top of page

By:

Subhash Kaushik and Kishore Paknikar

21 August 2024 at 11:16:39 am

Homoeopathy, As We Know It

When NASA searches for life beyond Earth, it speaks of searching for “life, as we know it.” Those five words capture one of the most important principles of science. If life exists elsewhere in the universe, it may not resemble the life we know on Earth. Scientists therefore do not search for the unknown using yesterday’s assumptions. They search with better instruments, better questions, and an open mind. The same principle has guided every major scientific breakthrough. Every generation...

Homoeopathy, As We Know It

When NASA searches for life beyond Earth, it speaks of searching for “life, as we know it.” Those five words capture one of the most important principles of science. If life exists elsewhere in the universe, it may not resemble the life we know on Earth. Scientists therefore do not search for the unknown using yesterday’s assumptions. They search with better instruments, better questions, and an open mind. The same principle has guided every major scientific breakthrough. Every generation mistakes the limits of its instruments for the limits of nature. Microorganisms influenced human life long before the microscope revealed them. Most stomach ulcers were blamed on stress until the discovery of Helicobacter pylori changed medicine forever. Casting Aspersions The same lesson applies to homoeopathy. For more than two centuries, homoeopathy has occupied a unique place in medicine. It has been practised across the world, integrated into healthcare systems in many countries and trusted by millions of patients. At the same time, it has remained one of the most debated systems of medicine. Critics have questioned not merely whether it works, but whether it could work at all. Most medical debates begin after a treatment has shown some benefit. Homoeopathy has often been judged before the scientific discussion could move beyond its proposed mechanism. Homoeopathic medicines are diluted to such an extent that little or none of the original substance is expected to remain. If almost nothing remains, how can anything produce a biological effect? Judged by the chemistry and analytical methods available during the nineteenth and much of the twentieth century, that conclusion appeared entirely reasonable. Science, however, does not stand still. Its greatest strength is not certainty but self-correction. New instruments often compel scientists to revisit old conclusions. Advances in nanoscience, materials science and analytical chemistry now allow researchers to examine highly diluted preparations in ways that earlier generations simply could not. Research from India and other countries has reported observations, including measurable physicochemical features in some highly diluted preparations, that have reopened scientific discussion. Not every finding has been independently reproduced, and many questions remain unanswered. Yet one conclusion is becoming increasingly difficult to dismiss. The scientific basis for rejecting homoeopathy without further investigation is no longer as strong as it once appeared. Changing Perceptions Yesterday’s science asked whether homoeopathy was possible. Today’s science is increasingly asking how highly diluted preparations should be investigated using the best tools available. The placebo argument deserves similar attention. Critics frequently argue that any benefit observed with homoeopathy is simply the placebo effect. There is no doubt that placebo is real. Confidence in a physician, expectation of recovery, and the body’s own healing mechanisms influence outcomes in every branch of medicine. More than two centuries ago, physicians recognized that nature itself plays a powerful role in healing. That observation applies not only to homoeopathy but to every therapeutic system, including modern medicine. Homoeopathy has been reported to produce responses not only in adults but also in infants, animals and even plants, where expectation and belief cannot readily account for the observations. These reports do not, by themselves, prove the effectiveness of homoeopathy. Scientific conclusions require rigorous, reproducible and independently verified evidence. They do, however, raise a legitimate scientific question. If placebo cannot adequately explain every reported observation, what does? The answer cannot come from opinion. It can come only from careful scientific investigation. This is precisely how science has always progressed. It does not reject difficult questions because they challenge accepted thinking. Nor does it accept extraordinary claims without evidence. It designs better experiments. India is uniquely positioned to lead this next phase of inquiry. It possesses one of the world’s largest networks of qualified homoeopathic physicians, teaching institutions, hospitals and patients. Equally important, it has created a dedicated research ecosystem through the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH), the apex research organisation under the Ministry of Ayush, Government of India. Its mandate is neither to defend tradition nor to promote belief. Its responsibility is to generate credible evidence through laboratory research, well-designed clinical studies, public health investigations and collaborations with leading scientific institutions. The history of science repeatedly reminds us that ideas are not accepted because they are popular, nor rejected because they are unconventional. They are judged by evidence. Homoeopathy should be no exception. It should neither receive special privilege nor face special prejudice. It should be subjected to exactly the same standards expected of every other branch of medicine. That is the spirit in which this article has been written. One of us comes from a lifetime devoted to homoeopathic research, education and patient care. The other has spent decades in mainstream scientific research, institution building and promoting scientific temper. We share neither blind faith nor blind scepticism but a commitment to the scientific method. The larger lesson extends far beyond homoeopathy. Scientific progress depends on a willingness to revisit yesterday’s conclusions when today’s evidence demands it. Every generation mistakes the limits of its instruments for the limits of nature. The history of discovery is, in many ways, the history of overcoming those limits. Homoeopathy may ultimately confirm some long-held beliefs. It may equally challenge others. Science must remain prepared for either possibility. What it cannot afford is to stop asking questions simply because the answers appear inconvenient. Research does not exist to protect ideas. It exists to test them. Homoeopathy has earned that test. It deserves to be judged by the best evidence that twenty-first century science can generate, not by the limitations of nineteenth-century knowledge. (Dr. Kaushik is the Director General, Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy (CCRH), Ministry of Ayush, New Delhi; Dr. Paknikar is the Member, Scientific Advisory Board, CCRH, N. Delhi and ANRF Prime Minister Professor, COEP Technological University, Pune. Views personal.)

The Currency Called Trust

Trust is one of the economy’s most valuable yet least visible assets. It underpins everyday interactions between individuals, businesses, and institutions, making lending, investment, trade, and long-term partnerships possible despite incomplete information. Built through strong institutions, sound governance, and shared social norms, trust reduces uncertainty, lowers transaction costs, and encourages cooperation. When trust is high, markets function more efficiently and growth is stronger; when it erodes, uncertainty rises and economic activity slows.


Stable Foundation

It reduces the need for excessive checks, legal safeguards, and constant monitoring, saving time and money while creating the confidence needed to invest, collaborate, and plan for the future. In doing so, trust provides the stable foundation on which prosperous economies are built.

Kenneth Arrow, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, highlighted the importance of trust by noting that nearly every commercial transaction depends on it, especially when commitments extend over time.


Economists today increasingly view trust as an important form of capital. Along with physical capital (infrastructure and machinery), human capital (skills and knowledge), financial capital (money and investments), and social capital (networks and relationships), trust is often considered a fifth form of capital.


Research consistently shows a strong connection between trust and economic growth. Countries with higher levels of trust generally achieve faster growth in income and productivity. Studies suggest that a 10 percent increase in the share of trusting people can raise annual per capita GDP growth by about 0.5 percent.


A business succeeds because of the trust it earns from its employees, customers, investors, and regulators. Trust strengthens a brand, builds customer loyalty, and reduces sensitivity to price changes. It also helps companies attract investment at lower costs and improves employee commitment and productivity. On the other hand, when trust is broken through scandals or poor governance, businesses can face financial losses, stricter regulations, and long-lasting damage to their reputation.


To understand the economics of trust in India, it is useful to observe how many everyday transactions rely on relationships rather than formal contracts. For years, economic activity has been supported by strong community ties and mutual confidence. A good example is the local kirana store, where shopkeepers often extend credit to regular customers based on personal trust rather than formal credit checks. Another example is the Mumbai Dabbawalas, who deliver thousands of lunchboxes daily with exceptional accuracy. Their success depends not on advanced technology or complex agreements, but on trust, accountability and shared values.


Traditional economic theory assumes that buyers and sellers have equal access to information. In reality, consumers often find it difficult to assess the quality, safety, or reliability of products and services before making a purchase. To bridge this gap, markets depend on trust-building mechanisms such as brand reputation, warranties, customer reviews, and third-party certifications.


When trust is low, the economic costs are significant. Businesses and individuals spend more on monitoring, legal safeguards, compliance, and fraud prevention, increasing the cost of transactions and reducing efficiency. Low trust also discourages companies from working with unfamiliar partners, making it harder to build strong supply chains and expand into new markets.


India is undergoing a significant transition from traditional, relationship-based trust to digital and institutional trust. This transformation is being powered by the country’s Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), commonly known as India Stack. Today, people can make secure and instant transactions without relying on personal relationships. The Unified Payments Interface (UPI) has been at the center of this change, making digital payments fast, convenient, and reliable while reducing dependence on cash and lengthy banking procedures.


The JAM Trinity, consisting of Jan Dhan accounts, Aadhaar, and mobile connectivity, has strengthened financial inclusion and created a robust digital identity framework. Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) enables government benefits to reach citizens directly, reducing leakages and improving confidence in welfare delivery. DigiLocker offers a secure platform for storing and verifying documents, while ONDC is building an open and trusted digital ecosystem for e-commerce.


As economies become increasingly digital, trust is gradually shifting from personal relationships to technology-based systems. Innovations such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and blockchain are transforming the way individuals, businesses, and institutions interact. AI is already being used in areas such as credit evaluation, financial services, and supply chain management. For AI to gain widespread acceptance, it must be transparent, reliable, and free from bias.


The experience of high-trust countries such as Japan and the Nordic nations highlights the economic value of trust. When people trust institutions and one another, business transactions become faster, costs decline, and cooperation improves. This results in more efficient public services, smoother business operations, and stronger long-term growth. Political scientist Francis Fukuyama also emphasized that trust is a key determinant of a nation's prosperity and competitiveness.


Building Trust Capital

For India, fostering social cohesion, strengthening institutions, and encouraging inclusive growth will be essential for building trust and achieving sustainable economic progress in the years ahead.


It will also depend on building strong trust capital across society, institutions, and the economy. The first pillar is institutional trust. Businesses and investors need confidence that contracts will be enforced fairly and disputes resolved quickly. Delays in contract enforcement and dispute resolution continue to be a major challenge. To address this, the Government has introduced initiatives such as e-filing, electronic case management, mediation mechanisms, and the Enforcing Contracts Portal. While these are positive steps, the pace of reform needs to accelerate.


The second pillar is digital trust. Platforms such as India Stack, UPI, Aadhaar, DigiLocker, and the eRupee have transformed the way citizens and businesses interact. As India’s digital economy expands, strong data protection, cybersecurity, and privacy safeguards will be essential to maintain public confidence. The third pillar is social trust. Sustainable development requires social harmony, equal opportunities, and inclusive growth. Excessive inequality, polarization, and social divisions can weaken cooperation and reduce economic progress.


As India moves towards 2047, a high-trust economy will be the foundation on which India's long-term prosperity and global competitiveness are built.


(The writer is a Chartered Accountant with a leading company in Mumbai. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page