3 ms·
Though I can believe there being a preference toward reducing competition, their argument is weakened by including homeopaths as maligned groups. Homeopaths ar
by MereInterest 6y ago
Though I can believe there being a preference toward reducing competition, their argument is weakened by including homeopaths as maligned groups. Homeopaths are not competitors with physicians, as that would imply that homeopaths provide medical treatment. At best, homeopaths provide a placebo. At worst, they actively poison customers (e.g. belladonna teething tablets) and prevent them from seeking out actual medical care.
- wonder_er 6y agoI believe the article addresses approximately your point: AMA's initial drive to increase physician incomes was motivated by increasing competition from homeopaths (AMA allopaths use treatments--usually synthetic--that produce effects different from the diseases being treated while homeopaths use treatments--usually natural--that produce effects similar to those of the disease being treated). [...] Apart from reversing rapidly declining incomes, allopaths also wanted to rescue their public reputations, which quite reasonably suffered given their proficiency in killing patients through such crude practices as bloodletting ("exsanguination") or mercury injections (poisoning). You're right - homeopaths were competitive with allopaths. But in the late 1800s (when most of the doctors/homeopaths grew up) the state-of-the-art physician was not much better (and perhaps often far worse) than what you are judging homeopaths.
- nmca 6y agoWhether homeopathy works (it doesn't) doesn't have a huge amount of bearing on whether homeopaths compete in the market with physicians (they do), because their customers are seeking the same thing.