Why the double attack on plausibility & Efficacy ?

             The skeptics on the one hand argue that in Double blind RCTs Homeopathy never been able to show results consistent enough to prove its efficacy beyond doubt. And on the other hand they attack,there is no plausible mechanism for the action of ultrahigh dilutions.                                                                    
                                 But both these observed* defects except suppression of  evidence with malicious intent, arise because of the 'observer effect' if we can use that term here. Homeopathic prescriptions are based not on the pathological diagnosis of a case. we need the individualized "Sense data" which is sensitive to observation. A sincere homeopath who knows his job can tell how difficult it is to prescribe a remedy to a nagging spouse,let alone to the volunteers at the RCTs who get the message, what is being tested is something who's efficacy is highly suspect. This obviously spoils patient cooperation rendering the atmosphere quite different from the clinical setup where extraction of the sense data is unhindered.When RCTs hence show poor results quite naturally every explanation of plausible mechanism becomes unsubstantiated in strictly scientific parlance especially if classical physics is made a model for such conformity.