Homeopathy has received backing from two new studies that found a review into the therapy, which claimed it to be a placebo, was seriously flawed.
The review, which was published in medical journal The Lancet in August 2005 and title ‘The End of Homeopathy’, was based on a comparison of six conventional medicine clinical trials and eight homeopathic studies and claimed that homeopathy results were nothing more than placebo.
However, the review was found to be flawed due to assumptions about data and a lack of indication about which trials received analysis.
Reconstruction of the trials in two separate studies have since challenged the review published by The Lancet and led by Professor Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne.
The two new studies have revealed that:
- Homeopathy provides positive conclusions from the clinical trials
- The 8 homeopathy trials were for different conditions and if the therapy works for these but not others the implication is that homeopathy is not placebo.
- Comparing homeopathy with conventional medicine was meaningless
- Terms and definitions used in the review were not explained and doubts were cast over unpublished criteria
The reconstructed trials have cast doubts over the initial review by Professor Egger and that his study was based on hidden judgements that were unfavourable toward homeopathy. Current evidence suggest that homeopathy is an effective and beneficial treatment for a variety of conditions including allergies, respiratory problems and influenza.
Further information about homeopathy and the conditions it can treat here
Related News:
Acupuncture is safe for children
Knee osteoarthritis reduced by Pine Bark
The review, which was published in medical journal The Lancet in August 2005 and title ‘The End of Homeopathy’, was based on a comparison of six conventional medicine clinical trials and eight homeopathic studies and claimed that homeopathy results were nothing more than placebo.
However, the review was found to be flawed due to assumptions about data and a lack of indication about which trials received analysis.
Reconstruction of the trials in two separate studies have since challenged the review published by The Lancet and led by Professor Matthias Egger of the Department of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Berne.
The two new studies have revealed that:
- Homeopathy provides positive conclusions from the clinical trials
- The 8 homeopathy trials were for different conditions and if the therapy works for these but not others the implication is that homeopathy is not placebo.
- Comparing homeopathy with conventional medicine was meaningless
- Terms and definitions used in the review were not explained and doubts were cast over unpublished criteria
The reconstructed trials have cast doubts over the initial review by Professor Egger and that his study was based on hidden judgements that were unfavourable toward homeopathy. Current evidence suggest that homeopathy is an effective and beneficial treatment for a variety of conditions including allergies, respiratory problems and influenza.
Further information about homeopathy and the conditions it can treat here
Related News:
Acupuncture is safe for children
Knee osteoarthritis reduced by Pine Bark