The following article is from a UK online newspaper, The Independent.
__________________________________________________________
Alternative therapy is 'magic, not medicine'
By Jeremy Laurance, Health Editor
01 March 2002
Homoeopathy, the practice of treating ailments with highly dilute solutions of agents, is not medicine but magic, a review of research studies has found. People who consult homoeopaths and swallow their remedies are wasting their money and their time, according to the National Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York University.
An estimated 470,000 people use homoeopathic remedies in England every year, and their popularity is rapidly rising. The Royal Pharmaceutical Society estimated that over-the-counter sales of homoeopathic remedies reached £23m in 1998.
The government-funded centre at York University, which examines the evidence for treatments and issues advice to the NHS, reached its damning conclusion about the centuries-old treatment after examining 46 systematic reviews of research published in the past decade, encompassing 200 randomised controlled trials.
It concluded: "There is currently insufficient evidence of effectiveness either to recommend homoeopathy as a treatment for any specific condition, or to warrant significant changes in the current provision of homoeopathy."
The finding will add to the confusion and uncertainty surrounding complementary medicine. Although hugely popular with patients, many doctors remain sceptical. However, an increasing number have shown themselves prepared to suspend their scientific disbelief in favour of a pragmatic decision to provide patients with what they want.
A 1995 survey revealed that four out of ten general practices had links with complementary practitioners, and 6 per cent employed their own therapist. Surveys carried out since then suggest those figures are likely to be substantially higher today.
A separate study of homoeopathy in the treatment of 242 patients with asthma caused by house dust mite allergy, published in the British Medical Journal today, found it was no better than placebo in improving either breathing or quality of life. Previous smaller studies had suggested there was a benefit.
The study, led by Dr George Lewith, a noted supporter of complementary medicine and a senior research fellow at the Royal South Hants Hospital, Southampton, concluded: "In this double blind, randomised, controlled trial ... we have failed to confirm that this treatment is therapeutically efficacious."
The findings of the York centre review and the BMJ study were dismissed by homoeopathic organisations. Wendy Miller, executive director of the British Holistic Medical Association, said: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Maybe they haven't done enough studies of the right kind. Homoeopathy treats patients as individuals whereas in randomised controlled trials patients are lumped together in groups. So the randomised trials won't show up the effect of individual treatment."
The growth of complementary medicine has been one of the most powerful social trends of the past two decades, fuelled by increasing disillusion with conventional medicine, which has proved ineffective against many of the chronic illnesses of modern times.
It was backed by the influential BMJ, which in 1999 launched a guide to complementary medicine for doctors, with advice on what worked and what didn't. Use of the therapies was so widespread, it said, they could not be ignored.
However, the equally influential New England Journal of Medicine condemned complementary medicine and its practitioners for peddling untested, unregulated remedies that could pose risks to patients.
An investigation by the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee in 2000 concluded that the public needed protection from untested alternative remedies and rogue practitioners. It said homoeopathy was an "acceptable" therapy which should move towards statutory regulation.
'We don't treat diseases, we treat sick people'
I have been a practising homoeopath for 25 years and in scientific terms I believe the current is running strongly in our favour.
These two reports [from the York centre and the British Medical Journal] are a couple of setbacks but if you look carefully at them there is still some evidence of positive effect.
I am a medical doctor as well as a homoeopath and a specialist in rheumatology. I could do conventional rheumatology, and I do occasionally, but I would feel my right arm was cut off if I couldn't practise homoeopathy.
The finding of the BMJ study by George Lewith is disappointing but there were four previous studies all of which were positive. This is the biggest but I am inclined to say that it is four to one in favour of homoeopathy.
The key areas where there is a positive effect of homoeopathy are allergies, flu-like illnesses, arthritis and ileus (paralysis of the bowel after surgery).
The problem with all these studies is that they employ a simplified model of homoeopathy.
[In the BMJ study], all they did was determine which patients were allergic [to house dust mites] and treat them with the same homoeopathic remedy what we call isopathy, like for like treatment.
What any homoeopath would do in a real consultation is talk to the patient and treat them constitutionally rather than just treat the allergy. We don't treat diseases, we treat sick people. The principle of homoeopathy is to treat the ailment with an agent that produces similar symptoms. So for a patient with hay fever, you might use a remedy based on onion. You look for something that causes a similar effect the running eyes and streaming nose associated with hay fever which you also get when you chop onions.
What you are doing is giving the body information, stimulating and directing the body's own defences.
I believe the evidence in favour of homoeopathy as a whole is positive but the research is scattered and there is not all that much of it.
Two comprehensive reviews both said the evidence was positive overall but in any one condition it was insufficient. More research has to be done."
Dr Peter Fisher, 51, is clinical director of the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital and homoeopathic physician to the Queen (appointed November 2001).
© 2001 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd