Wikipedia under Fire for Writing against Homeopathy

by Yeshey Dong
Wikipedia under Fire for Writing against Homeopathy
Yeshey Dong
Start Page: 
End Page: 
Select license: 
Public Domain

Wikipedia is known for unbiased description of anything from mere speculation to the most tangible invention of man. It has also been cited as a source of many researches as it cites reliable basis of information taken from written and oral facts by studies, reviews and findings of credible individuals. The company may have suffered complaints on the inconsistency of grammar, sentence construction and claims as it gathers its contents from freelance contributors but according to a study conducted by Journal Nature, Wikipedia has shown enough reliability to be compared with Britannica. As stated in the results of the study, “Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us”.

Despite the doubts in its credibility, individuals are still sensitive on what Wikipedia writes since it has still the power to greatly influence. This is why a great number of people are aghast of what Wikipedia has to say about homeopathy.

As cited, Wikipedia has described the ethics and safety of homeopathy as “unethical”. Other cited description includes “utter idiocy, controversial, unapproved by FDA, fraud, no convincing scientific and clinical evidence among others”. Almost all the sentences starting each new topic in this page states negative phrases against the practice.

This obvious biased and prejudice presentation of data has inflamed many supporters of homeopathy. As mentioned by The Peterson Group, one of the leading sources of information on alternative, complementary and integrative medicines, there is a current strife among their members as pro and anti-homeopathy individuals are getting into heated argument on the open topic left by Wikipedia.

Netizens traced to as far as Jakarta, Indonesia and Australia have also called for a public petition to change the contents of Wikipedia’s description of homeopathy. With a disabled editing option, these netizens implore to correct ‘misleading’ information.

In their note, they emphasized, “Rather than promoting neutrality of information, which is the mandate of Wikipedia, the write-up on Homeopathy is based on misinformation, skepticism, and biased references. As many people rely on Wikipedia for information, especially the general public, they are left with a misleading and incorrect impression of Homeopathy.” They also ask Wikipedia to update their information by consulting classical homeopathic experts and appropriate references.

However, Wikipedia seemed to deny them of this and will continue doing so as its founder; Jimmy Wale has publicly expressed his disapproval of the medical practice and calls it fraud in a conversation he participated in Quora.

  • Recommend Us