Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Mar 8, 2010 10:43:26 GMT
Justin Trottier: Time to call time on homeopathy
Last week, the British Parliament's House of Commons Science and Technology Committee recommended to the British government that the National Health Service (NHS) of Britain, the funder for public health care, stop funding homeopathy. This is unprecedented in a country with four homeopathic hospitals and many homeopathic clinics run by the NHS; it should also be a wake-up call to Health Canada and their approach to licensing natural health products.
The British parliamentary committee has been meeting since October 2009 and has been focused on the evidence behind the policy choices that led to the funding of these dubious agencies. The committee found that evidence and science did not enter into the decision to fund homeopathy and as such investigated the claims made by homeopathy and the licencing of homeopathic preparations by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). They found no scientific evidence to support the government's past practises and in fact recommended that the currently licenced preparations that are coming up for review in 2013 be removed from the registry all together.
Homeopathy is based upon the scientifically invalidated idea, first proposed by Samuel Hahnemann around 1793, that "like cures like", whereby a homeopath matches the symptoms caused by a preparation with the symptoms of the patient. The preparation itself is an incredibly diluted water solution that is banged or “seccussed” in between each dilution, which homeopaths purport gives the water a “memory” of the original active ingredients. These dilutions are extremely small, with very small chances of any of the original ingredient being a part of the solution. Homeopathic researchers have failed to prove any physiological effect and all of their assertions run counter to the basic tenets of modern physics and chemistry.
The clinical trials that have been presented for homeopathy have shown, at best, very weak results, and the gold standard of scientific medicine, the randomized control trial, has been the nail in the coffin of homeopathic dilutions. Several researchers, such as Edzard Ernst from the University of Exeter, have undertaken systemic reviews of the available studies for homeopathic preparations and they have concluded that homeopathy is no better than placebo in treating any of the conditions studied. The licensure of these sugar pills in the UK has been based upon literature review, study reports, and homeopathic provings, which are nothing more than the accepted practices of homeopaths and have nothing to do with actual scientific proof. Those who continue to believe in this magical medicine are doing so in the face of a complete lack of scientific evidence.
The Science and Technology Committee has recommended that the MHRA, the British version of Health Canada or the FDA in the US, no longer license homeopathic preparations. They found that the standards by which homeopathic preparations are licensed in the UK bear no resemblance to the standards used to license actual pharmaceuticals.
Manufacturers have to show that homeopathic preps are safe, while pharmaceuticals must demonstrate that they are safe and effective. It is not hard to prove water safe, but this selling point for homeopathy is a red herring: what has no effect should have no side effects as well. The parliamentary committee is very unequivocal in its recommendations, and Health Canada should take notice and review its own process of ensuring that alternative medicines are “...safe, effective and of high quality.” In the light of the complete lack of effectiveness, homeopathic preparations should not enjoy the privilege
of licensing in Canada.
The Committee for the Advancement for Scientific Skepticism at the Centre for Inquiry Canada recommends taking a second look on how Canada licenses and approves these products and services in Canada. It should be obvious that prescribing medicine that relies on the placebo effect and contains no active ingredients runs counter to the concept
of informed consent that is paramount in modern medicine. Medical freedom does not exist without proper information on the treatments and procedures being offered by medical professionals. Homeopathy should be rejected as an effective treatment: there is nothing in it.
National Post
By Justin Trottier, Michael Kruse, Iain Martel, Justin Trottier and Pam Walls, of the Centre for Inquiry Canada, an organization for humanists, skeptics and freethinkers.
Read more: network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/07/justin-trottier-homeopathy.aspx#ixzz0ha3xV868
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.
Last week, the British Parliament's House of Commons Science and Technology Committee recommended to the British government that the National Health Service (NHS) of Britain, the funder for public health care, stop funding homeopathy. This is unprecedented in a country with four homeopathic hospitals and many homeopathic clinics run by the NHS; it should also be a wake-up call to Health Canada and their approach to licensing natural health products.
The British parliamentary committee has been meeting since October 2009 and has been focused on the evidence behind the policy choices that led to the funding of these dubious agencies. The committee found that evidence and science did not enter into the decision to fund homeopathy and as such investigated the claims made by homeopathy and the licencing of homeopathic preparations by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). They found no scientific evidence to support the government's past practises and in fact recommended that the currently licenced preparations that are coming up for review in 2013 be removed from the registry all together.
Homeopathy is based upon the scientifically invalidated idea, first proposed by Samuel Hahnemann around 1793, that "like cures like", whereby a homeopath matches the symptoms caused by a preparation with the symptoms of the patient. The preparation itself is an incredibly diluted water solution that is banged or “seccussed” in between each dilution, which homeopaths purport gives the water a “memory” of the original active ingredients. These dilutions are extremely small, with very small chances of any of the original ingredient being a part of the solution. Homeopathic researchers have failed to prove any physiological effect and all of their assertions run counter to the basic tenets of modern physics and chemistry.
The clinical trials that have been presented for homeopathy have shown, at best, very weak results, and the gold standard of scientific medicine, the randomized control trial, has been the nail in the coffin of homeopathic dilutions. Several researchers, such as Edzard Ernst from the University of Exeter, have undertaken systemic reviews of the available studies for homeopathic preparations and they have concluded that homeopathy is no better than placebo in treating any of the conditions studied. The licensure of these sugar pills in the UK has been based upon literature review, study reports, and homeopathic provings, which are nothing more than the accepted practices of homeopaths and have nothing to do with actual scientific proof. Those who continue to believe in this magical medicine are doing so in the face of a complete lack of scientific evidence.
The Science and Technology Committee has recommended that the MHRA, the British version of Health Canada or the FDA in the US, no longer license homeopathic preparations. They found that the standards by which homeopathic preparations are licensed in the UK bear no resemblance to the standards used to license actual pharmaceuticals.
Manufacturers have to show that homeopathic preps are safe, while pharmaceuticals must demonstrate that they are safe and effective. It is not hard to prove water safe, but this selling point for homeopathy is a red herring: what has no effect should have no side effects as well. The parliamentary committee is very unequivocal in its recommendations, and Health Canada should take notice and review its own process of ensuring that alternative medicines are “...safe, effective and of high quality.” In the light of the complete lack of effectiveness, homeopathic preparations should not enjoy the privilege
of licensing in Canada.
The Committee for the Advancement for Scientific Skepticism at the Centre for Inquiry Canada recommends taking a second look on how Canada licenses and approves these products and services in Canada. It should be obvious that prescribing medicine that relies on the placebo effect and contains no active ingredients runs counter to the concept
of informed consent that is paramount in modern medicine. Medical freedom does not exist without proper information on the treatments and procedures being offered by medical professionals. Homeopathy should be rejected as an effective treatment: there is nothing in it.
National Post
By Justin Trottier, Michael Kruse, Iain Martel, Justin Trottier and Pam Walls, of the Centre for Inquiry Canada, an organization for humanists, skeptics and freethinkers.
Read more: network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/07/justin-trottier-homeopathy.aspx#ixzz0ha3xV868
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.