Trick or Treatment—The Undeniable Facts about Alternative Medicine (Electronic book text)

Both snake oil and ultra-diluted homeopathic remedies contain no active ingredient, and both also offer nothing but a placebo effect. Yet the former is now mocked and seen only in Hollywood cowboy films, and the latter is still sold in every pharmacy. If anything, homeopathy is even more absurd than snake oil, as demonstrated by a homeopath who wrote a letter outlining a particularly bizarre homeopathic remedy: ‘This patient continues to have multiple symptoms of lumps on scalp and has had a flu-like illness. Overall her mood has improved, however, I have given her a dose of Carcinosin Nosode 3 °C over the day followed by Berlin Wall 3 °C one a day in the morning…’ A response in the Medical Monitor emphasized the ridiculous nature of Berlin Wall as a homeopathic remedy: ‘What therapeutic advantages does Berlin Wall have over ordinary garden wall or Spaghetti Junction concrete? And do Scottish homeopaths use microdoses of that historic nostrum, Hadrian’s Wall? I think we should be told.’

So how did we get into a position whereby each year we are spending £40 billion globally on alternative therapies, most of which are as senseless as homeopathy, and many of which are a good deal more dangerous? In the penultimate section of this book we will look at the ten groups of people who are most responsible for our increasing enthusiasm for alternative medicine. In each case, we will explain the role that the group has played in giving alternative medicine undue credibility, and moreover we will suggest how each of them can correct the prevailing overly optimistic, uncritical and misguided view of alternative medicine. What follows is an analysis of what has gone wrong over the last quarter of a century, coupled with a manifesto for re-establishing the role of evidence-based medicine.

Top ten culprits in the promotion of unproven and disproven medicine

1 Celebrities

This 1ist is compiled in no particular order, so celebrities are not necessarily the worst offenders in terms of the unjustified promotion of ineffective alternative medicine, but they have certainly played an important role in recent decades. When Professor Ernst and his colleague Max H. Pittler looked for articles published in 2005 and 2006 which involved well-known people using alternative medicine, they discovered several dozen famous figures who were being linked with various unproven therapies. The celebrities ranged from fans of homeopathy, such as Pamela Anderson, Cindy Crawford and Cher, to devotees of Ayurvedic medicine, such as Goldie Hawn and Christy Turlington. These high-profile names give alternative medicine a greater level of credibility among the public, because they are clearly people who can afford the best medical treatment. In other words, these treatments may be perceived as superior to mainstream treatments because they are bought at a premium by the rich and famous.

In addition to actors and singers, there are also many sportsmen and sportswomen who have indulged in alternative medicine, such as Boris Becker and Martina Navratilova. These sporting celebrities deliver extra credibility, because they are role models. We assume that they take special care of their health and have excellent advisers. The truth is that wealthy sportsmen and their coaches can afford to waste money on extravagant placebos, while also spending large sums on the very best that conventional medicine has to offer.

The US homeopath Dana Ullman clearly believes that celebrities help sell alternative therapy to the public, because his latest book, The Homeopathic Revolution, is subtitled Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy. He tries to convince readers that homeopathy must work on the grounds that it has been used by some of the most famous figures in history, including eleven American presidents, seven Popes, Beethoven, Goethe and Tennyson, as well as Axl Rose, the lead singer of Guns N’ Roses.

All these uninformed or ill-informed celebrities would do the public a service if they stopped endorsing useless therapies. Better still, celebrities should arm themselves with the best available evidence and condemn faddish, flawed and dangerous treatments. The singer Kylie Minogue did exactly this in 2005 when she issued a statement regarding rumours that she was using alternative therapies to treat her own cancer: ‘She has asked her fans please not to believe stories of dramatic weight loss and desperate searches for alternative therapy. Kylie has made it clear to her representatives that she doesn’t want fellow sufferers to be misguided by the false stories regarding her condition and her choice of doctors.’