BBC News - Homeopathy 'could be blacklisted'

[PaxVobiscum]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34744858

Ministers are considering whether homeopathy should be put on a blacklist of treatments GPs in England are banned from prescribing, the BBC has learned.

The controversial practice is based on the principle that "like cures like", but critics say patients are being given useless sugar pills.

The Faculty of Homeopathy said the therapy had "profound effects" and patients backed it.

A consultation is expected to take place in 2016.

The total NHS bill for homeopathy, including homeopathic hospitals and GP prescriptions, is thought to be about £4m.

Homeopathy is based on the concept that diluting a version of a substance that causes illness has healing properties.

So pollen or grass could be used to create a homeopathic hay-fever remedy.

One part of the substance is mixed with 99 parts of water or alcohol, and this is repeated six times in a "6c" formulation or 30 times in a "30c" formulation.

The end result is combined with a lactose (sugar) tablet.

Homeopaths say the more diluted it is, the greater the effect. Critics say patients are getting nothing but sugar.

Common homeopathic treatments are for asthma, ear infections, hay-fever, depression, stress, anxiety, allergy and arthritis.

Surely the most effective approach would be to "dilute" the NHS provision until there's almost nobody allowed to prescribe it?

 

[DaleCooper]

It's about time the NHS stopped prescribing sugared water and calling it homeopathy. The dilution involved means you would get the same effect (or greater) from any randomly selected sample of water. Homeopaths are no better than quacks selling snake oil.

The dilution is such that there would probably not even be a single molecule of the substance in the "medicine".

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's about time the NHS stopped prescribing sugared water and calling it homeopathy. The dilution involved means you would get the same effect (or greater) from any randomly selected sample of water. Homeopaths are no better than quacks selling snake oil.

The dilution is such that there would probably not even be a single molecule of the substance in the "medicine".

If placebo (which is what it really is) is cheap and makes people feel better (through the placebo effect), why *not* prescribe it, particularly if you can charge £7-odd for a packet of sugar sweets costing 20p?

 

[PaxVobiscum]

It's about time the NHS stopped prescribing sugared water and calling it homeopathy. The dilution involved means you would get the same effect (or greater) from any randomly selected sample of water. Homeopaths are no better than quacks selling snake oil.

The dilution is such that there would probably not even be a single molecule of the substance in the "medicine".

That sounds like homeopathophobia to me.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's a tough one.

On the one hand, a placebo is sometimes just what the patient needs; it'd do a lot of good to prescribe sugar pills to people demanding antibiotics for coughs and colds, for instance. And a "homeopathic remedy" is the best way of prescribing a placebo to someone.

But on the other hand prescribing a placebo could do a lot of damage if it is an illness that actually requires real drugs to clear up or help with.

That said, £4m is chickenfeed so I don't see the point of going to the expense of consulting on banning it.

 

[NSEFAN]

If placebo (which is what it really is) is cheap and makes people feel better (through the placebo effect), why *not* prescribe it, particularly if you can charge £7-odd for a packet of sugar sweets costing 20p?

Is the NHS effectively quids-in for homoeopathy? In which case, it should be kept as a sort of "time-wasters tax" for people who have chronic non-illnesses like the common cold. If some want to live by superstitions then they should pay accordingly for the time they've stolen from patients who are genuinely ill.

 

[DaleCooper]

If placebo (which is what it really is) is cheap and makes people feel better (through the placebo effect), why *not* prescribe it, particularly if you can charge £7-odd for a packet of sugar sweets costing 20p?

There's the reason, in your own words. Apart from the blatant profiteering it hits at the very heart of the scientific method and contributes to "dumbing down".

It makes my blood boil, is there a cure for that?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That sounds like homeopathophobia to me.

Would a placebo cure me of that?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Is the NHS effectively quids-in for homoeopathy? In which case, it should be kept as a sort of "time-wasters tax" for people who have chronic non-illnesses.

Yes and no.

Homeopathic remedies are specially prepared by trained homeopaths (stop laughing at the back) so they're more expensive than just prescribing TicTacs.

But given the rampant misuse of some drugs- antibiotics being the big one- there's definitely a place for giving the time wasters a TicTac instead.

My only worry would be doctors misdiagnosing someone as a timewaster; it happened to my grandfather, who was labelled a hypochondriac right up until he died of lung cancer ages 62.

 

[DaleCooper]

My only worry would be doctors misdiagnosing someone as a timewaster; it happened to my grandfather, who was labelled a hypochondriac right up until he died of lung cancer ages 62.

The inscription on my gravestone will be "I told them I was ill".

 

[Bletchleyite]

My only worry would be doctors misdiagnosing someone as a timewaster; it happened to my grandfather, who was labelled a hypochondriac right up until he died of lung cancer ages 62.

That happens anyway - I doubt there would be any more of it just because "go home and take some paracetamol" was replaced by "here's some Tic Tacs". Indeed, unless the misdiagnosis related to diabetes, that might actually give an overall health gain - paracetamol isn't great for the liver.

There are people it wouldn't work on (I for instance always research what exactly I have been prescribed) but there are many it would.

 

[LexyBoy]

There's the reason, in your own words. Apart from the blatant profiteering it hits at the very heart of the scientific method and contributes to "dumbing down".

I think the thinking was that if the NHS can pocket the cash from the prescription charge then that's a bonus (rather than the quacks themselves).

We could do away with all the homeopath nonsense, and literally just have a stack of sugar pills at the ready with labels printed for whatever remedy is needed. I think there are a lot of issues around prescribing placebos though - both ethically (though it's better than prescribing actual medicine, if it's known that it will not be effective) and in the damage it would do to public perception of medicine/science.

 

[meridian2]

There is no empirical evidence anywhere to suggest funding homeopathic remedies is in the best interests of the NHS, who are supposedly cash-strapped anyway.

 

[edwin_m]

We could do away with all the homeopath nonsense, and literally just have a stack of sugar pills at the ready with labels printed for whatever remedy is needed.

Generic homeopathic drugs - brilliant.

Anyway, rather than a blacklist, shouldn't it be a very, very, VERY pale grey list?

 

[Busaholic]

The inscription on my gravestone will be "I told them I was ill".

Spike Milligan got there first.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

 

[SS4]

I just think homoeopathic medicines should stand up to the rigorous testing, R&D and evidence based trials that all medicine has to go through.

I suspect very little will get through

 

[GatwickDepress]

[youtube]HMGIbOGu8q0[/youtube]