An incredibly rare good move by MPs?
Discussion
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/feb/22/stop...
For those of you who don't know Homeopathic medicine costs the NHS in the region of 12 million plus a year although exact figures are not available.
The treatment contains nothing more than water and is scientifically proven to be of no more benefit than a simlarly administered placebo and it diverts funds drastically needed elsewhere.
Like all alternative therapies, by definition, it has never been proven to work or has been proven not to work.
Is this a rare case of common sense by MPs to save NHS resources?
For those of you who don't know Homeopathic medicine costs the NHS in the region of 12 million plus a year although exact figures are not available.
The treatment contains nothing more than water and is scientifically proven to be of no more benefit than a simlarly administered placebo and it diverts funds drastically needed elsewhere.
Like all alternative therapies, by definition, it has never been proven to work or has been proven not to work.
Is this a rare case of common sense by MPs to save NHS resources?
The salient point in your commentary is that it's no better or worse than placebo. This is true. Do not however assume that placebos are ineffective: far from it. Perhaps to save money the NHS might consider replacing treatments involving expensive drugs with cheaper placebos (but homeopathy will do). This would especially make sense for illnesses such as depression, which has been shown to benefit greatly from placebo and that drugs offer little improvement.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/he...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/he...
bogwoppit said:
The salient point in your commentary is that it's no better or worse than placebo. This is true. Do not however assume that placebos are ineffective: far from it. Perhaps to save money the NHS might consider replacing treatments involving expensive drugs with cheaper placebos (but homeopathy will do). This would especially make sense for illnesses such as depression, which has been shown to benefit greatly from placebo and that drugs offer little improvement.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/he...
As a clinical researcher as such I'm well aware of the benefits of the placebo effect.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/he...
However Homeopathy is extremely costly (12 million a year for water) and it remains grossly unethical to prescribe any placebo outside of a randomised controlled clinical trial.
I would imagine that a doctor knowingly prescribing any placebo (that isn't registered as an alternative medicine) would probably see himself struck off. It is a violation of the trust between a doctor and patient as the doctor is effectively trying to "trick" the patient.
In trials we have masses of consent forms and ethics committees before we can work with placebos. Infact in most instances it simply cannot be done as it is not ethical to replace medication with nothing.
nonegreen said:
Its a great shame the same logic is not applied to
1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
Sh!t!1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
I am going to have to have a stiff drink!
I agree with everything there. This is a dark dark day.
G_T said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/feb/22/stop...
For those of you who don't know Homeopathic medicine costs the NHS in the region of 12 million plus a year although exact figures are not available.
The treatment contains nothing more than water and is scientifically proven to be of no more benefit than a simlarly administered placebo and it diverts funds drastically needed elsewhere.
How much would it cost to treat these people with placebos? Knowing the NHS, a damned sight more than £12m.For those of you who don't know Homeopathic medicine costs the NHS in the region of 12 million plus a year although exact figures are not available.
The treatment contains nothing more than water and is scientifically proven to be of no more benefit than a simlarly administered placebo and it diverts funds drastically needed elsewhere.
yeah stop this and keep all those worthless quangos going....nice one they saved the world again, lets take out a 20million pound ad on tellie to let everyone know...
whether it works or not, i reckon the real reason is their being lobbyed by the big bad pharmas to completely wipe out alternative medicine....
whether it works or not, i reckon the real reason is their being lobbyed by the big bad pharmas to completely wipe out alternative medicine....
Well, I am going to open myself to flamming here but I have been using Homeopathy for years. To be frank, I really wouldn't care if it was on the NHS or not since you can have pretty much all the treatments you will ever need for £100 via other countries (mainly Switzerland, Germany and France...deeply unhealthy countries as we all know) and it's getting difficult to find the right products at the right CH in the UK anyway. In fact, I didn't even know you could get homeopathy through the NHS.
£12 millions is a joke though when you see what the NHS budget is: 60% for paying staff, 20% for drugs and other supply, the rest for buildings, vehicles etc. Budget is north of £100billion. According to NHS page, that's £1980 per UK habitant, so your £12 millions would save you: 2p.
I'd have more money in my pockets if they were working to repay their "expenses" rather than trying to gain public sympathy waving unconfirmed figures which in the grand scheme of things are peanuts.
£12 millions is a joke though when you see what the NHS budget is: 60% for paying staff, 20% for drugs and other supply, the rest for buildings, vehicles etc. Budget is north of £100billion. According to NHS page, that's £1980 per UK habitant, so your £12 millions would save you: 2p.
I'd have more money in my pockets if they were working to repay their "expenses" rather than trying to gain public sympathy waving unconfirmed figures which in the grand scheme of things are peanuts.
louiebaby said:
Also, how much is it saving on other therapies and counselling costs?
I have no problem with people acting on their beliefs provided they pay for them themselves. Since the main ingredient in homeopathic remedies is water is shouldn't cost a lot.
If the scientific evidence shows this stuff is nothing more than a placebo the NHS shouldn't be paying for it. They have placebos of their own - and Doctors could prescribe them!
Bill can just fill the little bottle from the tap at the back of the pharmacy...£12m back in the budget.
Mclovin said:
yeah stop this and keep all those worthless quangos going....nice one they saved the world again, lets take out a 20million pound ad on tellie to let everyone know...
whether it works or not, i reckon the real reason is their being lobbyed by the big bad pharmas to completely wipe out alternative medicine....
God no!whether it works or not, i reckon the real reason is their being lobbyed by the big bad pharmas to completely wipe out alternative medicine....
They were wanting to have them brought into mainstream use.
Think of the profit that could be made from water that once touched something that might possibly have done something.
G_T said:
bogwoppit said:
The salient point in your commentary is that it's no better or worse than placebo. This is true. Do not however assume that placebos are ineffective: far from it. Perhaps to save money the NHS might consider replacing treatments involving expensive drugs with cheaper placebos (but homeopathy will do). This would especially make sense for illnesses such as depression, which has been shown to benefit greatly from placebo and that drugs offer little improvement.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/he...
As a clinical researcher as such I'm well aware of the benefits of the placebo effect.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/he...
However Homeopathy is extremely costly (12 million a year for water) and it remains grossly unethical to prescribe any placebo outside of a randomised controlled clinical trial.
I would imagine that a doctor knowingly prescribing any placebo (that isn't registered as an alternative medicine) would probably see himself struck off. It is a violation of the trust between a doctor and patient as the doctor is effectively trying to "trick" the patient.
In trials we have masses of consent forms and ethics committees before we can work with placebos. Infact in most instances it simply cannot be done as it is not ethical to replace medication with nothing.
Also, £12m is peanuts compared to the cost of the other treatments that the doctor would end up prescribing. I think you'd fine the NHS paying more if they were abolished.
Don't get me wrong, as a scientist myself it annoys me no end that chiropractors and the like gets to spout rubbish about the value of their treatments, natural remedies can make unsubstantiated claims of efficacy etc. But that's a separate issue and the fact that people believe these things actually probably saves us money.
Edited by bogwoppit on Wednesday 24th February 17:14
Edited by bogwoppit on Wednesday 24th February 17:14
elster said:
nonegreen said:
Its a great shame the same logic is not applied to
1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
Sh!t!1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
I am going to have to have a stiff drink!
I agree with everything there. This is a dark dark day.
J B L said:
Mr E said:
J B L said:
To be frank, I really wouldn't care if it was on the NHS or not since you can have pretty much all the treatments you will ever need for £100 via other countries
Or free from a tap.
nonegreen said:
elster said:
nonegreen said:
Its a great shame the same logic is not applied to
1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
Sh!t!1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
I am going to have to have a stiff drink!
I agree with everything there. This is a dark dark day.
Dick Seaman said:
nonegreen said:
elster said:
nonegreen said:
Its a great shame the same logic is not applied to
1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
Sh!t!1 Man made climate change
2 Windmills
3 The civil service
All 3 of which have no proof to substantiate either their existance or their effectiveness.
I am going to have to have a stiff drink!
I agree with everything there. This is a dark dark day.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff