22 February 2010
Steve Scrutton, Director, Alliance of Registered Homeopaths
PRESS STATEMENT
For Immediate Release
Patients' Voice Excluded From Homeopathy Investigation
If you think patients might know about the treatment options that work best for
them, a parliamentary committee thinks otherwise. The results of a so called
'evidence check' into the effectiveness of homeopathy have just been released,
and they reveal an extraordinarily narrow view of what constitutes 'evidence'.
For one thing, no one has bothered to ask patients what their experience of
homeopathy has been. In fact, the patients' voice has been totally excluded from
the investigation! This is strange, because according to the Government White
Paper (January 2006) ‘Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for
community services,’ 'patient centred healthcare' is supposed to be at the heart
of NHS delivery. Or is this a commitment which is upheld, only when it's
politically expedient?
Recently, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (HoC S&TC) were
charged to investigate the available evidence in support of the efficacy of
homeopathy. Their survey comprised a combination of written submissions and oral
presentations. Now you would think that a specially convened committee of this
nature, would be keen to access information from every possible source. You
might even think that, given the recent parliamentary expenses scandal, a
parliamentary special committee would want to conduct its business in an open,
transparent and even handed manner, and show that it is using taxpayers' money
in a responsible manner. But you would be wrong!
Most of the homeopathy profession were not informed directly that an enquiry was
to take place, and only learned of it via the media, with less than ten days to
prepare a submission. Is that a serious way to treat an 'evidence check'? The
majority of individuals invited to give oral evidence were from the anti
homeopathy lobby. Only one practising homeopath was allowed to speak (there are
about 2,500 registered homeopaths in the UK), and not a single patient was asked
for their view (there are about 6,000,000 patients using homeopathy in the UK).
Does this sound as though the oral submissions represented a balanced
perspective?
But wait, there's more! It has been said that this 'evidence check' was
instigated by Liberal Democrat MP Dr Evan Harris, one of homeopathy's most
vociferous detractors. Dr Harris belongs to a self appointed pressure group that
calls itself 'Sense About Science' (SAS, get it?!!) If you want to know the
particular allegiance of this group, just take a look at who comprises SAS's
Board of Trustees, and the industries they represent. Did you know that Dr
Harris was one of the fourteen members of the S&T Committee? Shortly after the
inquiry closed, Dr Harris took part in a very public demonstration against
homeopathy. Is this the correct way for an individual in a privileged and
responsible position to behave? Should someone showing such a clear bias from
the outset, be allowed to sit on a committee of this nature? One could be
forgiven for thinking that our parliamentary process has been hijacked by this
influential pressure group, which seems to have succeeded in subverting the S&T
Committee into convening a 'kangaroo court' with just one predetermined agenda;
to discredit homeopathy.
As Karin Mont, Chair of the Alliance of Registered Homeopaths said; 'Millions of
patients in the UK know that homeopathy works for them, yet they are being
totally ignored. Also, we see the most amazing results when homeopathy is used
on animals, but this Committee seems intent on denying all the supportive
evidence with which it has been presented. If their recommendations are acted
upon by Government, patients will be denied the choice they have a right to
receive within the NHS. In short, if they can't afford to pay for their
homeopathic treatment privately, they'll have to go without!'
It appears that hundreds of positive trials, thousands of hospital reports, a
successful mass immunisation programme in Cuba, and a recent pilot project in
Northern Ireland, all showing homeopathy to be efficacious and cost efficient,
don't count as evidence. In fact the conclusions of the S&T Committee are so one
sided, you could ask if they actually read any of the submissions presented to
them? The experience of patients obviously doesn't count either, because they
weren't even invited to contribute to the enquiry. This is a sad day for our
citizens. It makes a mockery of genuine scientific enquiry, it brings the
democratic process into disrepute, and it has the potential to deny patients
access to a system of medicine which is gentle, safe, effective and cost
efficient.
ENDS
CONTACTS FOR EDITORS
Alliance of Registered Homeopaths
Millbrook, Millbrook Hill, Nutley
East Sussex. TN22 3PJ
Tel: 01825 714506
Email: info@a-r-h.org
Website: www.a-r-h.org
Registered Office
Steve Scrutton
Registrar and Media Officer
Alliance of Registered Homeopaths.
15 Manitoba Close, Corby,
Northamptonshire. NN18 9HX
Tel: 01536 744520
Email: steve@a-r-h.org
THE ALLIANCE OF REGISTERED HOMEOPATHS
INFORMATION FOR EDITORS
The Alliance of Registered Homeopaths (ARH) is a UK professional organisation
that supports and promotes a high standard of safe, effective homeopathic
practice. It currently represents over 700 practising homeopaths.
We are committed to:
.. ensuring that quality homeopathy is available to all who wish to use it
.. raising public awareness of the potential of homeopathic treatment
.. encouraging a high standard of education for homeopaths
.. supporting the ongoing professional development of our Members
.. encouraging co-operation between our Members and other healthcare
professionals, for the benefit of patients
.. engaging in research, publishing and other activities that enhance our
understanding of homeopathy
.. acting as an information base for the general public.