Complementary medicine fails to defend itself

May 23rd, 2006 - 23:54 | 5 comments

The Guardian has the direct quotes I referred to this morning:

Dr Peter Fisher, clinical director of the Royal Homeopathic Hospital, told the programme: “I think what this suggestion amounts to is a form of medical apartheid: any therapy which can’t trace its origins to what is called the biochemical model should be excluded from the NHS.”

Then there’s this enlightened chap:

Terry Cullen, chairman of the British Complementary Medicine Association, said Prof Baum’s letter was “frustrating”.

He said: “It’s very frustrating that senior responsible people dismiss complementary medicine for the sole reason that it doesn’t have the definitive scientific proof that other drugs have. There is so much anecdotal evidence that thousands of people gain benefit from using complementary medicines. We shouldn’t dismiss that.”

Yes we bloody well should. The anecdotal evidence was looked at, and experiments were performed to see whether it has any basis in reality. It doesn’t. That’s all there is too it. Now we move on.

Incidentally, I know of a local homeopath who charges £90 per hour-long session, which ‘includes all remedies’. The remedy being, you know, water. I can only assume that the NHS is paying a similar amount.

Unfortunately, this kind of crap isn’t something that can be laughed off. Whether the espousal of complementary medicine is based in genuine belief or simply greed, it’s always insidious and it actively adds to the world’s suffering. No matter how eloquent the words of royalty, the voice of reason must speak louder.

-----

5 Responses to “Complementary medicine fails to defend itself”

1 Lil May 26th, 2006 at 10:00 pm

Someone on HIGNFY just said that in mitigation it probably reduces the amount spent on treating side effects of drugs ;P
Actually, I wonder if it has an effect on levels of drug resistance in the population, by stopping people taking antibiotics for less serious things like colds/flu..?

What do you think of complementary medicine treating more psychologically-based things like stress? (Like silly me who makes herself ill for no reason =P..)
2 Andrew May 27th, 2006 at 2:11 pm

Mmm, but the side-effects of drugs are, I’m sure, preferable to whatever is being treated. Nobody’s claiming that real medicine is perfect, but it’s the only reasonable way forward. The argument that it reduces the amount spent on treating side effects assumes that anybody is actually getting better, which they aren’t. Complementary medicine just results in more people still being ill. If antibiotics are overprescribed (which is debatable) then it’s up to doctors to fix that problem, and it doesn’t excuse the real harm done by alternative therapies.

I’m sure that they do help with stress. I bet any psychologist could tell you why, and it’s nothing to do with their supposed treatment, whatever it happens to be in the given case. From what I’ve read, it seems reasonable that a relaxing time spent with somebody who seems to care about helping you would be beneficial. But talking to a medically trained professional, or changes in lifestyle, or even valium, would work just as well. There’s no reason to think that any complementary medicine is doing anything unexplained by real medicine. Real medicine understands the causes of stress pretty well, and knows how to treat it without subscribing to magic-reiki-hand-waving or drinking water at £90 a glass.
3 Lil May 27th, 2006 at 5:16 pm

*pokes* reiki isn’t just hand-waving But yes of course all the explanations are a complete load of mumbo-jumbo, and the reason they work when they do is psychological (though I’m sure accurate acupuncture has something to do with affecting nerve endings)

I just think that if less serious illnesses can be cured using what is effectively a placebo effect (shh! don’t tell them that ;)..) rather than giving people loads of drugs for everything, it can’t be bad… But then, if they’re just highly expensive placebos, they should not be on the NHS (pay for them yourself!) - and shouldn’t be relied upon as a cure for more serious things

I’m still rather miffed I found out the truth about homeopathic potencies, as they were a very effective placebo for my random everyday making-myself-ill stuff ;P

As you may have noticed I appear to be deciding the entire future of English healthcare on the ability to make myself feel nauseous, so don’t take my ramblings seriously =P
4 Andrew May 28th, 2006 at 12:35 am

Just saw that HIGNFY episode, and the more I think about what the doctor said the weirder it seems. He says it’s cost-effective, but when it’s not actually helping people get better, how can that be a good thing? I guess he was talking about illnesses that require no real treatment, or something, but it wasn’t very clear! I liked how the audience applauded just because he sounded authoritative, though
Placebos are really tough, yeah. I don’t know if there is an answer. How do you create something complex enough to convince people they’re really being treated, but not so appealing that they forego real medical treatment in its favour? Maybe the NHS has that in hand, and there are plenty of placebo drugs out there already that we can’t be told about
5 Lil May 28th, 2006 at 1:36 pm

Hehe maybe they were just being polite, like when Jade Goody was on (or was that on 8 out of 10 Cats?) and thought she was being funny =P

Hahaha shhhh! You might be carted away by scary NHS officials ;D Sometimes I think my hayfever tablets are placebo drugs =P

Did you see HIGNFY a fortnight ago, when they mentioned the tortoise being sold with a house in Exeter (it’s also been on BBC news)? It belongs to someone in my team at work XD

-----

Commenting Policy: Thoughts, observations, argument, debate and all other conversational wonderments are encouraged, but personal attacks or general trolling will result in your comment being deleted and your account/IP banned. If you're nice, however, you get strawberries.