[escepticos] Re: [escepticos] RE Un estudio cuestiona la eficacia de la homeopatía

[Javier Armentia <javarm@xxxxxxxx>]

El Editorial de THE LANCET:

THE END OF HOMOEOPATHY
That homoeopathy fares poorly when compared with
allopathy in Aijing Shang and colleagues’ systematic
evaluation is unsurprising. Of greater interest is the fact
that this debate continues, despite 150 years of
unfavourable findings. The more dilute the evidence for
homoeopathy becomes, the greater seems its popularity.
For too long, a politically correct laissez-faire attitude
has existed towards homoeopathy, but there are now
signs of enlightenment from unlikely sources. The UK
Parliamentary Select Committee on Science and
Technology issued a report about complementary and
alternative medicine in 2000. It recommended “any
therapy that makes specific claims for being able to treat
specific conditions should have evidence of being able to
do this above and beyond the placebo effect”. Going
one step further, the Swiss Government, after a 5-year
trial, has now withdrawn insurance coverage for
homoeopathy and four other complementary
treatments because they did not meet efficacy and costeffectiveness
criteria.
In a Comment, Jan Vandenbroucke gives a
philosophical interpretation of Shang’s study. One other
philosopher he might have included is Kant, who
reminds us that we see things not as they are, but as we
are. This observation is also true of health-care
consumers, who may see homoeopathy as a holistic
alternative to a disease-focused, technology-driven
medical model. It is the attitudes of patients and
providers that engender alternative-therapy seeking
behaviours which create a greater threat to conventional
care—and patients’ welfare—than do spurious
arguments of putative benefits from absurd dilutions.
Surely the time has passed for selective analyses,
biased reports, or further investment in research to
perpetuate the homoeopathy versus allopathy debate.
Now doctors need to be bold and honest with their
patients about homoeopathy’s lack of benefit, and
with themselves about the failings of modern medicine
to address patients’


Sobre el tema, nueva entrada en la pecera.
Saludos

javier armentia
---

Dasmandr escribió:

> En la Cadena SER parece que ya van llegando los redactores que estaban
> de vacaciones y han hecho un mejor artículo:
>
> http://www.cadenaser.com/articulo.html?xref=20050826csrcsrsoc_6&type=Tes
>
> El 26/08/05, Nacho<ncc1701zzz@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:
>  
>
> > El 26/08/05, Jose Ramón Brox<ambroxius@xxxxxxxx> escribió:
> >
> > [El artículo de El Mundo]
> >    
> >
> > > En conjunto lo considero un mal artículo.
> > >      
> > En El Mundo, de un tema científico, y en pleno Agosto, ¿esperabas otra cosa?
> >
> > Saludos.
> >
> >    
>
>