Homeopathy - Healing or Humbug?

Today, 20:15 on 3sat: Science Documentation Homeopathy - Healing or Humbug? A comment from German Central Association of Homeopathic Doctors (DZVhÄ)

05/12/2013

In March 2013, this documentation was sent for the first time, and the DZVhÄ repeats its criticism of the documentation here:
Basically, this article contains everything you would expect from a science documentary: advocates and critics of the method have their say, so that the audience is given a wide range of opinions on the difficult topic of homeopathy. But if one considers this story of the journalist Carsten Binsack as an insider, then nuances fall on: The choice of words. The editorial text describes homeopathy as highly controversial. Who is she from? Terms such as heresy or ritual emerge, the term belief is often strained.

False Statement: "Expert" Edzard Ernst is not a homeopathic doctor
The scientists who speak are not questioned. This would have been worthwhile especially for Edzard Ernst, who acts as a kind of moderator of the contribution, he is allowed to comment on every statement of the proponents and always has the last word. Edzard Ernst, professor emeritus, also knits here on his legend of the change from Saul to Paul. Carsten Binsack introduces Ernst with the claim, „He worked as a homeopath for a long time.“ Ernst says: „I worked in a homeopathic hospital in Munich.“ Both are wrong, and Binsack should have known that as well.
In the interview with Edzard Ernst in the Homeopathic News, the newsletter of the German Central Association of Homeopathic Doctors (DZVhÄ), from April 2010, it says: Do you have the additional medical title Homeopathy? Ernst: I've got the qualifications, but never applied for the title.

Asked: Is it correct for you to use the additional term „homeopathy“ have not acquired but continuing medical education courses „homeopathy“ have occupied. If so, which (A to F courses)? Ernst: I did not complete any courses. In other words, Edzard Ernst is not a homeopathic doctor and consequently has not been able to work as such. His claim that he has obtained the conditions for the additional designation is wrong, since he has not taken any courses. The term homeopathy is protected in Germany in the medical profession. Anyone who claims to be a doctor with an additional name must complete a part-time further education program prescribed by the medical associations, which amounts to about 1 ½ Takes years. Anyone who describes himself without qualification as a homeopathic doctor, operates label fraud.

Wrong is also the statement of Ernst, he had worked in a homeopathic hospital. It is true that after completing his examinations, he worked for half a year at the Naturheilheil Hospital in Munich. From the above interview, is it true that you worked half a year at the Natural Healing Hospital? Ernst: I'm not sure how long I've been working at Naturopathic Hospitals, that's been a while!

The effectiveness of homeopathy is proven by many studies
Even as a scientist Ernst is not undisputed. In recent years he has made a name for himself as author (Gesund ohne Pillen, Hanser Verlag 2009) or reviewer (Die andere Medizin, Stiftung Warentest 2005) of popular science books. In Germany and many European countries, there are institutes at several universities that are researching CAM (Complementary and Alternative Medicine). Professor Robert Jütte, director of the Institute of History of Medicine of the Robert Bosch Foundation in Stuttgart, brings the criticism of Ernst in a review (FAZ, 23 February 2009) of the book Healthy without pills in a nutshell: „Striking is the ignorance [of the authors] of methodological and factual objections that leading researchers in the field of complementary medicine have against the selective gaze of these two 'experts'. Contrary views are not mentioned. The authors also ignore a detailed Health Technology Assessment report on homeopathy in the context of the Swiss program Evaluation Complementary Medicine from 2006. This concludes that there is sufficient evidence for a preclinical effect and clinical efficacy of homeopathy (evidence level I) and II) and that it constitutes a safe and cost-effective intervention in absolute terms and in particular compared to conventional therapies. '.“ An overview of the study situation is provided by the DZVhÄ research reader, download: welt-der-homoeopathie.de.

Lobbying and professionalization is not disreputable
It remains unclear what Binsack means with the big homeopathic business, a topic that occupies a lot of space in the documentation. The industry generates 400 million euros in sales of homeopathic medicines. To classify this contribution: The turnover of the pharmaceutical industry in Germany in 2010 was approximately 40.5 billion US dollars). In the same year, the turnover on the GKV finished medicinal products market in Germany amounted to 29.7 billion euros - for homeopathic medicines, the statutory health insurance (GKV) had to pay 10.9 million euros (www.statista.com).

Another topic with nuances: The professionalization of the homeopathy scene. Of course, the DZVhÄ maintains contacts to politicians, editors and other associations, this allows us a good representation of professional interests. The German Journalists Union is also doing lobbying work. The author of the documentary is a welcome guest at the DZVhÄ Press Office in Berlin and has gladly used information and contacts. That is self-evident and belongs to a good press work. (Pm)