赫尼曼認為，病人服用大劑量「引症療劑」，只會加重病情，故主張服用極度稀釋的療劑。他構思出一種稀釋並震盪的技術，並認為這樣能維持物質的治療特性，同時消除其對人體之害。赫尼曼認為這個過程會激發和增強「治療物質靈氣般的治療力」。[55]
1810年，他收集並出版了《治癒術工具論（英語：The Organon of the Healing Art）》（The Organon of the Healing Art）一書。此書完整記載他所發明的新治療技術。1921年，該書出版第六版，仍為今日的順勢醫師所用。
順勢療法看著可怕的對抗療法（Homeopathy watching horrors of Allopathy），1857年由Alexander Beydeman繪製。圖中歷史人物以及擬人化的順勢療法觀察著19世紀主流醫療行為的殘酷。
19世紀：盛行以及早期的批評
順勢療法鼎盛期為19世紀，1825年赫尼曼的學生-漢斯·布奇·葛蘭（Hans Birch Gram）[63]將之引進美國。1835年美國第一間順勢療法學院於成立，1844年美國順勢療法研究院（英語：American Institute of Homeopathy）成立，整個19世紀，歐美一共有數十間順勢療法研究院[64]。一直到1900年，美國仍有22所順勢療法學院以及15,000名順勢療法從業人員。[65]
不過即使在它最盛行的時期，順勢療法依舊受到許多科學家及醫生的批評。1843年，維多利亞女王的醫師-約翰福布斯爵士（英語：Sir John Forbes）（Sir John Forbes）認為該療法方劑極微小的劑量不止無效，甚至是「對人類理智的羞辱」[71]。詹姆斯·揚·辛普森（James Young Simpson）於1853年針對其療法的高度稀釋方劑表示：「無論是再強的毒藥，其十億分之一的劑量都不可能對人類甚至是蒼蠅造成一絲影響。」[72]。19世紀的醫師兼作家-老奧利弗·溫德爾·霍姆斯也是順勢療法的批評者，他於1842年發表了一篇標題為《順勢療法及其類似的錯覺（英語：Homœopathy and Its Kindred Delusions）》（Homœopathy and Its Kindred Delusions）[73]的評論文章。法國順勢療法協會的成員發現，1867年時，歐洲某些重要的順勢療法醫生不再開立極低劑量的順勢療法方劑，也不再為之辯護。[74]美國最後一所專門教授順勢療法的學校，於1920年關閉。[67]
20世紀：復興
根據學者 Paul U. Unschuld [de]和 Edzard Ernst（英語：Edzard Ernst） 的研究，德國納粹政權對順勢療法很有興趣，並挹注大筆資金研究其機制，但始終沒獲得正面結果。[75]Unschld 指出順勢療法從未在美國紮根，但卻在歐洲人的思想中更加根深蒂固。[76]美國1938年的《食品、藥物和化粧品法案（英語：Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act）》（由紐約參議員兼順勢療法醫生 Royal Copeland（英語：Royal Copeland） 發起）承認順勢療法方劑為藥物的一種。在50年代，美國僅有75名專門的順勢療法從業人員[77]，但到了70年代中後期，順勢療法捲土重來，相關產業業績增長近十倍。[77]
有人將順勢療法的復興歸功於希臘順勢療法醫師 George Vithoulkas（英語：George Vithoulkas），因為他在70年代進行了大量研究，來更新順勢療法的適用情境並完善其理論與實踐[78][79]，但 Ernst 和 西蒙·辛格 認為這次復興與新時代運動的興起有關[44]，Bruce Hood（英語：Bruce Hood） 則認為，這波流行可能是因為順勢療法醫師提供病人相對較長的看診時間，以及人們「天然」產品的偏好，而順勢療法方劑普遍被認為是天然的。[80]
非牟利組教育組織教育查詢中心（Center for Inquiry，CFI）聯同懷疑查詢委員會 （Committee for Skeptical Inquiry，CSI），向美國食物及藥品監督管理局（FDA）簽名請願，批評布瓦宏生產的藥物歐斯洛可舒能標籤及廣告誤導。加拿大的CFI呼籲覺得受順勢療法所害的人聯絡他們。[204]
Tuomela R. Chapter 4: Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience. Pitt JC, Marcello P (編). Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Rational Changes in Science: Essays on Scientific Reasoning 98 (Springer). 1987: 83–101. ISBN 978-94-010-8181-8. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4.
Ladyman J. Chapter 3: Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience. Pigliucci M, Boudry M (編). Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. 2013: 48–49. ISBN 978-0-226-05196-3. Yet homeopathy is a paradigmatic example of pseudoscience. It is neither simply bad science nor science fraud, but rather profoundly departs from scientific method and theories while being described as scientific by some of its adherents (often sincerely).
ref name="Hahnemann">Hahnemann, Samuel. The Homœopathic Medical Doctrine, or "Organon of the Healing Art". Dublin: W.F. Wakeman. 1833: iii, 48–49. Observation, reflection, and experience have unfolded to me that the best and true method of cure is founded on the principle, similia similibus curentur. To cure in a mild, prompt, safe, and durable manner, it is necessary to choose in each case a medicine that will excite an affection similar (ὅμοιος πάθος) to that against which it is employed. Translator: Charles H. Devrient, Esq.
Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias, Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy, The Lancet, 2005, 366 (9487): 726–732, PMID 16125589, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2引用錯誤：帶有name屬性「shang」的<ref>標籤用不同內容定義了多次
Paul S. Boyer. The Oxford Companion to United States History. [January 15, 2013]. ISBN 9780195082098. After 1847, when regular doctors organized the American Medical Association (AMA), that body led the war on "quackery," especially targeting dissenting medical groups such as homeopaths, who prescribed infinitesimally small doses of medicine. Ironically, even as the AMA attacked all homeopathy as quackery, educated homeopathic physicians were expelling untrained "quacks" from their ranks.
Hemenway, Henry Bixby, Modern Homeopathy and Medical Science, JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association, 1894, (11): 367, doi:10.1001/jama.1894.02420900001001
Hahnemann S, The Organon of the Healing Art 5th, aphorism 269, 1833, ISBN 0-87983-228-2.
Hahnemann S, The Organon of the Healing Art 6th, aphorism 270, 18421921, ISBN 0-87983-228-2
Yale University, Cushing/Whitney Medical Library. The logic of figures, or comparative results of homoeopathic and other treatments. Philadelphia, Boericke & Tafel http://archive.org/details/logicoffiguresor00brad. 1900. 缺少或|title=為空 (幫助)
A 12C solution produced using sodium chloride (also called natrum muriaticum in homeopathy) is the equivalent of dissolving 0.36 mL of table salt, weighing about 0.77 g, into a volume of water the size of the Atlantic Ocean, since the volume of the Atlantic Ocean and its adjacent seas is 3.55×108 km3 or 3.55×1020 L :
Emery KO, Uchupi E, The geology of the Atlantic Ocean, Springer, 1984, ISBN 0-387-96032-5
Shaw, D. M. Homeopathy is where the harm is: Five unethical effects of funding unscientific 'remedies'. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2010, 36 (3): 130–131. PMID 20211989. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.034959.
Altunc, U.; Pittler, M. H.; Ernst, E., Homeopathy for Childhood and Adolescence Ailments: Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2007, 82 (1): 69–75, PMID 17285788, doi:10.4065/82.1.69, However, homeopathy is not totally devoid of risks… it may delay effective treatment or diagnosis
Malik, Imtiaz A.; Gopalan, Sethuraman, Use of CAM results in delay in seeking medical advice for breast cancer, European Journal of Epidemiology, 2002, 18 (8): 817–22, PMID 12974558, doi:10.1023/A:1025343720564, CAM use [in the developing countries this study solely considered] was associated with delay in seeking medical advice (OR: 5.6; 95% CI: 2.3, 13.3) and presentation at an advanced stage of disease
Cucherat, M; Haugh, MC; Gooch, M; Boissel, JP, Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy. A meta-analysis of clinical trials. HMRAG. Homeopathic Medicines Research Advisory Group, European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2000, 56 (1): 27–33, PMID 10853874引用錯誤：帶有name屬性「pmid10853874」的<ref>標籤用不同內容定義了多次
Linde, K; Scholz, M; Ramirez, G; Clausius, N; Melchart, D; Jonas, WB, Impact of Study Quality on Outcome in Placebo-Controlled Trials of Homeopathy, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1999, 52 (7): 631–6, PMID 10391656, doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00048-7
Rosenthal, Robert, The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results, Psychological Bulletin, 1979, 86 (3): 638–41, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638
Milazzo, S; Russell, N; Ernst, E, Efficacy of homeopathic therapy in cancer treatment, European Journal of Cancer, 2006, 42 (3): 282–9, PMID 16376071, doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.09.025
Posadzki, P.; Alotaibi, A.; Ernst, E. Adverse effects of homeopathy: A systematic review of published case reports and case series. International Journal of Clinical Practice. 2012, 66 (12): 1178–1188. PMID 23163497. doi:10.1111/ijcp.12026.
Meta-analyses of studies comparing homeopathic remedies < 12C with placebo indicated a statistically significant (p < 0.05) WMD in favor of homeopathy on the time to first flatus.
Results. Combined analysis shows a duration of diarrhea of 3.3 days in the homeopathy group compared with 4.1 in the placebo group (P = 0.008). The metaanalysis shows a consistent effect-size difference of ∼0.66 day (P = 0.008).
A pooled analysis of two small studies suggests a possible benefit for clinical homeopathy, using the remedy asafoetida, over placebo for people with constipation-predominant IBS.Cochrane Database Syst Rev （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
The results of the studies as well as the case reports define a sufficient basis for discussing the possible benefits of homeopathy for patients suffering from fibromyalgia syndrome although any conclusions based on the results of this review have to be regarded as preliminary.
Forty percent of general practitioners in the Netherlands practice homeopathy. With over 100 homeopathic medical schools, homeopathy is practiced in India along with conventional Western medicine in government clinics. In Britain, 42% of general practitioners refer patients to homeopaths. [3] （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
Homeopathic medicine as a distinct system of medicine is recognised by law in Belgium (1999), Bulgaria (2005), Germany (1998), Hungary (1997), Latvia (1997), Portugal (2003), Romania (1981), Slovenia (2007) and the United Kingdom (1950). The laws in Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Romania and Slovenia explicitly allow the practice of homeopathic medicine to medical doctors only. In Belgium and Portugal the law does not exclude non-medical practitioners, but has not yet been implemented. In Slovenia, although the law permits medical doctors to practise homeopathic medicine, the medical association withdraws doctors』 licenses if they actually practise it.[4] （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
Patient satisfaction with treatment did not differ between AGPs and HGPs but was highest for patients treated with homeopathic medications only.In France, homeopathy is widely accepted for the treatment of ILI and does not preclude the use of allopathic medications. However, patients treated with homeopathic medications only are more satisfied with their treatment than other patients.[5] （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
Plus précisément, un Belge sur deux fait confiance à ce type de médecine non conventionnelle, dite 「douce」 et qui représente pour lui une solution efficace sans effets secondaires et dont l'innocuité rassure. Une étude Ipsos réalisée au mois de mai dernier démontre, de fait, une utilisation et une fidélisation croissantes du nombre d'utilisateurs de médicaments homéopathiques en Belgique.[6] （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
Selon une étude Ipsos, plus de quatre Belges adultes sur dix utilisent l』homéopathie (45%), contre 29% des enfants, et 20% pour les animaux de compagnie, rapporte le quotidien belge Le Soir.[8]
Consumers already accept and use homeopathic medicines for self care, as evidenced by annual US consumer expenditures of $2.9 billion on homeopathic remedies.[9] （頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
-->American College of Medical Toxicology; American Academy of Clinical Toxicology, Five Things Physicians and Patients Should Question, Choosing Wisely: an initiative of the ABIM Foundation (American College of Medical Toxicology and American Academy of Clinical Toxicology), February 2013 [5 December 2013], （原始內容存檔於2013-12-04）, which cites
Woodward, KN. The potential impact of the use of homeopathic and herbal remedies on monitoring the safety of prescription products.. Human & Experimental Toxicology. May 2005, 24 (5): 219–33. PMID 16004184. doi:10.1191/0960327105ht529oa.
i/ˌhoʊmiˈɒpəθi/[1]）為替代醫療的一種，被科學界認定是偽科學之一種並持續在科學界及支持者間引發爭論[2][3][4][5]。順勢療法認為，如果某個物質能在健康的人身上引起罹患某病的症狀，該物質即可用來治療此類疾病，此理論是「以同類來治療同類」，也稱為以同治同[6]。人類從19世紀中葉[7]起獲取的科學知識都與順勢療法相牴觸，包括物理、化學、生物化學及生物學[8][9][10]等。順勢療法方劑從生物化學的觀點來看是惰性的，對所有我們已知的疾病都沒有療效，但順勢療法認為疾病是源自於一種被山姆·赫尼曼醫師命名為「病蔭」的現象，與隨後科學發現疾病源自於病毒及細菌的觀點並不同，不過臨床試驗已經證實，順勢療法方劑沒有客觀的療效。[11][12][13]由於順勢療法的理論令人難以相信，且該療法缺乏可驗證的有效性，以致其在科學界及醫學界普遍被認為是不可信的。[4][14][15]
