Then as an adult I discovered that there was an NHS homeopathic hospital staffed by doctors who had had conventional medical training and homeopathic training. So I naturally assumed that if the NHS were funding it, it must be efficacious. Then when nothing was helping me with my hayfever I asked to be referred to the London Homeopathic hospital for treatment. The treatment worked. Well the couple of years that I went for treatment I didn’t suffer from the particularly bad hayfever that I had suffered from in previous years.

However I was having a chat with one of the doctors about the success rate they had with hayfever treatments and how they worked out the statistics. He said “people come to see us for about three years and then it usually doesn’t need further treatment after that, and they’ve invariably been cured” I asked “how do you know that?” to which he replied “they haven’t come back for further treatment so they must be better”. Even with my scientific ignorance that sounded a bit fishy.

Then I read Ben Goldacre’s book and realised how stupid I had been. If I hadn’t read his book – maybe the placebo would still be working for me!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8640582.stm

New guidance for homeopathy use
The regulatory body for pharmacists in NI has proposed that patients be told that homeopathic products do not work, other than having a placebo effect.
The draft guidance comes following a report on homeopathy published earlier this year by the House of Commons Science committee.
It reviewed the evidence base for homeopathy and concluded that it was “not an efficacious form of treatment.”

But to what extent and in what way?

Homeopathy has no effect (as demonstrated by credible scientific evidence) on any pathological process.

So the effect of Homeopathy is, as Le Canard points out – on and by the “experience”.

And similar effects can be, and are, obtained by many means including other ‘placebos’ (sugar pills and the like), but also Tender Loving Care, a stiff drink, a satisfactory date with a loved one, a holiday, shaking hands with a member of the Royal Family or other celebrity (or perhaps touching the hem of their robe)…etc; etc.

Simple.

If some folk want to dress up in white coats, bash leather pads with phials of water, organise racks of water with fancy sounding names on the phials, conjure pseudo scientific explanations for non-existant effects,get naieve celebrities to endorse their behaviour, fair enough – whatever turns you on. But they should be honest and admit that is what they are up to.

Just as when I perform “Entertainmant at the Speed of Thought” in the guise of “Professor Riccardo” I admit I am a Member of The Magic Circle” – which of course imples that I do not actually use ‘magic’ except in the show business sense.

I call on Homeopaths to carry on their good work, but with honesty, integrity and probity about what they are up to.

At this year’s BMA Conference (June 28-30th) I am proposing that chemist shops remove homeopathic remedies from shelves marked as “medicines” (of any sort), and sell them from shelves clearly marked as “Placebos”.

I hope homeopaths will support this motion. Why would they not do so?

I am also proposing that no more funding should accrue to homeopathy unless and until NICE reports and makes recommendations.

My last proposal in 2008 established BMA policy that NICE should report. I now propose that until they have done so, public funding should be withdrawn.

That homeopathy is a placebo is beyond reasonable doubt. A placebo is just a treatment ‘given to please’ that in themselves do not have any specific effects.

An “effective placebo” is oxymoronic, I would argue.

What you could ask is why do so many people believe homeopathy to be effective and what is it about homeopathy that appears to be so good at instilling this belief? That is a valid question – and there are lots of good answers, although I would be the first to confess we do not know all the answers to that one.

The other interesting topic, and one Michael Brooks touches on, is the question of whether beliefs induced by a placebo can in themselves give rise to specific measurable health improvements.

There is an assumption amongst many that they can – and that this placebo effect is ‘powerful’. But studies to confirm this are few and far between and is is looking more and more that this might just be largely a myth.

A placebo does not alter the course of your illness. It may, however, change your mood and your beliefs that effect directly your experience of your illness. That may have some benefits, but it is an effect available to all medications and not just pseudo-medical treatments like homeopathy. The valid questions around this are to do with how you might enhance any effect here and, more importantly, what are the ethical issues of doing so – e.g. can you achieve benefit without deceit.

I am sorry the topic of my blog is not the same as what you think I ought to be talking about. I understand there are many scientists looking into the problems you mention and debating with each other.

As a matter of interest, how many problems do you think need solving in the world before you would approve of people discussing the dreadful problems inherent within the world of homeopathy?