Re: 'Homeopathy? You may as well have a glass of water, says expert'/'Pure Hogwa

[Guest guest]

If homeopathy were hogwash (and God only knows there may be a remedy

that one can make from washing a hog) then the thousands of doctors

and laypersons who've spent years and years studying homeopathy must

have severe mental problems or they are outright idiots. is

Rotella

>

> G'day QXCIers,

> -feast Your eyes on this:

> cheers,

> dar

>

> There are two very negative pieces on homeopathy published recently in

> the Daily Mail with associated articles below. We have not shown the

> second, 'Pure Hogwash', as it is in similar vein to the first which has

> been hand typed. Neither article are on the Daily Mail's website at

time

> of sending this.

> The first letter sent was to the Daily Mail. The second letter was to

> Professor Ernst and others.......*Zeus*

> *From:* Zeus <mailto:info@z...>

> *To:* letters@d... <mailto:letters@d...>

> *Sent:* Monday, December 19, 2005 6:53 PM

> *Subject:* Homeopathy? You may as well have a glass of water, says

> expert - Daily Mail 19/12/05

>

>

> Dear Daily Mail,

>

> Despite the recent study of 6,500 patients who were treated

> homeopathically at the Bristol Homeopathic Hospital over a 6 year

period

> with a 70% overall improvement, you continue to publish negative

> articles about homeopathy ('Homeopathy? You may as well have a glass of

> water, says expert' 19/12/05).

> I would like to draw your attention to two quotes by Professor Ernst in

> an article published in the British Medical Journal 2 years ago

(article

> copied below this letter) which make a nonsense of his statements in

> today's Daily Mail:-

> *Our family doctor in the little village outside Munich^ where I

grew up

> was a homoeopath. My mother swore by it. As^ a kid I was treated

> homoeopathically. So this kind of medicine^ just came naturally.*

> **

> *As a young^ doctor I had an appointment in a homoeopathic hospital,

> and^ I was very impressed with its success rate. My boss told me^ that

> much of this success came from discontinuing mainstream^ medication.

> This made a big impression on me. " ^ *

> **

> Don't you think that the 6 year study counts for something when most

> drug studies are conducted with far fewer people and much shorter time

> scales? I believe the 6,500 were in fact compared against another group

> as reported by the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine:-

> **

> **WHAT DOCTORS DON'T TELL YOU READERS' BROADCAST - E-news broadcast.

216

> *- 15 December 2005*

> ***HOMEOPATHY: It's better than drugs for chronic conditions

>

> *Yet more evidence has just come in that suggests homeopathy does work

> (despite the beliefs of doctors and conventional medical journals). The

> new study, which tracked around 6,500 patients with chronic health

> problems for six years, discovered that homeopathic remedies helped in

> 70 per cent of cases.

> Well, your doctor might counter that it's meaningless over such a long

> period of time. But, you can respond, *the researchers tracked a

similar

> group who had not been given homeopathy but instead were prescribed

> drugs, and they were no better after the same six years had elapsed.

> *(Source: *Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 2005; 11:

> 793-8).*

> **

> Can I make one thing very clear and that is in the making of

homeopathic

> remedies, dilution alone would do *nothing *whatsoever. It is only

> through the succussion (or vigorous shaking - 100 shakes between each

> potency, i.e. 1c, 2c, 3c, 4c, etc.), that the formative intelligence of

> the substance is brought out and imprinted on the water/alcohol medium.

> The scientific explanation can be found in quantum physics.

> I applaud the Daily Mail on their stance on GM, MMR, and recent

coverage

> on aspartame, etc. but I am tired of this homeopathy-bashing. The true

> reason for these articles is because homeopathy has become a word of

> mouth phenomenom and the pharmaceutical companies are 'feeding' these

> articles to the press, as they cannot stand the competition.

> Yours faithfully,

> Louise Mclean, LCCH MARH

> London

> __________________________________________

>

>

> British Medical Journal 22/11/03

>

>

> BMJ 2003;327:s166 (22 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7425.s166

>

>

> career focus

>

> PROFILE

>

>

> A scientist in the alternative camp

>

> //Edzard Ernst, holder of the only chair of complementary medicine^ in

> the United Kingdom, champions a rigorous scientific approach^ to his

> discipline and has many critics on either side of the^ fence. He talks

> to/ Geoff Watts /about his career/^ /

>

> Edzard Ernst, who recently celebrated his first 10 years as^ the

> occupant of Britain's only chair of complementary medicine^ at Exeter

> University, lives with contradictions. A firm believer^ that his branch

> of medicine should be treated like any other,^ and scrutinised

> accordingly, he concedes that he may be robbing^ it of the sense of

> " otherness " that is one source of its appeal.^ He says he understands

> that but believes that scientific honesty^ is a higher imperative.^

>

> If medical techniques are to be classified simply on the basis^ of

their

> efficacy†" they work or they don't†" why separate^ out one small

batch under

> the heading " complementary " ? Ernst^ points out that he didn't create

the

> distinction. But he concedes^ that the very existence of his chair is

> reinforcing it. " This^ is true†" to my regret. But I don't see any

other

> way to^ make progress. " ^

>

> And progress he has made. According to his department's own^ summary of

> its past 10 years' work (/Complementary Medicine:^ The Evidence So

Far/)

> his department has published some 800 peer^ reviewed papers, making it

> the field's most productive research^ unit. " He has systematically

> reviewed the literature over a^ huge breadth of complementary

medicine, "

> says Lewith,^ one of the small handful of doctors with an

> orthodox training^ who devote themselves to this field. " I think that

> has been^ hugely constructive and provided a valuable resource for

> researchers. " ^

>

> German born, Ernst had an orthodox medical training in Munich^ and

> worked in London for some time. Why the interest in complementary^

> medicine? " *Our family doctor in the little village outside Munich^

> where I grew up was a homoeopath. My mother swore by it. As^ a kid I

was

> treated homoeopathically. So this kind of medicine^ just came

> naturally.* Even during my studies I pursued other^ things like massage

> therapy and acupuncture. " ^

>

> The history of non-orthodox medicine in continental Europe is^ unlike

> that in the United Kingdom, where the creation of the^ NHS excluded

most

> of its techniques. In countries like Germany^ it seems to face much

less

> conflict with science. " *As a young^ doctor I had an appointment in a

> homoeopathic hospital, and^ I was very impressed with its success rate.

> My boss told me^ that much of this success came from discontinuing

> mainstream^ medication. This made a big impression on me. " ^ *

>

> Appointed to the chair of rehabilitation medicine in Vienna,^ he headed

> a department that included doctors practising massage,^ relaxation

> techniques, and spinal manipulation.^

>

> The chair he now occupies in Exeter was initially financed by^ a grant

> from the Maurice Laing Foundation, a charity created^ by the current

> head of the Laing building dynasty.^

>

> " He [Maurice Laing] offered to donate £1.5m to any university^ that

> would create a chair, " Ernst explains. " Apparently the^ foundation had

> some trouble finding one willing to take up the^ offer. " He laughs.

> " They didn't mind cigarette money, but complementary^ medicine was too

> hot! " ^

>

> Exeter University eventually agreed; a chair was set up, and^ Ernst saw

> the advert. " I rushed to my atlas to find out where^ Exeter was, " he

> recalls. He got the job.^

>

> At the core of his approach is rigorous science. This caused^ dismay to

> many practitioners. Ernst was puzzled. " It sounded^ to me so

inoffensive

> that it was a huge surprise that people^ were up in arms. Some claimed

> that their individualised and^ holistic methods defy testing by

> randomised clinical trial.^ When I'm being polite I say this is

based on

> a misunderstanding^ of what science is about. When I'm being less

polite

> I say these^ people are mad. " ^

>

> The charity Health Watch exists to support the case for properly^

> assessing medical techniques, conventional or otherwise. Its^ chairman,

> Garrow, views Ernst's efforts with some sympathy.^ " The various

> studies were done, and a handful of alternative^ therapies seemed to be

> useful. But the thing that really put^ him in bad odour with the

> alternative therapists was that he^ reviewed the evidence on safety. " ^

>

> Complementary medicine has always made much of the claim that^ because

> its therapies are " natural " they're necessarily safe.^ This is not the

> case and, to Ernst, safety was a key issue.^ " Assumption is not good

> enough when we talk about safety. We^ need to demonstrate it. When I

> decided early on that safety^ would be a research issue for us, it

> created a lot of opposition. " ^

>

> The academic world's initial wariness about a chair in complementary^

> medicine has largely evaporated. " Some doctors are condescending, " ^

says

> Ernst. " They give me a smile and say it's a waste of a^ good talent or

> it's not really worth investigating. " But, with^ a few exceptions, he

> claims to have achieved acceptance from^ the orthodox medical

> establishment.^

>

> By contrast his relations with the complementary community remain^

> troubled. " Virtually from the word go I've had problems with^ the

> complementary camp. Sometimes it subsides. But then as soon^ as we

> publish a negative result it flares up. We are champions^ so long as we

> produce positive results, but enemies when we^ produce negative ones. "

> And many of the department's findings^ have, it must be said, proved

> negative.^

>

> His critics argue that he is too inflexible in his application^ of

> orthodox research methods; that most of his comments on complementary^

> medicine seem unduly pessimistic; and that he should be using^ more

> subtle methods of assessing its effects. Above all he's^ charged with

> not recognising its uniqueness. But that is precisely^ his point.^

>

>

> When his chair was created, the complementary medicine community^

> thought it was getting an advocate. Instead it got a detached^ analyst.

> It was disappointed. " Seriously disappointed, " says^ Ernst. " At my

first

> public meeting someone was even up in arms^ that a medic had got the

> job. But whatever complementary medicine^ is, and there's a lot of

> debate about definitions, it is medicine. " ^

>

> *Whenever something is promising but unproved, I am fascinated^

by it *

>

> The complementary community's disappointment has had a predictable^

> consequence: less than 10% of Ernst's research funds come from^ within

> it. " Proponents of complementary medicine see me as too^ critical, "

says

> Ernst. " There's also a lot of propaganda against^ me. There are

> ridiculous stories that we are funded by the pharmaceutical^

industry to

> ditch complementary medicine. " Although he has not^ received grants

from

> any mainstream drug company, he would do^ so if they came without

> strings. " Of course it would confirm^ the belief of some that I am on

> the other side of the fence,^ so to speak. But for me it wouldn't be a

> problem. " ^

>

> Lewith feels it's a pity that Ernst hasn't succeeded^ in

> garnering more external peer reviewed support from bodies^ such as the

> Wellcome Trust. But many of those who hold the purse^ strings in

> orthodox medicine believe there are more productive^ ways of using

their

> money. However, thanks to a further large^ donation from the Maurice

> Laing Foundation, Ernst reckons his^ department is secure for the

> immediate future.^

>

> As Garrow sees it, if complementary therapies are ever^ to be

> offered on the NHS, we have to know they work. Ernst's^ own motive for

> ploughing what remains his separate if not exactly^ isolated furrow is

> simply the desire to know. " Whenever something^ is promising but

> unproved, I am fascinated by it. " ^

>

> ^______________________________________________________

>

> *Homeopathy? You may as well have a glass of water, says expert*

>

> by Tom , Daily Mail * *

> 19/12/2005

> Homeopathy is a waste of time and no better than a glass of water,

> Britain's first professor of complementary medicine declared yesterday.

> Edzard Ernst from Exeter University, said research showed that there

was

> no medical benefits to using such treatments. He said: 'Homeopathic

> remedies don't work.'

> Homeopathy is supported by Prince and used by millions of

> Britons to treat a range of common ailments.

> But Professor Ernst said: 'Study after study has shown it is simply the

> purest form of placebo. You may as well take a glass of water than a

> homeopathic medicine.'

> Asthma, migraines, skin disease, irritable bowel syndrome and

depression

> are conditions supposed to be improved by homeopathy.

> There are about 3,000 registered homeopaths in the UK.

> Around four in ten English GPs will refer patients to a homeopath.

> Homeopaths do not treat physical, emotional, mental or even spiritual

> illnesses separately; they regard them as being connected. And no

matter

> how many symptoms are experienced, only one remedy is taken that is

> aimed at all those symptoms.

> Based on the theory that 'like cures like' homeopathy has always been

> controversial.

> It suppposedly treats illness by giving patients substances that cause

> the very same symptoms. But the remedies are given in tiny amounts.

> They are often so diluted there is little or no active ingredient in

them.

> Professor Ernst, who took the first chair in complementary medicine at

> Exeter's Peninsula Medical School in 1993, said this meant there was no

> scientific basis to the treatments.

> The incredibly dilute solutions used by homeopaths make no sense,' he

> told The Observer newspaper. 'If it were true, we would have to tear up

> all our physics and chemistry textbooks.'

> Professor Ernst pointed to his study of arnica as evidence of the

> failure of the so-called remedies. Arnica is a standard homeopathic

> treatment for bruising.

> The professor gave one group of patients arnica after surgery.

> Another group of patients were given a placebo. Neither group knew

which

> treatment they were getting.

> Professor Ernst discovered it made no difference if the patients

> received arnica or the placebo - they all recovered at the same rate.

> In another study, Swiss scientists compared the results of more than

100

> trials of homeopathic medicines with the same number of trials of

> conventional medicines.

> The statistics covered a range of conditions, from respiratory

> infections to surgery.

> The scientists found homeopathy had no more than a placebo effect.

> Professor Ernst said that in some cases patients who were prescribed

> homeopathic treatments might report improvements.

> But he said this was probably because of the psychological lift

given by

> the sometimes 90 minute interviews carried out by sympathetic

> practitioners during diagnoses.

> Professor Ernst warned that the Health Service - which currently funds

> five homeopathic hospitals - could not afford to pay for such excessive

> attention.

> In October, the Smallwood report - commissioned by Prince ,

> called for more complementary medicines - particularly homeopathy - to

> be given on the NHS.

> Homeopathy was developed 250 years ago by German doctor

> Hahnemann. It has been used in the UK for two centuries.

> The British based Society of Homeopaths said that 30 million patients

> across Europe use the treatments.

> Professor Ernst also cast doubt on chiropractic, which treats illnesses

> through spine manipulation. And he said the laying on of hands to cure

> patients was equally invalid.

> But he remains a supporter of using other complementary medicines in

> certain cases. These include herbal remedies, acupuncture and

hypnotherapy.

> Professor Ernst said, however, that they must be taken alongside

> conventional medicines.

> Complementary medicine combines conventional medicine and the various

> forms of alternative medicine, such as osteopathy, chiropractic,

> acupuncture, homeopathy and herbal remedies.

>

> ^_______________________________________________________________

>

> *Professor savages homeopathy*

>

> 'You might as well take a glass of water,' fumes complementary medicine

> expert in university funding battle

>

> *Robin McKie, science editor

> Sunday December 18, 2005

> The Observer <http://www.observer.co.uk/>*

>

> Millions of people use it to deal with illnesses ranging from asthma to

> migraine. Prince believes it is the answer to many of the evils

> of modern life. But now Britain's first professor of complementary

> medicine, Edzard Ernst of Exeter University, has denounced

homeopathy as

> ineffective.

>

> 'Homeopathic remedies don't work,' he told The Observer. 'Study after

> study has shown it is simply the purest form of placebo. You may as

well

> take a glass of water than a homeopathic medicine.' Nor is Ernst's

> disdain confined to homeopathy. Chiropractic, which involves spine

> manipulation to treat illnesses, and the laying on of hands to 'cure'

> patients, are equally invalid, he says.

>

> Not surprisingly, his views and his studies have provoked furious

> reactions. Chiropractors and homeopaths have written in droves to

Exeter

> to denounce him. But now the scourge of alternative medicine says he is

> going to have to quit because Exeter will no longer support him or his

> department. 'They have never provided me with the money they originally

> promised me. Now we have been told in no uncertain terms that this

> department is going to close.' The university denied the charge.

> 'Professor Ernst's department has enough money to go on for a couple of

> more years,' said a spokesman. 'We are still trying to raise cash.

It is

> premature to talk of closure.'

>

> Ernst's department was created in 1993 when Exeter was given £1.5

> million by construction magnate Maurice Laing. When accepting these

> funds, Ernst said the university promised to raise the same amount

> again. 'They never did,' he added. Ernst, then a professor of

> rehabilitation medicine in Vienna, took the job to bring scientific

> rigour to the study of alternative medicines, an approach that has made

> him a highly controversial figure in the field. An example is provided

> by Ernst's study of arnica, given as a standard homeopathic treatment

> for bruising.

>

> 'We arranged for patients after surgery to be given arnica or a

> placebo,' he said. 'They didn't know which they were getting. It

made no

> difference. They got better at the same rate, whether they got

arnica or

> the placebo. And arnica is a classic homeopathic remedy. It doesn't

> work, however.'

>

> In another study, Ernst got five homeopaths to examine children with

> asthma. 'Children are supposed to respond better than adults to

> homeopathy, and asthma is said to be particularly responsive to

> homeopathic treatments,' he said. 'However, again we found no evidence

> that homeopathy worked.'

>

> Yet thousands of people swear by it. Britain has five homeopathic

> hospitals, which are funded by the NHS. 'The treatments do no good,'

> said Ernst. 'But the long interview - about an hour-and-a-half -

carried

> out by an empathetic practitioner during diagnosis may explain why

> people report improvements in their health. However, that kind of

> attention cannot be afforded by the NHS.' The incredibly dilute

> solutions used by homeopaths also make no sense, he added. 'If it were

> true, we would have to tear up all our physics and chemistry textbooks.'

>

> Nevertheless, Ernst insists that he is a supporter of complementary

> medicines. 'No other centre in the world has produced more positive

> results than we have to support complementary medicine,' he said.

> 'Herbal medicine, for instance, can do good. If I was mildly depressed,

> I think St 's wort would be a good treatment. It has fewer

> side-effects than Prozac. Acupuncture seems to work for some conditions

> and there are relaxing techniques, including hypnotherapy, that can be

> effective. These should not be used on their own, but as complements to

> standard medicines.'

>

> Not surprisingly, Ernst has been attacked by chiropractors and

> homeopaths who passionately defend their techniques. The latter

point to

> studies which they say show that most patients they treat are satisfied

> and cite an analysis in the Lancet of 89 trials in which their

medicines

> were found to be effective. The Smallwood report, commissioned by

Prince

> , has called for more complementary medicines, particularly

> homeopathy, to be given on the NHS.

>

> Ernst's opponents also claim some of his research methods are

unethical.

> Once, a colleague pretended to be a pregnant mother and asked

homeopaths

> and chiropractors if she should give the MMR vaccine to her child. Most

> said no. Ernst published a paper on these findings.

>

> The British Chiropractic Association told the university it would be

> better served by an individual who was 'genuinely interested' in

> complementary medicine.

>

> 'I think my peers would prefer someone who didn't rock the boat,' said

> Ernst.

>

> *The 'other' treatments*

>

> *Homeopathy *Invented 250 years ago by a German doctor,

> Hahnemann, homeopathy is based on the idea that, if a particular

drug or

> chemical causes a medical problem, it should also act as a cure, though

> only in an almost infinitely dilute state. There are about 3,000

> registered homeopaths in the UK and 21 per cent of GPs offered a

> homeopathy service in 2001 compared with 17 per cent in 1995. Skin

> disease, irritable bowel syndrome and depression are among the ailments

> supposed to be improved by homeopathy.

>

> *Herbal medicine* Plants or plant derivatives are used in herbal

> medicine to treat, prevent or cure various ailments. The approach has

> been used since 1500BC by the Egyptians. Today there are many branches,

> including Ayurveda, Chinese, Tibetan and Western herbal medicine.

> Popular remedies include echinacea, ginger, garlic, peppermint,

> feverfew, elderberry, goldenseal, St 's wort (below), ginseng and

> ginkgo. Consumers in Britain spend £126 million a year on herbal

> remedies to treat conditions such as constipation, diarrhoea and

> indigestion.

>

> ____________________________________________________

>

> ____________________________________________________

>

> After *'Homeopathy? You may as well have a glass of water, says

expert'*

> published in the Daily Mail on 19/12/05, there then appeared another

> similar article on 27/12/05 in the Daily Mail entitled *'Pure Hogwash',

> *again denigrating homeopathy in similar terms. See my email to Prof.

> Ernst below. Please forward this to other homeopaths. I really feel the

> Society of Homeopaths, Alliance of Registered homeopaths, HMA, British

> Homeopathic Association and Faculty should take some action about these

> kinds of derogatory articles which could seriously affect

practitioners'

> livelihoods....*Zeus*

>

> *From:* Zeus <mailto:info@z...>

> *To:* Edzard.Ernst@p... <mailto:Edzard.Ernst@p...>

> *Cc:* Homeopathic Educational Services (and Dana Ullman, MPH)

> <mailto:mail@h...> ; s.gordon@h...

> <mailto:s.gordon@h...> ; Alliance of Registered Homeopaths

> <mailto:asrv25@d...> ; lynne@w...

> <mailto:lynne@w...> ; Andy.Simpson@d...

> <mailto:Andy.Simpson@d...> ; Ian

> <mailto:ianwatson@b...> ; Dr. Spence

> <mailto:.Spence@u...> ; 'Duncan McNair'

> <mailto:duncan.mcnair@b...> ; Dr. Leo Rebello

> <mailto:leorebello@h...> ; peter morrell

> <mailto:peter-morrell@s...> ;

> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 28, 2005 4:52 PM

> *Subject:* ' Pure Hogwash' (Article about Homeopathy in the Daily Mail

> 27/12/05)

>

> Dear Professor Ernst,

> 'Pure Hogwash' aptly describes the content of your article on

homeopathy

> published in the Daily Mail on 27th December, where all the usual

> explanations of dilution, placebo, empathy of the practitioner are

> trotted out.

> This article seemed to be a follow up on your last one: 'Homeopathy?

You

> may as well have a glass of water'.

> Both appear to be a negative response to the very favourable Bristol

> Homeopathic Hospital study of 6500 patients treated over 6 years with a

> 70% overall improvement rate.

> Yet there was something in this article not previously known. 'The

> striking issue for scientists to consider is that patients do get

better

> - which I know as a homeopath myself and from the people I've talked

to'.

> The 3,000 homeopathic practitioners in the UK would be interested to

> know where you studied homeopathy and for how long, as the course

> normally takes 4 years before graduation.

> Many people believe that the UK would be served better by a

Professor of

> Complementary Medicine who had actually qualified in one of the main

> branches of alternative therapies. They would like to see some positive

> studies being published for a change.

> You mention your study on arnica where one group was given excessive

> doses of arnica 30c, three times daily for seven days before and again

> fourteen days after surgery. If you had studied homeopathy, you would

> know that arnica is not the best remedy to prescribe

post-operatively to

> patients after surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome. It would not have

> been the remedy of choice of most professional homeopaths for a speedy

> recovery after this procedure. It is no wonder this study showed

> homeopathy did not work.

> If you really had studied homeopathy, you would know that the

randomized

> placebo-controlled trial can never be a suitable scientific method for

> testing the effectiveness of homeopathy, which treats each patient

as an

> individual, requiring individualised homeopathic medicines.

> You ascribe the success of homeopathy to the placebo effect of empathy

> shown during the one to two hour consultation. Since this is the time

> that chiropractors, acupuncturists and herbalists take for a first

> consultation, are the healing effects of their therapies also to be

> attributed to the placebo effect?

> Your article concludes that 'the remedies do not work' yet I wonder why

> in an interview with Geoff Watts published in BMJ Online on 22nd

> November 2003, you stated the following:

> *Our family doctor in the little village outside Munich^ where I

grew up

> was a homoeopath. My mother swore by it. As^ a kid I was treated

> homoeopathically. So this kind of medicine^ just came naturally.*

> **

> *As a young^ doctor I had an appointment in a homoeopathic hospital,

> and^ I was very impressed with its success rate. My boss told me^ that

> much of this success came from discontinuing mainstream^ medication.

> This made a big impression on me. " ^ *

> **

> For the last 12 years your views on complementary medicine have not

> exactly been very complimentary. I doubt whether your pronouncements on

> homeopathy will make a jot of difference to the millions that enjoy its

> benefits. Though there is one sector that is keen to see the demise of

> homeopathy and that is the pharmaceutical cartel, as its increasing

> popularity threatens their profits.

> Yours sincerely,

> Louise Mclean, LCCH MARH

> London

> *Article this letter is referring to 'Pure Hogwash' (27.12.05) is

not on

> the Daily Mail website www.dailymail.co.uk <http://www.dailymail.co.uk>

> at time of writing.

> ______________________________________________

>

>

> Homeopathic arnica for prevention of pain and bruising: randomized

> placebo-controlled trial in hand surgery

>

> C Stevinson BSc MSc V S Devaraj FRCS FRCS(Plast) ^1 A Fountain-Barber

> MCSP SRP ^1 S Hawkins MCSP SRP ^1 E Ernst MD PhD

>

> *Department of Complementary Medicine, University of Exeter, 25

> Park Road, Exeter EX2 4NT, UK

> ^^1 Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Devon &

Exeter

> Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK *

>

> *Correspondence to: Professor E Ernst E-mail:

Edzard.Ernst{at}pms.ac.uk *

>

> Homeopathic arnica is widely believed to control bruising, reduce^

> swelling and promote recovery after local trauma; many patients^

> therefore take it perioperatively. To determine whether this^ treatment

> has any effect, we conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled,^

> randomized trial with three parallel arms. 64 adults undergoing^

> elective surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome were randomized^ to take

> three tablets daily of homeopathic arnica 30C or 6C^ or placebo for

> seven days before surgery and fourteen days after surgery.^ Primary

> outcome measures were pain (short form McGill Pain Questionnaire)^ and

> bruising (colour separation analysis) at four days after surgery.^

> Secondary outcome measures were swelling (wrist circumference)^ and use

> of analgesic medication (patient diary).^

>

> 62 patients could be included in the intention-to-treat analysis.^

There

> were no group differences on the primary outcome measures^ of pain

> (/P/=0.79) and bruising (/P/=0.45) at day four. Swelling^ and use of

> analgesic medication also did not differ between^ arnica and placebo

> groups. Adverse events were reported by 2^ patients in the arnica 6C

> group, 3 in the placebo group and^ 4 in the arnica 30C group.^

>

> The results of this trial do not suggest that homeopathic arnica^

has an

> advantage over placebo in reducing postoperative pain,^ bruising and

> swelling in patients undergoing elective hand surgery.^

>

> _______________________________________________

>

> *Edzard Ernst MD, PhD, FRCP, FRCPEd *

>

> Laing Chair in Complementary Medicine

>

> Professor Ernst qualified as a physician in Germany in 1978 where he

> also completed his MD and PhD theses. He has received training in

> acupuncture, autogenic training, herbalism, homoeopathy, massage

therapy

> and spinal manipulation. He was Professor in Physical Medicine and

> Rehabilitation (PMR) at Hannover Medical School and Head of the PMR

> Department at the University of Vienna. In 1993 he established the

Chair

> in Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter. He is

> founder/Editor-in-Chief of two medical journals (Perfusion and

FACT). He

> has published more than 30 books and in excess of 700 articles in the

> peer-reviewed medical literature. His work has been awarded with eight

> scientific prizes. In 1999 he took British nationality.

>

> Email: Edzard.Ernst@p... <mailto:Edzard.Ernst@p...>

>

> __________________________________________________

>

> *Excerpt from *WHAT DOCTORS DON'T TELL YOU READERS' BROADCAST - E-news

> broadcast. 218 *- 22 December 2005*

> **

> **

> *HOMEOPATHY: Rumours of its death are greatly exaggerated

>

> *If you read last week's bulletin (E-news no. 216) that homeopathy

helps

> accelerate recovery among chronic patients, you may be puzzled by the

> view this week from the UK's first professor of complementary medicine

> Edzard Ernst that the therapy doesn't really work at all.

> It appears Prof Ernst is on his way out as funds for his department at

> Exeter University are being stopped, and so he has taken the

opportunity

> to tell the world that " homeopathic remedies don't work " . He went on to

> say: " Study after study has shown it is simply the purest form of

> placebo. You may as well take a glass of water than a homeopathic

remedy. "

> His views mirror those that appeared in a recent issue of The Lancet

> following a review of six homeopathic studies. The Lancet concluded

that

> the very last word had been spoken about homeopathy, and that it is no

> better than a sugar pill. The only mystery, The Lancet concluded, was

> that we had persevered so long with such a preposterous therapy.

> So how does that sit with last month's positive study, which involved

> more than 6,000 chronic patients? Well, not all academics hold with The

> Lancet's, or Prof Ernst's, views. Several, including Lewith from

> Southampton University, believe there was a lot wrong with the Lancet

> study. None of the studies the Lancet reviewed were based on classical

> homeopathy in which the individual is treated; instead, they

> concentrated on the one-size-fits-all branch of the therapy, says

Lewith.

> Not only were the homeopathic studies highly selective, so too were

> those that 'proved' the efficacy of drugs. There's also the moot point

> about the placebo effect, which seems to be greater among those taking

> homeopathic remedies.

> Overall, the 'standard model' of the double-blind placebo medical trial

> among a large group seems unwieldy when it comes to assessing

> alternative medicine, with its accent on the individual. " We are only

> just beginning to understand how to research homeopathy and

> complementary medicine in general, " says Lewith.

> As for Prof Ernst, he's hardly had a good word to say about alternative

> medicine in the years he's been in the chair. He will be sadly missed.

> (Sources: The Observer, 18 December 2005; The Lancet, 20045; 366: 2081).

>

> http://www.wddty.co.uk/e-news.asp

> ________________________________________________

> *forwarded by *

> *Zeus Information Service

> Alternative Views on Health*

> *www.zeusinfoservice.com <http://www.zeusinfoservice.com> *

> All information, data and material contained, presented or provided

> herein is for general information purposes only and is not to be

> construed as reflecting the knowledge or opinion of Zeus Information

> Service.

> *Subscribe Free/Unsubscribe: info@z...

> <mailto:info@z...> *

> feel free to forward far and wide....

>