|
U-Know! Forum » House of Commons Committee advises end to NHS funding of homeopathy |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
tingltangl 16 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 15:52
|
||
|
So you think that only rigourously trialled, well proven therapies should be paid for by the NHS? and that homeopathy needs to meet the same "high standards" expected of other treatmenmts? According to the British Medical Journals handbook of clinical evidence, the proportions of commonly used treatments supported by clinical evidence is as follows: 13% beneficial 23% likely to be beneficial 8% trade off between benefits and harm 6% unlikely to be benefial 4% likely to be ineffective or harmful 46% unknown effectiveness In light of this do you understand why i might see the obsession with the money spent on homeopathy a tad hypocritical.??
|
|||
sanshee 633 posts |
Edited Feb 25, 2010, 16:21
Feb 25, 2010, 16:16
|
||
|
Then there is this. http://www.nhsdirectory.org/default.aspx?page=Therapies&t=y Now according to what I read, your GP will refer you to one such in your area, reminding you that of course to take the 'scientific route' for your condition too. Perhaps they don't fund it all, but it is all there under NHS 'by association'. However having said that someone I know who had a pethidine addiction was offered an NHS funded 'hands on healing' therapy (can't remember the exact name for it) and acupuncture. They went along with no expectations and consequently no results. x
|
|||
|
tingltangl 16 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 16:22
|
||
|
someone I know who had a pethidine addiction was offered an NHS funded 'hands on healing' therapy (can't remember the exact name for it) and acupuncture. They went along with no expectations and consequently no results.
|
|||
|
sanshee 633 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 16:23
|
||
|
That's what I just said! x
|
|||
|
tingltangl 16 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 16:23
|
||
|
[quote="tingltangl"]someone I know who had a pethidine addiction was offered an NHS funded 'hands on healing' therapy (can't remember the exact name for it) and acupuncture. They went along with no expectations and consequently no results. So tempting to use "anecdotal evidence" isn`t it?!! |
|||
|
sanshee 633 posts |
Edited Feb 25, 2010, 16:28
Feb 25, 2010, 16:27
|
||
|
I'm not entirely 'for' or 'against' any of this. But the NHS is supposed to be about 'cost effectiveness'. If offering someone an alternative therapy means less discomfort for them and less side effects (which from tried and tested medicines can be horrendous), then fine. However, if it's a 'waste of money' then I'm not. Simple as that. Anyway, do you know about acupuncture too? Do you support ALL alternative therapies? x
|
|||
|
sanshee 633 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 16:35
|
||
|
Also, I mentioned the 'pethidine addiction' bit to highlight that it ain't just Homeopathy that the NHS are giving any weight to. x
|
|||
|
tingltangl 16 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 16:57
|
||
|
Sorry Sanshee i was just being lighthearted about it. I can`t comment on other therapies as i`m not well enough informed on any of them. As far as cost effectiveness goes what i do know is that a large clinical outcome study done at the Bristol Homeopathic Hospital showed that a significant percentage of patients were able to either reduce or discontinue their medication after homeopathic treatment. (and no they won`t have had to continue taking homeopathic remedies- a single dose is often enough as the remedy is just a catalyst) They also required far few GP visits after treatment. http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/acm.2005.11.793 Now i`m assuming that this would save the NHS money in the long run? A similar study was recently done in Northern Ireland and came to a similar conclusion. http://www.facultyofhomeopathy.org/media/news/northern_ireland.html I think its worth bearing in mind that were Homeopathy to be withdrawn from the NHS something would have to be done with the thousands of patients who are referred to the homeopathic hospitals every year. Most of these patients have already had everything that conventional medicine can offer them before they are referred. Judging by the results of the clinical outcome studies these patients are clearly benefitting from homeopathic treatment in a way that has the potential to save the NHS money. I suppose my question is What would happen to these patients were homeopathy to be withdrawn? and would the therpaies offered to them as an alternative be any cheaper, or any more effective? To put the money spent on homeopathy in context. The NHS annual drug budget is £11 BILLION! Of that the annual bill for homeopathic remedies is £152000
|
|||
PMM 2941 posts |
Edited Feb 25, 2010, 17:05
Feb 25, 2010, 17:03
|
||
|
Hi. I don't have any strong views about this, so I'm keeping out of the debate. Just thought you might like to know how to use some of the code stuff for this forum. Basically, you enclose your command in square brackets, and close the command by using the same command preceded by a forward slash, also within square brackets. If you use the "reply with quote" thing, it will show you the code used. So to do a quote, you do square bracket, quote="Joe Bloggs" and the opposite square bracket followed by the text followed by square bracket, foward slash, the word "quote" and a closing square bracket. Joe Bloggs wrote: h Blah[/quote]You can also do stuff with text such as emboldening, italicising and headingsthe stuff that goes into the square brackets for the things above are b,i, and h1. Other numbers after the h give different sized headings. you can also embed hyperlinks into text. to do that you use the letters "url=" and your link inside the brackets, followed by the text you want to appear, followed by "url" and their forward slash inside the closing square brackets. A wikipedia article that happened to be in my paste buffer Like I said, you can see this in context by replying with quote. Hope this helps. Edit: Buggered if I know why the quote thing isn't working properly though.
|
|||
|
sanshee 633 posts |
Feb 25, 2010, 17:07
|
||
|
Yes, about time this topic went the way of what it means to the NHS, what the thread is about. I wonder what these lobbying for and end to it are basing their opinions on? Just a dislike for the whole thing, or something else? As for 'placebo', in essence, if it works for someone, if somehow you can 'convince' yourself better, then where the feck is the probelm? I personally couldn't do that for the same reason I doubt I could ever be hypnotised. So should I ever become ill, I think I'd have to throw my trust in the more conventional way of things. But if it can happen, which I think it does, at times, then, why should anyone complain about it? x
|
| Pages: 6 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
- ©2012ce Head Heritage Ltd. Contact us Top of page