The Gentle Art of Homeopathic Killing
Thursday, August 16, 2007
It is now over a year since Sense about Science, Simon Singh and the BBC Newsnight programme exposed how it is common practice for high street homeopaths to tell customers that their magic pills can prevent malaria. The Society of Homeopaths have done little to stamp out this dangerous practice apart from issue a few ambiguously worded press statements.The SoH has a code of practice, but my feeling is that this is rarely used to censure homeopaths and is therefore liable to mislead the public. If the SoH cannot deal with the malaria issue raised by Newsnight can the public expect them to deal with wider issues? .
As a quick test, I picked a random homeopath with a web site from the SoH register to see if they flouted a couple of important rules:
The homeopath I picked is called Julia Wilson and runs a practice from the Leicestershire town of Market Harborough. What I found rather shocked and angered me.48 • Advertising shall not contain claims of superiority.
• No advertising may be used which expressly or implicitly claims to cure named diseases.
72 To avoid making claims (whether explicit or implied; orally or in writing) implying cure of any named disease.
Straight away, we find that Julia M Wilson LCHE, RSHom specialises in asthma and works at a clinic that says,
Many illnesses and disease can be successfully treated using homeopathy, including arthritis, asthma, digestive disorders, emotional and behavioural difficulties, headaches, infertility, skin and sleep problems.Well, there are a number of named diseases there to start off. She also gives a leaflet that advertises her asthma clinic. The advertising leaflet says,
Conventional medicine is at a loss when it comes to understanding the origin of allergies. ... The best that medical research can do is try to keep the symptoms under control. Although creams and puffers can provide temporary relief, they are not offering your child a cure. Homeopathy is different, it seeks to address the triggers for asthma and eczema. It is a safe, drug free approach that helps alleviate the flaring of skin and tightening of lungs...Now, despite the usual homeopathic contradiction of claiming to treat causes not symptoms and then in the next breath saying it can alleviate symptoms, the advert is clearly in breach of the above rule 47 on advertising as it implicitly claims superiority over real medicine and names a disease.
Asthma is estimated to be responsible for 1,500 deaths and 74,000 emergency hospital admissions in the UK each year. It is not a trivial illness that sugar pills ought to be anywhere near. The Cochrane Review says the following about the evidence for asthma and homeopathy,
This is not a surprise given that homeopathy is just a ritualised placebo. Hopefully, most parents attending this clinic will have the good sense to go to a real accident and emergency unit in the event of a severe attack and consult their GP about real management of the illness.The review of trials found that the type of homeopathy varied between the studies, that the study designs used in the trials were varied and that no strong evidence existed that usual forms of homeopathy for asthma are effective.
However, a little more research on her site reveals much more serious concerns. She says on her site that 'she worked in Kenya teaching homeopathy at a college in Nairobi and supporting graduates to set up their own clinics'. Now, we have seen what homeopaths do in Kenya before. It is not treating a little stress and the odd headache. Free from strong UK legislation, these missionary homeopaths make the boldest claims about the deadliest diseases.
A bit of web research shows where Julia was working (picture above). The Abha Light Foundation is a registered NGO in Kenya. It takes mobile homeopathy clinics through the slums of Nairobi and surrounding villages. Its stated aim is to,
introduce Homeopathy and natural medicines as a method of managing HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria in Kenya.I must admit, I had to pause for breath after reading that. The clinic sells its own homeopathic remedies for 'treating' various lethal diseases. Its MalariaX potion,
is a homeopathic preparation for prevention of malaria and treatment of malaria. Suitable for children. For prevention. Only 1 pill each week before entering, during and after leaving malaria risk areas. For treatment. Take 1 pill every 1-3 hours during a malaria attack.This is nothing short of being totally outrageous. It is a murderous delusion. David Colquhoun has been writing about this wicked practice recently and it is well worth following his blog on the issue.
Let's remind ourselves what one of the most senior and respected homeopaths in the UK, Dr Peter Fisher of the London Homeopathic Hospital, has to say on this matter.
there is absolutely no reason to think that homeopathy works to prevent malaria and you won't find that in any textbook or journal of homeopathy so people will get malaria, people may even die of malaria if they follow this advice.Malaria is a huge killer in Kenya. It is the biggest killer of children under five. The problem is so huge that the reintroduction of DDT is considered as a proven way of reducing deaths. Magic sugar pills and water drops will do nothing. Many of the poorest in Kenya cannot afford real anti-malaria medicine, but offering them nonsense as a substitute will not help anyone.
Ironically, the WHO has issued a press release today on cheap ways of reducing child and adult mortality due to malaria. Their trials, conducted in Kenya, of using cheap mosquito nets soaked in insecticide have reduced child deaths by 44% over two years. It says that issuing these nets be the 'immediate priority' to governments with a malaria problem. No mention of homeopathy. These results were arrived at by careful trials and observation. Science. We now know that nets work. A lifesaving net costs $5. A bottle of useless homeopathic crap costs $4.50. Both are large amounts for a poor Kenyan, but is their life really worth the 50c saving?
I am sure we are going to hear the usual homeopath bleat that this is just a campaign by Big Pharma to discredit unpatentable homeopathic remedies. Are we to add to the conspiracy Big Net manufacturers too?
It amazes me that to add to all the list of ills and injustices that our rich nations impose on the poor of the world, we have to add the widespread export of our bourgeois and lethal healing fantasies. To make a strong point: if we can introduce laws that allow the arrest of sex tourists on their return to the UK, can we not charge people who travel to Africa to indulge their dangerous healing delusions?
At the very least, we could expect the Society of Homeopaths to try to stamp out this wicked practice? Could we?
Labels: homeopathy
3 Comments:
You think homeopathy is bad
Scientists based at McGill Cancer Centre sent a questionnaire to 118 lung cancer doctors to determine what degree of faith these practicing cancer physicians placed in the therapies they administered. They were asked to imagine that they had cancer and were asked which of six current trials they would choose. 79 doctors responded of which 64 would not consent to be in any trial containing Cisplatin - one of the common chemotherapy drugs they were trialling, (currently achieving worldwide sales of about $110,000,000 a year) and 58 of the 79 found that all the trials in question were unacceptable due to the ineffectiveness of chemotherapy and its unacceptably high degree of toxicity
The point is that the practice of medicine, whether conventional or "non-conventional" is always dependent upon the context of the culture within which it is practiced.
That means that each culture has criteria upon which it decides whether something is effective or not effective. And there are no 100 per cent reliable criteria to determine whether one particular treatment will benefit each individual who undertakes it.
At the moment, the litmus test for medicine in the west, is a scientific trial. However these trials are unreliable. I have friend with MS who has been presribed a cocktail of drugs, all of which are useless.
When researching the efficacy of these drugs I discovered none of them had been trialed by the drug companies on unhealthy frail individuals taking many other prescription drugs, the very people they would be presribed to.
Instead, drug trials are aimed first of all, at very healthy people who take no drugs at all. The target population in these situations receives a drug that has never been tested on them, and never been trialed in conjunction with all the additional drugs that this target population is presribed. So interactions and side effects are often unknown at the time the drug goes on the market.
If a side effect is not listed, then GPs often dismiss the side effects experienced by the patients who have been presribed the drug as it is not already included on the literature. Most new drugs on the market are therefore experimental by nature.
I think it is possible that hoemopathy is effective in many people with various complaints, although I would not choose to use it as a primary treatment or for maleria prevention.
The point is that the ability to "prove" a treatment, is always dependent on the criteria and avialability of proof at the time.
It is now possible to see changes in the brain during an MRI when someone is receiving acupuncture treatment. This "proof" was not available ten years ago. Does that mean that the changes in the brain now evident, did not take place?
Doubtless, until this scanning technique was developed many doctors would have vociferously denied that such brain changes could occur during acupuncture treatment. As they deny now that homeopathy or herbal medicine could possibly cause as any "real" physiological changes or be a factor in the restoration of health and treatment of disease.
What a wondefully straightforward commentary on an irresponsibly dangerous aspect of homeopathy. The fact that the medicines contain no medicine doesn't mean you can't die as a result of taking them.
Concerning Lawrence's comment on acupuncture, it has been known for ages that sticking a needle in yourself causes a signal in the brain. You don't need an expensive scanner to show that, and there is nothing new about it. Read any old textbook of sensory physiology. The fact that this signal exists tells you nothing whatsoever about the important question, which is 'does acupuncture help patients?'. The ancient principles of acupuncture are clearly sham. It seems that acupuncture is no more than a theatrical form of placebo.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home