34 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 10, 2019
implications of these findings for both
consumers and social scientists.
Homeopathy and the Allure of
Complementary and Alternative
Medicine (CAM)
In the late eighteenth century, homeopathy
emerged from the work of German physician
Christian Friedrich “Samuel” Hahnemann
(1755–1843), who discovered (or invented)
homeopathy as a treatment reliant on stimulation
of the body’s healing power. Hahnemann
viewed his practice as scientific and only
prescribed placebos to “soothe the patient’s
mind and desire for medicine with something
inconspicuous such as a few teaspoons a day of
raspberry juice or sugar of milk” (Jütte, 2014, p.
209). As part of his nonplacebo treatment plan,
Hahnemann prescribed diluted medicines
according to the “law of similar,” or “like cures
like” this means that, to cure an affliction, the
treatment should mimic the symptoms of the
illness. If a patient has hay-fever symptoms, then
a homeopath might prepare a dose of red onion
because both the illness and treatment lead to
tears, a runny nose, and so on (Banerjee,
Costelloe, Mathie, &Howick, 2014). The
homeopath would dilute the onion, and then
increase the potency of the dilution by shaking,
or succussion, to release the spirit-like power of
the medicine.
Although critics of homeopathy emphasize both
its lack of benefit and its potential harms as an
alternative treatment, it is necessary to go further
than simple dismissal of health consumers’
choices, and ask why individuals seek out such
treatments in the first place. Scholars have
shown that magical thinking is at the heart of
many decisions to use alternative therapies
(Beyerstein, 2001 Greasley, 2010 Stevens,
2001). But magical thinking aside, other
motivations to use such products may include a
justified disillusionment with orthodox medicine
or a fear of adverse drug side effects (Ernst,
2002). This literature has made significant
contributions to an understanding of CAM’s use,
but the concept of magic provides additional
insight into beliefs and practices such as
homeopathy that defy easy categorization,
especially in contemporary health care.
Spiritual or religious identities (e.g., religious
affiliation or attendance, beliefs, or practices)
may predict the use of CAM, and increased
spirituality may result from the use of particular
therapies. More telling perhaps is that the choice
to use a particular modality is not as easy or
straightforward as that of choosing a brand of a
multivitamin or some other supplement.
Consumers’ investment in alternative treatments
is suggestive of a more profound attachment that
goes well beyond normal health-seeking
behaviors (Evans et al., 2007 Mao, Palmer,
Healy, Desai, &Amsterdam, 2011).
Complicating matters further, many
contemporary homeopaths both distance
themselves from mainstream medicine and seek
out scientific validation. Regarding the former
position, Hahnemann specifically developed
homeopathy in reaction to his concerns about
existing medical knowledge and practice, which
homeopaths refer to by the pejorative allopathy,
from the Greek meaning “other suffering.” For
Hahnemann and his twenty-first-century
followers, allopathic medicines produced effects
opposite the symptoms of an illness and
involved treatments such as bleeding a person to
reduce fluids, and induced vomiting (Boyle,
2013). Although many homeopaths
acknowledge the benefits of modern medicine,
they nonetheless describe evidence-based
approaches such as clinical trials as allopathy (or
more recently, biomedicine). The use of the term
allopathy may seem innocent, if perhaps archaic,
but it is often used as a pejorative (Levy, 2016).
Despite distancing themselves from mainstream
medicine (allopathy/biomedicine), many
contemporary homeopaths nonetheless seek
scientific and medical legitimacy (Vigano,
Nannei, &Bellavite, 2015). Several journals
publish research regarding homeopathy. One of
the more popular journals is Homeopathy
(formerly the British Homoeopathic Journal),
which is published by Elsevier, one of the
biggest companies in academic publishing.
Although some homeopaths have attempted to
convert homeopathy to rational medical science
through the appropriation of scientific
discourses, they have been unsuccessful in
escaping a “spiritual and metaphysical view of
healing” (Haller, 2009, p. 113). Contemporary
implications of these findings for both
consumers and social scientists.
Homeopathy and the Allure of
Complementary and Alternative
Medicine (CAM)
In the late eighteenth century, homeopathy
emerged from the work of German physician
Christian Friedrich “Samuel” Hahnemann
(1755–1843), who discovered (or invented)
homeopathy as a treatment reliant on stimulation
of the body’s healing power. Hahnemann
viewed his practice as scientific and only
prescribed placebos to “soothe the patient’s
mind and desire for medicine with something
inconspicuous such as a few teaspoons a day of
raspberry juice or sugar of milk” (Jütte, 2014, p.
209). As part of his nonplacebo treatment plan,
Hahnemann prescribed diluted medicines
according to the “law of similar,” or “like cures
like” this means that, to cure an affliction, the
treatment should mimic the symptoms of the
illness. If a patient has hay-fever symptoms, then
a homeopath might prepare a dose of red onion
because both the illness and treatment lead to
tears, a runny nose, and so on (Banerjee,
Costelloe, Mathie, &Howick, 2014). The
homeopath would dilute the onion, and then
increase the potency of the dilution by shaking,
or succussion, to release the spirit-like power of
the medicine.
Although critics of homeopathy emphasize both
its lack of benefit and its potential harms as an
alternative treatment, it is necessary to go further
than simple dismissal of health consumers’
choices, and ask why individuals seek out such
treatments in the first place. Scholars have
shown that magical thinking is at the heart of
many decisions to use alternative therapies
(Beyerstein, 2001 Greasley, 2010 Stevens,
2001). But magical thinking aside, other
motivations to use such products may include a
justified disillusionment with orthodox medicine
or a fear of adverse drug side effects (Ernst,
2002). This literature has made significant
contributions to an understanding of CAM’s use,
but the concept of magic provides additional
insight into beliefs and practices such as
homeopathy that defy easy categorization,
especially in contemporary health care.
Spiritual or religious identities (e.g., religious
affiliation or attendance, beliefs, or practices)
may predict the use of CAM, and increased
spirituality may result from the use of particular
therapies. More telling perhaps is that the choice
to use a particular modality is not as easy or
straightforward as that of choosing a brand of a
multivitamin or some other supplement.
Consumers’ investment in alternative treatments
is suggestive of a more profound attachment that
goes well beyond normal health-seeking
behaviors (Evans et al., 2007 Mao, Palmer,
Healy, Desai, &Amsterdam, 2011).
Complicating matters further, many
contemporary homeopaths both distance
themselves from mainstream medicine and seek
out scientific validation. Regarding the former
position, Hahnemann specifically developed
homeopathy in reaction to his concerns about
existing medical knowledge and practice, which
homeopaths refer to by the pejorative allopathy,
from the Greek meaning “other suffering.” For
Hahnemann and his twenty-first-century
followers, allopathic medicines produced effects
opposite the symptoms of an illness and
involved treatments such as bleeding a person to
reduce fluids, and induced vomiting (Boyle,
2013). Although many homeopaths
acknowledge the benefits of modern medicine,
they nonetheless describe evidence-based
approaches such as clinical trials as allopathy (or
more recently, biomedicine). The use of the term
allopathy may seem innocent, if perhaps archaic,
but it is often used as a pejorative (Levy, 2016).
Despite distancing themselves from mainstream
medicine (allopathy/biomedicine), many
contemporary homeopaths nonetheless seek
scientific and medical legitimacy (Vigano,
Nannei, &Bellavite, 2015). Several journals
publish research regarding homeopathy. One of
the more popular journals is Homeopathy
(formerly the British Homoeopathic Journal),
which is published by Elsevier, one of the
biggest companies in academic publishing.
Although some homeopaths have attempted to
convert homeopathy to rational medical science
through the appropriation of scientific
discourses, they have been unsuccessful in
escaping a “spiritual and metaphysical view of
healing” (Haller, 2009, p. 113). Contemporary
