trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Systematic reviews of clinical trials have found homeopathic remedies no more effective than placebo.

the verdict
CONTESTED PARTIAL
Recorded sources
2 sources for · 1 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that systematic reviews of clinical trials have found homeopathic remedies no more effective than placebo?

Partly. One systematic review of homeopathy trials found no clear evidence of homeopathic aggravations, and a parliamentary report favors RCTs and systematic reviews over patient satisfaction for judging efficacy. A separate set of homeopathic pathogenetic trials reported more remedy-specific symptoms than placebo, but these are not clinical efficacy trials.

Verdict: CONTESTED PARTIAL · 2 sources for, 1 against · Last checked

The private library was unavailable for some searches in this check. Missing library results are not evidence against the claim.

Evidence for · 2
Homeopathic aggravations: a systematic review of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials
2003
Get citation
Grabia, S. & Ernst, E. (2003). Homeopathic aggravations: a systematic review of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1475-4916(03)00007-9

Evidence against · 1
Homeopathic pathogenetic trials produce more specific than non-specific symptoms: results from two double-blind placebo controlled trials
2008
Get citation
Walach, H., Möllinger, H., Sherr, J., & Schneider, R. (2008). Homeopathic pathogenetic trials produce more specific than non-specific symptoms: results from two double-blind placebo controlled trials. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269881108091259

See more details
More for · 1
House of Commons - Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy - Science and Technology Committee
Get citation
House of Commons - Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy - Science and Technology Committee. (n.d.). publications.parliament.uk. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/45/4504.htm

Receipt History
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work