Why is it any more difficult to test homeopathic products than any other medicine? Given that they're mostly indistinguishable from water, it should be easier to do a controlled trial.

Can you just shout this point out at an opportune moment? Or disguise yourself as one of the less enthusiastic Lords/Ladies and get in on the debate?

The system really doesn't work, does it?

Don't they refer to "proving" a remedy when they mean (their idea of) testing it out? They give it to healthy people and then see what happens, rather than testing it on people with the disease, I think.

If they can't do their background reading, wouldn't it be better if every Lord and Lady was assigned a Googler Pursuivant?

I know that prove can mean "test", but it is an odd term to use nowadays. Of course homeopathy is passed down as revealed truth, so you can't expect them to change anything.

You're probably right about the meaning of proof, but homeopaths have their own system of expressing dilutions: 100X, 30C etc.

I've just looked it up, and "the exception proves the rule" is actually a legal phrase meaning 'if you state an exception to an unwritten rule, you're confirming that the rule applies at other times'. According to this, anyway:

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/exception-that-proves-the-rule.html