Deleted

There is only one type of science and medicine. The tested type. Whatever its origins, if it works, it can be tested. Once it has been tested, it can be used.

Complementary medicine complements just what ?

Alternative TO medicine is the proper phrase.

The state should not subsidise, encourage or promote quackery.

TT said:
"The state should not subsidise, encourage or promote quackery."

Should the state actively engage in opposing alternative methods?

In case TT does not return, I thought this might indicate where nanny says "quackery" should reside:

uk.reuters.com/artic...

Before there is any further extension of NHS services, treatments etc there should be a thorough review of what it already does

A little rationalisation is long overdue

'Mumbo Jumbo Medicine' has no place in the NHS. If foolish people wish to receive a dose of placebo or get conned then it should be at their own expense.

TT
You [and others] have a rather blinkered approach to this subject. Whilst I agree that homeopathy defies any kind of scientific logic it may actually work for some and that is the proof, personally I do think it's quackery but it should not be confused with natural remedies which have been tried and tested for many many years and are in fact the roots of our current medicine. This issue is of course manipulated by the corporate drugs co's who don't want us to use natural remedies that reduce their profits. We can help ourselves to no end by being 'in-tune' with our minds and bodies, knowing what we can do for ourselves to aviod dis-ease and keep away from the doctor and his/her side effect ridden toxic 'cures' in the first place. I always consult the 'green pharmacy' before going to my local surgery.

You can't see an osteopath on the NHS but they do work and my GP sees the same one that I do, but apart from that most of it is total tosh and I live in the complementary/alternative therapies capital of the world, of coarse some natural medicines work some where out there mother nature has the answers but they need to be scientifically tested and brought into mainstream medicine.

How long does it take to get out of pre mod on this board keep popping back but it seems never to let anyone in, this keeps been mentioned on other BBC message boards are you some sort of private club??

complementary Medicine; I suppose it might help to pay someone.......compliments

Complementary: (of two or more different things) combining in such a way as to form a complete whole or enhance each other.
Alternative: available as another possibility, OR mutually exclusive.

1) Note the two are not interchangeable.
2) There is no implication that an evidence based thing should be given equal weight to a non-evidence based thing in either term.

There are two clichés
1) Evidence based.
2) Current best practice.

In my former existence I was constantly frustrated by clichés! Conventional dental practise is not necessarily either evidence based or best practice, yet it can be enforced with the full force of the GDC.

Example: Sub-acute bacterial endocarditis (SBE). As a student it was received wisdom that all patients that had recovered from rheumatic fever had to receive prophylactic antibiotics to prevent SBE when undergoing certain dental procedures. This was then extended to patients who had cardiac surgery. Evidence? None. Failure to administer AB cover leading to subsequent SBE would result in BIG trouble; negligence. Now no AB cover is required for anything; current best practice. Presumably complications caused by the administration of AB cover e.g. allergy would result in similar draconian punishment.

I would ask on what day the reversal occurred so that two practitioners could be punished for sins of commission and omission separated by a mere 24 hours!

Another example, this time medical: I was frequently given “junior aspirin” as a child. Now any mother doing this could probably be accused of child abuse! In fact it was only in the early 1970s that we had any idea how aspirin worked.

While with these examples in mind it could be said that it ill behoves the medical profession to criticise the “witch-doctors” of homeopathy and acupuncture, neither of which therapies have EVER produced effective or repeatable results under double blind testing, I do subscribe to evidence based treatment. I just wish that the evidence was a bit better researched and not subject to reversal.

Best practice should not be coloured by current fashion and “crackpot ideas” should not be rejected without testing. Once tested, well that’s another story!

Finally even my bête noir NICE, the National Institute for Clinical Economy, surely would not approve ineffective treatment on the NHS just because it was cheap, would it?

It can't be worse than the effects on the Stalinist "NHS", of boob , bottom, and erectile dysfunction 'lobbies', in a state characterised by UN and other research teams as hostile to the children that are its future, or somebody else's