Homeopathy & ubiquitous bias

another retraction

The following paragraph is taken from the literature review component of my Master of Applied Health Science submitted September 2025….

---

Bias is not always permissible as a valid reason to retract a published homeopathic study.

https://academic.oup.com/oncolo/article/30/7/oyae252/7766099?login=false (1)

In 2022, due to readership incredulity that ‘it could not be true’¹

(highlighted above) The Oncologist (journal) announced an Issue of Concern for the Frass et al., (2020) Homeopathic Treatment as an Add-On Therapy May Improve Quality of Life and Prolong Survival in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Three-Arm, Multicentre Study.²

https://academic.oup.com/oncolo/article/29/11/e1631/7766098?login=false (3)

The validity of the study was confirmed via a formal Correction Notice³

(highlighted above). However, The Oncologist editors demonstrated their interpretative bias by not encouraging trial replication to solve the editorial puzzle of homeopathy’s only purported value as placebo. Bias further confirmed by the search for ‘pharmacologically active’ constituents within the disparagingly termed homeopathic ‘concoctions’ well known to not exist.⁴

‘‘ A demonstrated and noteworthy example of academic and scientific integrity being applied to a homeopathy trial despite clearly stated editorial bias against it ’’

until November 2025 when The Oncologist decided to retract.⁵

https://academic.oup.com/oncolo/article/30/11/oyaf364/8340391 (5)

This is not a new problem in homeopathy research.

For example, Macías-Cortés et al., (2015)⁶ reported both homeopathy and Fluoxetine as effective treatments for moderate to severe menopausal depression, and found that homeopathy, but not Fluoxetine, improved menopause symptoms.

This, the first research hospital based Double Blind Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial comparing homeopathy and biomedical treatment of peri and menopausal women and was retracted five years post publication…⁷

(IHT indicates Individualized Homeopathy Treatment) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32777857/ (8)

The retraction by the journal PLoS One was inexplicable to, and rejected by, Macías-Cortés et al., (2020) in part due to the original approving editor Professor Yiru Fang, an expert psychiatrist, having three decades of experience in depression research.⁸

See also:

The Australian report

Homeopathy & public perception

---

‘ In contrast to frequent claims, the available MAs of homoeopathy in placebo-controlled randomised trials for any indication show significant positive effects beyond placebo. Compared to other medical interventions, the quality of evidence for efficacy of homoeopathy was similar or higher than for 90% of interventions across medicine. Accordingly, the efficacy evidence from placebo-controlled randomised trials provides no justification for regulatory or political actions against homoeopathy in health-care systems. ’⁹

1. Figg, WD., and Bates, SE. (2025). Clinical trial results: each patient’s participation should count. Oncologist. Jul 4;30(7):oyae252. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae252

2. Frass, M., Lechleitner, P., Gründling, C, et al. (2020). Homeopathic Treatment as an Add-On Therapy May Improve Quality of Life and Prolong Survival in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Three-Arm, Multicenter Study. Oncologist. Dec;25(12):e1930-e1955. doi: 10.1002/onco.13548

3. Oncologist. (2024). Correction to: Homeopathic Treatment as an Add-On Therapy May Improve Quality of Life and Prolong Survival in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Three-Arm, Multicenter Study. Oncologist. Nov 4;29(11):e1631-e1632. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae253. Erratum for: Oncologist. 2020 Dec;25(12):e1930-e1955. doi: 10.1002/onco.13548. Erratum for: Oncologist. 2022 Dec 9;27(12):e985. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac221.

4. Figg, WD., and Bates, SE. (2025). Clinical trial results: each patient’s participation should count. Oncologist. Jul 4;30(7):oyae252. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae252

5. Retraction of: Homeopathic Treatment as an Add-On Therapy May Improve Quality of Life and Prolong Survival in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Three-Arm, Multicenter Study. Oncologist. 2025 Nov 11;30(11):oyaf364. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyaf364.

6. Macías-Cortés, C., Llanes-González, L., Aguilar-Faisal, L., et al. (2015). Individualized homeopathic treatment and fluoxetine for moderate to severe depression in peri- and postmenopausal women (HOMDEP-MENOP study): a randomized, double-dummy, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. PLoS One. Mar 13;10(3):e0118440. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118440. Retraction in: PLoS One. 2020 Apr 23;15(4):e0232415. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232415. Erratum in: PLoS One. 2015 May 04;10(5):e0127719. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127719

7. Macías-Cortés et al., (2020). Comment on [Retraction: Individualized Homeopathic Treatment and Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression in Peri- and Postmenopausal Women (HOMDEP-MENOP Study): A Randomized, Double-Dummy, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial] [Comment on a published article.] PLoS One. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/comment?id=10.1371/annotation/82077eec-9edb-403b-9b02-4d5d77d6dbae

8. Macías-Cortés EDC, Llanes-González L, Aguilar-Faisal L, Asbun-Bojalil J. Individualized Homeopathy for Depression in Climacteric Women: Comments on the Retraction by PLoS ONE. Homeopathy. 2020 Nov;109(4):267-270. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1714741

9. Hamre, HJ., Glockmann, A., von Ammon, K et al. (2023). Efficacy of homoeopathic treatment: Systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled homoeopathy trials for any indication. Systematic Rev. Oct 7;12(1):191. doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02313-2