It's lovely to have alternatives available for "conventional", Western medicine. It's nice to have an "open mind". I make these statements with only a touch of wryness; I do sincerely try to keep an open mind. Nevertheless, I am really rather relieved to read news reports about a group of leading British doctors who have directly challenged the way many NHS trusts use their funds.
A GROUP of Britain’s leading doctors has urged every NHS trust to stop paying for alternative medicine and to use the money for conventional treatments. Their appeal is a direct challenge to the Prince of Wales’s outspoken campaign to widen access to complementary therapies. Public funding of “unproven or disproved treatments” such as homoeopathy and reflexology, which are promoted by the Prince, is unacceptable while huge NHS deficits are forcing trusts to sack nurses and limit access to life-saving drugs, the doctors say. As reported by The Times Online
I have very little faith in the NHS, as some of you may already know, but, rather ironically, the aforementioned doctors' lack of faith towards unproven alternative therapies is increasing my faith towards the doctors.
Some alternative therapies may form a solid support mechanism for suffering patients, but I do think they should be an optional extra; a luxury in a way; not something that the taxpayers pay for. If any of the alternative therapies would be scientifically proven to be consistently effective in treating serious conditions, I'd be saying different things.
If I have a tension headache, or if I am feeling the pressure of stress, aromatherapy might help. But I wouldn't dream of making someone else pay for my treatment.
If I have an incurable disease for which I am receiving conventional treatment, I might also wish to use some additional therapies. But the additional therapies should be a choice, an extra and entirely at the expense of the private individual.
Some alternative therapies seem to hover between the line of "conventional" and "alternative". That's when this whole thing becomes very messy and it's hard to hold on to a hard line on either side of the argument. The BBC website has a wonderful set of resources, examining these very issues:
Research conducted by the BBC has shown that alternative medicines are becoming increasingly popular. Yet their effectiveness is yet to be proven to the majority of medical practitioners in the UK and there are concerns over safety as many of the treatments remain untested. BBC News Online's health team examines the issues.
My biggest beef is with Homeopathy. You see, it's utter bollocks. Well, apart from the - sometimes, admittedly, very vividly experienced - Placebo effect.
Let me elaborate (although the above statement sums it all up quite tidily). The original concept of Homeopathy, when explained to a person to whom metaphysical matters are of interest, will sound inviting, promising and even plausible.
To treat the patient with a little bit of what might be making them unwell.
Classical homeopathy is generally defined as a system of medical treatment based on the use of minute quantities of remedies that in larger doses produce effects similar to those of the disease being treated. Hahnemann believed that very small doses of a medication could have very powerful healing effects because their potency could be affected by vigorous and methodical shaking (succussion). Hahnemann referred to this alleged increase in potency by vigorous shaking as dynamization. Hahnemann thought succussion could release "immaterial and spiritual powers," thereby making substances more active. "Tapping on a leather pad or the heel of the hand was alleged to double the dilution" (ibid.). From (the utterly scrumptious) The Sceptic's Dictionary.
So, the original concept seemed to have a little bit of potential, well, to gullible sorts anyway, but good grief. Basing the entire treatment on how much, and through which very specific methods it has been diluted?
Let me put this in other terms. Let's say we start with a few drops of a plant extract. All well and good. I actually DO believe that plant-based medicine and treatments can be incredibly effective. After all, much of the now so-called conventional medicine started that way.
However, in Hocus-pocus-pathy, you take the plant extracts, dilute, shake... then take the diluted mixture, add a few drops of that to a new batch of water and dilute, shake... then take the diluted mixture, add a few drops of that... well, so on and so forth, until the final "remedy" has as many molecules of the original plant as you would randomly find by chance in, say, sea water.
Just think about that quietly for a moment.
Various tincture-based elements are then added (alcohol, grapeseed oil, or perhaps something else to give the remedy a medicinal consistency) and abracadabra, a cure-all is ready!
Homeopathy is based on the notion that water has a memory. That its molecules can remember the presence of a substance that, for all intents and purposes is no longer there.
Did I mention the word BOLLOCKS yet?
What homeopathic practitioners do very effectively, is provide consultative, holistic treatment to their patients, complete with such apparent (or quite possibly very sincere) care for the wellbeing of the patients that the experience in itself must be very healing. And I don't dispute that. I just so wish that people weren't being told, well, bollocks.
I wish that if a practitioner were to set up a councelling and spiritual support service, they'd just set up one of those; not a charlatan outfit designed to exploit the weak and vulnerable. Homeopathy is the Scientology of alternative therapies and I really don't think it's fair to charge people horrid amounts for so-called remedies and therapies when it's all a bit of a con, really.
It's been bugging me for some time to know that in this country, my tax money has gone towards paying for someone's homeopathy treatment - I would certainly let out a little whoop of delight if NHS dropped that form of alternative therapy from their list of funded services. It is none of my business if people wish to pay for this kind of stuff privately (it doesn't harm me; and I know lots of people get something very real out of it), but I don't think it has any place whatsoever standing shoulder-to-shoulder with therapies that have been scientifically proven to be effective.
Cross-posted to: Blogcritics.org
EDIT 30/05/06: This entry was chosen as one of the "Editors' Picks" at BlogCritics.
i guess i haven't ever thought in these terms before. my beef is so heavily directed towards pharmaceutical(?) manufacturers (i believe they are much more prone to pushing what alleviates symptoms, but not what cures ailments because it makes sense for them monetarily) that i can't get past that part of it all to even start questioning alternatives. of course, by and large, homeopathic on a medical front here in america has not been embraced... i mean, you can barely get insurance to help pay for legitimate, time proven treatments, much less homeopathic. (at least, that's my experience.)
Posted by: fourthfret | 27 May 2006 at 22:49
I have to admit to feeling slightly fatalistic about any form of medical treatment that has the element of money/business/payment changing hands in it - business is business and it sometimes doesn't sit right with altruistic purposes. However, I do not believe that the cynicism should necessarily be directed towards doctors, nurses and other health professionals - but in some cases, you are quite right to be cynical about drugs manufacturers.
Posted by: Nukapai | 27 May 2006 at 23:12
I just wanted to thank you for the comment you left on the Blair bitches blog about reviewing, it's nice to know there are people who are still on panet earth when it comes to this stuff. "E'hugs from me :) She seems like an angry person just looking for someone to take it out on and today it was me...oh well.
Anyway, not to ramble on your blog about that stuff, I just wanted to give thanks.
Now, if I hadn't had too many beers I'd blather on about the topic of homeopathy as I did grow up in a community that practiced it heavily and if my father hadn't intervened with modern medicine when I was a baby I would have died. I should hate the practice but I don't and often look towards it for certain things but it hasn't done me any good, yet I still find myself with faith in it. There are too many doctors that are all too eger to put someone on meds and call it a day, this bugs me. As well as Insurance needing to start paying for massages, I carry my stress in my neck and am in pain daily yet they will not cover what fixes it, they'd rather cover what blankets the issue (i.e.pills).
Ok the beer is talking...I'm shuttting up now :) hope you have a good weekend
Posted by: emilymartian | 28 May 2006 at 06:02
And yet when my kittens were on their deathbeds.. in fact the vet was telling me there was no hope (distemper) and the cats had given up their will to live... I purchased a homeopathic treatment which was for "wasting away, no will to live, diarrhea, and respiratory congestion" and those kittens, then only weeks old.. are now 2.5 years old. My vet was amazed and now stocks homeopathics on his shelves. The kittens had not been treated due to my not knowing what to give them.. are buried in my yard.
Many of the conventional treatments do not pass double-blind placebos (hello? vaccinations?) and yet we pay for those toxins everyday don't we?
Posted by: Michelle | 29 May 2006 at 00:58
Michelle, I am glad your kittens survived! I love cats dearly myself.
However, I have to say that anecdotal evidence is not the kind of evidence that would prove - particularly scientifically prove - that Homeopathy works.
What happened to you could have been a fortunate coincidence.
My challenge is this: if Homeopathy really does work, then why has it not been scientifically proven to do so yet?
There is a really interesting million dollar challenge on the table in USA - James Randi (who has devoted his life to exposing hoaxes and pseudo-scientific hocus pocus) has openly said on his website and on many other forums (in television documentaries and the like) that if anyone comes forward with real evidence of Homeopathy actually working, he will personally give them a million dollars. Nobody has come forward. That challenge has been active for years.
I know thousands, even millions of people will have excellent anecdotal evidence of Homeopathy's wondrous results. But then, thousands, or even millions of people also believe that the world has other quite magical and mystical things going on, which also amount to hocus-pocus. People always look for patterns, connections - and they love being able to believe in things. Homeopathy offers comfort for many.
What makes me angry is the con aspect of it. If you set out a service to offer comfort and to offer councelling, or hope, then call it that. Don't call it "herbal medicine". Don't spread mis-information. There are enough lies in our world; I really don't like when more of them are perpetuated.
Posted by: Nukapai | 29 May 2006 at 10:12
Michelle, up above, doesn't think vaccinations would pass a double blind test? Scary people out there, Pia.
You were right, Pia. I do like this post. My father is a strong believer in homeopathic remedies of the dilution sort you describe here. I don't share that belief! Like you, I admit that lots of plants produce chemicals that help us because they fight invaders that the plants have in common with us. However that doesn't mean that diluting some chemical or mixture of them way down is going to be good for us.
Posted by: utenzi | 19 June 2006 at 16:55
Dear Pia
It is obvious that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Homeopathy has been proven repeatedly that it does work. Please do more research into the NHS Homeopathic Hospitals in the UK which have a better success rate than conventional hospitals. Also, I suggest your start reading about Quantum Physics and molecular biology. This may shed some light on your biased ideas.
Please try to remember that the pharmaceutical companies run the NHS and government and YOU!!!!!! They can't make any money off of homeopathic remedies which is why they are repeatedly condemning it. Homeopathy is the second most widely used medical system in the world and is continuing to grow due to new research at the molecular level.
Regards,
A highly educated homeopathic medical student.
Posted by: Tracey | 05 October 2006 at 16:04
Dear highly educated student, please direct me to the evidence that homeopathy works. I would love for it to work! It'd be excellent. I hate going to the GP. I'd much rather use alternatives.
The reason I believe what I wrote about homeopathy to be true, is that there really IS NO EVIDENCE, is there?
Or someone would surely have claimed that cool one million dollars put on the table by James Randi.
When something outrageous is suggested ("hey, there's an invisible pink elephant in the room!") the onus to prove it is on those who make the outrageous claims in the first place.
I don't have to prove anything about homeopathy; I am not the one making the claims.
Posted by: Nukapai | 05 October 2006 at 23:25