NHS spending on homeopathy cannot be justified
Posted by Julian Huppert, MP for Cambridge, at 11:42, Fri 2 July 2010:
The British Medical Association has recently called for a ban on NHS funding of homeopathy, a system that uses highly diluted substances to treat patients. As a scientist and a strong proponent of evidence-based policies, I applaud the BMA’s view. The NHS has funded homeopathic treatments for a long time, but a commitment to evidence-based policies means examining evidence and data to evaluate decisions. In light of what we know about homeopathy—namely, that it is ineffective beyond placebo—it is simply wrong for the NHS to continue spending on homeopathic treatments. There is no scientific basis for why an extremely diluted solution completely devoid of any active ingredient should be an effective treatment. Homeopathy has been shown to be ineffective beyond placebo, as summarised in the findings of the Fourth Report from the Science and Technology Select Committee of Session 2009-10, Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy, HC 45. The use of homeopathy by NHS doctors also raises ethical questions. Because the placebo effect ultimately depends on deception, it removes patient choice and undermines the trust inherent in the doctor-patient relationship. It is unethical to prescribe patients homeopathic remedies while giving them the mistaken impression that they are valid medical treatments. In these tough economic times where we must look for savings, spending on homeopathy cannot be justified. Disgracefully, our Government has no idea how much it spends on homeopathy, but estimates reported by the Guardian place NHS spending on homeopathy at £12 million from 2005 to 2008. These are millions of pounds that could be spent on treatments that have been proven to be effective at treating patients. People are of course welcome to spend their own money on any legal products they choose, but for the NHS to continue giving the best care to our country, it must look to evidence to justify its programs and cut spending that is not effective and not cost-effective. When times are tough, difficult decisions need to be made. Fortunately, this is not one of them. I hope we make the right choice by ending NHS funding of homeopathy.
Comments
If you are subscribed to HearFromYourMP in this constituency,
log in to post a reply.
Otherwise, if you live in the UK,
sign up in order to
HearFromYourMP.
Posted by John Connett, 12:05, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
Agree wholeheartedly! There should be no NHS funding of homeopathy. -- John Connett
Posted by Ewan Kirk, 12:12, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
I completely agree that NHS spending on homeopathy is a total waste of money. However, at £12m, it's 1/100th of one percent of NHS spending and spending time and effort on this isn't going to save much money. Try to focus on the big issues if possible...
Posted by Jon Wilson, 12:29, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
Here, here. It's ridiculous that it was funded in the first place.
Posted by Andy Saul, 13:01, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
Absolutely. A pound spent on homeopathy from the public purse is a pound wasted.
Posted by Pedram Badakhchani, 13:33, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
Absolutely agree, homeopathy is dangerous
http://www.1023.org.uk/whats-the-harm-in-homeopathy.php
Posted by Daniel Bratton, 13:43, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
I agree. Let's hope the NHS is soon banned from wasting money on this ridiculous snake oil.
Posted by Dr Mike Clark, 13:55, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
I fully support your stance on this issue. As a medical researcher I have always found it to be of the utmost hypocrisy that NICE will not give approval for new therapies that have a scientifically proven benefit because they fail to achieve an appropriate cost benefit threshold when the NHS is also spending large sums of money on homeopathic remedies that are effectively little more than water sold at huge profit. As you say the theoretical basis for any observed effectiveness of homeopathic remedies is most likely due to faith healing in response to a prescribed placebo, but a placebo that is sold at great profit to the manufacturers.
Posted by wynn turley, 15:31, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
Please don't send me any more emails. I used to vote liberal however if I want the Tories in I will vote for them direct.
Posted by Roger Giddings, 17:08, Fri 2 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
I thought Cambridge was supposed to be full of intelligent people, not blinkered self opinionated pseudo scientists as represented on this site. Try getting your head out of your test tube or next research grant application and look at the research that is done world wide on Homeopathy. Apply some reason rather than bigoted opinion. Huppert has just lost my vote.
Posted by Nick Tuson, 15:14, Sun 4 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
The trouble is the retreat from science and rationality - this is a symptom and a sop to tedious middle-class voters. Of course it doesn't work - ample proof. Of course we should not fund it - a no-brainer. But are we going to fix a system that allowed it funding in the first place? Where was the BMA then? Where the MPs? We should also not pay consultants so much - the reason is that studies show no correlation between hospitals, consultants and health of the population. They DO show a correlation with health and living conditions, health and GP services and health and income. So the rational thing to do is scrap the middle-class subsidy called Big Pharma and concentrate on good local care. That has problems, not least the deflationary impact of extracting so much from the economy and the political outcry from noisy surgeons. Of course, it could be re-invested in house-building and science research, but a land-owning class is not going for that because it reduces their net yields.
When there is something rotten in the state of Denmark, one must fix the state, not the smell. Or, more apositely, the Great Stink in London was the result of poor planning and investment - Basilgette's sewers solved that, but the sheets hung over the windows of Parliament did not. We must take care we do not merely raise sheets to hide behind - we elect representatives for more than self-interest and neglect.
Electoral reform is a good start but won't be allowed in any meaningful form precisely because it cuts across so much privelege and abuse.
Vote against Homeopathy, but also vote FOR NICE, FOR investment, FOR science, FOR reform.
Cheers, Nick
Posted by Mr Duncan Skinner, 16:27, Sun 4 July 2010: (Is this post abusive?) #
Long overdue. If only the government would also base it's drugs policy on evidence we would have much less suffering because of illegal drugs sold by organised criminals.
Posted by Wolfgang Hoffmann, 01:23, Fri 25 February 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
Julian Huppert, About what kind of scientists and scientific research are you talking about? If you look at some independent research that has been done you will find very different results. What you are talking about is opinionated politics and not science. It sounds to me that you are supporting the pharmaceutical industry and their multi-million business who have been fighting for many years in order to disgrace homeopathy. To give you some direct evidence: I was treated with homeopathic remedies for ten years and that did me more good than some 'common' medicine. But that was not in the UK. Now you lost me totally, Julian Huppert.
W Hoffmann, Cambridge
Posted by John Connett, 11:41, Fri 25 February 2011: (Is this post abusive?) #
Recently received the Government response to the petition to "Implement the recommendations of the House Commons Science and Technology committee evidence check on Homeopathy".
"The new Government considered the findings and recommendations of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee and has published a full response.
The Department of Health will not be withdrawing funding for homeopathy on the NHS, nor will the licensing of homeopathic products be stopped. Decisions on the provision and funding of any treatment will remain the responsibility of the NHS locally".
Hands thoroughly washed, probably with homeopathic antiseptic!
More details from:
http://www.hmg.gov.uk/epetition-responses/petition-view.aspx?epref=nohomeopathy