MD Lundberg states at medpagetoday.com in "The Accidental Genius of Homeopathy"(2011-06-07):
"[transcript] why is homeopathy rubbish? In classical homeopathy [...] a chemical substance theorized to be possibly effective against a particular malady [...is] diluted and shaken repeatedly until the chemical initially placed into the water has been so diluted that none of its molecules can be found by chemical analysis [...and is] then administered to a patient by a healer who believes fervently that it will be therapeutically active in fundamental violation of the laws of physics [...] all thoughtful physicians I know consider the historical theory and philosophy of homeopathy to be rubbish, balderdash, preposterous, BS [...] NOT PLAUSIBLE [...and] not even worth testing for safety and efficacy [...he speaks of] homeopaths and their related ilk [...] a competent-seeming, confidence-oozing, self-labeled healer who listens with empathy, communicates well, and radiates good will, who then doles out pretty, colored, distilled water [...] safety in homeopathy would not seem to be a problem, save for possible delays to treatment for some serious malady for which allopathic medicine has effective, safe treatment."
Note: yes, rubbish -- empty remedies falsely posed as medicinal. But using the 'allopathic' label upon modern medicine to me rings false. It's as accurate as labeling modern chemistry alchemy. And I think it plays into the homeopathic camp's nonsensical typification of modern science-based medicine, because allopathy was the tail-end of archaic humoralism philosophy and such heroic and now-a-days seen-as-wacky measures around the year 1800.