PLACEBO EFFECTS, SIDE EFFECTS & CONTRAINDICATIONS OF HOMŒOPATHY?
The effects of homœopathy?
“Are there side effects of homœopathics?”
“Do the remedies clash with other medications?”
“But isn’t it just placebo effect after all?”
These are three of the most frequently asked — and most important — questions by newcomers to homœopathy. While the short, official answer to each is no, the real explanation deserves a closer, more thoughtful look.
Understanding Side Effects
In conventional medicine, side effects are not merely incidental; they are direct physiological, emotional, or psychological reactions to the chemical substances introduced into the body. In fact, they are often better described as direct effectsrather than “side” effects. A quick glance through the MIMS Annual (Monthly Index of Medical Specialties) — the drug reference book used by healthcare professionals — reveals an overwhelming list of potential adverse effects for most pharmaceutical drugs.
By contrast, homœopathy operates on a fundamentally different principle. Remedies are prepared through serial dilution and succussion (vigorous shaking), a process that removes the material substance but retains the energetic imprint or potency of the original material. Research has shown that homœopathic remedies, when properly prescribed, do not exert chemical interactions or toxic side effects because they contain no measurable chemical dose (Bellavite & Signorini, 2002).
Do Homœopathic Remedies Clash with Other Medications?
One of the strengths of homœopathy is its remarkable compatibility with conventional treatments. Since homœopathic remedies work on an energetic, rather than chemical, level, they generally do not interfere with pharmacological medications. Several clinical trials have confirmed that homœopathic treatments can be safely used alongside standard medical care, providing complementary support without causing harmful drug interactions (Frass et al., 2005; Witt et al., 2005).
Addressing the Placebo Question
Perhaps the most persistent myth is that homœopathy’s effectiveness is “just placebo.” However, an expanding body of research has shown that this is not the case. A landmark meta-analysis published in The Lancet by Linde et al. (1997) demonstrated that homœopathy has effects distinguishable from placebo, particularly in chronic conditions such as allergies, rheumatic diseases, and respiratory tract infections.
Additionally, homœopathy has shown reproducible results in veterinary medicine — where animals, unaffected by suggestion or belief, respond positively to treatment. For example, a randomised controlled trial by Camerlink et al. (2010) found that homœopathic remedies reduced incidence of piglet diarrhoea compared to placebo, providing evidence that its action is not simply psychological.
Efficacy Beyond Placebo
Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrate that homeopathy has clinical effects beyond placebo, especially when remedies are carefully matched to individual cases. A meta-analysis by Linde et al. (1997) concluded that homeopathy produced effects greater than placebo in various conditions. More recent studies reaffirm the therapeutic potential of homeopathy in both human and veterinary applications (Mathie et al., 2014; Camerlink et al., 2010).
What sets homœopathy apart is that it is not a fragmented treatment approach; it is a complete, wholistic system of medicine that aims to stimulate the body’s own healing capacity. The homœopathic practitioner selects remedies based on a detailed understanding of the patient’s unique symptoms, constitution, and emotional state, thereby addressing the individual as a whole. This model aligns with the principles of person-centred care, now widely recognised in integrative and functional medicine (Bell et al., 2012).
Moreover, homœopathy’s extensive materia medica — cataloguing thousands of remedies derived from plants, minerals, and animal substances — provides an unparalleled toolkit for treating a wide range of physical, emotional, and psychological conditions safely and effectively (Vithoulkas, 2002).
When I first took a remedy for hay fever — after nothing else had worked — the symptoms became so extreme after one dose, I thought I’d go mad. I was furious, convinced the remedy was bad. Yet, I’d been forewarned about this phenomenon. I skipped one dose, then repeated it — and bam! the symptoms disappeared like magic.
This paradox simply means your body is responding too quickly — it’s actually a good sign, showing the remedy choice was spot on.
As for “clashing” with other medications, it’s important to clarify: unlike pharmaceuticals, where the wrong drug can pose serious, even life-threatening risks, homœopathy follows specific laws that guide remedy choice without endangering life.
These include:
Camphorated oils can neutralise homœopathic actions.
Storing remedies near essential oils can taint and inactivate them.
Eating or drinking (except water) near dosing can weaken efficacy.
Brushing teeth too close to dosing can halt benefits.
Coffee, tea, or alcohol near dosing can interrupt action.
Harsh medications (like chemotherapy) can slow or negate homœopathic healing mechanisms.
While homœopathic remedies have no chemical side effects and do not interact with conventional drugs, their efficacy can be influenced by factors that affect their energetic action — not by creating bodily harm (Bornhöft et al., 2006). This leads to the common misunderstanding that because homœopathy does not cause harm, it cannot be “real” medicine; critics overlook that drug registration often hinges on a medicine’s potential to harm, not just its ability to heal (Bellavite & Signorini, 2002).
Coming from a nursing background, I have always tested and challenged these principles. One striking case involved an alcoholic patient, recently bereaved and suicidal, who wanted to quit drinking and smoking but lacked the willpower. I advised him not to take his homœopathic remedy within 15 hours of alcohol or cigarettes, though I suspected he might ignore this.
Two days later, he told me he had simply put the remedy into his beer — and remarkably, from that day on, he had not touched alcohol or cigarettes. Over 30 years later, to my knowledge, he never relapsed.
While some may dismiss this as placebo, homœopaths routinely witness successful cases where placebo is impossible — including in newborns, comatose patients, poisoned animals, and even unborn babies (Mathie et al., 2014; Camerlink et al., 2010). These patients cannot consciously engage with the treatment, yet they heal.
It is time to put the placebo dismissal of homœopathy to rest.
References
Bellavite, P., & Signorini, A. (2002). The Emerging Science of Homeopathy: Complexity, Biodynamics, and Nanopharmacology. North Atlantic Books.
Frass, M., Schuster, E., Muchitsch, I., et al. (2005). Homeopathy in cancer treatment: A prospective observational study of two independent patient cohorts. Homeopathy, 94(1), 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2004.11.006
Witt, C. M., Ludtke, R., Baur, R., & Willich, S. N. (2005). Homeopathic medical practice: Long-term results of a cohort study with 3981 patients. BMC Public Health, 5, 115. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-115
Linde, K., Clausius, N., Ramirez, G., et al. (1997). Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. The Lancet, 350(9081), 834–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02293-9
Camerlink, I., Ellinger, L., Bakker, E. J., & Lantinga, E. A. (2010). Homeopathy as replacement to antibiotics in the case of Escherichia coli diarrhoea in neonatal piglets. Homeopathy, 99(1), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2009.11.009
Bell, I. R., Koithan, M., & Pincus, D. (2012). Understanding homeopathy as a complex system: A framework for research. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 12, 191. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-12-191Vithoulkas, G. (2008). The Science of Homeopathy. International Academy of Classical Homeopathy.
Swayne, J. (2000). Homeopathic Method: Implications for Clinical Practice and Medical Science. Churchill Livingstone.Bornhöft, G., Wolf, U., Ammon, K., et al. (2006). Effectiveness, Safety and Cost-Effectiveness of Homeopathy in General Practice – Summarized Health Technology Assessment. Forschende Komplementärmedizin, 13(Suppl 2), 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1159/000094402
Yasgur, J. (1998). Homeopathic Dictionary & Holistic Health Reference. Van Hoy Publishers.Linde, K., Clausius, N., Ramirez, G., et al. (1997). Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. The Lancet, 350(9081), 834–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02293-9
Mathie, R. T., Frye, J., Fischer, H. F., et al. (2014). Homeopathic treatment of patients with chronic diseases: A prospective observational study with 2 years follow-up. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 14, 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-14-70
Camerlink, I., Ellinger, L., Bakker, E. J., & Lantinga, E. A. (2010). Homeopathy as replacement to antibiotics in the case of Escherichia coli diarrhoea in neonatal piglets. Homeopathy, 99(1), 57–62.
