eCAM Advance Access originally published online on January 26, 2006
eCAM 2006 3(1):145-147; doi:10.1093/ecam/nek007
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author (2006). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved
The online version of this article has been published under an open access model. Users are entitled to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the open access version of this article for non-commercial purposes provided that: the original authorship is properly and fully attributed; the Journal and Oxford University Press are attributed as the original place of publication with the correct citation details given; if an article is subsequently reproduced or disseminated not in its entirety but only in part or as a derivative work this must be clearly indicated. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Commentary |
Homeopathy and The Lancet
Director of Research, Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital Great Ormond Street, London WC1N 3HR, UK
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
 |
Introduction |
|---|
The Lancet of August 27, 2005 featured a cluster of articles highly critical of homeopathy which attracted considerable media attention. The media reports echoed The Lancet's press release: ‘homeopathy is no better than placebo’. The centerpiece was a meta-analysis of clinical trials of homeopathy compared with clinical trials of allopathy (conventional medicine) (1). The first author is Aijing Shang, but the leader of the research group is Prof. Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Berne, Switzerland.
The meta-analysis formed part of the Complementary Medicine Evaluation Programme (Programm Evaluation Komplementärmedizin, PEK) financed by the Swiss Federal government. The international review board of PEK has publicly protested at political interference in the scientific process: ‘There is a consensus among the review board members that the final PEK process deviated from what would have been expected by conventional standards. Especially disconcerting was the fact that
|
The Meta-Analysis |
|---|
|
Transparency, Sensitivity and External Validity |
|---|
|
Upper Respiratory Tract Infections |
|---|
|
Conclusion |
|---|
For reprints and all correspondence: Peter Fisher, Director of Research, Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital, Great Ormond Street, London WC1N 3HR, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 20 7391 8890; Fax: +44 (0) 20 7391 8829; E-mail: Peter.fisher@uclh.nhs.uk
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  L. R. Milgrom Journeys in The Country of The Blind: Entanglement Theory and The Effects of Blinding on Trials of Homeopathy and Homeopathic Provings Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med., March 1, 2007; 4(1): 7 - 16. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. R. Khuda-Bukhsh Laboratory Research in Homeopathy: Pro Integr Cancer Ther, December 1, 2006; 5(4): 320 - 332. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Bellavite, R. Ortolani, F. Pontarollo, V. Piasere, G. Benato, and A. Conforti Immunology and Homeopathy. 4. Clinical Studies--Part 2 Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med., December 1, 2006; 3(4): 397 - 409. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
E-letters:
Read all E-letters
- Homeopathy and the Lancet... and worse
- Paul Lepine
- Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 22 Feb 2006 [Full text]
- Homeopathy and Randomised Eminent Professors (Emeritus or Otherwise)
- Lionel Milgrom
- Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 14 Jul 2006 [Full text]
- Reply to Lettery by LR Milgrom
- Edzard Ernst, et al.
- Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 5 Mar 2007 [Full text]
- Comment on an open letter to Professor Edzard Ernst from Dr Lionel Milgrom
- Leslie Rose
- Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 6 Mar 2007 [Full text]