NHS funding of homeopathy

Meanwhile back at Pulse someone claiming to be a medical GP has had the effrontery to trot out that classic piece of stupidity that vets' use of homeopathy proves it is not placebo.

That needs a firm rebuttal. It's a fiddle to format a reply while I'm away from my computer for a few days- iPhones are fine but they do not make proof-reading of long posts very easy and you can't write something off-line then paste it into a forum's text box. Maybe someone else would like to pick up the baton.
 
The latest development:

Homeopathy dirty tricks campaign mentioned in Parliament
http://www.badscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4421&sid=50dfb23c7efabb088098e1491d5a5646

Snippet (David Tredinnick, MP) -

I want to allow the Minister time to reply, because the fate of the Royal London Homeopathic hospital is of great concern internationally. I shall illustrate that, and the importance of the treatment, by looking at the results that have been achieved in Africa by homeopaths who have been trained at the hospitals that I have mentioned. Those results are especially instructive, as the homeopaths involved are treating patients with AIDS, HIV or other serious diseases such as malaria, in countries where the problems are very great.

For example, at Kendu bay in Kenya's Nyanza province, the Abha Light foundation is an organisation that partners mothers and orphans in the rural community who are suffering from AIDS, and it has had great success in returning those people to an active life. There has also been considerable success in the use of the local herb product called neem as a homeopathic medicine. It has produced what has been described as

"a convincing reduction in malaria attacks"

in a highly endemic area.
 
Who on earth elected that guy? :-O If I was one of his constituents I'd be demanding a surgery...
 
The latest development:

Homeopathy dirty tricks campaign mentioned in Parliament
http://www.badscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4421&sid=50dfb23c7efabb088098e1491d5a5646

Snippet (David Tredinnick, MP) -
Neem - that would be this article I presume.
Haven't a chance to look at it now.

What any of this has to do with NHS homeopathy is beyond me.
It's equivalent to saying that a maternity unit in Dundee should not be closed on economic grounds because a maternity unit in Kinshasa possibly might have successfully delivered 200 babies in one year.
 
Last edited:
Neem Drops, as used in the study:

http://www.abhalight.org/products/index.html

Neem Drops is a homeopathic alcohol-based tincture with many qualities. Helps in malaria, strengthens liver, pancreas & spleen, purifies the blood & good for many skin ailments. Neem is excellent for clearing out cases of chronic malaria. It's easy to take. Only 10 drops in a little water about ½ hour before meals.

No mention of homoeopathic strength as far as I can see.
 
Found it at last. A rebuttal? Certainly not. It hardly says anything about Shang et al, while trotting out the usual dog and pony show of homeopathy's canards (how's that for mixing zoological metaphors?).

I seem to recall we concluded that canards should be floated rather than trotted...
 
Neem Drops, as used in the study:

http://www.abhalight.org/products/index.html



No mention of homoeopathic strength as far as I can see.
They do say that homeopathic preparations "contain minute traces of the original compound" however. If such precision is good enough for David Tredinnick, it should be good enough for you.

PS I've posted about this study at badscience and at gimpy's.
 
If the current state of the ‘Homeopathy worked for me' campaign is anything to go by, it looks like the general public is pretty indifferent about retaining provision for homeopathy on the NHS.

So far, the campaign has managed to collect a paltry 6,527 signatures and its Chair, Michelle Shine, who was working to get 250,000 signatures to take to parliament in June 2008 for Homeopathy Awareness Week, has just resigned:
http://www.hmc21.org/phdi/p1.nsf/supppages/2555?opendocument&part=8

The responsibility for finding 17,391 new signatures every week until June appears to have passed to ‘classical homeopath’ Ursula Kraus-Harper. You can read more about her here…
http://www.homeopathymiltonkeynes.co.uk/

…and here:
http://www.badscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4134&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=45
 
I see that from their web site
As many of you know, Lancet reported in 2005 that five separate studies of homeopathy demonstrated no more than a placebo effect. It seems from mail I am getting from the UK and India this week that homeopathy’s collective non-response to this report has emboldened homeopathy’s critics and begun to erode homeopathy in the UK and Europe. It is also reported that Lancet is soon to report on homeopathy again.
Is this so? Anyone heard anything?
 
Last edited:
Another medical doctor/homeopath writes:

I am a medical doctor who has used homeopathic medicine for over 25 years and believe that homeopathy has a clinical effect independent of the placebo effect.

-snip-

….I say this to those who ridicule it because they believe it is ‘no better than placebo’: Homeopathy is not a ‘con’ because the thousands of medically qualified doctors practising it do believe that it is clinically effective and would not get results or bother to spend many years studying it if they did not believe in its clinically efficacity. I believe my patients get better because homeopathic medication works. To those who think that is only because I believe this that my patients get better I would say the following: How do you suggest that doctors get their patients better by getting them to believe that their health will improve?

-snip-

I find it deeply disturbing that Ernst and his colleagues would choose to attack homeopathy instead of working very hard indeed on this ‘systematic investigation’ in search of what they clearly believe is the healing power of the homeopathic consultation alone and then finding a way of teaching doctors to utilise it. Until then would it not be more logical to avoid attacking homeopathic doctors and campaigning against NHS homeopathy?

http://drkaplanarticles.blogspot.com/2008/03/placebos-self-induced-healing.html


Desperation seems to be setting in.
 
It would have been helpful if Kaplan had inserted his links correctly - they don't work. I agree that the research effort needs to be directed towards characterising the non-specific effects, although I don't think these are all that mysterious. He seems to be tacitly admitting that there are no specific effects, and if that's the case then he is lying to his patients.
 
From BlueWode's quote

I say this to those who ridicule it because they believe it is ‘no better than placebo’: Homeopathy is not a ‘con’ because the thousands of medically qualified doctors practising it do believe that it is clinically effective and would not get results or bother to spend many years studying it if they did not believe in its clinically efficacity.

There's that word 'belief' again. The greater thousands of qualified people who are convinced by the evidence that homeopathy is no more effective than placebo are completely outweighed by his 'belief'.

I cannot completely agree with Asolepius. Enough money and effort has been wasted on research into homeopathy. Let the homeopaths spend their own money. Instead I would like some work directed to study why presumably well trained and intelligent people can throw away the scientific method and believe something based on purely anecdotal evidence. Are they trained to believe in their own observations so deeply that they can discard logic? Are they led into this 'belief' slowly over a period of time or is it a sudden conversion? What can be changed in their training to avoid these pitfalls?
 
I cannot completely agree with Asolepius. Enough money and effort has been wasted on research into homeopathy. Let the homeopaths spend their own money.
I don't mean research into homeopathy per se, I mean research into how the consultation apparently produces beneficial effects. Note that I said it probably isn't very mysterious - homeopaths seem to counsel patients to do all sorts of things, such as changing diet, and the sugar pills are just the reminder to keep doing that.
 
I included the consultation in the process of homeopathy. You are right, we can guess what is happening, they are not curing anybody. We have enough clinical results to show little clinical and/or statistical benefit.

Another thing to consider is that no matter how the results of research into the 'face to face' part is presented, the homeopaths will scream 'It works'.

Part of the reason for the existence for homeopaths is financial, but it is the other part, the delusional component that interests me. Just how do they suspend their critical faculties to believe in the nonsense?
 
Part of the reason for the existence for homeopaths is financial, but it is the other part, the delusional component that interests me. Just how do they suspend their critical faculties to believe in the nonsense?


A combination of the following?

"Why Health Professionals Become Quacks"

It is especially disappointing when an individual trained in the health sciences turns to promoting quackery. Friends and colleagues often wonder how this can happen. Some reasons appear to be:

Boredom
Daily practice can become humdrum. Pseudoscientific ideas can be exciting. The late Carl Sagan believed that the qualities that make pseudoscience appealing are the same that make scientific enterprises so fascinating. He said, "I make a distinction between those who perpetuate and promote borderline belief systems and those who accept them. The latter are often taken by the novelty of the systems, and the feeling of insight and grandeur they provide" [1] Sagan lamented the fact that so many are willing to settle for pseudoscience when true science offers so much to those willing to work at it.

Low professional esteem
Nonphysicians who don't believe their professions is sufficiently appreciated sometimes compensate by making extravagant claims. Dental renegades have said "All diseases can be seen in a patient's mouth." Fringe podiatrists may claim to be able to judge health entirely by examining the feet. Iridologists point to the eye, chiropractors the spine, auriculotherapists the ear, Registered Nurses an alleged "human energy field," and so on. Even physicians are not immune from raising their personal status by pretension. By claiming to cure cancer or to reverse heart disease without bypass surgery, general physicians can elevate themselves above the highly trained specialists in oncology or cardiology. By claiming to heal diseases that doctors cannot, faith healers advance above physicians on the social status chart (physicians are normally at the top of the chart while preachers have been slipping in modern times). Psychologists, physicians, actors, or others who become health gurus often become darlings of the popular press.

Paranormal tendencies
Many health systems are actually hygienic religions with deeply-held, emotionally significant beliefs about the nature of reality, salvation, and proper lifestyles. Vegetarianism, chiropractic, naturopathy, homeopathy, energy medicine, therapeutic touch, crystal healing, and many more are rooted in vitalism, which has been defined as "a doctrine that the functions of a living organism are due to a vital principle ["life force"] distinct from physicochemical forces" and "the theory that biological activities are directed by a supernatural force." [2,3] Vitalists are not just nonscientific, they are antiscientific because they abhor the reductionism, materialism, and mechanistic causal processes of science. They prefer subjective experience to objective testing, and place intuitiveness above reason and logic. Vitalism is linked to the concept of an immortal human soul, which also links it to religious ideologies [4].

Paranoid mental state
Some people are prone to seeing conspiracies everywhere. Such people may readily believe that fluoridation is a conspiracy to poison America, that AIDS was invented and spread to destroy Africans or homosexuals, and that organized medicine is withholding the cure for cancer. Whereas individuals who complain about conspiracies directed toward themselves are likely to be regarded as mentally ill, those who perceive them as directed against a nation, culture, or way of life may seem more rational. Perceiving their political passions are unselfish and patriotic intensifies their feelings of righteousness and moral indignation [5]. Many such people belong to the world of American fascism, Holocaust deniers, tax rebels, the radical militia movement, and other anti-government extremists who would eliminate the FDA and other regulatory agencies that help protect consumers from health fraud. Liberty Lobby's newspaper The Spotlight champions such causes and also promotes quack cancer cures and attacks fluoridation.

Reality shock
Everyone is vulnerable to death anxiety. Health personnel who regularly deal with terminally ill patients must make psychological adjustments. Some are simply not up to it. Investigation of quack cancer clinics have found physicians, nurses, and others who became disillusioned with standard care because of the harsh realities of the side effects or acknowledged limitations of proven therapies.

Beliefs encroachment
Science is limited to dealing with observable, measurable, and repeatable phenomena. Beliefs that transcend science fall into the realms of philosophy and religion. Some people allow such beliefs to encroach upon their practices. While one may exercise religious or philosophical values of compassion, generosity, mercy and integrity (which is the foundation of the scientific method's search for objective truth), it is not appropriate for a health professional to permit metaphysical (supernatural) notions to displace or distort scientific diagnostic, prescriptive or therapeutic procedures. Individuals who wish to work in the area of religious belief should pursue a different career.

The profit motive
Quackery can be extremely lucrative. Claiming to have a "better mousetrap" can cause the world to beat a path to one's door. Greed can motivate entrepreneurial practitioners to set ethical principles aside.

The prophet motive
Just as Old Testament prophets called for conversion and repentance, doctors have to "convert" patients away from smoking, obesity, stress, alcohol and other indulgences [6]. As prognosticators, doctors foretell what is going to happen if patients don't change their way of life. The prophet role provides power over people. Some doctors consciously avoid it. They encourage patients to be self-reliant rather than dependent, but in doing so they may fail to meet important emotional needs. Quacks, on the other hand, revel in, encourage, and exploit this power. Egomania is commonly found among quacks. They enjoy the adulation and discipleship their pretense of superiority evokes.

Psychopathic tendencies
Studies of the psychopathic personality provide insight into the psychodynamics of quackery. Dr. Robert Hare who investigated for more than twenty years, states, "You find psychopaths in all professions. . . the shyster lawyer, the physician always on the verge of losing his license, the businessman with a string of deals where his partners always lost out." [7] Hare describes psychopaths as lacking a capacity to feel compassion or pangs of conscience, and as exhibiting glibness, superficial charm, grandiosity, pathological lying, conning/manipulative behavior, lack of guilt, proneness to boredom, lack of empathy, and other traits often seen in quacks. According to Hare, such people suffer from a cognitive defect that prevents them from experiencing sympathy or remorse.

The conversion phenomenon
The "brainwashing" that North Koreans used on American prisoners of war involved stress to the point that it produced protective inhibition and dysfunction. In some cases, positive conditioning causes the victim to love what he had previously hated, and vice-versa; and in other cases, the brain stops computing critically the impressions received. Many individuals who become quacks undergo a midlife crisis, painful divorce, life-threatening disease, or another severely stressful experience. The conversion theory is supported by a study of why physicians had taken up "holistic" practices. By far the greatest reason given (51.7%) was "spiritual or religious experiences." [8]

Many people -- including far too many health professionals, law enforcement officials, and judges -- exhibit a cavalier attitude toward quackery. Although most reject the idea that quackery is "worth a try" for a sick person [9], it is important to reinforce and mobilize those who understand quackery's harmful potential.

More...
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/quackpro.html


BTW, re this:
The latest development:

Homeopathy dirty tricks campaign mentioned in Parliament
http://www.badscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4421&sid=50dfb23c7efabb088098e1491d5a5646

Snippet (David Tredinnick, MP) -


There’s a great post on it over at this new blog:
http://majikthyse.wordpress.com/category/homeopathy/

:)
 
Last edited:
Homeopath Lulu gets serious with the Scilly Isles PCT

Thanks to Dr*T at the Bad Science forum for spotting this.

Lulu Badger of the Salisbury Homeopathic College – and member of the SoH…
Lulu’s passion for homeopathy, and her desire to promote a deeper understanding of the processes of health and disease are as strong today as they have ever been. She has successfully treated many, many conditions from minor ailments to life threatening diseases, from the infectious or contagious diseases to the deep seated chronic or auto-immune diseases.

http://web.mac.com/lulubadger/iWeb/Site/Lulu Badger - Homeopath.html


…writes to the Isles of Scilly PCT (Primary Care Trust) to ask if its failure to make provision for patients seeking treatment with “the very many highly qualified and successful” Cornish complementary and alternative medical practitioners is simply due to “prejudice borne of ignorance” concerning their practices. Of course, her main concern is about the Trust’s perception of homeopathy:
The molecule/no molecule problem is only a problem if those in judgement believe the universe to be governed by Cartesian or Newtonian laws of physics.

-snip-

During the last century, work in the field of quantum physics has made some extraordinary leaps (please pardon the pun) towards understanding the nature of the universe. Its very clear conclusions to date are that…

Long read...
http://web.mac.com/lulubadger/iWeb/Site/Letter to the PCT.html


I wonder why she hasn’t published the PCT’s reply. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
If I was clever and knew science and stuff, I'd write an intelligent comment on this latest update. But I'm not, so I'll just say;

Lulu. No-one cares what you think. Go away, you fossilised irrelevancy.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom