The onus of proof is on the person making the claim. It’s on the homeopaths to provide evidence that it does work. Many millions of dollars have been wasted trying to create this proof, but it has never stood up to basic scrutiny.
So it is therefore logical to assert that homeopathy doesn’t do what it claims to be able to do.
Further, many of the arguments used to justify the use of homeopathy aren’t internally consistent and are based on concepts that have no scientific validity.
The common distrust of conventional medicine and the assumption of Doctors and Big Pharma colluding to supply pharmaceuticals is patently ridiculous. This is in a system where Drs, pathology specimen collectors, pathologists, pharmacists, and pharmaceutical manufacturers are seperate entities with minimal contact between them.
However, the homeopathy practitioner is uncritically allowed to be the sole specimen collector and analyst, the only diagnoser, and the only prescriber and dispenser of “treatments”. They are also the only person that reviews the “treatment”. A homeopath is allowed and in fact encouraged to mark their own homework, while a network of specialists at arm’s length is treated with deep suspicion. Does this make sense? No.