Thanks for your comments. To take them in turn.

1. If they aren’t trying to change anyone’s mind about homeopathy then what’s the point? If people believe that the remedies are effective then they will continue to buy them, Boots are just responding to an existing market. Take away that market and they’ll stop selling them. I don’t agree that people shouldn’t be allowed to buy things which are ineffective, unless they are being advertised as doing something they don’t. As far as I’m aware (and I’d welcome information to the contrary) Boots just label up homeopathic remedies with the ingredient of the base it’s made from and the fact that it’s homeopathic, they’re not claiming that it will do anything. You could argue that homeopathic remedies should have a warning “Does not actually contain any active ingredients” but that’s a matter for regulation, not for Boots.

2. That’s the sort of argument which allows believers in all sorts of nonsense to discount the claims of sceptics. To homeopaths, their logic is perfectly sound and many sceptical arguments against it can just be rejected immediately without thought because what they actually say isn’t followed.
Homeopathy isn’t just repeated dilution, there are specific mechanisms which are supposed to be followed during the process. Now, you and me will say that those mechanisms don’t make any difference, but that doesn’t mean you can just ignore them as to homeopathic believers they are the essence of the process.
If you do everything according to their rules and it still doesn’t work, then you’ve got them. It’s an onerous process, particularly if those rules don’t make much sense, but it’s the only way to do it.

3. Absolutely, and that’s something which should strongly continue. That’s not something which is being targeted by this campaign though that I can see. We should be highlighting that taking homeopathic medicine isn’t going to project you from diseases like Malaria, not showboating for the press.

4. I’d be incredibly surprised (and shocked) if you found an actual pharmacist in Boots who claimed that homeopathic remedies are medicines, any more than they would claim that shampoo is medicine. Boots are a general store which contains a pharmacy but they sell lots of other things as well.

1) I don’t believe for a minute that the aim of the 10:23 campaign is to change homeopaths’ minds. The aims are more to a) highlight that Boots are selling pseudo-medicines knowing that they are inert and b) to demonstrate the absurd nature of homeopathic remedies (there’s nothing in it.)

2) It is only a straw man if you accept the validity of homeopathic arguments. The fact that the overdose will ‘not work’ according to the internal logic of homeopaths is irrelevant since this logic is so obviously flawed. The campaign demonstrates the pills do not work according to real world logic.

3) Critics have highlighted very clearly in the press that homeopaths should not be treating diseases such as malaria. It is essentially fruitless as the homoeopathic authorities will do nothing about it an most of what goes on is outside of the jurisdiction of UK bodies.

4) I have some sympathy with the problems of ‘playing with medicine’, but one has to balance that against the fact that homeopathic pills are not medicines and that it is also irresponsible for Boots and their pharmacists to claim that they are.