Entry 712, on 2008-03-03 at 21:31:39 (Rating 3, Science)
You would think that when you visited a medical professional you could do so without being prescribed some nonsensical remedy based on some sort of pseudoscience. Those of you who have read previous entries in this blog won't be surprised to hear that a podcast has annoyed me to the point where I need to engage in a rant.
The podcast involved sea sickness (you weren't expecting that, right) and various possible remedies prescribed by a professional pharmacist. Initially things looked good as she mentioned several drugs with proven effectiveness, as well as some side effects. But then she started heading into an alternative universe by talking about acupuncture.
Now I freely admit that acupuncture is not the worst form of pseudoscience. I think the balance of evidence is against it having any real effectiveness, with the possible exception of acupuncture including electrical currents. The mode of action of acupuncture is complete nonsense, so if it does work it is purely through luck rather than design.
So I let the acupuncture thing pass but worse was to come. The next remedy this professional (really?) pharmacist mentioned was homeopathy! The evidence supporting this rather bizarre belief comes entirely from very badly performed experiments, anecdotal incidents, and some pseudoscientific nonsense with no credibility at all.
When you buy a homeopathic remedy you buy water. There are two problems with this. First, its very expensive water that you drink a few drops at a time and, apart from the placebo effect, has no benefit at all. Second, by using a homeopathic remedy the patient usually fails to use something that has a chance of working, such as a conventional medicine.
I work at a university and I don't know how much time the pharmacy department here spends teaching alternative medicine to its students. I don't have an objection to teaching alternative medicine because some of it actually has some limited effectiveness, but I think it should be pointed out that some forms really don't work: homeopathy being one of the worst; and others are unproven at best and ineffective and possibly dangerous at worse (for example, acupuncture).
Support for alternative remedies often takes two forms. One is the claim that conventional medicines are there just because they are pushed by large pharmaceutical organisations for their own profit. The other is that alternative remedies are natural and were devised hundreds or thousands of years ago.
I don't accept either of these. I agree that commercial pressures are a problem in conventional medicine, but on balance it is just one negative aspect of a medical environment which has been remarkably successful.
The claim that traditional medicines are ancient so therefore they must work just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. For example, the average life span of the Chinese people was very low until they introduced western style, evidence-based medicine there. If acupuncture is so good why didn't it work for them?
We know that many ancient medical beliefs were ineffective. If using ancient remedies is so good let's go back to leaches and blood letting! Yes, I know they occasionally worked, but more often they just made things worse.
So I'm very disappointed that pharmacists are pushing nonsense like homeopathy. Ironically, in many cases they do it for the same reason that people are warned against using scientific medicine: because they are there to make a profit.
Comment 1 by Anonymous on 2008-03-10 at 11:51:42:
How do you explain the real scientific evidence which supports alternative medicine? Last year there was a study which showed that homeopathy does work. It was a real scientific study described in a medical journal. Maybe it really does work.
Comment 2 by SBFL on 2008-03-16 at 22:12:01:
I don't really buy into alternative medicines, but they do appear to be on the rise. Not a trend you would expect if they failed to be effective.
Comment 3 by OJB on 2008-03-17 at 15:01:33:
Regarding the scientific evidence: There are some studies which support alternative remedies and I think some of them might help to some extent. Some herbs have a limited positive effect, for example. But the big research result supporting homeopathy (for example) has been shown to be fake. And the balance of support for most alternative medicine is negative.
Regarding the popularity of alternative meds: I think its very dangerous assuming something is true or efficacious because its popular. There are numerous examples where this hasn't worked. The popularity could also be because people are sucked in by marketing, or the health food shops and pharmacies who stock this stuff sell it irresponsibly.
Comment 4 by SBFL on 2008-03-19 at 00:35:42:
Well possibly. I guess the proof will be in the pudding on this one.
Comment 5 by OJB on 2008-03-19 at 18:07:52:
if you're interested, I have an entry on the subject in my skepticism section here.
You can leave comments about this using this form.
Enter name, email (optional), enter number, comment, click Add. You can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies. Comment should appear immediately (authorisation is inactive).
BLOG PAGE