ਹੋਮੀਓਪੈਥੀ: ਰੀਵਿਜ਼ਨਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਫ਼ਰਕ

[[File:Hahnemann.jpg|thumb|right|ਸੈਮਿਊਲ ਹਾਨੇਮਾਨ]]

ਹੋਮੀਓਪੈਥੀ ਦਵਾਈ ਦੀ ਇਕ ਛੂਤ-ਵਿਗਿਆਨਕ ਪ੍ਰਣਾਲੀ ਹੈ।<ref name=Tuomela>{{cite book |author=Tuomela, R|authorlink=Raimo Tuomela |veditors=Pitt JC, Marcello P |doi=10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4 |series=Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science |volume=98 |year=1987 |pages=83–101 |publisher=Springer |chapter=Chapter 4: Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience |title=Rational Changes in Science: Essays on Scientific Reasoning |isbn=978-94-010-8181-8}}</ref><ref name=Smith2012>{{cite journal |author=Smith K |title=Homeopathy is Unscientific and Unethical |journal=Bioethics |volume=26 |issue=9 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01956.x|pages=508–12 |year=2012}}</ref><ref name=Ladyman>{{cite book |author=Ladyman J |veditors=Pigliucci M, Boudry M |year=2013 |pages=48–49 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |chapter=Chapter 3: Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience |title=Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem |quote=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). |isbn=978-0-226-05196-3}}</ref><ref name=Baran2014>{{cite book |vauthors=Baran GR, Kiana MF, Samuel SP |journal=Healthcare and Biomedical Technology in the 21st Century |publisher=Springer |year=2014 |pages=19–57 |title=Chapter 2: Science, Pseudoscience, and Not Science: How Do They Differ? |doi=10.1007/978-1-4614-8541-4_2 |isbn=978-1-4614-8540-7 |quote=within the traditional medical community it is considered to be quackery|chapter=Science, Pseudoscience, and Not Science: How Do They Differ? }}</ref> ਹੋਮਿਓਪੈਥੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਤਿਆਰੀਆਂ ਕਿਸੇ ਵੀ ਸਥਿਤੀ ਜਾਂ ਬਿਮਾਰੀ ਦੇ ਇਲਾਜ ਲਈ ਅਸਰਦਾਰ ਨਹੀਂ ਹਨ; ਹੋਮਿਓਪੈਥੀ ਵੱਡੇ ਪੱਧਰ ਦੇ ਅਧਿਐਨ ਵਿਚ ਪਲੇਸਬੋ ਨਾਲੋਂ ਵਧੇਰੇ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਸ਼ਾਲੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਪਾਇਆ ਗਿਆ।<ref name="pmid12492603">{{cite journal |last1=Ernst |first1=E. |authorlink=Edzard Ernst|title=A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy |journal=British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology |volume=54 |issue=6 |pages=577–82 |year=2002 |pmid=12492603 |pmc=1874503 |doi=10.1046/j.1365-2125.2002.01699.x}}</ref><ref name="shang">{{cite journal |last1=Shang |first1=Aijing |last2=Huwiler-Müntener |first2=Karin |last3=Nartey |first3=Linda |last4=Jüni |first4=Peter |last5=Dörig |first5=Stephan |last6=Sterne |first6=Jonathan AC |last7=Pewsner |first7=Daniel |last8=Egger |first8=Matthias |title=Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy |journal=The Lancet |volume=366 |pages=726–32 |year=2005 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2 |pmid=16125589 |issue=9487}}</ref><ref name=inquiry_4504>{{cite web |date=February 22, 2010 |title=Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy – Science and Technology Committee |publisher=[[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|British House of Commons]] Science and Technology Committee |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4504.htm |accessdate=April 5, 2014 }}</ref>