Dennis Ryan Posted over 1 year ago Should we let homeopathy be? It just goes to show, Peter, like many of the skeptics who denounce homeopathy, don't know what they are talking about. The principles used in the preparation of ultra-diluted medicines are in the public domain and have been for 200+ years. Changing the methodology cannot produce a medicine that could be patented. The Boiron company has patented the name oscillococcinum (an influenza prophylactic and therapeutic), but they cannot patent the medicine which comes from a source in the public domain. The majority of skeptics of homeopath are not speaking from personal experience, they are just regurgitating received "wisdom" or knowledge they have heard or read and then go on to repeat what they have heard or read. They tend to latch onto one element of homeopathy, usually the ultra-molecular dilution issue, and fail to understand the wider aspects that relate to the nature of disease and treatment. I am not interested in changing the skeptic's minds which are steadfastly and irrevocably made up. This is because they now BELIEVE what they spout. A belief is not knowledge, it is not science, it is not evidence it is a belief that has strong emotional attachments and forms part of the self image of the skeptic; and he/she is fully entitled to his belief. He/she is not entitled to denigrate others who do not share their belief.