Scribd
Upload
58 views

Diferente

The document discusses the arguments for and against accrediting homeopathy by the NHS. Against accreditation, it notes that numerous clinical trials have found homeopathy no more effective than placebo. It could mislead patients and waste taxpayer money. However, some argue that patients should have choice in treatment. For some therapies like acupuncture, there is evidence of limited effectiveness for certain conditions like back pain. More research is still needed to fully understand risks, compatibility with other treatments, and effectiveness.

Uploaded by

Gabriela Scarlat
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
58 views

Diferente

The document discusses the arguments for and against accrediting homeopathy by the NHS. Against accreditation, it notes that numerous clinical trials have found homeopathy no more effective than placebo. It could mislead patients and waste taxpayer money. However, some argue that patients should have choice in treatment. For some therapies like acupuncture, there is evidence of limited effectiveness for certain conditions like back pain. More research is still needed to fully understand risks, compatibility with other treatments, and effectiveness.

Uploaded by

Gabriela Scarlat
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Should homeopathy be accredited by the NHS

The term Complementary apply to all these types of therapy


taken alongside conventional treatment.
Alternative Medicine are therapy taken instead of
conventional treatment.

They include:
Homeopathy, Aromatherapy, Chinese Medicine,
Acupuncture, Reflexology, Hypnosis, Herbalism.

Arguments against

The basis for approval of treatments of the NHS is efficacy


and value for money. These are assessed by NICE and
decisions are made to fund or not fund treatments, which
are published as NICE guidelines. One of the key factors is
whether or not there is strong evidence that a therapy
actually works, and in practice this is established by clinical
trials.
These are experiments in which the therapy under question
is compared against placebos and alternative medications.

Homeopathy cost the NHS between 4 million and 10 million


a year.
Over 200 trials have been done and all have proven that
homeopathy does not work only as a placebo.

As Jeremy Hunt stated, money should be spent on what is


proven to work. It makes a lot more sense to spend money
on a treatment doctors agree with and know works than on
what a lot of people regard as nonsense.
The taxpayer pays large amount of tax for the NHS and they
want their money to go to a useful, worthwhile cause and
not on treatment that may not even work at all. Spending
large amounts of money on homeopathic treatment instead
of proven, tried and tested methods is a huge opportunity
cost that is rightfully seen as highly controversial.
It’s so highly diluted, so how can the dose size have any
effect at all?
There is a highly inconsistent relationship between dose and
effect, without any plausibility. Sometimes it appears to
works, sometimes it doesn’t. Just like a placebo effect,
homeopathy is incredibly unreliable, the same patient can
have varying results day after day.

Complementary medicine their likelihood of harm is limited


because the patient is also seeing their conventional doctor.
There is a danger that the public will think if the NHS is
funding for homeopathy treatment it will risks misleading
patients.
Providing a register of homeopathic practitioners risked
legitimising unproven treatments and that patients could
harm their health by choosing these over conventional
vaccines and medicines.
St John’s wort helps to reduce anxiety and help to improve
mood swings. It may reduce the effectiveness of several
medicines including some heart disease medications.
For example, constipation could be a more serious symptom
of another condition and delay treatment.

It could mean that the patient is not seeing a conventional


doctor and the potential for harm or delaying diagnoses is
much higher.
The evidence base backing these therapies is not as
substantial as compared to the evidence available for
conventional medicine. This is weak compared to the
stringent standards imposed on research for conventional
medicine.
Some complementary therapies involve taking substances
that may be toxic such as liver toxicity of some Chinese
Medicine treatments or that may interact with conventional
treatments being taken simultaneously.
Alternative therapies are poorly regulated.

An alternative therapist will not be a trained conventional


doctor and, therefore, will not be in a position to advice the
patient with the full picture in mind. This may lead to
patients making ill-informed and sometimes harmful
decisions.

Arguments for

Firstly, patients should have the right to choose their own


treatment and that choice should be respected -20% of the
population so it must be effective in some way.

As the PSA states, it wants to ensure that homeopathic


practices are to a sufficient standard so that anybody
considering using this type of treatment is happy with the
way it is carried out, and this leads to them being more
optimistic and believing of homeopathy. So certain
standards being met eases a patient’s mind and makes them
more confident in the treatment thus enhancing the quality
of the treatment.
Patients will get better by their own resources and mental
belief even if the drug has no effect whatsoever.
The placebo affect is very powerful and some patients
benefit.

Most types of complementary medicine have no evidence


base but a few such as acupuncture have been accepted as
being better than placebo for limited conditions such as back
pain.
It is thought that patients generally feel better because
practitioners tend to spend a lot of time with the patient and
form a therapeutic relationship.
Many therapies do not involve taking substances into the
system and therefore there is a low level of side effects
experienced by the patient.

Some therapies involve a high level of contact between the


therapist and the patient. The time spent treating the patient
is often considerably longer and has more of a holistic
nature that conventional treatment.

Some therapies involve a spiritual component which, along


with the greater therapist patient relationship, may fulfil the
needs of patients who require a more holistic approach to
their care.

When conventional medicine is failing a patient or where


options have run out, alternative therapies can offer further
hope.
Hypnotherapy is useful for weight loss, anxiety and
cessation of smoking.

Although they hay not necessarily treat the underlying


medical condition, they may still have a role in treating side
effects of conventional treatments or complications for
the underlying condition.

Conclusion

So far, evidence collected is poor quality and variable due to


poor standardization.
Perhaps, by making it more official it will have to go through
proper trials like drug trials.
It is very important to inform patients of their true
effectiveness.

Some patients have been put at risk from unregulated


homeopathy.
Any one offering medical advice should have medical
training.

We need more research.


Understanding of harmful effects and compatibility with
current treatments
Patients need protection and need to have proper and
strong regulated bodies behind them.
Proper training
An alternative practitioners should have a conventional
medical background.

You might also like