geni wrote:
If indeed homeopathic medicine doesn't work as you allege, there is at least no recent claims of it doing direct harm. (Direct harm involves far more than any allegation of negligence for failing to send the victims to a "real" doctor.)
Hmmm of course to make that stement you have to accept that agrivations are not due to any active effect of homeopathy.
you also have to ignore this
http://www.adrugrecall.com/zicam/zicam.html
(although of course not all homeopaths would accept that as homeoapthy.
And even if we accept this product as homeopathic (a determination that I am in no position to make) it is still only one product. I suppose that the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia. could be checked by someone with ready access to see if the product is included
The 2003 California appelate case of National Council against Health Fraud v. Botanical Laboratories, Inc. This is from the losers' own website. http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/filed_7.htm is instructive . The judges concluded "Appellant believes that no one should be allowed to market homeopathic remedies. Congress has decided otherwise, and officially recognizes the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia. Appellant’s broad-brush approach of sweeping all homeopathic remedies into a single bag marked "undesirable" simply does not work in the courts, where each claimed instance of unfair advertising and unfair business practice must be closely scrutinized. Appellant failed to present any admissible evidence in this case that respondents are guilty of false advertising and unfair business practices with respect to any of their products.."
Ec