By Manfred Mueller, MA, DHM, RSHom(NA), CCH
A few years ago, I was asked to be a consultant on the Research Review Committee and the Editorial Committee for an NIH educational grant on teaching complementary and alternative medicine at the Program on Integrative Medicine at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC. While working with this group, consisting mostly of medical faculty and staff, I noticed that academic texts on complementary and alternative medicine are written almost exclusively by academicians within conventional medicine — by authors lacking practical or personal experience with the field they write about. Furthermore, in the research articles I reviewed for the project, I repeatedly came across profound misrepresentations of the basic homeopathic tenets by established scientists who are writing about homeopathy.
I was pleasantly surprised to read, in 2003, an article on homeopathy by Prof. Anisur Rahman Khuda-Bukhsh in the Journal of Molecular Chemistry entitled, “Towards understanding molecular mechanisms of homeopathy.” I was impressed that he actually explained the laboratory technique of potentization in this article, unlike some of his western colleagues who seemed to work hard to obscure the difference between simple dilutions and potentization. Here was a scientist who had thoroughly understood the theoretical principles of homeopathy. He was not only clear about the key questions, but also had the ability to communicate his understanding with clarity and the necessary detail.