Analysing the Conflict between Biomedicine and Homeopathy

The broad objective of this research project is to understand conflict and conflict management and to apply that knowledge to the conflict between biomedicine and homeopathy. My presentation examines a variety of theoretical frameworks around conflict. Initially examining conflict as a topic and its historical role in war and politics alongside new strategies used currently, I bring to light an understanding of conflict in general. Using the perspective of Gandhi’s non-violent resistance, Clausewitz’s strategy on war, Machiavelli’s political strategic considerations and Sun Tzu’s Art of War, I disclose how conflict has been managed historically, what strategies have been used to succeed and what mistakes have resulted in defeat. I have chosen to study military and political conflict strategies because biomedicine currently has the power to marginalise other therapeutic approaches, such as homeopathy, using strategies usually reserved for war and politics.

Through the available body of information from the NHMRC report, I will disclose how orthodox medicine is using its dominant position to write reports and make claims as a mechanism of exclusion, a strategic plan to marginalise homeopathy. I will look at the strategies used by orthodox medicine to gain dominance and the deficiency of homeopathy’s approach culminating in its lost position.

Homeopathy fundamentally challenges the implicit assumption of biomedicine (that disease is to be fought) with its intrinsic principle of symptom similarity. Ironically, vaccination sits as a centerpiece expression of this principle. From my own experience as a homeopath I suggest the Law of Similars as a mechanism for conflict resolution.

Conclusions drawn from this investigation may provide novel approaches to conflict resolution and a theoretical framework where rapprochement between biomedicine and homeopathy may be possible.

Keywords: Conflict, strategy, biomedicine, homeopathy, rapprochement