|
| HOME | BOARD OF DIRECTORS | CODE OF ETHICS | CONTACTS | RESOURCES | NEWS |
||
|
| OHA AT A GLANCE | OBJECTIVES | REGULATION PETITION | SITE MAP |
||
 Ontario
Homeopathic Association comment on Lancet articleThe French call Homeopathy ‘medicin douce’, soft medicine, because of its mild nature, the low occurrence of side effects, and patient centred focus. Its ever growing popularity may be the reason that homeopathy is often targeted by critics who favour a conventional medical approach. Over it’s more than 200 year history, the homeopathic medical community has unfortunately become familiar with constant attempts by conventional medical interests to discredit it. Not totally surprising, some feel, since the preparation of homeopathic medicines and mechanism of action are still beyond modern scientific understanding. That coupled with the fact that homeopathy by nature is a highly individualized medical system, makes it evident that homeopathy does not lend itself easily to conventional medical research methods. Still, a low blow is cast in declaring that homeopathy is no more effective than placebo in the recent article by Swiss team, Aijing Shang et al. under the leadership of Professor Matthias Egger, published in the Lancet August 26. Matthias’s team searched out 110 homeopathic medicine/drug trials and 110 conventional drug trials addressing similar medical conditions. They then pared these down to 8 homeopathic and 6 conventional drug trials, eliminating in the process some high quality homeopathic trials, which demonstrated better than placebo effects. Further, the 8 homeopathic trials did not take into account individualized, patient centred prescribing which homeopathy is largely defined by. The article has been declared misleading and its conclusions totally unfounded by researchers around the world. Those familiar with homeopathy understands well, as Dr. Iris Bell. M.D., PhD. states, (Comment on Shang Study Published in Lancet) “Shang et al have successfully applied a methodological approach to the articles they reviewed that is highly suitable for drawing conclusions about conventional medicine but is incomplete in evaluating homeopathic medicine. They did not include criteria that would apply to high quality homeopathic research reflecting the nature of homeopathic practice.” Renowned homeopath Rajan Sankaran also points out that any medical system should be evaluated according to its own principles, not from the view point of another system. Note also the Chatfield/Relton full critique of the Lancet article. Though the authors declare no conflict of interest, Stephen Gordon ( Who’s biased? The Lancet declares ‘the end of homeopathy” see below) points out that” bias and selective publishing of results are present on all levels.” But through it all, homeopathy continues to grow in popularity and demand. Everyone who has felt the benefits of homeopathy will attest to its efficacy. Sankaran comments, “ Nothing sustains a form of medicine for 150 years unless it is effective. Homeopaths today successfully use the same remedies that were used 150 years ago, in addition to adding new ones to their materia medica. In contrast, modern medicine keeps discarding many of its wonder drugs once their side effects become known.” He also reminds us that each medical system has its strengths and limitations. By working along side and not against each other, there is an advantage to our patients. Maya de Szegheo-Lang Ontario Homeopathic Association |
||