Every now and then, people screw up. Who amongst us has never made a mistake? Even the American Council gets it wrong now and then. Yet, we are nothing if not humble. Since it's World Homeopathy Week, this provides the prefect opportunity for some self reflection and humility. Is it possible that we have been unfairly criticizing homeopathy and homeopaths all this time?
In the interest of keeping an open mind, I decided to search for evidence that might indicate that I may have been wrong all along. It was a humbling experience, but I'm glad I did it. I feel so...... cleansed. I was dumbfounded by what has been in front of my face all this time that I failed to see. Clearly, I was so arrogant and unshakeable in my belief system of traditional science that I did not give homeopathy the respect that it deserves. I feel shamed.
So, the very least I can do to atone for my sins is to present some of what I uncovered during my journey toward self-enlightenment. The evidence speaks for itself.
Evidence in support of homeopathy: The consequences of the homeopathic effect in swimming pools.
We all know that at roughly 100 percent of people who swim in pools also pee in pools (See: "Does a Bear Pee in the Pool?"). What homeopathy tells us should be obvious: Even when a pool is drained and replaced by fresh water, it doesn't matter, because any trace of water remains will retain the memory of what used to be in the pool.
So, it should come as no surprise that people who have had the opportunity to swim in a newly filled pool nonetheless experienced some pharmacological effect from it. Nothing can exemplify this phenomenon better than exposure to homeopathic estrogen (1) arising from women who take birth control pills and subsequently pee in the pool. (Estrogen is excreted in urine. Women also pee in pools. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.)
This formed the basis of an elegant experiment, which was published in the prestigious Journal of Tuna Farts, Bassoon Repair and Chia Pet Husbandry. Here is the protocol:
1. Drain pee pool
2. Replace with fresh water
3. Select an appropriate cohort.
4. Put them in the pool.
5. Record results.
Test subject #1, the (dis)honorable Mike Adams, did respond in a manner that was consistent with homeopathic science.
Test subject #2 Dr.Joe Mercola was apparently a hyper responder:
** But if you DO, have a weak stomach, fear not:
Big Dough Joe is selling something that will fix you right up! Go Joe!
This guy should have spent the extra two bucks for priority mail
With n = 2 (more than suitable for any journal that accepts papers from the Environmental Working Group) we see a non-dose response, which is consistent with all principles of homeopathic science. While the magnitude of the difference between Adams and Mercola is not easily explained, we postulate that Adams' "inner Satan" may have partially neutralized the non-molecule responsible for his transformation. Alternatively, Mercola may simply be more well endowed, possibly due to the superiority of his supplements. Notwithstanding, these results are consistent with those reported in the literature. (See: Weil, Andrew, MD, "Talking to Your Toothbrush" Journal of Deranged Lunatics; 2014 (4) 211-216.)
Limitations of study:
The absence of data on the BPA content of Pez dispensers in Nepal is a possible confounder. More research is clearly needed in this area.
Conclusion: The former presence of estrogen in a swimming pool does in fact lead to phenotypic alterations in sexual development, which are consistent with water memory.
(Speaking of memory, guys—good luck getting those images out of your mind should you ever consider having sex again.)
(1) "Estrogen" is not a specific molecule, rather, class of female sex hormones that are very closely related in chemical structure, but have different functions. Estradiol is the primary estrogen in woman.
For a sane look at homeopathy, see Dr. Alex Berezow's recent article.