Either homeopathy is not particularly effective and so does not need regulation, because the statistical significance that it has a helpful effect is so low; or else it causes measurable and directly attributable effects on the body, in which case surely questions of when to take it and how much to take are important??
I've heard, for example, that echinacea works by stimulating white blood cell response. I have no idea if it's actually true, and a quick google didn't turn up anything to support this. But if it is true then, for example, leukaemia patients, or HIV patients, or patients with systemic lupus, should surely be warned that they should not be taking it, as there'd be contraindications?? This is the kind of thing that regulation would be extremely important for - if, that is, these therapies have any effect. And surely we won't know unless/until rigorous studies are conducted.
Unless/until that happens, I can't help but think that the biggest losers will be the patients - are surely any self-respecting therapist, of any stripe, would want their patients to have the best products and the best chances?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-21 09:44 am (UTC)I've heard, for example, that echinacea works by stimulating white blood cell response. I have no idea if it's actually true, and a quick google didn't turn up anything to support this. But if it is true then, for example, leukaemia patients, or HIV patients, or patients with systemic lupus, should surely be warned that they should not be taking it, as there'd be contraindications?? This is the kind of thing that regulation would be extremely important for - if, that is, these therapies have any effect. And surely we won't know unless/until rigorous studies are conducted.
Unless/until that happens, I can't help but think that the biggest losers will be the patients - are surely any self-respecting therapist, of any stripe, would want their patients to have the best products and the best chances?