Independent article yesterday.

[Guest guest]

Anybody else see this? All over the front page. Ends with an

unpleasant piece by Ernst saying that if we want to be regulated we

should only be using herbs supported by his definition of evidence.

ie Hypericum and Crataegus,and that we use " adventurous mixtures "

rather than sticking to the available research.

It is very worrying that he is pushing his interpretation of Evidence

based medicine, which is " use nothing without a lot of randomised

controlled trials " rather than its true meaning - use the best

available evidence to add to and improve on clinical expertise.

he also says we have spent our money and time on lobbying rather than

on research. We couldn't have afforded him, which is possibly what he

means, but for heaven's sake, PLEASE start writing up your successful

case histories and sending them to your professional bodies before we

are reduced to prescribing in the same tragic way that pharmaceuticals

have been, just as orthodox science is beginning to realise the

benefits of complex prescriptions.

Does anybody know if he is still funded by Boots?

Sally Owen

MNIMh