anything like it happens in the religious or faith based situation where questions are not attended to. Any proclamation to the caliber of homeopathy deserves a spirited defense hinged on facts and common sense. In this regard, it will be plausible than ever before but not just a mere statement meant to be consumed in raw form. Question will also come from such quarters as, why would homeopathy wants to be an exceptional in the field of medication that is peppered with justification one after another? What is so peculiar about it yet they handle the same physiological make up? It is important that the proponents of theory do research and report substantial facts rather than riding on miraculous happenings in the 21st century. Believing the concept of homeopathy will not only amount to self denial of the salient analytical questions but also a direct affront to the scientist who work tirelessly to make sophisticated scientific happenings palatable to the public. Take for instance the search for HIV drug; people spend hours upon hours in the laboratory to fathom the spectacular nature of the virus so that for the last time a medication can be in place to help eradicate the disease that threatens the world population (CMR, 89). It will be unfair to believe a statement that has not been tested anywhere and no logical argument that can be used to back it up at the expense of the much-researched ones or giving them same treatment. Most interestingly is the fact that even the proponent of homeopathy concede that they do not fathom how it works and their only explanation is that probably it’s made of operation is beyond the domain of the western science. It must be understood that homeopathy propose a serious statement that before it is considered within the scientific domain, it should be given a logical and common sense explanation in the first place. Amore objective, balanced, and rational explanation would do for homeopathy. Works Cited Sehon, Scott and Donald Stanley. "Evidence and simplicity: why we should reject homeopathyjep_1384." Evaluation of Clinical Practice (2009): 6. Development of vaccines from discovery to clinical testing. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Print. Ellis, Ronald W.. Combination vaccines development, clinical research, and approval. Totowa, N.J.: Humana Press, 1999. Print. Lefebvre, Kala. Homeopathy. New Delhi: World Technologies, 2012. Print. Meeting on cold exposure in medical research and clinical practise. Oulu, Finland: Nordic Council for Arctic Medical Research, 1982. Print. Read More