INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy.

Homeopathy

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Message
Author
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1201 Postby Alan H » July 23rd, 2017, 11:47 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Tetenterre wrote:
Did you hear Helen Beaumont on R4 Today programme yesterday?
Yes, all the usual nonsense and misleading guff. She was wrong saying that someone abstained on the HoC homeopathy report. One person did vote 'no' but no one abstained. A detail perhaps, but she still got it wrong. But it's the usual tactic of attacking the messenger... Also, the 6,500 survey she lauded perhaps didn't quite say what she thinks it does.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3231
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Homeopathy

#1202 Postby Tetenterre » July 23rd, 2017, 11:56 am

My thoughts as well - I think there has been some agreement among homeopaths to keep hammering on that there is evidence from RCTs that it works (but they never seem to be able to cite it). Then we had the "you don't have a complete understanding" tripe. I think we've been here before re the 6500 survey; it is serially misrepresented by quacks (a bit like the Gotzsche "medicine is the 3rd biggest killer" opinion).

I wonder if HRH "Right Charlie" has intervened yet...
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1203 Postby Alan H » July 23rd, 2017, 12:05 pm

Tetenterre wrote:My thoughts as well - I think there has been some agreement among homeopaths to keep hammering on that there is evidence from RCTs that it works (but they never seem to be able to cite it). Then we had the "you don't have a complete understanding" tripe. I think we've been here before re the 6500 survey; it is serially misrepresented by quacks (a bit like the Gotzsche "medicine is the 3rd biggest killer" opinion).

I wonder if HRH "Right Charlie" has intervened yet...
I'd love to see his consultation response...
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1204 Postby Alan H » August 11th, 2017, 10:55 pm

Got a mention in New Scientist this week on the Feedback page.

A previous column had pondered scentless perfumes:
Eau no

“SURELY the scentless perfume from Josie Maran (3 June) is the perfect gift for a female homeopath,” writes Dave Hulme. We’re sure there are versions pour femme and pour homme, Dave. But how to tell which is which?

My reply was published this week:
Non-scents

A SOLUTION to our perfume problem has wafted in. “You pondered how to tell pour homme and pour femme scentless perfumes apart (29 July),” writes Alan Henness. “If they are homeopathic, you need ponder no more.”

Alan says that Kate Chatfield, a senior lecturer in homeopathy at the University of Central Lancashire and representative of the Society of Homeopaths, answered this very question before the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee.

Quizzed by Lord Broers on whether it was possible to distinguish between homeopathic drugs after they have been diluted, Chatfield replied: “Only by the label.”
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1205 Postby Alan H » September 8th, 2017, 7:52 pm

I got another mention in the irreverent Feedback column of the New Scientist this week:
Off label

PREVIOUSLY John Cartmell suggested a cost-saving idea, that a homogeneous stock of homeopathic remedies could be labelled at the point of sale according to whatever the customer wanted to order (26 August).

Alan Henness suggests that another option would be to simply label them as confectionery. In fact, this idea has already been proposed by one manufacturer, says Alan, “when they were having some, ahem, ‘regulatory difficulties’ a few years ago“.

“Maybe they could add real ingredients to give them different flavours?” he says. Better yet, thinks Feedback, why not cut out the middleman and just sell the labels, to be attached to whatever substance the customer wishes to empower with some homeopathic potential?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1206 Postby Alan H » October 25th, 2017, 9:38 pm

Only just found this out: Enfield CCG decided to decommission homeopathy at their Governing Body meeting on 20 September.

2017-10-25_21h28_30.png
2017-10-25_21h28_30.png (10.26 KiB) Viewed 944 times


And there is a new consultation announced yesterday, this time by CCGs in South West Yorkshire.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1207 Postby Alan H » November 30th, 2017, 3:00 pm

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1208 Postby Alan H » March 13th, 2018, 11:07 am

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 23085
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Homeopathy

#1209 Postby Alan H » June 5th, 2018, 5:02 pm

The British Homeopathic Association have just lost their Judicial Review against the decision by NHS England on their consultation on homeopathy.

The written ruling is here.

NHS England statement:

NHS England welcomes homeopathy court ruling
NHS chief Simon Stevens has today welcomed the High Court’s decisive rejection of a legal challenge by the British Homeopathic Association to overturn plans to no longer routinely fund homeopathy on the NHS.

As part of action to clamp down on waste, over the last two years NHS England has taken action to curb prescriptions for medicines that can be bought over the counter or are of low value.

At the end of last year NHS England published guidance to curb prescriptions for 18 ineffective, unsafe or low clinical priority treatments, such as co-proxamol, some dietary supplements, herbal treatments and homeopathy, saving up to £141 million a year. Earlier this year NHS England published a further list of 35 minor, short-term conditions for which over the counter medicines should not routinely be prescribed, saving around a further £100 million a year.

Savings form a key building block of the NHS’s 10 point efficiency plan contained in the Next Steps on the NHS Five Year Forward View, published in March 2017.

NHS chief, Simon Stevens said: “There is no robust evidence to support homeopathy which is at best a placebo and a misuse of scarce NHS funds.

“So we strongly welcome the High Court’s clear cut decision to kick out this costly and spurious legal challenge.”

Guidance on items which should not be routinely prescribed in primary care is available on the NHS England website.


The BHA's statement: BHA’s brave legal bid to overturn NHS decision on homeopathy fails
The British Homeopathic Association (BHA) has failed in its legal challenge to get NHS England’s decision to stop funding homeopathic medicines overturned.

Last year, NHS England recommended doctors should no longer prescribe a number of treatments, including homeopathy, that it said provided little value. The BHA believed it had identified serious flaws in the way the health commissioning authority consulted the public on this issue and sought a judicial review.

The case was heard by the Honourable Mr Justice Supperstone at the Royal Courts of Justice. The charity’s main claims against NHS England were that the consultation misrepresented homeopathy and therefore was unfair; and a report used in the consultation to inform the public was so complicated it would deter rather than encourage people to respond. Although the judge found there were sufficient grounds for a judicial review, after four days of lengthy legal arguments he dismissed the claims.

Margaret Wyllie, BHA Chair, said the case highlighted how health bosses were unfairly manipulating the consultation process and making decisions about healthcare services without genuine patient engagement.

“That NHS England attracted fewer than 3,000 responses from patients to a national consultation that ran for three months highlights its failure to genuinely engage with the public on important decisions about healthcare provision.”

Although 18 medicines were under review the only negative statement in NHS England’s press release promoting its public consultation was about homeopathy.

“The statement was so prejudicial it was widely reported in the media that the decision to deny patients homeopathic medicines had already been taken. How the judge failed to recognise that this was a deliberate attempt by NHS England to unfairly influence the public is astonishing,” said Mrs Wyllie.

“The only information about homeopathy that NHS England provided was an outdated report that was critical of the therapy. And although it did contain the case for homeopathy as put by scientists, doctors and patients, it is preposterous to think the public were going to read a complex report of over 275 pages to help inform their response to the consultation.”

She added: “It appears NHS England can fail to engage with patients properly on removing services and get away with it. That is not good enough, for it is important to remember that the real losers in this case are the patients who are now being refused a treatment on which they have come to depend.”

Despite this disappointment, the BHA remains committed to defending homeopathic services. We will continue to champion homeopathy’s health benefits, cost effectiveness and the right of patients to choose homeopathy for their healthcare needs.

Our charitable aims remain unchanged: to enable greater access to homeopathy through providing financial support for research, training of healthcare professionals, providing factual and useful information about homeopathy to the public, and expanding the BHA’s network of charitable and low cost clinics throughout the UK. Growing numbers of people are seeking a more holistic approach to their healthcare and the BHA is working to enable them to do so.


"Brave". Some would say "foolhardy".
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?


Return to “Sciences and pseudo-science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests