Abstract
In June 2019, the journal PLoS ONE retracted an original research article, published
in 2016, which described the effects of homeopathic Arnica montana on interleukin-4 treated human macrophages. The results showed an increase in extracellular
matrix gene expression, including the gene encoding fibronectin, which is one of the
main proteins involved in connective tissue healing. Here, the authors of the article
discuss the critical points raised by the journal in the retraction note, with a focus
on the specific methodological aspects of research on high dilutions of natural compounds.
The editorial arguments made to justify the retraction did not prove any methodological
errors, nor scientific misconduct. As a general rule, when a study published by a
group of researchers raises scientific doubts because the results appear at variation
with the commonly accepted knowledge in a field, the study is repeated by other scholars
and any contrasting results are published and/or discussed. Therefore, retraction
of the Arnica m. study by PLoS ONE is a violation of the conventions of scientific publication and
knowledge-sharing methods derived from honest experimental method.
Keywords
Arnica montana
- gene expression - paper retraction - homeopathic dilutions - scientific literature
